Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:American Heritage Dictionary representation

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was: Move. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 11:54, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:American Heritage Dictionary representation

Obviously doesn't fit the namespace (even

Help:IPA for English and Pronunciation respelling for English already exist, why would we need a dedicated page for this particular dictionary, and not for, say, Merriam-Webster? Delete or redirect to Pronunciation respelling for English. Nardog (talk) 22:30, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep. The notation is significant enough that I had to learn it in elementary school. Also, as it is a dictionary notation, I cannot see the redirect to Pronunciation respelling for English as suitable.LakeKayak (talk) 23:08, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep but users that vote to keep it should think about expanding it. Mr KEBAB (talk) 23:20, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move to article namespace and expand, so it provides additional information that is not already found in Pronunciation respelling for English#Traditional respelling systems. --mach 🙈🙉🙊 06:06, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I never realized it was in a different name space. While my reasoning is still the same, I wish to change my vote to Move to article namespace. I have tried minor expansions, but I haven't been able to figure out what major expansion could work.LakeKayak (talk) 02:02, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's
talk page or in a deletion review
). No further edits should be made to this page.