Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/O'Hay
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Merge and redirect to Hayes. Note: There was nothing useful to merge. Deathphoenix 18:46, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
O'Hay
Name etymology;
10:25, May 18, 2005 (UTC)- Merge talk13:42, 2005 May 18 (UTC)
- Merge works for me. — RJH 14:57, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per BD2412, leave a Redirect to discourage this from being recreated as is. --Unfocused 16:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- A merge works for me as well. Don't forget to leave a redirect. Mgm|(talk) 17:07, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, no redirect, as comhrá 07:29, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Misses the point - someone may search for talk15:32, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
- No they won't. If anyone searches for comhrá 06:24, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- No they won't. If anyone searches for
- Misses the point - someone may search for
- Merge and redirect to bainer 14:46, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Merge and redirect to Gallagher. Deathphoenix 18:51, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
O gallachoir
Name etymology;
10:25, May 18, 2005 (UTC)- Merge talk13:42, 2005 May 18 (UTC)
- Merge works for me. — RJH 14:58, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per BD2412, leave a Redirect to discourage this from being recreated as is. --Unfocused 16:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge per BD2412 Stancel 00:25, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, no redirect, as comhrá 07:29, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Misses the point - someone may search for talk15:33, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
- Just as I said for O'Hay above, except it's even stronger here because comhrá 06:26, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, now they redirect to Gallagher, and the page explains the connection. If the information in the existing talk05:34, 2005 May 21 (UTC)
- Well, now they redirect to Gallagher, and the page explains the connection. If the information in the existing
- Just as I said for O'Hay above, except it's even stronger here because
- Misses the point - someone may search for
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Merge and redirect to Yoder
Yoder (surname)
Name etymology;
10:25, May 18, 2005 (UTC)- Keep talk13:42, 2005 May 18 (UTC)
keepphatt phaggotz (vote by 207.200.116.9 - something like 15 or 16 edits)
- Keep — RJH 14:55, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete all surname articles which are not disambiguation pages. RickK 16:34, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep → at least until the Names/Surnames debate is resolved. --Unfocused 16:48, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and rework and rename it to make it a disambiguation. The info is already there. Mgm|(talk) 17:09, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
- It is? Where? RickK 22:12, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
- In Yoder, the disambiguation that already exists and that makes turning this article into a disambiguation pointless. MacGyverMagic is apparently advocating the existence of two separate disambiguation articles for "Yoder", duplicating each other. Uncle G 13:19, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
- It is? Where? RickK 22:12, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
- Yoder (surname) merged in, and an interwiki link to a shiny Wiktionary:Yoder article telling readers the etymology, alternative spellings, pronunciation, translations, and whatnot of the name, just like a dictionary article on a word should.17:49, 2005 May 18 (UTC)
Wiktionary and thenMerge to a normal name disambiguation at Yoder. Uncle G- Comment - no reason it can't be both an article on the name history and a disambig at talk18:18, 2005 May 18 (UTC)
- The history of the name is the history of the word, and belongs in the dictionary. The history of the people/places/things belongs in the encyclopaedia. This is standard practice from many other name disambiguations. The history of Darlington, the place, is in the encyclopaedia. The history of the name Darlington, how it originated as a word, and how it was co-opted and its meaning expanded, is in the dictionary. A with our spangly interwiki linking system, readers can pass back and forth from the one to the other. Uncle G 13:19, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
- Comment - no reason it can't be both an article on the name history and a disambig at
- merge Yoder per Uncle G. —msh210 21:33, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- keep or re-merge with Yoder article. There is "encyclopedic" information and history on the name, so I don't think it should simply be thrown away. As regards the "is not a geneology database" comment, why would the current article qualify as "geneology"? Should we reject information just because it is associated with a surname? I think there is plenty of room in Wikipedia for interesting aspects of various surnames without it becoming simply "geneology". — Greenmoss 22:55, 18 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- The list of people with the surname Yoder that has begun to grow qualifies the article as genealogy. And very little of the content of this article is encyclopaedic. How to pronounce the word "Yoder" isn't encyclopaedic, for example. There's a perfectly good dictionary right beside the encyclopedia, that has holds written (and, in some cases where Wiktionarians have been really enthusiastic and uploaded sound files, spoken) information on the pronunciations of words. Uncle G 13:19, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
- "The list of people with the surname Yoder that has begun to grow qualifies the article as genealogy" - so we should get rid of all the disambig lists of people sharing the same last name, because that's genealogy? Genealogy is not the study of people sharing a last name, but of the lines of ancestry and descent within a single family (see, e.g. talk15:44, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
- so we should get rid of all the disambig lists of people sharing the same last name — Try fewer straw men and more reading. Start with reading what I wrote below at the same time as the above. Uncle G 08:48, 2005 May 20 (UTC)
- Whoa, let's take a step back here! What we're really discussing is whether the information in this article should a. be discarded, b. maintained in its current place, c. moved to somewhere else in wikipedia (presumably the Yoder article) or d. moved to somewhere else in wiki* projects (presumably Wiktionary). Consensus seems to be moving toward c. around here, and that's fine with me. What I really *don't* want is a., and I also don't think d. is appropriate, considering this isn't a "word" in the English language, with a definition, etc. An encyclopedia really does seem like the most appropriate place for it. Greenmoss 16:02, 21 May 2005
- so we should get rid of all the disambig lists of people sharing the same last name — Try fewer straw men and more reading. Start with reading what I wrote below at the same time as the above. Uncle G 08:48, 2005 May 20 (UTC)
- "The list of people with the surname Yoder that has begun to grow qualifies the article as genealogy" - so we should get rid of all the disambig lists of people sharing the same last name, because that's genealogy? Genealogy is not the study of people sharing a last name, but of the lines of ancestry and descent within a single family (see, e.g.
- The list of people with the surname Yoder that has begun to grow qualifies the article as genealogy. And very little of the content of this article is encyclopaedic. How to pronounce the word "Yoder" isn't encyclopaedic, for example. There's a perfectly good dictionary right beside the encyclopedia, that has holds written (and, in some cases where Wiktionarians have been really enthusiastic and uploaded sound files, spoken) information on the pronunciations of words. Uncle G 13:19, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
- Merge with comhrá 07:29, 19 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- No need for Wiktionary now. A shiny new a genealogy database. The only content to merge into Yoder is the third paragraph, the only actual encyclopaedic content of the whole article (apart from the original family name disambiguation), on the demographics of people named Yoder, which fits quite snugly into a "people with the family name Yoder" section of the name disambiguation article at Yoder. But for that one paragraph, my vote would have been delete. Uncle G13:19, 2005 May 19 (UTC)
- ...which is exactly why I suggested merging talk05:24, 2005 May 21 (UTC)
- ...which is exactly why I suggested merging
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.