Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cage (enclosure)


 * 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 keep -R. fiend 15:06, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Cage (enclosure)
dicdef Icarus 05:11, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * keep Stub has potential: there are many different cage types and uses (eg a prison cage, a birdcage, a rollcage, a wrestling cage-match). An encyclopedic overview of these could be useful. Anetode 08:49, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Anetode. Stubby indeed but can be expanded. Also, is the first hit on the Cage disambiguation list. - Mgm|(talk) 09:23, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep it probably should be at Cage with the dab page at Cage (disambiguation). Dunc|&#9786; 12:18, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Please don't move disambig pages to XXX (disambiguation) if XXX is already used as a disambig page. It serves no practical purpose. I've redirected the example above to make it a bit harder to make another pointless move. / Peter Isotalo 14:06, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The examples given above are relevant to articles like prison and wrestling, not as a separate article. / Peter Isotalo 14:06, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * keep. Clear potential for expansion. &mdash; brighterorange  (talk) 18:23, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. If kept, move cage to cage (disambiguation) and move cage (enclosure) to cage.  -Sean Curtin 23:47, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. The name should remain as is.  Given the number of entries in the DAB article, it makes sense to leave the DAB article where it is. Vegaswikian 07:33, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Expand - a dull article, but has potential. --MacRusgail 17:35, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. A cage is one of those apparently dull, everyday things like a door or a nail that should have an article. --A bit iffy 13:38, 24 September 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.