Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monica (given name)


 * 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. Core desat 07:02, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Monica (given name)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Do we really need a page of semi-random people named Monica? Calvin 1998  Talk   Contribs  20:10, 3 February 2008 (UTC) Persons who happen to have the same surname or given name should not be mixed in with the other links unless they are very frequently referred to simply by the single name (e.g., Elvis, Shakespeare). For short lists of such persons, new sections of Persons with the surname Title and Persons with the given name Title can be added below the main disambiguation list. For longer lists, create a new Title (name), Title (surname) and/or Title (given name) page. I felt the list was long enough to warrant being moved to a separate page, which was a judgment call on my part. I also want to remind editors that a given name page is not the same as a dab page (again, see the Manual of Style). Since nominated for deletion, this article has been amended with a significant amount of information about the name itself that should not be merged to or included on a disambig page, which is only intended to guide the user to the article about the topic they're looking for. Propaniac (talk) 14:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I was prepared to root for this page, but it's not to be confused with an article about the name Monica. This is essentially a navigation aid to help a person distinguish between Monica Lewinsky and Monica Seles, among other things.  Which one got stabbed by a deranged fan?  Which one interned with President Clinton?  Unneccesary.  Mandsford (talk) 20:23, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The "random" entries are vandalism that just happened. This a disambiguation sub-page to help editors who wikilink to "Monica". Yes, such links exist. • Gene93k (talk) 20:25, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Monica. We don't need two separate dab pages with the same title. What next? Monica (disambiguation) (disambiguation)? J Milburn (talk) 20:54, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge to Monica like every other name disambiguation on Wikipedia Doc Strange (talk) 21:20, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep for the same reasons noted at Articles for deletion/Julie (given name). There is much content that could be added that does not belong on a disambiguation page. -- Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 22:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Merge the list of names back to the regular Monica disamb; if/when the list becomes too unwieldy due to length, then split the disamb into seperate parts again. I really don't see any need as of yet for this action. Zidel333 (talk) 23:58, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment—I have added content to the article: name etymology, history, popularity, the name in literature, name days in various countries. That all constitutes examples of the sort of content that belongs in an article about the name "Monica". Dab pages are not articles. -- Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 05:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep unmerged, especially after Paul Erik's etymology additions. Dabbers are trying to get rid of the name flood on dab pages, so a merge would set a precedent to undo the efforts of the last six months. – sgeureka t•c 09:51, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep/Do not merge I created this article as part of my cleanup several months ago of the Monica disambiguation page. The Manual of Style for Disambiguation Pages states:
 * Keep This isn't a disambiguation page, and sufficient content has been added to make that clear; merging its contents to Monica, which, like all disambiguation pages, is a non-article in the article namespace, would be wholly inappropriate. --Sturm 15:05, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * keep - to much for a disambiguation page. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 21:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Proposal - I suggest creating a new page with a list of people named "Monica" (perhaps named List of people named Monica), and turning this page solely into a description of the name itself. Calvin 1998   Talk   Contribs  23:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Why? (that's with a curious tone, not a challenging tone) I think that would only be necessary if this article became too long. As an example, the article Smith (surname) was too long, so a separate list was created, People with the surname Smith. But Monica (given name) is not that long. -- Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 00:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep, do not merge This is encyclopedic content, even as ugly as some of you may find it; disambig pages are sure as heck not the place to dump this. Read the guideline at MoS:DP. That guideline says to move it here, to Monica (given name). Anyone who recommends merging an article such as this into a disambig page, which is not an article, has not even begun to understand what disambiguation means within Wikipedia, and should recuse himself or herself from this discussion. Chris the speller (talk) 23:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, do not merge I also added the WikiProject Anthroponymy to Talk:Monica (given name). This is a valid given name article, not a disambiguation page. See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthroponymy/Lists of names and (if you've got even more time & inclination) the rest of WikiProject Anthroponymy. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, do not merge Remember (talk) 13:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, do not merge it is not a disambiguation page and the content is for the most part encyclopedia. older ≠ wiser 14:12, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, should be separate from disambiguation page per WP:MOSDAB. Now has infobox etc as a standard Given Name article. - Fayenatic (talk) 13:46, 6 February 2008 (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.