Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elementary School Musical (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Clear keep consensus supported by policy. (non-admin closure) Monty  845  22:45, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Elementary School Musical
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Orphan dab; nav function is better served by hatnotes EBE123  talkContribs 19:39, 16 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong keep As per WP:INTDABLINK, disambiguation pages are not supposed to be linked to from other articles. They not to be classified as orphaned articles as per WP:O.  Using hatnotes in this case does not really make sense.  Where would a hatnote be placed?  This would only apply if there was already a non-disambiguation page titled Elementary School Musical. – Dream out loud  (talk) 19:53, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I think that it is that it should use hatnotes instead of this page. The hatnotes would be on the articles.  There is already an hatnote on Elementary School Musical (The Simpsons).   EBE123  talkContribs 20:07, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That would completely defeat the purpose of having disambiguation pages. According to WP:TWODABS, "if an ambiguous term is considered to have no primary topic, then that term should lead to a disambiguation page".  There is no primary topic, so a disambiguation page is needed.  In other words, if there was no disambiguation page, how would anyone be able to find either article?  No ordinary user is going to know that they have to type "(The Simpsons)" or "(South Park") after the article name.  So what if they just searched for "Elementary School Musical"?  That wouldn't take them anywhere, and you would simply get a red link.  That is why we have disambiguation pages.  Maybe you should take some time and read over WP:D. – Dream out loud  (talk) 20:17, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep per Dream Out Loud. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 22:26, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:16, 17 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Deletion is appropriate only if one of the two articles is to be considered as the primary topic. If neither is the primary topic, a disambiguation page is appropriate at the undisambiguated title. older ≠ wiser 01:37, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Neither article is the primary topic, which is why there's no reason for deletion. Both articles are about TV show episodes, so they should both be on the disambiguation page. – Dream out loud  (talk) 02:00, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, perfectly legitimate use of a disambiguation page per WP:TWODABS. -- Kinu  t/c 20:28, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete (E.g.) The Simpsons one can be used for Elementary School Musical. If they don't want that link, the South Park one is at the top of the page, and vice versa. Kei_Jo (Talk to me baby! :þ) 16:12, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hatnotes are useful when a term has an obvious primary topic (i.e., Cheese), which does not exist in this case. Indeed, one could theoretically argue the position opposite yours, stating that this should redirect to the South Park episode because it aired first. -- Kinu  t/c 17:34, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Why would the Simpsons article be used over the South Park article? Or vice versa? Neither article is a primary topic, so you can't just pick one of the two and add a hatnote for the other article.  People need to know the guidelines before making comments like this.  This whole AfD could have been avoided if anyone actually paid attention to WP:D. – Dream out loud  (talk) 20:36, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - per WP:TWODABS. This page falls exactly into those guidelines. -- Whpq (talk) 16:33, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep A pretty straight forward keep. If there is "no primary topic, then that term should lead to a disambiguation page." --Bejnar (talk) 21:33, 19 April 2011 (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.