Cannabis Indica

thcscience_admin
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 a surname index.  Sandstein  10:35, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gavan Duffy (disambiguation)[edit]

Gavan Duffy (disambiguation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is just one link that is not under see also. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 17:26, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. -- Tavix (talk) 19:07, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
After another look, it's complicated whether it's a compound surname or not (see comments below). Instead, I would rather prefer to move this page to Gavan Duffy and move Gavan Duffy to C. Gavan Duffy, where both pages were for several years before a move last month. That way we don't have have a discussion on whether it's officially a "disambiguation" or "surname," just have it at the base name and create a hybrid of sorts (a {{disambiguation|surname}}). -- Tavix (talk) 02:35, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure I understand what you mean - could you explain what you mean by "Disambiguation|surname"? Do you mean we should replace the existing disambiguation page with a "you may also be looking for..." link at the top of C. Gavan Duffy's page? --Gimubrc (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:13, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies, I got a little too technical with my explanation. I was suggesting reverting the pages moves that happened last month. Which means that Gavan Duffy moves to C. Gavan Duffy and Gavan Duffy (disambiguation) moves to Gavan Duffy. Second, to explain {{disambiguation|surname}}, it just means that it's a disambiguation page that also lists people with the surname. The template explains that it is a disambiguation page, but it is also listed in Category:Disambiguation pages with surname-holder lists. This is done when there aren't enough names to create a separate surname page, so the few people with the surname are simply listed at the disambiguation page like any other entry would (you can check the category for examples). In this case, it would qualify those with the surname to be "promoted" from the see also section, making it a 'valid' disambiguation. Does that make sense? -- Tavix (talk) 19:39, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that makes sense - thanks for the explanation. I support your proposal: it makes sense to handle it that way. --Gimubrc (talk) 21:07, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed, it makes sense to keep as a surname article. I'm just not sure about the renaming: at the moment Gavan Duffy is about Charles Gavan Duffy and I don't see at first glance how that could be a primary topic. Uanfala (talk) 19:34, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with Tavix's reasoning that we should keep but reconfigure as a surname index; there are apparently enough Gavan Duffies that keeping the page in some form has merit. --Gimubrc (talk) 15:25, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: in the context of his political career, Charles Gavan Duffy (1874–1958) was usually referred to as "C. Gavan Duffy" or "Gavan Duffy". See [1], [2] (actually incorrectly listed as "Gavin"), [3], [4]. In his case, Duffy is definitely a surname; I cannot speak for Charles Gavan Duffy. There is however a "Gavan Duffy Park" in Ireland which seems to be named after Charles Gavan Duffy. I would also like to point out that I was not involved in the creation of this disambiguation page, only of a differently named redirect which morphed into a disambiguation page. It should also be noted that, over time, there appears to have been some differences of opinion about which entries should fall under "See also" for this page. However, if a surname type article were to be created, it would probably be appropriate to have a "See also" for Gavan Duffy. --Big_iron (talk) 16:34, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment So Gavan Duffy isn't a composite surname then? It doesn't seem to be treated as such by all but one of the authority records at viaf.org. I don't know if authority files are reliable for stuff like that, does anyone know? 20:22, 7 March 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uanfala (talk • contribs)
  • Comment Gavan Duffy is not a composite surname, it is middle name + surname. This makes it a partial match and so doesn't fit disambiguation guidelines. It is a case of whether we go for WP:IAR arguing that there is a clear benefit to readers from this. But is there? 86.133.142.73 (talk) 09:26, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as it currently seems to have content. SwisterTwister talk 06:17, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Having content is not relevant if the content is partial matches, which we are not meant to have on dabs. 86.133.142.73 (talk) 20:46, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, hatnotes are sufficient to disambiguate Gavan Duffy and Gavin Duffy. All the others are unambiguous partial title matches. There is no indication that any of them are ever referred to as "Gavan Duffy". older ≠ wiser 21:26, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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.
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gavan_Duffy_(disambiguation)

Leave a Reply