Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SAR
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - kept - SimonP 06:25, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)
Added to the VfD page by User:SchmuckyTheCat. I've completed the nomination. No vote. Radiant! 19:47, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)
- Then again, I entirely fail to see why this should be deleted,
so keep(with the note that a heavy edit war seems to be going on over the 'Sar' and 'SAR' pages) Radiant! 19:47, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC) - (William M. Connolley 20:39, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)) I'm a bit confused... did he list SAR or Sar?
- Keep dont merge (heavy edit war!?! Good grief, you've been lucky...) - William M. Connolley 20:39, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC).
- Looking at the "please discuss" requests in the edit history, the incomplete nomination appears to have been SchmuckyTheCat's way of getting William M. Connolley to come to the talk pages and discuss a merger instead of reverting. Looking at the talk pages, it appears to have worked. However, {{merge}} and {{mergedisputed}} are the correct ways to do this. Given that no-one seems to want the article deleted, if neither SchmuckyTheCat nor anyone else come forward in the interim with a reason that it should stay open, I will close this discussion as Keep (without prejudice to future VFD discussions) tomorrow. Uncle G 22:53, 2005 Mar 13 (UTC)
- Sorry, I had to get up and leave and was confused that it was successfully listed. My vote is that SAR should be merged with Sar. They are both disambiguation pages. I fail completely to see why a disambiguation page should care about being case sensitive. SchmuckyTheCat 02:25, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- You are probably right about that, given that expanding a disambig page lessens the chance of mistakes. Radiant! 09:02, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)
- and this is VfD, not VfM, but since the merge pages don't try and poll for concensus, and there was dispute, and VfD often ends up polling for merging - meh, you get it. SchmuckyTheCat 15:35, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Keep - no merger Words and acronyms are completely different things, and should be kept as such. Grutness|hello?
10:24, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Keep - don't merge, just add see also to both. As it was before this whole mess. --Joy [shallot] 23:13, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
StC has done the disputed merge; I've undone it. It shouldn't be done in the middle of this vote, which anyway looks like being for keep not merge at the moment (William M. Connolley 20:24, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)).
- * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Disambiguation_and_abbreviations SchmuckyTheCat 23:11, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Merge--probably best at SAR. I think this is the more common way of handling instances when both u/c and l/c uses exist, probably at least partially because most searches outside Wikipedia are NOT case-dependent, so it is NOT valid to assume that just because the user typed lowercase letters that they are looking for a word instead of an initialism. It's also more convenient to have 'em all on one page. For example, AA serves both the word "Aa" and the initialism "AA". Niteowlneils 04:40, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.