Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Diamond


 * 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) Unionhawk Talk E-mail 05:25, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Jim Diamond

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This is an empty page that serves no purpose, which only redirects to a James Diamond page that contains links for Jim Diamond bios and a James Diamond Bio. Recommended change: Either move Jim Diamond Bios to this page or delete this page so that the name can be used for a person Biography. Deadalus821 (talk) 23:11, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Oppose There are not enough Jim/James Diamonds (4) to justify separating James from Jim. At the moment, typing in Jim Diamond takes you straight to a disambiguation page with 3 Jims listed and one primarily known as James. If one of the Jims was significantly more notable than the others then there would be a case for moving it to the primary page, but that doesn't seem to be the case. It certainly does not serve no purpose, it takes you to a very relevant disambiguation page. Boleyn (talk) 05:37, 17 August 2009 (UTC) Comment From my preliminary look into it, the Scottish musician seems more notable, but not significantly so. I'm concerned that this move would end up being moved again in the future. However, it would mean that at least some of those typing in Jim Diamond would go straight to the page they want, so it would be quicker for people. I don't have strong feelings on that suggestion - however I feel strongly that the original suggestion of aking this a Jim only dab or deleting it would be an error. Boleyn (talk) 20:06, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. Completely reasonable redirect to a disambiguation page. Even if it were appropriate to delete it, it should be handled through WP:RFD rather than through AfD. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:02, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment It does seem a little messy as it stands. Imho, Jim Diamond (Scottish musician) should be moved to the primary page with a hatnote to Jim Diamond (music producer). The other Jim Diamond is up for a speedy deletion, and James H. Diamond can stay where he is. In any case, AfD doesn't seem the right place to bring it to Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 11:34, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. I agree with Dylanfromthenorth, there are only two "Jim Diamond"s and the singer is the more likely search target, so that article should be moved here and the other two covered by hatnotes.--Michig (talk) 17:22, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep This is a perfectly reasonable redirect. Also, this is the wrong venue. Redirects should be discussed at Redirects for discussion. Until It Sleeps Wake me 02:28, 23 August 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.