Talk:Add Insult to Injury

VfD talk....

Delete - dictionary definition - Texture 16:19, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Wiktionary material? - Fredrik 16:31, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
It is usual to redirect proverbs to [List of English proverbs] (or appropiate language of origin) because there is rarely much to say about them. This isn't really a proverb though... is there a similar appropiate list? Also it may need to be transwikied to wikiquote? Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 16:33, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Delete or improve: it is not even definition, or explanation. The article doesn't go beyond rephrasing the expression in 11 times more words (and not necessarily more clear ones than the phrase itself). Mikkalai 16:44, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)
This should be moved to Wiktionary unless more can be said about it. Mikkalai is right; there needs to be more substance to this article if it is to be kept in Wikipedia (e.g. origins, historical usage, etc.)
More can probably added to make it acceptable. In its current state it is a dicdef, and should be moved or deleted. Ludraman 11:30, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)
i added another meaning (an album). Muriel 08:49, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Is this 'turn of phrase' common everywhere? UK vs. US, etc.? If not, keep or have it redirect to general list. Zoney 14:07, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Delete Quinwound 03:52, Mar 15, 2004 (UTC)
Please delete. It's really not anything more than a definition, is it? Two halves 04:16, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Near the end of the review period and it's still a definition plus a single line about an album that is already amply covered in the article about the band. The one link in (from Injury) does not make sense to me given the context of that article. Please delete. I don't think this is even strong enough to move to Wiktionary. Rossami 22:21, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Delete, this isn't even a proverb, it's just an idiom. - DropDeadGorgias (talk) 16:49, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)

Deletion cannot be the right answer, as if the idiom content is removed it should simply be a redirect to the band, but that feels wrong too. Talk continues at Talk:Add insult to injury. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 09:14, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
- I'm okay with redirect it if you think anyone will ever follow it. I also think it would be okay to delete. If the album ever becomes really important, we can always recreate the article with the content then. Rossami 13:42, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

from pump[edit]

Not sure if this is the best place to address this, but this article still exists with a VfD tag from March--the Talk page seems to have a pretty clear consensus to delete. Niteowlneils 02:00, 3 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

It's listed in the Ongoing discussions section, although this seems to have been a unilateral action by Pete/Pcb21 despite what looks like a clear consensus to delete. I've turned it into a stub for the album, but left the VfD tag. - Lee (talk) 10:57, 3 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

As I said on vfd, the consensus was to delete the article about the phrase, but if the phrase is deleted, then we either have an article about the album, or redirect to the creators of the album. Either way, it is not a deletion issue but a content issue, I'll remove the vfd tags. I wasn't being unilateral, I was responding to the outcome of the discussion. Pete/Pcb21 (talk) 20:17, 3 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]