Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of ministers of agriculture of Victoria


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Minister for Agriculture (Victoria). Star  Mississippi  13:11, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

List of ministers of agriculture of Victoria

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Background: Page was initially split from Minister for Agriculture (Victoria).

Because I believed that the content in Minister for Agriculture (Victoria) wasn't sufficient for a stand alone article (see here), I undid the split and merged the pages together again. A PROD for this article was then contested.

Reason for deletion: This page is essentially a duplicate of Minister for Agriculture (Victoria). ––– GMH MELBOURNE   TALK  08:35, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Australia. –––  GMH MELBOURNE   TALK  08:35, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Minister for Agriculture (Victoria) is fine in this case, as "List of of " is a reasonably common naming pattern. If it's cleaner to avoid the split history, delete and redirect is probably fine. I agree that it does not seem like a necessary split. &mdash;siro&chi;o 08:43, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect is a good idea. ––– GMH MELBOURNE   TALK  08:46, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:03, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Speedy merge/redirect Really dumb move to split the list off, leaving just a rump sub-stub. It's perfectly fine (and in fact preferable) to have both information about the position and a list of officeholders in the same article, even if you expect some expansion later. Why would you make readers go to separate pages for this? There is no WP:SIZE basis for a split. Reywas92Talk
 * Keep I don't mind a redirect, but the redirect page will become a massive stub. JASpencer (talk) 15:44, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I have no idea what that means, what is a "massive stub"? That's contradictory. We only need one page, not two, to describe the position and who has held it. Reywas92Talk 17:15, 2 October 2023 (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.