Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deutsche

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. --Ezeu 21:09, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deutsche

'del This is not a disambiguation page as it claims: not a single item fom the list ever known as "Deutsche". This is an entry for German adjective. Wikipedia is not a German-English dictionalry. Mukadderat 17:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

• Keep and Tweak With a little work, this could be a decent disambig page. As it stands now, though, it does read as a dictionary. EVula 18:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Disambiguating what? Which of the things listed is commonly known solely as "Deutsche"? Please name at least two (because that's the minimum necessary for disambiguation rather than just a redirect). Uncle G 18:59, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Well, I could list fourteen items, but they're already in the article. Look at Pink (disambiguation); there are several items where the disambiguated word is a part of the name (The Pink Panther, Pink Floyd, RTV Pink, etc.). See also Abegweit, which is (apparently) a Mi'kmaq word. There's most certainly a precedent for leaving a disambig page for words that form the names of notable subjects, even if they aren't in English. EVula 02:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
      • No, they aren't, and that's the point. None of the items in the list is commonly known solely as "Deutsche". Deutsche Bank is, unsurprisingly enough, known as Deutsche Bank, for example. If you think that there are things commonly known solely as "Deutsche", please name two. Uncle G 13:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
        • The Pink Panther and Pink Floyd are not commonly known solely as "Pink". EVula 15:03, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
• "Deutsche is the feminine adjectival form for Deutsch". So we will get a separate list for Deutscher and, wait for it, another list for the masculine which just happens to be... Deutsche. It disambigs nothing. I'm supporting this nomination and hope it can be stamped out before it proliferates. (English. Francais. Francaises. Espanol.......) Delete Emeraude 19:28, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as it is a real term, and serves as a disambig. See also Deutsch (disambiguation) French, Irish, and who knows how many others? BTW, there is already a Deutscher as well. I suppose they could all be redirected to the Deutsch dis-ambig page, but that would seem to cluttered. I can sort of understand the concern that the content of en.wikipedia.com be in English, but it should not be solely restricted to English things, but represent things more international in scope. As such, this disambig does serve a reasonable purpose. Mister.Manticore 19:41, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
  • No, it doesn't. And, ironically, the articles that you've linked to undermine your argument. Deutsch (disambiguation) actually lists several people who are commonly known solely by their family name "Deutsch". Similarly, there are various people and things commonly known as "French" and "Irish". What people, places, and things are commonly known as "Deutsche"? Please name two. Uncle G 23:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
    • Are you saying Deutsche doesn't exist as a word?? That's very strange, since it provably does exist, and the possibility of somebody entering it into Wikipedia is thus not nil. Thus it is useful as a navigational tool to have a disamiguation. If you wish to argue otherwise, please make some arguments that are more substantial than referring to policy pages. I can't see anything on Wikipedia:Disambiguation that precludes this usage, and it starts off saying However, it is not set in stone and should be treated with common sense and the occasional exception. thus I would say even if there were a problem you could explicitly define, you'd still have to make a common sense argument. And you haven't. Sorry. Mister.Manticore 00:04, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
      • Are you saying Deutsche doesn't exist as a word? — I'm saying what I wrote. Please actually read it and answer the question that I posed. please make some arguments that are more substantial than referring to policy pages. — I suggest that you consider the irony of that request. You'd still have to make a common sense argument. And you haven't. — The common sense argument is right there in the nomination. Please actually read that, too. Uncle G 13:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
        • I'm afraid I don't understand your question then, please try to explain it better, and address its relevancy to this situation. And sorry, but you do have a problem with making references to pages without specifing what and where you're talking about. I'm not going to read a whole page and try to decipher what you're talking about. Sorry. I'm afraid I just can't respect that kind of argument. Especially when you do it, as I've said before, multiple times in the same article. That's bordering on harassment. And the common sense works both ways. Yes, this page shouldn't cover everything that starts with Deutsche, but that just means that the page shouldn't do that, any more than the thousands of other disambig pages don't try to cover everything. And as I said, I'd have no real problem with a redirect to Deutsch (disambig), except for the clutter issue. Still, if you can work around that, go ahead. Mister.Manticore 15:11, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Valid disambiguation page. I'm not aware that dab pages must only include items that share the title of the dab article exactly. Sandstein 20:12, 23 October 2006 (UTC) -- Changed to delete, see below. Sandstein 14:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Then please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia:Disambiguation and the entire purpose of disambiguation articles. Disambiguation articles are for where two or more articles, or redirects, would otherwise employ the same title. Things that aren't actually known as "Deutsche" don't require listing on a disambiguation article at Deutsche. There is no ambiguity. This isn't a disambiguation article. It's a mis-titled list article — one with a pretty bizarre inclusion criterion. It's List of things whose names begin with the word "Deutsche". Uncle G 23:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
    • I'd agree with you if there were really no disambiguity to resolve, but it's not inconceivable that someone would pick up only the first part, e.g. "I work at Deutsche garble", in which case this can come in useful - it's not your usual crufty "List of songs that contain the letter y" or something. Sandstein 08:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
      • The software already has automatically maintained mechanisms for such cases. That's what Special:Prefixindex/Deutsche (which is amongst the several things that one is presented with when one uses the "Search" button) is for. Uncle G 13:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
        • Ah, thanks, I didn't know about this (but I can't find it in the search results). I suppose a redirect to Special:Prefixindex/Deutsche isn't possible? Anyway, the results show this list would grow unmaintainably big, so I'm switching to delete. Sandstein 14:58, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
        • Eh? I just did a search for "Deutsche", and I didn't come across the Prefixindex page (which I'd never seen until now), though I did find (almost the same page)Special:Allpages/Deutsche... waaaaaay up at the top (and only if you hit "Search" rather than "Go"; Go is what's activated when the user hits return) and not in the main section of the search. I'd never think to look there if I was a new user to Wikipedia. We're not writing the encyclopedia for seasoned wiki veterans who know all/most of the ins and outs; "idiot-proof navigation" should be a complimentary goal to writing the encyclopedia. EVula 15:15, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, unusual, but useful. --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 22:30, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as disambiguation page. --Targetter ^{(Lock On)} 22:56, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
  • As above: Disambiguating what? None of the arguments that this can be a disambiguation article have actually pointed to any things that require disambiguation at this title. Uncle G 23:25, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as disambiguation page. (In answer to Uncle G: me neighbour Nora's son, he's right clever he is, got a posh new job in London with summat called Deutsche, so I'll go look it up on t'wikipedia). There's room for an argument about whether this is strictly a dab page or a "list of thigs whose name begins" with Deutsche, but either way it's useful to readers. --BrownHairedGirl ^{(talk) • (contribs)} 09:16, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
  • And having got there, you'll be none the wiser who your neighbour's son works for! Emeraude 10:17, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
• Comment is there a meaningful distinction between this article and the numerous articles on given names and surnames which end us being largely a list of people whose name contains the name as one element of their full name? Carlossuarez46 21:10, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per BrownHairedGirl. The reader who sees the list of entities beginning with "Deutsche" might well recognize the one the neighbor's son works for. Because Wikipedia is not Wiktionary, though, I'd delete the introductory material about the German word. JamesMLane t c 09:01, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with removing the introductory material as it provides context to the article. It should be kept short, but not eliminated. Mister.Manticore 14:58, 31 October 2006 (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.