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 speedy keep. Per WP:SK#1, the nominator has withdrawn their nomination without dissent. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 16:46, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Principle[edit]

Principle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

An extremely generic, abstract term. The article starts with a dicdef, then proceeds into a clumsy way far from complete list of various principles. I say this page is the place for disambig, and to this end I request its deletion, and page move in Talk:Principle (disambiguation) . Staszek Lem (talk) 01:16, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and improve. One of the biggest mistakes we can make as an encyclopedia is to start deleting articles on concepts that are abstract and difficult to write about. bd2412 T 12:06, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep The nomination seems to be suggesting redirection which is not achieved by deletion. In any case, the topic merits more work per WP:IMPERFECT. Warden (talk) 12:25, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Nomination withdrawn after reading and understanding WP:DABCONCEPT, thanks to User:BD2412. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:30, 17 July 2013 (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.