Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Yost (disambiguation)


 * 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   delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:01, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

David Yost (disambiguation)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unnecessary disambiguation page, per Template:db-disambig and WP:TWODABS. Boleyn (talk) 20:46, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, unless I'm misunderstanding the definition of primary topic as it pertains to people and human names. (Below copied from the subject page's Talk, prepared in response to nom for speedy deletion but relevant here.) Dwpaul (talk) 20:57, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I do not think that there is a "primary" among the two pages that were being disambiguated (the first criterion) prior to User:boleyn's change to a { {for} } hatnote at David Yost pointing directly to Dave Yost, and there are other notable David Yosts (e.g. former Assistant Head Coach at the University of Missouri), just not ones with WP pages (but that could happen at a moment's notice). One of the subjects (the one unfound if you search by his legal name) is likely to become even more notable in an upcoming contested state election. Hence a DAB page seemed the appropriate solution. Dwpaul (talk) 17:07, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I suppose the better solution would be for the existing article David Yost to move to David Harold Yost, since that is the actual name used in the lede of the article, and for the DAB page to be created at David Yost -- but this seemed a bit more than necessary until there is actually a third (at least) David Yost to be disambiguated. My main purpose was just to support the { {other people} } tag on the extant two articles but to not require their updating when or if there is a third. Dwpaul (talk) 17:24, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * If neither of the two meanings is primary, then a normal disambiguation page is used at the base name. per WP:MOSDAB Dwpaul (talk) 18:02, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * See also Disambiguation: [I]f an ambiguous term has no primary topic, then that term needs to lead to a disambiguation page. In other words, where no topic is primary, the disambiguation page is placed at the base name. In this case we are referring to two different people of equal (or equally limited) notability (unlike, e.g., Einstein), and neither is the primary topic to link to with hatnotes versus using disambiguation. Dwpaul (talk) 19:09, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete We have a Dave and a David. Why not just hatnote them to each other? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:54, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
 * They are both Davids, though one is better known as Dave, and as documented above there are others that are recently notable. Dwpaul (talk) 01:00, 22 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. If other people with the same name get Wikipedia articles then this page can be recreated. Link the two pages with hatnotes per TenPoundHammer. Tassedethe (talk) 22:33, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * And now one has, subject to WP:AFC: Dr. David S. Yost -- Dwpaul (talk) 23:00, 22 September 2013 (UTC)


 * More prominently calling attention to the fact that there are now three Wikipedia articles concerning people named David Yost to be disambiguated, which calls much of the logic used to support the deletion of this dab (e.g., citing WP:2DAB) into question. The third page is David S. Yost, submitted for creation today. Dwpaul (talk) 23:14, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, that's simply not true. There are still only two Wikipedia articles on people named David Yost (and one AfC submission). --BDD (talk) 18:55, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Didn't mean to misrepresent. You are correct, but as you note (below) the AfC submission has the potential to change the AfD discussion, all I meant to point out. Dwpaul (talk) 19:01, 30 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:TWODABS... however, if the AfC submission goes live, this page suddenly becomes necessary again. So it may not be practical to delete if that's going to be live any time soon (right now it hasn't been submitted for review). --BDD (talk) 18:55, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * It actually has been submitted (see the bottom of the AfC page) but for some reason the notice that it hasn't has not been removed. Do I need to/can I remove it? Thanks. Dwpaul (talk) 18:58, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * My mistake. I have very little experience with AfC, but I would think you could replace the notice at the top and move the notice at the bottom there. --BDD (talk) 19:18, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the notice is supposed to be removed by a (apparently backlogged) bot. I see from the template that one could (if very brave) change the parameters manually, but I hesitate to do since I don't want to somehow remove the AfC from the workflow. Thanks. Dwpaul (talk)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Trevj (talk) 08:46, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisting comment Relist pending outcome of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/David S. Yost. -- Trevj (talk) 08:48, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete and hatnote preferred, but fine as is per TWODABS (whatever version). Such a minor issue and DAB can come back later if needed. Widefox ; talk 15:16, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete and hatnotes from David to Dave and v.v. If and when we have an article on David S., the current AfC (and he doesn't look terribly notable...?), then it's the work of minutes to re-create the dab page and change the hatnotes. (Alternatively, someone could create a convincing Redlink to David S. in some article, and add him to the dab page: he's redlinked at Office of Net Assessment but unsourced - or is that Disinfopedia External Link a Reliable Source?) Pam  D  17:11, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep It is a lot easier to have a disambiguation page for when we get more people. I have seen way to many actor lists link to the wrong person because we do not disambiguate enough and let people who clearly do not dominate the actual use of the name be the primary topic.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:44, 8 October 2013 (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.