Deletion of -logy

Comment: High-importance etymology articles and articles about linguistic topics should not be pushed out using the  policy. This is the place for encyclopædic information, the article may need work to be more encyclopædic, but it isn't invalid.  is a red herring here, this is an obvious |common-sense |exception
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTDIC||WP:MOS||WP:COMMON||WP:IAR)

Comment: to Wictionary as a probable search term. , but according to http://stats.grok.se/en/200905/-logy, the page gets roughly 5000 views per month
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTDIC)

Comment: Clearly'' something for a |dictionary. The keep arguments appear to be variously ,  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:DICT||WP:ITSUSEFUL||WP:ILIKEIT||WP:WAX)

Comment: and improve article. Firstly, I fail to see that the Wiktionary article covers the same ground as the WP one – the former contains only two sentences plus two definitions (plus lists of derived terms and translations, which admittedly belong only to Wiktionary). Secondly, there are any amount of exceptions to : see the subcategories of :Category:Affixes, not to mention :Category:English words. Should all of these be deleted or transwikied? Some of these are really good articles, so the bad or stubby ones like -logy should be improved, not deleted
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:NOTDIC)