Deletion of List of words having different meanings in British and American English

Comment: your first argument () is ''bollocks''/''bullshit'', because then all lists of words would have to be deleted. Your second and third arguments are essentially the same, lack of sourcing is not a criterion for deletion. We can tag it with {{tl|unrefart}} and look for some sources, they sure exist. If you want to delete this one, then try to delete all language-related lists at once. ''Bonne chance
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:DICT)

Comment: As a fairly regular contributor to the articles, I'm reluctant to see them go, but I don't think there's any answer to Jack's points - they're a blatant violation of  and .  ''However'', I would also add the comment that, if we decide on deletion, we shouldn't attempt to recreate the content.  If the content is (in principle) acceptable, and the issue is just about the formatting of the articles, then deletion is not the way to go; resurrecting the merge proposal would be a better idea.  On the other hand, if the content isn't acceptable (mainly for OR reasons), it will remain unacceptable no matter how it's reformatted.  The lists are very useful indeed, but Wikipedia isn't (apparently) the place for them
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:OR)

Comment: Violates 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary (WP:WINAD)

Comment: the trouble is, it is not a "harmless collaboration" but a ragbag of nonsense and rubbish which takes an enormous amount of energy to keep straight. Unwatched for a day or two, it degrades into unreliable and misleading uselessness. It attracts a fantastic quantity of |original research and unfounded personal opinion. The problem is the list structure, which acts as an invitation to add "my two-cents-worth" or "my tuppence-worth". I am sure the many contributors are well-meaning, but most of what gets added is nonsense (and/or duplication) and needs to be deleted. Jack is right - the only solution is to delete the lists and replace them with a proper encyclopedic article covering the nuances of different usages
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR)

Comment: the lot of them. They are extremely |useful, utterly |fascinating, and a great deal of |work has gone into creating and maintaining them - but they are fundamentally rubbish. I for one would like to spend less time correcting egregious errors in these three articles, and put some effort into helping to improve American and British English differences
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:USEFUL||WP:INTERESTING||WP:EFFORT)