Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/European Union acronyms, jargon and working practices

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

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) B music ian 03:34, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

European Union acronyms, jargon and working practices[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article appears to be a kind of glossary of eurospeak. Fairly clear violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. — Blue-Haired Lawyer ^t 21:02, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep We need a better title, but I think it is nonetheless sufficient important as an auxiliary aid in understand the articles in the encyclopedia to be kept here somewhere. DGG ( talk ) 22:00, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is no rule against glossaries on Wikipedia; in fact, they are specifically recognized as a legitimate variety of list. See MOS:LIST#List articles, as well as Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Glossaries (currently undergoing a revision). Although not currently titled as such, this article is a useful list, mainly populated by (and providing concise and helpful explanations of) blue-linked terms. --Arxiloxos (talk) 22:51, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. My $0.05: the article can be useuful for quickly findig relevant articles on the European Union. I'd use the following rule of thumb; anything that is factual, informative and helps readers quickly find what they are looking for should usually not fall foul of Wikipedia house rules. --Grimne (talk) 11:06, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:15, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:16, 8 February 2012 (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 article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.