Talk:Nexum
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
from VfD:
Another apparently lost/orphaned VfD nom, as the tag was added November 8, but it doesn't seem to have ever been placed on the main VfD page, and doesn't appear on "old". Procedural/abstain--currently dic def. Can it become encyclopedic? Niteowlneils 18:54, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Delete. Dicadef.CB Droege 20:18, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Is the term still used in the legal or banking professions today? If so, it's a dictdef and should be treated so, or perhaps listed on the pages of similar terms we already have. The only way I could see it being encyclopedic enough for its own article is if the concept is still influential on today's systems, or triggered a major change back when it was an issue. Inky 19:24, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Delete: Ancient dictdef. I'm not sure the point of noting something that was abolished in 300 BC (when the Romans weren't really the Romans). Geogre 19:45, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Delete, dicdef. --fvw* 11:45, 2004 Nov 27 (UTC)
- Ah, look at that. I ran my mouth off and didn't even realize I hadn't cast a vote. Delete. Inky 22:48, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Keep stub. Arguably, this was a predecessor concept to "collateral", a vital and current concept. Content is verifiable and relevant to an understanding of Roman culture and law. See here for a more detailed explanation. Rossami (talk) 23:52, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)
- Keep and expand a bit, if possible. Verifiable term from Roman legal history. Since when do verifiable historical concepts have to still be used today to be encyclopedic? -- Ferkelparade π 00:52, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Keep - vey much of western law originates from Roman law (although in heavily modified form). However, this definitely needs expansion. At the very least, it should be included into the history of a relevant modern-day equivalent - Skysmith 08:24, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
end moved discussion
