This page is preserved as an archive of the associated article page's "votes for deletion" debate (the forerunner of articles for deletion). Please do not modify this page, nor delete it as an orphaned talk page.
keep, no harm. GreenMountain 03:36, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Pointless. In any case, it is probably impossible to write this from a NPOV. Delete this as yet another useless list. Tannin 07:30, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Comment: I dont see any relation between POV/NPOV and the page in question. How could somebody write a POV on this subject? My vote is below ... Optim 16:02, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
What a load of absolute bloody knee-jerk nonsense has been spouted in reply to that comment of mine. I am astonished at comments such as those made by Optim above and UtherSRG and Anon below. The problem - and it should not require me to point it out - is that a good 30% of the words on the list (back when the entry was just a list) did not fit the criteria unless you speak with a US accent. Now throw in another dozen accents from around the globe and any attempt to make an exhaustive list becomes an utterly hopeless task. Last time we had one of these crop up - it was titled List of words that are commonly mispronounced or some such - the acrimony dragged on for weeks, and although I myself initally voted to keep the entry, in the end it became clear that there was just no way that we were ever going to be able to agree about what words should be listed and what words should be left out. Language is simply too variable. However, with that out of the way, I see that the initial list has mutated into an article instead - an approach that is workable, as the list component can now be simply a short list of examples on which all can agree. The entry, in other words, is no longer just anoyjer bloody useless list, and has genuine value: keep. Tannin 13:27, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Linguistics is the study of language, and liguists note that the spoken language is key. The issue of accent is not a reason to discredit this topic, but rather to study it. If there are accents of English that do not convey this difference between verb and noun form then there is a natural language opportunity to test the Sacher-Warf hypothesis. Additionally what happens in languages where verb-noun is not so malleable? Lastly, it was stated that 30 % of the words in this list only are properly included with US accent; is there evidence to support that statement. My vote follows later.Kd4ttc 19:23, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Yet another useless attempt to delete valid content, you mean. NPOV? What can you possibly mean, there is no point of view involved, it is a factual list of words that change their gramatical role depending on stressing of the sylables. Keep it! Also - see the talk page for a serious discussion of this linguistic phenomenon. 209.102.127.70 07:48, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Keep and see how the page develops. It deascribes an interesting phenomenom. ping 08:33, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Keep. This is an important linguistic fact. English is one of thos languages that most easily forms one word type from another and vice versa and this is one of the key "tools" used. Bmills 11:33, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Delete. silsor 04:17, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC) Somebody goofed. silsor 23:46, Jan 10, 2004 (UTC)
Delete. --MIRV 04:24, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC) Huh? The page history reveals that I never made this vote. No opinion. --MIRV 20:21, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Keep, of course. The fact that one person considers it pointless to study language is only that person's weakness. Anyone who cares about the scientific study of the English language will find this interesting, even if the article is imperfect in its present form. Those who don't care about that topic should work on other things.
Keep. Who wrote the above? Didn't sign it... tsk, tsk. *grins* - UtherSRG 23:11, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I wrote it and signed it. Someone else deleted my signature, apparently while deleting (and so apparently rescinding) their own vote for deletion. Michael Hardy 00:47, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Keep, is quite useful to anyone studying linguistics. PMC 00:21, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Keep, and make something more of it than simply a list. This is an interesting linguistic phenomenon in English. Djnjwd 01:14, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Keep. Lists like these are useful to people who study language and who teach language. This list in particular is interesting and will be helpful to me, an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teacher, when discussing the role of stress in English. The textbooks usually give only a few common examples, so having this many examples is helpful. I see that there are numerous "List of . . ." pages. Maybe they need to be organized by category. I didn't find a category called "Language Lists"; perhpas such a category needs to be added. Language study includes and requires a great many lists of words that cannot be easily accessed in dictionaries, lists like this one. CyberCypher 11:30 (Taipei Time) 3:30 (UTC), 10 Jan 2004
Sorry if it looks like I voted on my own listing, but upon looking at the page history it seems somebody accidentally merged two listings together yesterday (maybe Michael Hardy?) Anyway, with history view loads pushing 30 seconds I don't have time for this mess right now. Good night. silsor 06:35, Jan 10, 2004 (UTC)
I did not ever merge two lists together. I have no idea what that could refer to. Michael Hardy 21:55, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I thought that because you were making major changes to the page at the time, sorry silsor 23:46, Jan 10, 2004 (UTC)
What happened was this edit by Michael Hardy at 21:42 on 9 Jan 2004. At that time, the Vfd entries for the list of words and for Bruce V. Bracken for some reason abutted each other, and some people had commented on the list of words below the entry for Bruce, not realising that they were commenting under the wrong entry. So Michael Hardy tried to sort it out by moving Bruce's link lower down, to separate it from the other entry, not realising that the votes by you and MIRV immediately following it belonged with Bruce as well. -- Oliver P. 10:35, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)
I'd like to temporarily delete initial-stress-derived noun and its talk page in order to recombine their histories with Meaning and pronunciation patterns in English and its talk page respectively, after copy-and-paste page moves. I'll wait a while to see if there are any objections first, though. -- Oliver P. 10:51, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)
No objection. You don't need VfD for temporary deletes in order to combine histories. Angela. 06:22, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)
Keep. See above for rational. By the way, if the reorganization takes place, I already put a link to the original article in pronunciation which will need to be maintained. Kd4ttc 19:23, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)
