Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of terms of endearment
First, it's not a content fork, it's an expansion of the article and complements it well.  Second, it's not simply a dictionary entry, because some of the entries are blue-linked, which makes it a navigation resource.  Third, "Dumping ground of unsourced additions" is not a valid reason for deleting - this describes Wikipedia as a whole very well.  Ninety-five percent of Wikipedia is unsourced, and the solution is to source it, NOT DELETE IT.  If we deleted 95% of Wikipedia, it would be ruined.  The nom said "I could just remove 90% of the terms as unreferenced, but AFD seems like a better place to" get rid of it - now you know how to use policy to delete almost anything you want in two easy lessons.  There isn't much difference between that and vandalism.   applies to most of Wikipedia, and can be used as an excuse to delete any of that -- therefore, I'd like to see more than this standard excuse -- how does this list differ from pages we should keep?  The list has some good examples of terms of endearment, so I think we should keep it around so that someone can source it eventually (either as a stand-alone list or merged back into the article), and in the meantime, the dubious entries could be moved to the talk page pending finding sources for them
— [[User talk:The Transhumanist|The Transhumanist]], 02:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:VER (Wikipedia:Verifiability)