Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jake Hansen

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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 11:37, 15 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Jake Hansen

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

malformed disambiguation page, blocking article creation The Banner talk 10:50, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:21, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: nothing malformed about it: two people who each merit a redirect or a dab page entry. But if you want to create an article about one of them, I'd suggest over-writing the dab page and giving a hatnote to point to the appropriate article for the other one. If you want to write an article about someone else, create it with a disambiguation and then do a Request Move to move it to the base name and the dab page to "... (disambiguation)". PamD 23:26, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep User:The Banner, have you read MOS:DABRL and MOS:DABMENTION? Valid dab page, 2 valid entries. Boleyn (talk) 16:13, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User:The Banner, can you please respond to the above question, and also look at the page again (substantial changes from originally shorter although still-valid dab) and consider withdrawing nomination? There is no point in this dragging on. Boleyn (talk) 15:51, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I don't take people too serious that think that everybody has read every policy and essay under the sun. Especially, when those people are constantly waving with those policies and essays. The Banner talk 17:15, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
User:The Banner, I take that as a no to being vaguely familiar with guidelines before deciding a page should be deleted, and no to withdrawing nomination? Not checking guidelines before declaring a page invalid is wrong, but certainly something I've done - it happens. The most important issue is once it's been pointed out to you, not wasting everyone's time dragging this out. As it stands, other editors will waste their time looking over this discussion, when you could read the guidelines or look at the page as it is - doing either would take less than a minute - withdraw nomination and save people time. I've certainly withdrawn nominations and made mistakes myself - the important thing is trying to resolve them quickly. Boleyn (talk) 18:51, 14 June 2014 (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.