Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Serbia (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   keep. People should feel free to perform further cleanup as needed, per MOS:DAB -- RoySmith (talk) 17:16, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

Serbia (disambiguation)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Instead of disambiguating fundamentally different topics, this page merely offers a list of articles about history of Serbia, pretty much duplicating the contents of Template:History of Serbia. WP:DABNOT specifically says "do not add a link that merely contains part of the page title, or a link that includes the page title in a longer proper name, where there is no significant risk of confusion or reference", and I think that all entries on this page violate exactly that. A brief research of all pages starting with 'Serbia' does not show anything else worth disambiguation, so this page should be deleted. No such user (talk) 10:20, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. 10:20, 24 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguation-related deletion discussions. 10:20, 24 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. I've deleted the inappropriate entries, but that still leaves plenty of states that could reasonably be called Serbia. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:19, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * And they are all that same Serbia in different historical periods. Compare e.g. Poland (disambiguation) (a good example) and Slovakia (disambiguation) (which is worse than Serbia). No such user (talk) 06:53, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * In the first place, they're not the "same Serbia"; if they were, they wouldn't need separate articles. In the second, the purpose of a dab page is to list things that are referred to by the same name. There are quite a number that qualify in this particular case. As for Slovakia (disambiguation), I've nominated that for deletion. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:14, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * But let's please be consistent. The entries in Serbia (disambiguation) relate to Serbia in exactly the same manner as Slovakia during World War II, Slovak Soviet Republic and Slovak Socialist Republic relate to Slovakia, and the difference between a "Slovak Republic" and a "Slovakia" (whichever period is referred to) is too subtle. My reading of the policy and the practice, that historical articles about a polity should not be listed on polity (disambiguation), but others may reasonably disagree. Maybe we should have a rfc somewhere at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation before these Afds? At least, I will leave a notification there to get a broader input. No such user (talk) 10:05, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Slovakia during World War II is a clearcut WP:PTM, and I see a significant difference between Slovakia and Slovak Republic, unless there is some explicit mention in a Republic article that the state was referred to simply as Slovakia. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:06, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Of course it was: . Or pretty much anything from GBook search Slovakia 1939 My point is that "Kingdom of Serbia" is as much a WP:PTM as is "Slovak Republic (1939–45)" (nb. Slovak Republic is a redirect to Slovakia). Either both should be included in the respective dab pages, or none. No such user (talk) 12:50, 25 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. I'm not aware of any prohibition against polity articles listed on dabs. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:30, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep: entities like "Republic of Foo", "Kingdom of Foo" are likely to be referred to as plain "Foo" and do not constitute "partial title matches" of the sort which policy excludes from dab pages: there is risk of confusion because all these different "Foo" entities existed at different points in time and had different meanings (if they all meant the same thing, there would only be one article). Pam  D  12:39, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Disambiguation is for different topics that have the same name, sub-topics of a main article do not belong there. As far as the Kingdom and Principality being Serbias, yes, they are a part of what Serbia is, they are not a different distinct topic. The nominator is correct, these entries make more sense as part of of History of Serbia template. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:33, 31 July 2014 (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.