Talk:.jobs

RFD discussion: July–September 2019

The following information has failed Wiktionary's deletion process (permalink).

It should not be re-entered without careful consideration.

---

.jobs

Didn't we want to get rid of these top-level domains? --Gibraltar Rocks (talk) 21:30, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

I've said a few times that we should omit the dot (i.e. aero not .aero); I can't remember anyone arguing for deletion. However, in recent years the domain rules have expanded so that any private company can create their own TLD: see this huge list of the ones that exist now: [1]. It could get a bit silly if we try to include them all these days. Equinox ◑ 21:37, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Delete all TLD entries. Others have substitutable offers with more encyclopedic content that is needed if somebody one wants to know something about a TLD. Nobody types a TLD into a dictionary to find out it it’s a TLD. Fay Freak (talk) 02:02, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

So, make me an admin, and I'll delete all the TLDs. --Gibraltar Rocks (talk) 08:07, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Can’t we simply follow the usual CFI rules? Only if there are three or more independent instances of use in durably archived media of (say) the TLD “.cookingchannel” (with or without dot) – as a lexical unit by itself; not as part of a larger url like www.lifestyle.cookingchannel – should it be included.  --Lambiam 17:38, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

This passes by the considerations of their actual use. By this argumentation we could also most lexemes of programming languages. But we don’t include their lexica because these are not defined by use. Neither is it relevant whether TLD are used. Fay Freak (talk) 21:35, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Delete. Ultimateria (talk) 17:21, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Delete, not a word. —Rua (mew) 11:25, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

• RFD deleted. —Μετάknowledge^{discuss/deeds} 20:16, 28 September 2019 (UTC)