Talk:DDMMYYYY
Latest comment: 4 years ago by Dan Polansky in topic RFD discussion: December 2019–March 2020
The following information passed a request for deletion (permalink).
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.
As I'm not happy about how the discussion for DDMMYY turned out, I'm gonna RFD this one too. --Vealhurl (talk) 23:49, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep Commonly used in running text in collocations such as "DDMMYYYY format". Probably best defined as a noun. DCDuring (talk) 00:58, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- The non-gloss definition gives the example of 02/04/2011, presumably for 2 April 2011, but that format is usually denoted as “DD/MM/YYYY”. This is utterly confusing; look at the question posed here. In DDMMYYYY format it should be “02042011”; for more examples see the inset with the heading “References in periodicals archive” here. It looks like this is also the dominant meaning in the sparse durably archived uses, such as e.g. here. Where can we find the discussion for DDMMYY? --Lambiam 08:52, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Delete. Equinox ◑ 11:52, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- I must admin my nomination was a form of mild trolling - I was a little drunk when editing last night...--Vealhurl (talk) 12:16, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Delete - not a word. - TheDaveRoss 13:43, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
- Keep - I'm not sure what it is, but it definitely exists in various texts. SemperBlotto (talk) 07:54, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
- Treat the same as DDMMYY, however that one came out. bd2412 T 05:25, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- In case that is too oblique to parse, I mean keep. bd2412 T 04:18, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
- Keep for reasons laid out at DDMMYY Purplebackpack89 22:46, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
- RFD kept: no consensus for deletion. Over 3 months have elapsed. --Dan Polansky (talk) 12:36, 6 March 2020 (UTC)