Deletion of Animal verbs in English

Comment: Actually, I'm not up on wiktionary's inclusion criteria, so I'm not sure this fit there either.  If not there, then perhaps there's some other wiki which would be an appropriate home for this.  I'm a bit conflicted here.  I can get past the  complaints; I was all ready to argue |IAR keep.  But, beyond , relying on google translate for the (overwhelming) majority of the sources just doesn't work for us.  I encourage {{U|EditExpress}} not to be discouraged.  I think this is an interesting and useful compendium, it just doesn't meet our specific requirements.  Hopefully a better home can be found for it somewhere
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT||WP:IAR||WP:NOT)

Comment: to Wiktionary per 
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: an |indiscriminate collection of trivia. Is "bat" indeed an "animal verb"? Or is this a coinsedence? Does not belong in the encyclopedia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)

Comment: I suspect there could be an interesting Wikipedia article on zoosemy in word formation; see {{jstor|41398175}} for an example of a source on exactly the topic considered here, animal verbs in English. That said, a mere list of such words and their definitions would seem to violate , even if we eliminated the false friends
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTDICTIONARY)

Comment: Delete Delete.  Wikipedia is  a dictionary.  The article is basically a collection of trivia.  Separately, I don't feel that Google Translate is a good reference for definitions of words, but the sourcing is irrelevant to the delete vote
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOT)