Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bernard Lens


 * 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) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Bernard Lens

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

No need for a disambiguation page when no articles by its title exist. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 02:56, 23 October 2009 (UTC) Lo dicono a Signa. 17:23, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. There are no existing Bernard Lens so there is no need for disambiguation.-- JL 09  q? c|undefined 03:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * One: Two: Bernard Lens III, Bernard Lens II will follow ; Bernard the grandfather is barely notable and Bernard IV is, I am afraid, not. NVO (talk) 17:10, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Treat it not as a diambig but as an article in its own right, notability established (Sir Horace says "incomparable" and I have no reason to distrust his lordship). There's nothing wrong about articles on dynasties. I'll fix this one over the weekend. NVO (talk) 04:28, 23 October 2009 (UTC) now it is a disambig.NVO (talk) 10:49, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Is it forbidden to start with a disambig page? This is a referenced material providing a good start for further expansion. It could be useful for the readers. --Vejvančický (talk) 07:06, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per NVO and Vejvancicky.  Anna Lincoln  11:15, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete It is a disambiguation page. It is probably only ever going to be a disambiguation page. A disambiguation page with only one link isn't necessary. Adambro (talk) 17:17, 23 October 2009 (UTC) Keep Now more than one Bernard Lens article exists so this disambiguation page is appropriate. Adambro (talk) 19:02, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep It's a disambiguation page, but there's legitimacy to it. Give it a little time for expansion. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?
 * Keep It seems that links to the others will be provided soon, and they seem notable enough; one has been nominated for DYK. -- Casmith_789 (talk) 17:47, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep of course. By the way: In German wikipedia, they distinguish people as here: de:Kaspar Winzerer (grandfather, father, son). Only nobilities would be named as Caspar I, Caspar II.... 78.55.100.137 (talk) 10:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Right, but this numbering is what the source uses. The convention is sort of standard for artistic dynasties: Jacob de Gheyn II, Henricus Hondius II and coexists with "the elders" or "the juniors". NVO (talk) 10:49, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Excellent work, NVO. --Chris Johnson (talk) 20:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - seems like this will be expanded as and when required, and it it a useful disambiguation page, so no need to be deleted. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 09:38, 29 October 2009 (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.