Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vine Hill-Pacheco, California


 * 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 as non-disambig page per consensus. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 20:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Vine Hill-Pacheco, California

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This is a disambiguation page that lists geographical locations. But the two forks of this page have no relation. So this page makes no sense. Chris! c t 06:10, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * keepThe relationship is that it is listed on the list of California places as a unique place and someone may try and look it up. Red-linked entries like that should be redirected or created. In this case it should link to both Vine Hill and Pacheco and therefore logistically this means a disambiguation was necessary. Please see "what links here" on this articles page which links to List of places in California (V) W-i-k-i-l-o-v-e-r-1-7 (talk) 06:58, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * User has been blocked indefinitely for sockpuppetry by User:Lucasbfr. -- jonny - m t  10:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nomination. Whatlinkshere doesn't show much use at all.  Seems that editing List of places in California (V) to point to the correct pages would be preferable to forcing these two together.  -- jonny - m  t  08:39, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak keep -- former CDP name now apparently split. --Dhartung | Talk 09:04, 18 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - Useful disambiguation page if just for it's past designation in the Census.--Rtphokie (talk) 16:01, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Vine Hill, California. From the reference document, it appears that the CDP was simply renamed so from a census viewpoint there is no reason for this to be a dab page.  If does merit a note in the text at some point. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:42, 22 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hers fold  (t/a/c) 04:54, 27 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Weak keep, but without the disambiguation tag. These aren't places with the same name. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:38, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Dhartung, this page serves a useful purpose about a real location. (jarbarf) (talk) 16:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, if this used to be an "official" place, then its potentially a useful page. Agree with removing the disambig tag though, because this is not really a disambiguation page.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 05:42, 5 April 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.