Wiktionary talk:Shortcut/Comprehensive list

Requests for deletion/Others - kept
Kept. See archived discussion of February 2008. 06:46, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

RFD discussion: February–June 2018
This hasn't been comprehensive for more than a decade. But even if it were, it would be useless — Special:Prefixindex/WT: gives a complete listing. (And I'm not sure what you would do with a list of shortcuts, to be honest.) —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 04:54, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Weak keep ; maybe the page could be greatly improved, but is its concept/overall goal really completely useless? Surely there's someone who might want to know what all the shortcuts are without having to sift through the prefixindex. Some newbie editors/lurkers may not even know about prefixindex or how to use it. So, it could be marginally useful for people looking for shortcuts so they have to type less next time they want a very certain page. On the other hand, the usefulness of this page is pretty marginal, even though it may still exist to some extent. PseudoSkull (talk) 05:06, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You speak of newbies and lurkers. How would they find this page, given that it's not really linked to anywhere? Why would it be useful for them to see a very incomprehensive list that is misleadingly titled as if it were comprehensive? —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:12, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, well, it is quite funny that the list is so incomprehensive and that the title is a complete lie. But, back to being serious. The page could be improved to actually be comprehensive; it doesn't always have to stay a joke. What I'm proposing is that all actual, current shortcuts to current pages are added to Shortcut/Comprehensive list. But maybe that's too much work for what it's worth (which is why my keep vote is weak). As far as linkage, it is possible that the page could be renamed, and/or more pages can link to it. I really don't like the name of the page itself; I think it should be moved to List of shortcuts if it gets kept. Comprehensive is...not the right word for this page, even if it actually was comprehensive. PseudoSkull (talk) 05:20, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I mean, are you volunteering to keep it updated? It seems like a waste of everybody's time. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 05:22, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. --Per utramque cavernam (talk) 10:23, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. To me the useful way to find shortcuts would seem to be through : seeing it on a page if you want to find that specific one, or checking the inclusions if you want to see all shortcuts that exist and have been documented (can be presumed to be actually in use). --Tropylium (talk) 18:31, 5 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. PseudoSkull (talk) 18:38, 20 March 2018 (UTC)


 * RFDO failed. —Μετάknowledge discuss/deeds 12:41, 4 June 2018 (UTC)