Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sliem

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was redirect to S-L-M. MBisanz ^talk 00:08, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sliem

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

It's a dictionary entry. Wiktionary wikt:sliem has most of this (the cognates are behind a link, but that is fine). — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:27, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Move to Wiktionary The article has much more detail than Wikitionary.. going through it's background even. Wiktionary only tells us that it means peace.--Joey (talk) 07:40, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Wiktionary: definitely a dictionary definition with no potential for growth. הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 12:33, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 20:45, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 21:01, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to S-L-M; merge if there is any relevant information not already covered there, but I didn't see any. As This-that points out, Wiktionary already has the definition, etymology, and link to the greeting 'Sliem għalikom'. Cnilep (talk) 23:29, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Merging the content to S-L-M would be a good idea, only that it isn't necessary, as you mentioned; but redirecting seems odd, as most Semitic words belong to a triconsonantal root: this is equivalent to redirecting "proclamation" to "clame", no? הסרפד (Hasirpad) [formerly Ratz...bo] 03:46, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm not sure I understand your objection. If 'Sliem' were merged to 'S-L-M' a redirect would be left in place both to preserve edit history and to direct users to some useful information. If, as I think we agree, merging there is not necessary, then redirecting to S-L-M would at least direct users to information relevant to what they are probably looking for; currently, Maltese sliem is listed as one of the Semitic-language words based on the root. Would you argue, instead, to delete the Wikipedia page? or to soft-redirect to the Wiktionary page? I can envision logical arguments for either of those following a transwiki to Wiktionary, but I think the information on this page is already included in Wiktionary, either at wikt:sliem or wikt:Appendix:Proto-Semitic/šalām-. Cnilep (talk) 04:09, 21 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 02:56, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:35, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

belongs to wiktionary. nothing to say about the word. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:20, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to S-L-M per Cnilep. The focus of this article's writer, at least, was how "sliem" relates to that Semitic root. As a second choice, delete per nom. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:50, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per S-L-M per comments above. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:02, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wiktionary, or redirect to S-L-M. TBr and ley ^{(what's up)} 21:15, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.