Talk:Tornadocane

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

↓    Skip to table of contents    ↓

This article was nominated for deletion on 9 February 2008. The result of the discussion was keep.

	This article is part of WikiProject Severe weather, an attempt to standardize and improve all articles related to severe weather. You can help! Visit the project page or discuss an article at its talk page.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance within WikiProject Severe weather.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Tornadocane article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

Contents 1 Tornadocane/Landcane/Landphoon 2 2008-02-9 Automated pywikipediabot message

[edit] Tornadocane/Landcane/Landphoon

We recently had a similar article to tornadocane called landphoon removed from wikipedia because the term was not in the glossary of meteorology. What's interesting is that landphoon had about seven unique sources, while tornadocane has exactly one source using the term. I'm going to remove the link, and propose the article's removal, for consistency's sake. For reference, I was the creator of landphoon last August. Thegreatdr (talk) 16:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 2008-02-9 Automated pywikipediabot message

This page has been transwikied to Wiktionary.

The article has content that is useful at Wiktionary. Therefore the article can be found at either here or here (logs 1 logs 2.) Note: This means that the article has been copied to the Wiktionary Transwiki namespace for evaluation and formatting. It does not mean that the article is in the Wiktionary main namespace, or that it has been removed from Wikipedia's. Furthermore, the Wiktionarians might delete the article from Wiktionary if they do not find it to be appropriate for the Wiktionary. Removing this tag will usually trigger CopyToWiktionaryBot to re-transwiki the entry. This article should have been removed from Category:Copy to Wiktionary and should not be re-added there.

--CopyToWiktionaryBot (talk) 19:50, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

So the wiktionary allows anyone to define any term, even if there's no accepted definition for the term, other than in one person's web page? I'd think that would be a violation in wiktionary as well. Thegreatdr (talk) 20:10, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

I guess tornadocane survives for another day. It appears if the delete and keep votes are the same, wikipedia opts to keep an article, even if it doesn't otherwise fit wikipedia criteria. Thegreatdr (talk) 15:25, 17 February 2008 (UTC)