Talk:轉法輪

From Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Sgconlaw in topic RFD discussion: October–November 2017
Jump to navigation Jump to search

RFD discussion: October–November 2017[edit]

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.


Name of a book. White Snowflakes (talk) 16:02, 5 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

Removed. Entry has been cleaned up. Wyang (talk) 01:55, 8 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
For the record, names of books are governed by WT:NSE, which allows editor discretion as to keeping. This deletion was out of process. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:47, 8 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
I have unstruck the heading so discussion on whether the book sense ("Zhuan Falun (main book of Falun Dafa)") should have been deleted can continue. — SGconlaw (talk) 09:34, 9 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
There is no need to discuss this. This is obviously outside the scope of Wiktionary, and was created with an agenda. Zhuan Falun doesn't even have a Wikipedia page. We don't even have Harry Potter, why the double standards? Wyang (talk) 09:45, 9 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
I know of the Falun Gong's existence but nothing of their beliefs or texts. WT:NSE permits the inclusion of the titles of works provided they are attested (the Qur'an is given as an example). The non-existence of an English Wikipedia page is not conclusive. Send this to RFV? (Incidentally, Harry Potter is not the name of a book, but a character from a series of books and films. The term would have to satisfy WT:FICTION to be included.) — SGconlaw (talk) 10:07, 9 October 2017 (UTC)Reply
Harry Potter is the name of the novel series, as well as the name of the character. The absence of an English Wikipedia page is of course indicative. This is just common sense: Is Zhuan Falun even remotely at the same level of the Qur'an, or other books in Category:en:Books? Apparently no, otherwise it would have at least warranted an article on Wikipedia for its literary value. Wyang (talk) 10:16, 9 October 2017 (UTC)Reply

{{look}} Even though the deletion was out of process, I am closing this discussion since there have been no further comments for more than a month. — SGconlaw (talk) 06:50, 17 November 2017 (UTC)Reply