Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Touché (2nd nomination)


 * 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    Redirect. I have implemented the redirect to Glossary_on_fencing as Kaligelos suggests but it may be retargeted if there is a consensus to do do. Eluchil404 (talk) 07:00, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Touché

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Simply a dictionary definition of the term (dicdef). It's covered perfectly well at wiktionary and Fencing, it's currently a content fork. Encyclopedia articles are not supposed to define a term two different ways, and it does this because it's not encyclopedic. Even if it only defined it in one way it's still only a dictionary definition of the term. In an encyclopedia like Wikipedia we, wherever possible, merge terminology into the main topic because it puts the term into full context, which makes it more coherent and useful.Rememberway (talk) 18:40, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm calling for MERGE to fencing or outright DELETE.Rememberway (talk) 20:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oddly, the nominator has never edited a fencing article before now; indeed, he has been arguing, to no particular effect, that our titles must use only nouns, sufficiently so to revert-war the policy page. This article came up as an example, and he is now attempting to merge or delete the evidence against his fringe view. Speedy close as frivolous. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:45, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree that this can be speedily closed. Even if we agree that there's no need for an article with this title--about which I'm agnostic--we'd still have to put in a redirect to Fencing because it's a plausible search term.  Thus there is no prospect of making this into a redlink, and the nomination fails WP:BEFORE.— S Marshall  T/C 20:48, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, I already user merged it, but Pmanderson unmerged it again.Rememberway (talk) 20:53, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The merger cost the encyclopedia information, to no point; but that is for discussion on its talk page; this is not a solution. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:59, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * And merge is a perfectly respectable result in AFDs anyway.Rememberway (talk) 20:56, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It's a result of Keep, since admins don't have to do anything. Should this nomination also be closed as withdrawn? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:59, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No, it's a result of MERGE, but then again you didn't know you weren't supposed to blank AFD tags, and accuse people of 'vandalism' in the subject line, so I guess I that's par for your course.Rememberway (talk) 21:34, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Fencing. Other than the one-line non-fencing use of the term, which truly is Wiktionary material, everything here is already there.  This probably meets speedy keep criterion 1 on a literal reading (as the nominator does not desire deletion), and I'm often a pretty big advocate for closing these things out early when possible.  However, since at least one past redirection was reverted, there's probably no harm done in employing this venue to judge consensus, since it's already here. Serpent&#39;s Choice (talk) 21:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Fencing per Serpent's Choice. And yes, merge is indeed a normal outcome at AfD. And yes, a WP:MERGE proposal process does exist to gather consensus over controversial merges - frankieMR (talk) 23:49, 24 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - Leaning towards Redirect... The term is commonly used beyond just fencing circles (although those usages derive from fencing). I think there is at least the potential for expansion as a stand alone topic for an article. Blueboar (talk) 01:42, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep but merge to Fencing. The concept warrants a pointer to the fencing article where it's discussed. However, there's nothing further needed about the use of the word. —C.Fred (talk) 03:37, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge - This is probably the first French word I ever learned via endless reruns of Touché, Pussy Cat!, but I don't think a laundry list of "in popular culture" references would make for a very good article. Tarc (talk) 13:10, 25 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree we don't want a "laundry list"... but adding a few well selected and notable examples would improve the article. Blueboar (talk) 03:00, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:17, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge is a reasonable solution: I see no way the article may grow beyond dicdef. Kaligelos (talk) 17:08, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * COMMENT: In fact I've just found a proper target of merge/redirect: Glossary on fencing and performed the merge. Kaligelos (talk) 00:56, 1 June 2011 (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.