Revision as of 21:05, 11 July 2006 editGreen caterpillar (talk | contribs)3,262 edits comment AfD← Previous edit |
Revision as of 21:09, 11 July 2006 edit undoJewbo WaIes, LOL (talk | contribs)30 editsNo edit summaryNext edit → |
Line 12: |
Line 12: |
|
The ''']''' alone is larger than all the lists I've built combined!!! And then there's the mathematics topic lists and the list of mathematicians (which is 166 kilobytes long!). That food shouldn't be afforded similar treatment doesn't make any sense, especially considering the central role it plays in all of our lives. If the approach is okay to take on the far broader subjects of Mathematics, Philosophy, Biology, etc., then why isn't it appropriate for the narrower subject of food? Your stance doesn't make any sense. Please explain. --] 20:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
The ''']''' alone is larger than all the lists I've built combined!!! And then there's the mathematics topic lists and the list of mathematicians (which is 166 kilobytes long!). That food shouldn't be afforded similar treatment doesn't make any sense, especially considering the central role it plays in all of our lives. If the approach is okay to take on the far broader subjects of Mathematics, Philosophy, Biology, etc., then why isn't it appropriate for the narrower subject of food? Your stance doesn't make any sense. Please explain. --] 20:21, 11 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
:What I think is unmaintainable is that there are way too many food-related topics, because one could include list of foods, food agencies, meal types, etc. ] 21:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
:What I think is unmaintainable is that there are way too many food-related topics, because one could include list of foods, food agencies, meal types, etc. ] 21:05, 11 July 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Abstain'''. I abstain. --] 21:09, 11 July 2006 (UTC) |
Listcurft. Certainly incomplete and potenially very huge list. Would work much better as a category, if there isn't one already. -- Koffieyahoo 04:27, 10 July 2006 (UTC)