Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aum (unit)
The fact that a unit is antiquated is not a sensible reason to delete because, as a general encyclopedia, we are here to provide information about such obscure topics.  We have no policy forbidding content on such grounds and an |editing policy which indicates the opposite.  It is quite easy to find further sources which document units such as the aum.  For example, see https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=tZZQAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA77 here, "''AUM, or Aume, a Dutch measure for Rhenish wine, (as an aum of hock) containing forty English gallons.''"  while other authors such as Thomas Frognall Dibdin|Dibdin has more to say about it too.  Note that there is even some need for disambiguation too as there's a second AUM unit - the animal unit|animal unit month (AUM).   There's a huge amount to consider here and, in some cases, we might choose to merge into an existing page.  For example, the circular inch might be merged into the circular mil, as they are related units.  This would not be done be deletion but by ordinary editing.  Working through all this detail will take time but there is |no pressing reason to do all this in seven days.  This just seems to be a |vexatious proposal contrary to our |behavioural guidelines insofar as it is directed against the work of a particular editor rather than obscure units in general
— user:Andrew, 14:02, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:PRESERVE||WP:DEADLINE||WP:ZEAL||WP:BITE (Wikipedia:Editing policy)