Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tongue-twisters

This is a massive and very interesting list of tongue-twisters in numerous languages. Unfortunately, I believe this isn't suitable material for an encyclopedia, for the following reasons:

• It keeps expanding forever.
• Most of the tongue-twisters are unverifyable and some may have been invented by the authors.
• A lot of the content isn't really tongue twisters, but other linguistic peculiarities (such as long strings of consonants or vowels in words, phrases made out of homonyms etc).
• Most importantly, the topic itself is unencyclopedic. Only a few examples would be required to illustrate the concept of a tongue-twister, Wikipedia needn't host a database of them.

Of course, I wouldn't want such a great list to be completely deleted. Maybe Wikibooks would host it, or some other way could be found to keep it online and editable.

Rain74 18:07, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

• Transwiki to wikibooks Where ^(talk) 18:38, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep or transwiki. I see no indication of mass, though. Jordanmills 22:26, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
• Keep or transwiki. Haikupoet 01:22, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
• keep Because...
• Wikipedia is not paper
• Not sure you can verify a toungue-twister. Its seems akin to verifying that the sky is up. It isn't like there is an official United Tongue Twister Board of America or something. It is the most arguable point of deletion, though.
• Just because some of the article needs to go, doesn't mean the WHOLE article has to go...
• If a List of Tongue Twisters is encyclopedic, then so are 95% of all the list categories.

Roodog2k 23:30, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

• Keep or transwiki.
• Not sure you can verify a toungue-twister. a toungue-twister can be made by anyone does not need to be verified
• Just because some of the article needs to go, doesn't mean the WHOLE article has to go...
• A List of Tongue Twisters is encyclopedic.

• Comment: we have deleted similar lists before, such as lists of jokes. Also, the very fact that tongue-twisters are unverifyable, pointed out by previous users, is an argument for deletion in my opinion. Wikipedia is supposed to explain the concept of a tongue-twister (in the article Tongue-twister) and perhaps provide a few examples to illustrate subject, not list every tongue-twister in existance. Rain74 16:41, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

: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.