Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 October 12

樂天 (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

We often disambiguate topics with the same name in Chinese characters (i.e. {{Chinese title disambiguation}}) because there is not a one-to-one correspondence between romanized and Chinese-character names. No explanation was given as to why the contents failed this criterion. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:38, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• There's a bunch of precedents for keeping such pages listed at
  Cryptic 05:42, 12 October 2023 (UTC))[reply
  ]
  • Actually, I'm going to go for a straight overturn here. This title, or the spelling variants also disambiguated here, would have been
    Cryptic 18:22, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
• Endorse. Deletion review is a venue for handling failures to follow deletion process. It's not for where you simply disagree with the AFD outcome. Stifle (talk) 08:12, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Endorse - The close is the right close for the AFD. Temp-undeleting it probably wouldn't do any good, at least for those of us who do not read Chinese. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:10, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Almost the entire dab is visible in the creation log comment; only the last entry and typical dabbish boilerplate are cut off. Last entry was "
    Cryptic 02:27, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
• Overturn I'm not familiar with Chinese disambiguation pages but Cryptic's explanation seems plausible to me. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:19, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Overturn per Cryptic. It appears the outcome was incorrect with no fault of the closer. Star Mississippi 15:20, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore close was right, but deletion reasons completely bogus. We should keep this page. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:48, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore. I agree with Cryptic. If the characters were unambigouous, a redirect would be appropriate, so when they are ambiguous, keeping a disambiguation page is compliant with policy. While DRV should not be used due to mere disagreements, it can correct good-faith errors. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:39, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]