Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glossary of alternative medicine
as per  - ''Wikipedia is not a dictionary''.  I would also argue that Wikipedia should not be a glossary, but that is an extension of policy that will need further discussion.  Currently, we clearly ban dictionary entries, but seem to allow "Glossaries".  The difference between a dictionary and a glossary is subtle ... To my mind, dictionaries ''define'' the words, while glossaries ''explain'' the words.  To get back to the article in question: dispite its title, the bulk of the article consists of nothing more than dictionary definitions of various alternative medicine terms.  In the few cases where the article actually acts as a "glossary" (ie it actually ''explains'' a term, as opposed to simply giving a definition of it) a seperate article can be written (or already exists) for the term
— User:Blueboar, 14:50, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NOT (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)