Deletion of Idiom dictionary

Comment: The prose is meandering, the content confused, formatting and internal linking is inappropriate, and the article cites no sources. These are real problems, but problems in need of |clean-up, not deletion. The concept which the article should cover (and which, say http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Idiom_dictionary&oldid=122637456 five years ago, it sort of did) is notable, verifiable, and possible to describe without original research
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:RUBBISH)