Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Run-up


 * 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The result was Keep (non-admin closure), nom-withdrawn. Chetblong T C 23:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Run-up

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This purports to be a disambig page, but instead of disambiguating articles it simply gives three dicdefs, none of which as far as I can see can ever be more than a dicdef. Emeraude (talk) 00:24, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Each of the definitions includes a link to an article that expands upon that particular meaning for the term. Perhaps the definitions and links should be reworded, but the disambiguation is needed. Previously the entry pointed to a cricket article, which is hardly relevant for the majority of Wikipedia users, as there are multiple meanings for run-up. Agateller (talk) 03:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and change those defns. to redirects to the pages indicated in the defns. JJL (talk) 01:40, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, perfectly appropriate disambiguation page. I'm forced to wonder if the nominator looked closely at the piped redirects (which have since been fixed). --Dhartung | Talk 07:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Does in fact do an adequate job of disambiguation, especially now the text has been reworded a little. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 09:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Accepted. Links weren't clear when I made the nom. (That's what comes of late night editing!) Now support Keep.Emeraude (talk) 12:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Is that a withdrawn nomination? -- RoninBK T C 12:53, 4 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.