Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sumela Monastrey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 of the debate was redirect. howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 23:15, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Sumela Monastrey
This page is incorrectly spelt. There is an existing page, correctly spelt, that refers to the same topic. I have merged the content into the correctly spelt page (Sumela Monastery). A redirect is pointless because of the spelling mistake. Rob cowie 13:19, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
- redirect, likely spelling mistake + content has been merged. Kappa 16:00, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
- The process of dealing with duplicate articles does not involve deletion at any stage. As per Kappa, redirect. Uncle G 01:20, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- With respect, no encyclopaedia should include articles that are incorrectly spelt. This is not a case of an 'alternative' spelling, it is wrong in any dialect of English. Its deletion will not cause any information to be lost and will improve the quality of wikipedia. Rob cowie 08:43, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- No. Its deletion will mean that the next time that an editor comes along, makes the mistake (a mistake that has already been made once, and will thus very probably be made again), we'll end up back at AFD again, with your nominating the next duplicate article that is created. There's no need to keep treading this same path through AFD over and over, each time that yet another editor makes this same mistake, when a redirect prevents the problem from actually happening in the future.
There's also the fact that your own merger of the article's content now prevents the article from being deleted. Article merger does not involve deletion as its final step. Uncle G 17:56, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- I suspect the error was made prior to the correctly spelt article was created; it seems likely that a user searched for 'Sumela Monastery', did not find a page and thus created it (albeit with a spelling error). I don't follow the logic that the mistake is likely to be made again... this time, a correct article exists. Following this course of action will inevitably lead to vast numbers of redirect pages with incorrect spellings - surely unsustainable? Further, I fail to understand why an article merge (which is essentially an edit by a user) then prevents the article from being deleted. Why is this the case? Is that for ever?Rob cowie 21:41, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- No. Its deletion will mean that the next time that an editor comes along, makes the mistake (a mistake that has already been made once, and will thus very probably be made again), we'll end up back at AFD again, with your nominating the next duplicate article that is created. There's no need to keep treading this same path through AFD over and over, each time that yet another editor makes this same mistake, when a redirect prevents the problem from actually happening in the future.
- Redirect is in place. Closing AfD. howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 23:15, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- 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.
