Talk:Brillig
 | This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary. The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there. |
Maybe not a speedy
[edit]Seems to me that the article in this case is a bit more than a dictdef, and the word's history might conceivably be of use in a wider context, so I'm reluctant to see it speedied. Geogre 02:49, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I agree about the speedy delete part -- dicdef is not one of the criteria for speedy delete. See this misleading template's listing at Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion#Template:Deletetranswikied.--Dmcdevit 03:10, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)
In general, I agree that transwikied items ought to go. In general, they're inappropriate content and, essentially, the information has been preserved in the place where it will do most good, but sometimes not. Dictdef isn't a criterion for speedy, of course, but I suppose the argument would be made that it is now duplicated content, and that has long been one of the informal criteria. At any rate, I agree that a merge & redirect would be a great disposition in this case. In fact, it seems like the only logical thing. Geogre 13:07, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)