Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anti-fairy

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. MBisanz ^talk 01:48, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-fairy[edit]

Dab with no targets to point to. I can't see an article ever being written on either form of anti-fairy, so this dab is useless. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 17:10, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - there are two meanings; someone searching might be after one or the other. If there was only one meaning then a redirect would be appropriate to the parent topic - that is not the case so keep. Seems a good DAB. Springnuts (talk) 21:54, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- There isn't even a single article for this term so i fail to see your reasoning here. --neon white talk 01:43, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We do not have an article on either topic, so no need for a DAB page. JulesH (talk) 16:55, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Aitias // discussion 00:07, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unneeded dab page. --neon white talk 01:43, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There's a thing known as an anti-fairy tale (Antimärchen), but it isn't abbreviated "anti-fairy". ☺ Uncle G (talk) 03:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's a perfectly proper disambiguation between two things that are covered as sub-topics within larger articles, both of which are known as Anti-Fairies. We use redirects for such situations (see Wikipedia:Redirect#What do we use redirects for?), and where two such redirects clash at a single title we construct a disambiguation. Keep. Uncle G (talk) 03:44, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. What is the harm in keeping this here? Nothing, as far as I can see. Both terms are equally insignificant, and this dab page will steer a person looking for this obscure term in the direction he or she wants. Unschool 06:40, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I'm not changing my vote; I just wanted to say that I looked at the version of the article to which 10 lb. added the AfD tag, and now I can understand his thinking. But what Uncle G. has done I think makes a keep more obvious. Unschool 06:44, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ahem! Uncle G (talk) 09:36, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Changing to keep in light of changes to the page since my last comment. JulesH (talk) 10:13, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as reworked since it serves to disambiguate two article sections (and move to Anti-Fairies if it survives the AfD). -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:07, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a useless dab. Tavix (talk) 23:05, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It would be used when a reader enters "anti-fairy" (or one of several variations) in the search box. Why do you think it's useless? -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:08, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Useful page for searching purposes. --Edcolins (talk) 13:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Two is the minimal number for a disambiguation page. Having more than one way to navigate to articles is better than just one way. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 01:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here you're correct -- two is the minimum number when there is no primary topic. -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:46, 6 January 2009 (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.