Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tractatus de superstitionibus

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 was Keep (non-admin closure), because its WP:DAB value is confirmed. Ecoleetage (talk) 00:24, 13 May 2008 (UTC)"

[edit] Tractatus de superstitionibus

Tractatus de superstitionibus (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Neither of these works has a page. No need for a dab. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 04:37, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

  • {{huh}}? Keep of course. The entire point of WP:DAB is to point people to the article they are looking for. People typing "Tractatus de superstitionibus" may be looking for either the Nicholas Magni or the Martin of Arles article. Because of the two works with the same title, the page cannot just be a redirect. --dab (𒁳) 05:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. I don't see how this violates WP:DAB. There is no requirement that disambiguation entries lead to an article where the term is the primary topic. --Dhartung | Talk 06:46, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - I suggest, if there are no objections, changing the heading to read "Tractatus de superstitionibus may refer a printed work by one of the following:". It makes the disambig a little clearer and gives a little info about the work. TN‑X-Man 14:21, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - I've gone ahead and made my suggested change. TN‑X-Man 19:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep, the solution resides in creating articles to dab to.--Berig (talk) 18:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - perfectly reasonable disambiguation page. Aleta Sing 00:01, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - This type of disambiguation is important to have, both for those new to the topic and "old hands". We can write/fill out the articles later.Ron B. Thomson (talk) 21:17, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. I don't have any problem with this usage of a DAB page. TN-X-Man's change in the heading is an improvement and makes the DAB more clear. EdJohnston (talk) 17:22, 11 May 2008 (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.