Talk:non-rhotic

This article is getting a little too encyclopedic in my opinion. &mdash; Hippietrail 00:08, 12 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * From WT:RFD:

non-rhotic
Encyclopedic. Gorrut 16:03, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * But of linguistic, dictionary importance. VERY STRONG KEEP  --Connel MacKenzie T C 17:23, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ridiculous. Removed rfd. — Vildricianus 17:37, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Not ridiculous, it is encyclopedic. Read the talk page. Gorrut 19:12, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Ridiculous. RFD is for deleting articles, not trimming down their defs. Removed RFD and trimmed def. — Vildricianus 19:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * That's right. I was requesting that the article be deleted, not trimmed down. I wasn't requesting that this encyclopedia definition be trimmed down. —This unsigned comment was added by Gorrut (talk • contribs).
 * In that case, this is a failed RFD. — Vildricianus 08:45, 5 July 2006 (UTC)