Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DES (disambiguation)

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 of the debate was no consensus; redirected to DES. Johnleemk | Talk 10:32, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] DES (disambiguation)

DES probably used to redirect to Data Encryption Standard, but someone who thought Diethylstilbestrol was more important decided that DES should redirect to DES (disambiguation). Well, what's the point in having DES (disambiguation) then? Why not just use DES as the disambiguation page? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 221.163.173.185 (talk • contribs) 00:47, December 3, 2005.

• This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 15:30, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• It's a perfectly fine disambiguation article. This nomination is the result of a slow burning revert war at DES with Matt Crypto on one side, who asserts that this should be a primary topic disambiguation with Data Encryption Standard as the primary topic, and several editors on the other side who believe that this should be an equal weight disambiguation, since when they came to look up DES they were looking for the drug. It has been discussed, but not resolved, on Talk:DES. Furthermore, the choice between the two forms of disambiguation is a simple matter of whether DES redirects to Data Encryption Standard or to DES (disambiguation). Deletion is not involved at any stage, and AFD is not the place for deciding this. Please learn how to use WP:RFC. I am strongly tempted to close this discussion, and take measures to encourage both sides to resume the discussion on Talk:DES that they have abandoned. Keep. Uncle G 16:00, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and Redirect DES to this page. I also Endorse User:Uncle G's suggestion about closing the AfD and moving the discussion to the talk page. This did not go under ANY discussion at all. The disambig is appropriate. Don't assume that just because you wouldn't search for the drug, that everyone else wouldn't either. "Data Encryption Standard" and "Diethylstilbestrol" get about equal hits on google. It's an acronym commonly used to describe both things, and to arbitrarily assign importance of one over the other is probably not NPOV. Peyna 16:09, 3 December 2005 (UTC).
  • I've went ahead and added a comment to Talk:DES and left notes on all related pages for people to refer to that discussion in the event that this AfD is eventually closed due to irrelevance. Peyna 16:19, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  • I concur with User:24.17.48.241's statement below. Peyna 19:13, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
• Move or re-submit to Wikipedia:Requested moves--no reason to waste time and resources passing primary disambiguation thru a redirect. DES should either be the disambiguation content (or the "Data Encryption Standard" or "Diethylstilbestrol" content, although neither seems deserving of primary disambiguation, IMHO), but it shouldn't be a redirect to either. 24.17.48.241 18:29, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
  • First: Wikipedia:Requested moves involves deletion, too. Deletion is not a part of solving this problem. Second: Neither of those two articles should ever be at DES, per our Wikipedia:Naming conventions (acronyms). Third: DES redirecting to DES (disambiguation) is an equal-weight disambiguation, not a primary topic one. Fourth: Redirecting the undisambiguated title to the "X (disambiguation)" article is a common means of setting up an equal weight disambiguation, and doesn't "waste time and resources". Redirects are cheap, remember. Uncle G 06:12, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
• Comment - Note that someone has added a third expansion, Delivered Ex Ship. FreplySpang (talk) 20:22, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Weak keep until this matter can be resolved per User:Uncle G. Ian13 21:19, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Update. I have changed every wikilink to DES to refer to whatever article it actually meant to refer to (most of which were for Data Encryption Standard, but I did come across a few others (I also didn't change anything on talk pages). I have replaced DES with a disambig page, which makes DES (disambiguation) now an unneeded duplication of DES. If someone would be willing to double-check and make sure I have everything pointing the right direction, it would be appreciated. Peyna 23:52, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, based upon the above comment by me. Peyna 23:52, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
  • You've forgotten that the {{otheruses}} and {{otheruses2}} templates rely upon this page existing, even if only as a redirect. Moreover, what happens when Matt Crypto reverts you? My opinion remains unchanged. There is no reason to delete this article, and deletion is not involved in solving the problem. Uncle G 06:12, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as no-longer-needed disambiguation page now that DES is the dab page. (Hopefully, any edit-warring about this will come to an end once this is complete... wishful thinking?) *Dan T.* 02:07, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to DES or keep. Kappa 02:42, 7 December 2005 (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.