Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Madeline


 * 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   procedural close. Now a redirect to Mary Magdalene J04n(talk page) 22:21, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Mary Madeline

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The two entries on this dab page are only partial matches, and not even that close. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:56, 26 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Sir  Rcsprinter,  Bt  (state the obvious)  @ 00:24, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

The nom & preceding discussion seem to show basis for this nom so far is IDL, and i would summarily close it were i not the creator. I urge immediate close (without prejudice to renom), to afford the del-advocates the opportunity to start over with a clean slate when they have figured out some way in which their dislike for it corresponds to our actual standards for Dab-entries, and thus (perhaps potentially in this case) Dab-deletion. --Jerzy•t 10:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Snow delete per nom. There really isn't much else to say.  Erpert  Who is this guy? 05:42, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Nom'r has seized upon PTM's language "contains part of the page title" without taking counsel from the examples that are the bulk of that single-'graph section, and that clearly show that "partial" refers to relations like that between e.g. North and North Carolina, not in any sense to cases where the mismatch reflects "significant risk of confusion or reference[s]" among mis- or variant spellings and/or among mis- or variant pronunciations, such as those HatNoted at Alkane, Annales School, Argon, etc., etc.


 * Comment. Technically you are correct. These aren't, on second thought, partial matches. Here is a better rationale: there is no primary topic nor any other legitimate entry, so what is there to disambiguate? The two entries would normally (if one were extremely generous) go in the See also grab bag section. I have yet to see a well-formed dab page with only a See also section. Clarityfiend (talk) 10:46, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep (as always, without prejudice to renom), for entirely different reasons from before:
 * There is no article now under this title (even in the sense that we presumably do or would handle Dab-fDs here, having no separate del process for Dabs), but a redirect, and i believe you will find the RfD criteria quite different, since deletion of an Rdr is so seldom helpful and so often harmful, and retention so often harmless or beneficial.
 * The functionality of the former Dab page has now been dispersed:
 * * access to Mary Magdalene is now directly via the Rdr, since our impression that the relationship between it and "Mary Madeline" was merely one of likely confusion is now corrected: as i point out in detail at Talk:Mary Madeline, the name "Mary Madeline" is in fact an aspect (albeit a currently neglected one) of the topic "Mary Magdalene", because the juxtaposition of the two names as one person's given names is not a random event, but rather one substantially reflecting a desire to evoke or venerate Mary Magdalene.
 * * access to Mary Matalin is now via the Rdr and thence via the Redirect HatNote, since it seems likely that those interested in why "Mary" and "Madeline" occur together in that order will significantly outnumber those who heard Matalin as "MAD-uh-lin".
 * Discussants sorting thru the first-round's now admittedly erroneous Del arguments, and/or responding to still mistaken second-round ones in the now irrelevant context in which they were presented would be counterproductive, and a fresh start (if further discussion is even needed) correspondingly beneficial.


 * --Jerzy•t 10:04, 29 May 2013 (UTC)


 * What did you say?  Erpert  Who is this guy? 18:30, 31 May 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.