Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Servian (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 and reorganize per Serpent's Choice below (early closure, consensus reached). Duja ► 08:12, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Servian (disambiguation)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

It's a mess. OK, here we go. There are 3 related articles:
 * Servia, small Greek town; (dab notice put on top)
 * Servian, French village (dab notice now put on top by myself);
 * Serbia etc. It turned out that "Servia" is an archaic (pre-1920s) English term for Serbia (found in e.g. Catholic Encyclopedia and 1911 Britannica etc.). See related talk on Talk:Serbia. Now, has unilaterally moved things around quite a bit, which I attempted to fix by reverting and putting dab-notices at top of Servia and Servian.

In my opinion, that fixes the issues, and this article has turned out as unnecessary and orphan. Now, I didn't want to stretch WP:CSD G6 (housekeeping), as the article was subject to a revert war. (Plus, there are potential COI issues of mine: the attempts to use term "Servia" in Serbia-related articles were taken as trolling rightly or wrongly). Duja ► 09:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as nominator. Duja ► 09:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * What am I missing here? It looks like a valid disambig, but you're right, it's terribly ugly. What do you propose? We delete it, then start from scratch? It would be fine with me. I'm going to try to refactor it now; iff he doesn't revert though, then I say keep. Part Deux 09:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Like I tried to say, it's complicated. The original layout of articles was as it is now, minus this dab page. Then R9tgokunks moved the French commune to Servian (commune), and made a redirect from Servian to Servian (disambiguation). Instead, I tried to overcome the problem by ensuring that top-page dabs are at Servia and Servian. This dab page is now simply... unnecessary. Nothing points to it, no one will arrive at it, and it basically contains only two items, which are already cross-linked. I don't see a point in keeping it. Like I said, I didn't want to stretch CSD G6 and delete it myself. Duja ► 10:12, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Maybe go WP:RM, request a move from the commune back to servian, and place a dab header at the top (though it looks like we're already de facto at that point with the redirect going to the commune now). Part Deux 10:27, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Uh-oh. It seems we still misunderstand each other: at the moment, there aren't any redirects involved. I am an admin, therefore I technically had the tools to sort things out, and I used them to an extent to revert the things to the previous state (i.e. moved Servian (commune) back to Servian), and decided to let the community sort this mess out via this AfD (which also has the capacity of renaming/merging). WP:RM is the hard and unreliable way (trust me, I closed many with 3 votes). I could have just ignored all rules and sort things out as I thought it was best, but I wanted to hear some outside opinions. Duja ► 10:42, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Gasp! You deleted used the tools to remove to a bad redirect?! How dare you? Well, according to the talk page Servia is an old name for Serbia, so I say, keep, as it's notable. Unless you can convince me otherwise before I get off, which is in like two minutes. Part Deux 10:46, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Erm, yes. I didn't say that "Servia" wasn't a notable term for Serbia (although it's very outfashioned); just, it's supposed to be sorted out via top-page dabs at Servia and Servian (and a notice to Serbia should be added, like I said on Talk:Serbia) rendering this page useless. How can anyone arrive to this page when it's orphaned? (except for this AfD). If anyone suggests a better organization of things, I'm all ear. Duja ► 10:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * It is a little confusing to have a Servia and a Servian. I wouldn't personally mind having a top edit dab at both pages linking to each other, but it seems easier to just have a top edit dab at every page linking to Servian (disambiguation). No? Considering it is a notable term, I think it's worth being noted on WP. Part Deux 11:00, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Suggestion. Leave the commune at Servian (commune).  Move the Greek town to Servia (Greek town) (or something).  Leave Serbia right where it is.  Move the disambiguation page to Servia.  Redirect Servian to Servia.  Delete the Servian (disambiguation) page as redundant and an unlikely search term.  Tag all 3 articles with hatlinks to the disambiguation page.  Serpent&#39;s Choice 11:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sounds decent to me. Part Deux 11:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep, sounds reasonable. Add several Servia's in US to the equation: http://www.placesnamed.com/S/e/servia.asp, Norwegian ship, Servian Wall in Rome... Duja ► 12:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that since it refers to "Servian", 1st point Servia should be scrapped from this, and 3rd point turned into an earlier form of "Serbian" i.e. "Servian". Otherwise it's not making much sense. --Abu-Bakr69 13:53, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Agree with User:Serpent's Choice, Keep and Reorganize - Yeah,I think that the disambiguation page isnt specifically needed so i think we should move it to Servia (or Servian?).-- Hrödberäht 15:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Just please, refrain from moving the articles in the midst of discussion, and don't call good-faith edits "vandalism". We seem to be converging towards a solution, and we can even close this AfD earlier, but please show some patience. Duja ► 15:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Cleanup as well as follow Serpent's Choice's suggestions. that is exactly what i was thinking then read his post. seems like a jumbled article that needs to be straightened out.--Tainter 15:47, 30 January 2007 (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.