Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Republic of Serbia (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 was redirect to Serbia (disambiguation). Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:16, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Republic of Serbia (disambiguation)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is redundant to Serbia (disambiguation). All links are already present in Serbia (disambiguation). Vanjagenije (talk) 21:04, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:09, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:10, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is a legitimate dab page, and the fact that all of its entries are listed on another doesn't change that. If the decision is to delete, then Kingdom of Serbia (disambiguation) and Principality of Serbia (disambiguation) are in the same boat. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:22, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not the same because "Republic of Serbia" is Serbia (i.e. Republic of Serbia redirects to Serbia, those are the same). On the other hand, Kingdom of Serbia does not redirect to Serbia. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:29, 9 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Alternative: I wouldn't object to a redirect hatnote in Serbia to the other two. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:39, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - P.S. I don't follow your reasoning about the other two dab pages. They each have a primary topic and two subsidiary ones and they're all listed in Serbia (disambiguation). What's the difference? Clarityfiend (talk) 00:42, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Also, why did you revert my edit of this page? It's misleading to have two entries that point to the same article and contrary to MOS:DABPIPE. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:47, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know. It was a mistake. Sorry. Vanjagenije (talk) 08:20, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Serbia (disambiguation) as this disambiguation page completely overlaps it. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:47, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Tavix. MB 23:20, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – I agree with Tavix's analysis, but not with his conclusion – it will end up in Category:Orphaned disambiguation pages (what, we don't have one?) rendering it useless. No such user (talk) 13:07, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@No such user: Huh? Your rationale makes no sense to me. If this disambiguation is redirected, it would no longer be a disambiguation page, so whether or not it's an "orphaned disambiguation page" is irrelevant. BTW: All disambiguation pages should be orphans, it's the goal of WP:DPL. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:47, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Tavix: – pages with suffix "(disambiguation)" are normally not orphans – they are linked from hatnotes and other disambiguation pages. On the other hand, we have redirects for the primary purpose that someone, someday, might want to search for their title or link to them. But why would anyone, ever, wish to link to a page named Republic of Serbia (disambiguation)? This page was created only 5 days ago, and Wikipedia had happily lived 15+ years without it. After you redirect it, you might as well delete it per {{db-r3}}. No such user (talk) 15:09, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, R3 would not be applicable in this situation. Per WP:R3: "This criterion does not apply to...redirects ending with "(disambiguation)" that point to a disambiguation page. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:19, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yeah, but the intent was to prevent deletion of {{R to disambiguation page}}s such as Smith (disambiguation) redirecting to Smith; orphaned redirects named Foo (disambiguation) pointing to Bar (disambiguation) are of no use whatsoever. No such user (talk) 07:10, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as R from incomplete disambiguation Smartyllama (talk) 17:13, 16 August 2017 (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.