Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canada (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The result of the debate was nomination withdrawn. Mind matrix 17:47, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Canada (disambiguation)[edit]

This article is useless, if someone is searching for Canada they expect to find the country, not a section of the Auschwitz concentration camp. If they were looking for that, they would search for the Auschwitz concentration camp. ~~Delete~~ changed to keep after seeing the recent changes. Tev 05:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete information as per nom and redirect to List of Canada-related topics so this doesn't get recreated again.--み使い Mitsukai 06:01, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, disambig page is useless because the only other meaning is too marginal. Deserves a brief mention in the Canada article, though. JIP | Talk 07:56, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It has a "This article is about the country, for the yadayadayada" notice on the Canada (country) now Jcuk 09:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to keep, as a result of many recent additions and as per notions in my note below. :) E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 17:37, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak delete~~ I don't think the prior dab/hatnote is/was improper (For other uses, see Canada (disambiguation)) but I agree the solitary entry is marginal. Are there other locales or items named "Canada" that could be added to the dab? Similarly, if it is nixed, there's no reason to include brief mention of this sxn of Auschwitz in this article about the country across the pond; expand there. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 10:36, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~. Right now the mention of the Canada building is only a couple sentences in the article on Auschwitz. --thirty-seven 10:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to keep. A lot of the items currently listed in this disambig page seem frivilous and should be removed, especially the lists of every non-governmental organization with 'Canada' in its name. However some things, most especially the historic geopolitical meanings of 'Canada', justify this disambiguation page. --thirty-seven 21:32, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I hate pointless dab pages. I don't think there's a need to mention the Auschwitz reference in the Canada article. MLA 11:01, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I would say there are other places locally known as Canada, at least in our region there is one, albeit written Kanada (as Canada is written Kanada in Slovak language). The dab page might grow as more such places are uncovered and inserted into WP. My solution would be standard stuff like This page is about country, for other uses see dab at Canada page and no other reference (to Auschwitz etc.) in the Canada article. Ruziklan 14:45, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --Ter e nc e Ong 14:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Weregerbil 15:56, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I've thoroughly updated the page. Tweak it as you wish, but there's no reason to delete it. Mind matrix 17:01, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per User:Mindmatrix -- now rewritten to be a useful disambig page. Jkelly 17:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep now that it's full (maybe a little too full, but that's fixable). --Rob 17:28, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Excellent disambig page! :D --Andylkl ^{[ talk! | c ]} 18:01, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep given that it’s now useful. (I agree with Rob that it’s got a bit too much—imagine if every organization with the name ‘Canada’ was listed...). —GrantNeufeld 19:23, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep obviously Canada should go to the county, but historically speaking "Canada" meant many different things, including the Ottawa River, The Canadas, etc thus the need for a disambiguation page - Jord 19:56, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep A good disambig, is notable Nick Catalano (Talk) 20:12, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep to distinguish between Canada, The Canadas, and Canada Lee, but I doubt we need things like Made in Canada and Blame Canada on there. CanadianCaesar The Republic Restored 01:26, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep useful disambiguation page. NoIdeaNick 02:36, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep There are a lot of Canadas out there. It's creepy. Buchanan-Hermit™..CONTRIBS..SPEAK!. 06:43, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Good disambig. -- Samir ∙ ^T_C 08:40, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (no vote): I like the article, but it's not exactly a disambiguation page - many of the items noted merely have 'Canada' in the name, and wouldn't be confused with the word 'Canada' by itself. Peter Grey 08:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment These are valid criticisms ... I share them, but note that even the editor who recently significantly enhanced the dab page has commented on pruning the dab as suggested. I think recent additions were an overcorrxn in response to this AfD. E Pluribus Anthony | talk | 12:38, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but prune. youngamerican (talk) 13:50, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. But make more like a disambiguation page and less like an indiscriminate-list-of-things-that-all-feature-"Canada"-somewhere-in-the-name-of-their-article. -- Krash (Talk) 16:12, 28 February 2006 (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.