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 delete. Unsourced content should not be transwikied. May be redirected to wherever appropriate. Sandstein 06:41, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vagina gentium (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Either this is genuine, in which case it's a seemingly unsourced dicdef that should be transwikied. Or, while not quite something made up in school one day, it's a phrase that's never used. I know Google's unscientific etc etc, but I can find no legitimate non-trivial use of this phrase anywhere. As I'm frankly a bit baffled by this one, bringing it here for consensus as to whether to boot it over to Wiktionary, delete it altogether or keep-and-expand (having gone through what sorry sources I can find, I do not volunteer to do this) — iridescent (talk to me!) 02:08, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Transwiki To Wikitionary Mbisanz 02:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• To Wikitionary [1]. -- GarbageCollection - ^!Collect 03:00, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As much as I love the vagina, this version must go. The theory is real, the term was no part of my anthropology education. MarkBul 03:06, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as lacking reliable sources and therefore failing WP:V. The term was used by the historian Jordanes to describe the part of Scandinavia from which the Gothic tribes erupted into the Roman world, and it has since been applied to other areas from which peoples have spread into surrounding regions, but in a hasty search I can find no evidence of its use to mean "the place where humans first appeared," as stated in the article. Deor 03:13, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• To Wikitionary Would fit over there, but probably not deserving of an article. Pursey 03:33, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Although an article for this phrase could be written over at Wiktionary, this certainly is not it. J Milburn 13:06, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. FWIW, vagina gentium is not really Latin; originally, vagina meant "sheath" or "scabbard", and its use to describe female private parts is relatively late in development. Venter gentium feels more natural (venter, "belly" or "womb"). - Smerdis of Tlön 13:47, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have a feeling that Jordanes probably knew Latin better than you or I do, so saying that the expression is "not really Latin" isn't much help. Deor 18:06, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While I agree about saying it is "not really Latin" is not extremely helpful, SoT is correct in the original meaning of "vagina", and its usage appears to be incorrect here. Off topic, what does "FWIW" mean? J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 02:36, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think FWIW means "for what it's worth." The usage would be incorrect—or at least muddled—if what Jordanes meant was in fact "womb of nations"; but who's to say that was what he was trying to express? (And if he had meant "womb," he probably would have used matrix or alvus, not venter.) Perhaps the metaphor he had in mind was that of the birth canal rather than the womb. In any event, I still think the article should be deleted, since as I said above, there appear to be no sources that back up its claim that the term is used to refer to "the place where humans first appeared." Deor 12:34, 4 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jordanes (6th century), who described himself as as agramatus - illiterate, wrote a rather poor approximation of classical latin. Delete this entry. /Pieter Kuiper 20:40, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• XWiki to Wiktionary, but take out the speculation. J-stan ^Talk_Contribs 20:53, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Transwiki this is much more suited for the Wikitionary.--JForget 01:09, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect There's an article on Cradle of civilization, so this should be a redirect to that article. This article shows that it is a legitimate term "coined by Iordanes in the 6th century". SilkTork *** SilkyTalk 15:59, 5 September 2007 (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.