Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ETLAs from AAAA to ADZZ

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled ETLAs from AAAA to ADZZ.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.

ETLAs from AAAA to ADZZ - Oh, God, please no, kill it before it spreads. And why does it say they're three-letter abbreviations? RickK 19:16, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

  • Kill it NOW. Please? - Lucky 6.9 19:33, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  • It said TLA becasue the page was copied from TLAs from AAA to DZZ with an A added on to each TLA. I changed it to ETLA. --Ben Brockert 19:56, May 19, 2004 (UTC)
  • This is a case when a joke went amok. I say, wait untill the guy creates all pages, and then delete them all, not to repeat this discussion 26*7 = 182 times. Mikkalai 20:01, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I'd like to see the lists of all possible three-letter abbreviations deleted, too, or at least de-wikified. Everyking 21:08, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't understand, what's so horrible about this? I have a dictionary that lists all sorts of acronyms..how is this any different exactly? Rhymeless 21:16, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's not a list of actual acronyms, it's a list of all possible acronyms. It's equivalent to a "List of all numbers from 1 to 456976 (26^4). -- Cyrius|&#9998 21:40, May 19, 2004 (UTC)
      • I don't understand how that would be a bad thing, really...unless the author would be attempting to backlink every possible acronym (for instance, creating a page that states merely that it is a possible acronym) Otherwise, it seems like it might somehow be useful towards reference. Rhymeless 21:47, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Firstly, I notice that this is the first contribution from a newly created userid (who does however seem to have learned how to edit remarkably quickly, so perhaps they have been active as an IP). Secondly, there seems to have been no discussion as to whether these 182 lists would be useful. Surely the creator at least deserves that? The term ETLA is humorous, especially to those of us who have read IBM PLMs, but it does seem to have some currency. I put an explanation of its history into the TLA article a couple of times, but it kept disappearing. (It's there! TLA#Background. Mikkalai 22:01, 19 May 2004 (UTC)) Thirdly, there's no rush to either create the other 181 lists or alternatively delete this one, any more than we delete tree of life articles because some of them are missing too. If we decide they are useful, others will fill the gaps. That's the whole idea of a Wiki. Fourthly, I think Everyking has a point. If we delete this, perhaps the TLA project should go too by the same logic? No vote at this stage. Andrewa 21:18, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
    The logic is not the same. TLA vfd was already discussed and closed. The issue is a classical one: "how many sandgrains makes a pile of sand?". It seems in our particular case the answer is voted to be four. Mikkalai 21:57, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a very bad joke. Kill it now before it escapes from the lab. Wile E. Heresiarch 00:22, 20 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This list is not useful. Possibly if it only included genuine acronyms, but in this form, not.Average Earthman 08:43, 20 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. A list of TLAs is one thing, as most of them have some meaning, but what proportion of 4-letter abbreviations are actually in use? Five percent? If it was changed to a list of ETLAs we have articles for, that might be acceptable. sjorford 10:08, 20 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
    • If I spent the time to make a list of ETLAs, would it live? --Ben Brockert 00:55, May 21, 2004 (UTC)
      • I suspect it would go straight to VfD again, but I for one would change my vote. sjorford 08:54, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
      • I would likewise vote in favor. I've more than once had to look up an acronym, and IMHO, this would be a valuable resource. I'd vote for a name change though - since it's a neologism, it's still fair to ask. EFLA - Existing Four-Letter Acronyms. Denni 20:35, 2004 May 21 (UTC)
  • I'm personally in favor of going directly to FOAD on this one. Some people have FAR too much time on their hands. Delete. Denni 00:24, 2004 May 21 (UTC)
  • I've never seen so many phantom links in one place. -Litefantastic 00:25, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dear god make it stop..... (that means delete in case you couldn't tell....). --Starx 05:14, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  • <Wikipedia Witch Trials> Burn it! Bbbbuuuuurrnnnn iiiitttt! </Wikipedia Witch Trials> Delete with extreme prejudice. DO'Neil 07:14, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue or the deletion should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/ETLAs_from_AAAA_to_ADZZ&oldid=1174337929"