Talk:Editor-in-Chief

RFD discussion: December 2016–August 2017
I'm unsure about this one, but couldn't a wide range of titles be used as "honorifics"? It doesn't seem particularly lexical to me. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 00:40, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
 * We similarly have President and King as honorifics. Are they any more lexical? bd2412 T 02:53, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Presidents and kings are heads of state, and far more important than a mere . A hard redirect may be the answer. DonnanZ (talk) 09:14, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
 * "More important" is an encyclopedic consideration. We include words of even skating "importance" if they are attested. bd2412 T 00:23, 27 December 2016 (UTC)


 * RFD kept: no consensus for deletion: only one boldfaced delete if we count the nomination as one, and one delete does not consensus make. --Dan Polansky (talk) 06:20, 20 August 2017 (UTC)