Deletion of Spastic

Comment: That's not the problem; it's not a short definition or written ''exactly'' like a dictionary, the length is fine, but the  policy says: ''however, articles rarely, if ever, contain several distinct definitions or usages of the article title''. But the article defines the word ''spastic'' as somebody with nervous twitches; '''and''' somebody who is courteous to teachers; '''and''' somebody who has a lot of energy; '''and''' a type of drink. These things have ''absolutely nothing'' in common other than the word 'spastic'. At that point per the  policy, the wikipedia article is no longer an encyclopedia article, it's an extended dictionary entry. We have to have standards to build a good encyclopedia, this article fails to meet them
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:ISNOT)