- 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 Procedural Close. Defer to the RfD. I'll let someone else handle that re-opening. Star Mississippi 13:26, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Bela River (disambiguation) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This was created during Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 6#Bela River (disambiguation) ad hoc, but I don't think we actually want it unless we want to move it to Bela River. The articles in question have had hatnotes instead of using this and it seems to have been just fine like that, probably because of the distinct change in word order. And we don't need a disambiguation page because of a see also section. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 19:55, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Joy [shallot] ( talk) 19:55, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex ( talk) 20:25, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I don't think the Rfd should have been closed, but since we're here, the hatnotes suffice. I would also be okay preserving this as a redirect to Bela Reka which was the original status quo. Mdewman6 ( talk) 20:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
- I would be fine with procedurally closing this and reopening the Rfd. Mdewman6 ( talk) 18:00, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
- Procedural close this and re-open the RfD as I said at the closer's talk page. It'll also help keep the arguments at one place. Jay 💬 15:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 Procedural Close. Defer to the RfD. I'll let someone else handle that re-opening. Star Mississippi 13:26, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Bela River (disambiguation) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This was created during Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 6#Bela River (disambiguation) ad hoc, but I don't think we actually want it unless we want to move it to Bela River. The articles in question have had hatnotes instead of using this and it seems to have been just fine like that, probably because of the distinct change in word order. And we don't need a disambiguation page because of a see also section. -- Joy [shallot] ( talk) 19:55, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Joy [shallot] ( talk) 19:55, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex ( talk) 20:25, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I don't think the Rfd should have been closed, but since we're here, the hatnotes suffice. I would also be okay preserving this as a redirect to Bela Reka which was the original status quo. Mdewman6 ( talk) 20:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
- I would be fine with procedurally closing this and reopening the Rfd. Mdewman6 ( talk) 18:00, 16 October 2022 (UTC)
- Procedural close this and re-open the RfD as I said at the closer's talk page. It'll also help keep the arguments at one place. Jay 💬 15:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
- 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.