Talk:I'm Hindu

The following information passed a request for deletion.

This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.

---

I'm Hindu

No value. --Hekaheka (talk) 03:14, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Comment: is there a particular reason why you don't think this phrase has any value, although you haven't nominated any other statements of religious belief for deletion? [[1]] shows that Wiktionary includes similar phrases for a variety of religions, presumably because they're useful phrases for people who may not speak English well, and so meet the criteria for inclusion. If those phrases are suitable for inclusion, then so is this one. P Aculeius (talk) 03:34, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

I tried I'm Christian, I'm Muslim, I'm Buddhist, I'm Greek Otrhodox, I'm Sikh, I'm Pagan and concluded that this is the only one in this category. I failed to check I'm Jewish, and I'm nominating that and all similar statements of any religion or ideology that can be found. --Hekaheka (talk) 23:14, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

It's not, click on the link above, and you'll see why. These exist because they're useful phrases for those who don't speak English well. If anything, they're likely to acquire more variations. P Aculeius (talk) 00:01, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm a Christian, I'm a Muslim, I'm a Buddhist. —Stephen ^(Talk) 03:33, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

How is a person who does not speak English enough to understand what I'm Hindu means supposed to understand what is given as explanation for those particular words? The "explanation" indicates that the speaker is a follower of Hinduism requires better understanding of English than the sentence that is being explained. Contrary to what you say, this entry - and the others like it - is not at all useful for those who don't speak English well. --Hekaheka (talk) 04:53, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

I doubt most people use phrasebooks to translate phrases into their own language. The idea is to show how to express an idea in another language. Passive understanding of a second language is generally much better than the ability to say things in that language. I can figure out the meaning of texts in dozens of languages, but I'm only really comfortable speaking English. Chuck Entz (talk) 05:15, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Category:English phrasebook/Religion, check these then. They all use "I am". Aryamanarora (talk) 12:34, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Also, the translations into other languages make them easier to understand, even if the reader doesn't speak English. Aryamanarora (talk) 12:46, 13 October 2015 (UTC)

Keep because it seems legitimately useful for a phrasebook (though I still have my doubts about whether phrasebook should be in mainspace). Equinox ◑ 20:49, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

• Keep per Equinox and Stephen (I'm a Christian, I'm a Muslim, I'm a Buddhist). --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:08, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
• Abstain. If we're going to have a phrasebook in the first place, then the phrase I'm Hindu or I'm a Hindu, depending on which one you actually say in English, belongs in there. Korn [kʰʊ̃ːæ̯̃n] (talk) 10:46, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
• Keep. --Daniel Carrero (talk) 11:18, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
• Move all phrasebook entries identifying characteristics to "I am a" titles; redirect contractions to those. bd2412 T 14:04, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

  What are "I am a" titles? e.g. "I am Chinese" seems more plausible than "I am a Chinese person". Equinox ◑ 18:24, 20 October 2015 (UTC)

  Still better than "I'm", which is a bit informal for a dictionary to use as a default. bd2412 T 17:38, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

• RFD kept: either consensus to keep or in any case no consensus to delete. --Dan Polansky (talk) 08:54, 22 November 2015 (UTC)