Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johns Creek


 * 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   redirect to Johns Creek, Georgia. (non-admin closure) -- Trevj (talk) 09:07, 10 September 2012 (UTC)

Johns Creek

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

The stream is of negligible importance compared to the city of 76,728 with a per capita income of $66,000. A simple hatnote will suffice. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 09:18, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Procedural Speedy Keep - The nom accidentally AfD'd the disambiguation page. He needs to nominate specifically the page he feels should be deleted. --Oakshade (talk) 20:26, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The dab page is the one getting deleted right? What should I have done? I don't know anywhere else that it would get much discussion. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 21:32, 2 September 2012 (UTC)
 * If there are two existing "Johns Creek" articles, then it is appropriate to have a dab page for it as that is the search term. If you'd like one of the articles to be deleted, then AfD that specific one.  If you think both articles should be deleted, then AfD both of them, but in separate AfDs as they are two separate types of topics (one a town, the other a geographical feature). --Oakshade (talk) 00:28, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. If I understand correctly, Marcus Qwertyus isn't proposing to delete either of the articles.  As such, I don't think deletion is appropriate or necessary here: assuming Marcus is right, then Johns Creek should redirect to Johns Creek, Georgia, adding a hatnote to that article pointing to Johns Creek (Chattahoochee River).  It seems to me this could be accomplished by editing, without any need for an AfD.--Arxiloxos (talk) 01:46, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Correct. The intended outcome is for Johns Creek to redirect to the city without deletion. I just don't think RfD or any other processes are appropriate here. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 07:12, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - as nom isn't actually proposing that an article get deleted, what he wants is a WP:RM. Bizarre. GiantSnowman 11:46, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * No. Johns Creek, GA isn't getting moved any time soon. It should be like how Nashville redirects to Nashville, TN. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 11:56, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment, I think what some voting keep are suggesting is that no deletion is needed to change the page into a redirect. older ≠ wiser 12:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 23:35, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Convert to redirect to city article: I think this is what the nominator wants, and if it weren't for the AfD template I'd just go ahead and boldly do it. WP:SNOW perhaps? I've already put the hatnote in place on the city article, although it's not yet accurate! (I've also created a redirect from John's Creek, for readers who know their grammar but not the spelling of the town name!) Pam  D  13:03, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not really an AfD matter, nor an RM: it's a discussion of whether the city is, or is not, the primary usage of the undisambiguated term. The nominator thinks so, and from the evidence I'd agree. So if consensus is that the city is the primary usage, then the base term needs to redirect to the city - which, by US convention (?) is at the disambiguated name of Johns Creek, Georgia. Another approach would be to move the city article to plain Johns Creek (in which case, simplify the hatnote).  Pam  D  13:11, 4 September 2012 (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.