Talk:Cruft

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article was nominated for deletion on September 26, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

Contents 1 Humor 2 Pronunciation? 3 Vote for Deletion: Crufty 4 Proposal to change Cruft to a disambiguation page 5 Comment 6 Wiktionary

[edit] Humor

nn cruft d —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SPUI (talk • contribs) .

[edit] Pronunciation?

How do you pronounce cruft? [kɹʊft]? [kɹuːft]? —Frungi 03:29, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vote for Deletion: Crufty

who added that page?? --Shandris 10:14, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I really don't think we should delete the whole article. It's a great word and I've heard it's used in places like MIT. Faseidman 18:10, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposal to change Cruft to a disambiguation page

There are a few meanings for this word, so whether if this article gets deleted or not, it would be better off changing this into a disambiguation page, and salvage the article (whether if its deleted or not) to a separate page.

As many readers would really be looking for Wikipedia:Fancruft. --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 15:22, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Interesting idea, but disambiguation pages shouldn't link to Wikipedia namespace, it's self-reference. --Roninbk _{t c #} 08:54, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment

I know nothing on the specific topic of this article, but it needs a first sentence that briefly explains the word before the article splits into categories. - Emiellaiendiay 04:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wiktionary

My prod just got removed. Unless someone gives me a good reason, I'm going to nominate this to be transwikied ... --evrik ^(talk) 22:51, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I removed the prod, but only because I thought there should be discussion first through AFD. It doesn't need to be transwikied, it's already at Wiktionary, but deletion might be in order.--Cúchullain ^t/c 06:44, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

• ahhh, well your supposed to sate why the prd was removed ... --evrik ^(talk) 15:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I did say it "should be discussed first" in my edit summary, I suppose I could have added "through AfD". Speaking of which, are you going to list it? --Cúchullain ^t/c 18:02, 25 February 2007 (UTC)