Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barefoot and pregnant

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 16:15, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Barefoot and pregnant

DicDef of an expression that has been Transwikied to Wiktionary. Kevin Rector (talk) 05:03, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

Delete, dictionary definition. Megan1967 08:22, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete--nixie 04:02, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Dictionary definition + waffle != encylopedia article. -- The Anome 15:01, May 3, 2005 (UTC)
- "Waffle"? What is that supposed to mean? 205.217.105.2 16:50, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep it seems like a good article and is informative 66.0.121.112 17:38, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — encyclopedic subject, good initial research, plenty of potential to expand ➥the Epopt 18:23, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete.--Silversmith 19:50, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- What is the deal with people voting "Delete" and not giving any rationale? 205.217.105.2 20:06, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. Agree with the Epopt. CarsonDailyCity 20:22, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because it has been expanded after it was placed here on VFD. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 20:27, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete waffling on a dicdef-subject, unencyclopedic, tabloidy.--Fenice 05:48, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Obviously, has been expanded to go far beyond a dicdef. -- AlexR 05:58, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While it's a potentially notable topic, this article is pure nonsense. Ambi 07:21, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I almost just changed my vote to keep, but then thought, is there anything this article says that is worth keeping, that couldn't be covered in the Human pregnancy article which already says: "Edema, or swelling, of the feet is common during pregnancy. For the sake of comfort, many pregnant women wear larger shoes or go without. This may have something to do with the origin of the phrase "barefoot and pregnant."? --Silversmith 08:51, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this article has validity and is informative and should be kept. Let me be clear in saying that you are the bane of wiki's existence, you so-called 'deletionists'- what makes you think your contributions are important and why don't you squander the fruitless hours of your lives somewhere else?

i didn't know about the merge option- i guess that would be fine also- as long as it will exist somewhere. can i just ask one question to wiki addicts: before the creation of wikipedia what did your lives center around? how forunate that it came to be, now i guess your existence will have some meaning.

Selfless people do like to donate their time to worthy causes, whilst they also work very hard in their professions.--Silversmith 16:02, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

above is from user:Tparker393. They've been around since December but this was their 13th total edit and first to a VfD. Thryduulf 13:05, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merge the picture and the small amount of non-waffle into a (short) paragraph on Human pregnancy, then redirect. Thryduulf 13:05, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
fascinating, but I'm afraid it's a Delete for me Merge if possible, as above, otherwise my delete still counts. This is just a thing that some mothers decide to do. It's not article-worthy, it's just an "eccentricity", albeit one of those old wives' tales sort of things that a lot would swear by. But come on... what next, Nude in winter? Master Thief Garrett 14:10, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.