Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Livery in law


 * 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   speedy keep. SK#1: nom withdrawn, and no other deletion arguments (non-admin closure) czar   &middot;   &middot;  17:05, 30 June 2013 (UTC)

Livery in law

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not quite sure whether this dab page should be deleted or possibly redirected to Livery of seisin. The second entry is related to the first, and in fact it has been proposed that they be merged. The other two alleged dab entries don't belong here at all. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:45, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I am also nominating the following related page because it has the same problem and consists of the same two entries: Livery of seisin and Sasine:
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 07:39, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Evano1van(எவனோ ஓருவன்) 07:39, 23 June 2013 (UTC)


 * The proposal is to merge Livery of seisin into Seisin, not Sasine. Peter&#160;James (talk) 08:52, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Close The nomination was unclear and the later addition of another article leaves matters even less clear. I don't know what is being proposed for Livery in deed. Anyway, this is a matter best dealt with by normal editing without AFD involvement. Go ahead with editing and redirecting involving talk page discussion when required. Thincat (talk) 12:23, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep livery in law is a legal concept and process explained in numerous sources and should therefore be a blue link. The rest is a matter of ordinary editing, not deletion. Warden (talk) 13:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Withdraw nomination. Okay, I was thinking of it only in terms of a badly formed dab page. I'll tidy it up a bit, reclassify it, and tag it for an expert to deal with. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:34, 24 June 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.