Hello, you have come here looking for the meaning of the word
User talk:Msh210/Archive/entrance to Sea Gate. In DICTIOUS you will not only get to know all the dictionary meanings for the word
User talk:Msh210/Archive/entrance to Sea Gate, but we will also tell you about its etymology, its characteristics and you will know how to say
User talk:Msh210/Archive/entrance to Sea Gate in singular and plural. Everything you need to know about the word
User talk:Msh210/Archive/entrance to Sea Gate you have here. The definition of the word
User talk:Msh210/Archive/entrance to Sea Gate will help you to be more precise and correct when speaking or writing your texts. Knowing the definition of
User talk:Msh210/Archive/entrance to Sea Gate, as well as those of other words, enriches your vocabulary and provides you with more and better linguistic resources.
This page is an archive of old discussion. Please don't edit this page. If you wish to communicate with me (msh210), you can do so at User talk:Msh210. Thanks!
I hate to ask this, but … w:WP:POINT? —RuakhTALK 13:12, 2 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
- As it says in boldface atop that page, that "documents an English Wikipedia behavioral guideline" (emphasis supplied).
Okay, okay, I shouldn't have made them. I was curious to see how far this new rule would be applied, and wanted, yes, to make the POINT that it could easily be malapplied. I'm surprised ] is on its way to being kept, but I note (here, anyway) that the reasons given for the deletion — speedily, no less — of ] are not based on the CFI.—msh210℠ 15:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)Reply
- As I've pointed out before, the generic deletion comment "Not dictionary material, see WT:CFI" is misleading, as CFI doesn't mention the topic. Furthermore there's nothing written in CFI to exclude entries like Michael Jackson, Barry Bonds or Drew Barrymore, we just circumnavigate the problem by deleting them on sight. Mglovesfun (talk) 15:49, 2 September 2010 (UTC)Reply