Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/xaband
Appearance
This page was created in 2001 and has been at X (band) since 2002. A few days ago it was moved to X (US band) and the 30-odd pages linking to it were changed. It was replaced with a "disambiguation" page which actually caused ambiguity for any external web pages linking there. A disambiguation page is unnecessary, since people aren't likely to type "X (band)". Realistically, they'll go to X. I compare this to Nirvana (band). Although there're two bands called Nirvana, there's no need to move it to Nirvana (US band). I don't think of X as a US band, just a great band. Last (and least) this X is certainly better known than any other X band. For comparison, try a Web search for its singer "Exene Cervenka". Mackerm 08:40, May 7, 2004 (UTC)
- Previous debate of this proposal: Template:VfD-X band. - David Gerard 10:37, May 7, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep. The current setup is clearer. - TB 08:52, 7 May 2004 (UTC)
- At the top, I state reasons why it's very much less clear. Would you please address them? Mackerm 21:01, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
- I don't see it really takes more justification than that. The current setup looks clearer (c.f. Pliny) - David Gerard 00:35, May 9, 2004 (UTC)
- At the top, I state reasons why it's very much less clear. Would you please address them? Mackerm 21:01, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep the page.Grant65 (Talk) 09:57, May 7, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep the current setup, it's entirely sensible. - David Gerard 10:37, May 7, 2004 (UTC)
Keep it as it is. --Ben Brockert 21:41, May 7, 2004 (UTC)- Keep it as it is, so that X (US band) can't be moved back. Whether one is slightly more popular than the other or not doesn't matter. Items to be disambiguated don't have to have parity in popularity, they just need to be abmiguous, as X (band) is. Look at Pliny, for example. Pliny the Elder is much more well known and has a lot more links than Pliny the Younger, but they are disambiguated as equals, as they should be. --Ben Brockert 17:30, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Wikipedia policy says if one meaning is clearly predominant, it remains at the general title. At the top I tell how you can determine that. Pliny the Elder and Pliny the Younger are their commonly-used names already, so there's no need to change either of them. Mackerm 00:08, May 10, 2004 (UTC)
- Yeah, but it isn't "clearly predominant". Of course a search on Exene Cervenka will turn up the US X, just as a search on Ian Rilen won't - David Gerard 10:56, May 10, 2004 (UTC)
- 8,450 vs. 283 Google hits speaks for itself. Mackerm 14:17, May 10, 2004 (UTC)
- Yes - it says "more, but hardly so overwhelming as to wipe out the smaller one." - David Gerard 14:56, May 10, 2004 (UTC)
- 8,450 vs. 283 Google hits speaks for itself. Mackerm 14:17, May 10, 2004 (UTC)
- Yeah, but it isn't "clearly predominant". Of course a search on Exene Cervenka will turn up the US X, just as a search on Ian Rilen won't - David Gerard 10:56, May 10, 2004 (UTC)
- Wikipedia policy says if one meaning is clearly predominant, it remains at the general title. At the top I tell how you can determine that. Pliny the Elder and Pliny the Younger are their commonly-used names already, so there's no need to change either of them. Mackerm 00:08, May 10, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep it as it is, so that X (US band) can't be moved back. Whether one is slightly more popular than the other or not doesn't matter. Items to be disambiguated don't have to have parity in popularity, they just need to be abmiguous, as X (band) is. Look at Pliny, for example. Pliny the Elder is much more well known and has a lot more links than Pliny the Younger, but they are disambiguated as equals, as they should be. --Ben Brockert 17:30, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Keep it as it is. I agree that nobody is likely to type "X (band)", but you say yourself that external pages might link there - do you want them to get nothing, or to get this disambiguation page?! --Stormie 00:37, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
- I want it deleted so that the original page can be moved back where it was. Mackerm 00:44, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Comment- Wikipedia policy says voters should include their reasoning with their opinion. Mackerm 15:35, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Is mine better now? --Ben Brockert 17:30, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
- It only addresses the stated least important reason. Mackerm 20:49, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Your least important reason isn't necessarily the least important reason. I can now answer your question from the last discussion, "How do you prevent people from arguing on the VfD page and just vote?" You don't argue with them after they've "just" voted, that's how. --Ben Brockert 01:36, May 9, 2004 (UTC)
- Ben, I apologize for sounding argumentative. My intent was to encourage everyone to state his case as completely as possible. Something along the lines of "on this point you're wrong because XXX, and on this point you're right, but it's outweighed because XXX." My hope is that will keep the discussion focused. Mackerm 20:13, May 9, 2004 (UTC)
- It only addresses the stated least important reason. Mackerm 20:49, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Is mine better now? --Ben Brockert 17:30, May 8, 2004 (UTC)
- Maybe more X US Band back and add a link at the top to the Aussie one Burgundavia 07:19, May 13, 2004 (UTC)