Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Romanian Principalities (disambiguation)


 * 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 delete. RL0919 (talk) 07:23, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Romanian Principalities (disambiguation)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is an impartial nomination following on from a discussion at Talk:Romanian Principalities (disambiguation). I have no opinion on the substance of the article. I say only that it cannot remain under its present name, and that !keep is not an option

Romanian Principalities (disambiguation) bears no resemblance to a DAB page. It violates MOS:DAB in all sorts of ways: essay-like material, a picture, non-title-matches, orphan redlinks, irrelevant sections and links, citations, and external links. That is my case for something other than the status quo. If that were all, I could have proposed delete (which I now do as default option to avoid sitting on the fence), but I would accept any outcome except !keep. However, other proposals have been made. I therefore bring the page here.

Background notes, which may help contributors to this discussion get up to speed:
 * 1) Romanian Principalities (disambiguation) appears to be a translation of ro:Principatele române (dezambiguizare). I do not know what the Romanian rules for DAB pages are, but they are as inapplicable in English WP as English rules are in Romanian WP.
 * 2)  redirects to United Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia
 * 3)  redirects to ro:Principatele române (dezambiguizare). (In English WP, that would be a WP:MALPLACED error.)
 * ro:Principatele Române (no English equivalent) covers much the same ground as Romanian Principalities (disambiguation).
 * 1) (Different capitalisation is one of the known tricks in English WP to unhelpfully evade a name clash. I do not know whether Romanian requires a capital for a nationality adjective (as English does) or lowercase (as e.g. French, German and Italian do). The issue of the correct titling of pages in Romanian WP is outside the scope of this discussion - Narky Blert (talk) 22:29, 20 December 2018 (UTC))

Pinging, , and , who were involved in the Talk Page discussion. Narky Blert (talk) 22:10, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions.  CoolSkittle  (talk) 22:43, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions.  CoolSkittle  (talk) 22:43, 20 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete I don't find anything here worth keeping or merging. What does "supposed Romanian state forms" mean? Who supposes them? What is a "state form"? The original Romanian expressions may have meaning, but the English as translated doesn't. What are the WP:RS for this "generic term" and its definition as stated here? As for the rest of the article - the historic eras are better covered in the other articles about Romania and the info box on the History of Romania within those articles. The Historic leaders section is not very informative when arranged alphabetically, and it's hard to believe that the area of Romania has had only 21 leaders between ca 82BC and 1878AD. I don't know what the last section, Concepts, entities, formations, other, is meant to cover, including as it does a battle and 'Romanian mediaeval village'. So, delete. RebeccaGreen (talk) 00:46, 21 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Two comments: First, the closing admin may wish to review the discussion at Talk:Romanian Principalities (disambiguation). My reading of that discussion is that it tends to support deleting, but since that was not really a deletion discussion, it may be unfair of me to impute such a notion to others who commented there. Second, I agree with Narky Blert that "keep" is not an option, as the content is nothing like a disambiguation page. I have little specific objection to moving the page or perhaps merging its contents elsewhere, except that leaving a redirect at the current title might invite further problems down the road. For that reason, I suppose you can mark me as delete. Cnilep (talk) 03:27, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment by nom. Cnilep makes a point which I might have made and with which I agree. Romanian Principalities (disambiguation) has no valid redirect target. That pagename needs to go whatever the outcome of this debate. Narky Blert (talk) 07:14, 21 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Without bringing up new reason discussed in the article's talk page and having mostly agreed with the opinion of others here; since there are already much better articles that are covering the subject and anyway the creation of this page was a mistaken concept - reinforced by others - and because of other technical problems raised there and here, the best is to delete.(KIENGIR (talk) 15:28, 21 December 2018 (UTC))
 * Delete, as per my previous comments on the talk page. This article conflates the notion of "Romanian Principalities" (which is generally a synonym for Danubian Principalities) with anything the editor thought they could construe for a principality that was also Romanian; other content is editor's idea about articles that we should have, though the content is already covered by articles that we do have, meaning this page aims for content forks, probably POV content forks. Dahn (talk) 17:14, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
 * 'General note I would advise that Romanian Principalities we kept as a redirect to Danubian Principalities, and United Principalities of Wallachia and Moldavia as a distinct article from both. The former two are a generic geographical notion; the latter is the actual name in use by the confederal state which also briefly named itself Principality of Romania, and was succeeded by the Kingdom of Romania. Dahn (talk) 09:32, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That issue is probably best dealt with by a redirect hatnote on the target article. Narky Blert (talk) 17:51, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No objection to that. Im just advising editors not to fold content here into UP of W&M, nor Danubian Principalities into UP of M&W, having noticed that there was some disagreement (and, IMHO, some confusion) about that issue. Dahn (talk) 23:13, 24 December 2018 (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.