- 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 redirect to Danube#Names and etymology. Sandstein 08:37, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Hister ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
An alternate name for the Danube River, and probably all that's needed on this topic is one or two sentences on that page. The true purpose of this article seems to be coatracking for various debates on whether or not Nostradamus correctly predicted the rise of Adolf Hitler, and should therefore be deleted. Thunderbunny ( talk) 01:44, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:11, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Not seeing a reason to delete here.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
08:54, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- Wikipedia policy is generally against having two articles for the same thing, as this is confusing, more difficult to maintain, etc. I would say most major geographic features in the world were called something else by somebody else at some point in time. And then there's the implications from the talk page and article history that this article isn't really about it's subject.
Thunderbunny (
talk)
03:02, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- If we have two articles for the same thing then that's a
fork which states "If the content fork was unjustified, the more recent article should be merged back into the main article. But merger is not done by deletion – see
WP:MAD. The closest
reason to delete is "Content forks (unless a merger or redirect is appropriate)". Merger or redirection would be appropriate in this case and so there's no reason to delete. The only problem is that there's more than one possible target as the topic is naturally covered at both
Danube#Names_and_etymology and
Nostradamus#Notes. So, the simplest and most sensible choice is just to leave the page as it is and improve it per our policy
WP:ATD, "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page."
Andrew🐉(
talk)
11:22, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- I could get on board with a redirect to Danube River, but not Nostradamus. One is properly the subject of the article, the other is not. Thunderbunny ( talk) 04:58, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- If we have two articles for the same thing then that's a
fork which states "If the content fork was unjustified, the more recent article should be merged back into the main article. But merger is not done by deletion – see
WP:MAD. The closest
reason to delete is "Content forks (unless a merger or redirect is appropriate)". Merger or redirection would be appropriate in this case and so there's no reason to delete. The only problem is that there's more than one possible target as the topic is naturally covered at both
Danube#Names_and_etymology and
Nostradamus#Notes. So, the simplest and most sensible choice is just to leave the page as it is and improve it per our policy
WP:ATD, "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page."
Andrew🐉(
talk)
11:22, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Wikipedia policy is generally against having two articles for the same thing, as this is confusing, more difficult to maintain, etc. I would say most major geographic features in the world were called something else by somebody else at some point in time. And then there's the implications from the talk page and article history that this article isn't really about it's subject.
Thunderbunny (
talk)
03:02, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Not seeing a reason to keep here. Article is not about Hister, which is described at Danube#Names_and_etymology, but about a poem that happens to use this word. I'm not seeing where Nostradamus's works are individually analyzed in an encyclopedic way. Reywas92 Talk 20:23, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- delete this WP:COATRACK for Notradamus-cruft. Mangoe ( talk) 00:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Redirect to Danube#Names_and_etymology where, as Reywas92 points out, there is a discussion of Hister. Smartyllama ( talk) 19:49, 9 February 2021 (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 redirect to Danube#Names and etymology. Sandstein 08:37, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Hister ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
An alternate name for the Danube River, and probably all that's needed on this topic is one or two sentences on that page. The true purpose of this article seems to be coatracking for various debates on whether or not Nostradamus correctly predicted the rise of Adolf Hitler, and should therefore be deleted. Thunderbunny ( talk) 01:44, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:11, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- Keep Not seeing a reason to delete here.
Andrew🐉(
talk)
08:54, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- Wikipedia policy is generally against having two articles for the same thing, as this is confusing, more difficult to maintain, etc. I would say most major geographic features in the world were called something else by somebody else at some point in time. And then there's the implications from the talk page and article history that this article isn't really about it's subject.
Thunderbunny (
talk)
03:02, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- If we have two articles for the same thing then that's a
fork which states "If the content fork was unjustified, the more recent article should be merged back into the main article. But merger is not done by deletion – see
WP:MAD. The closest
reason to delete is "Content forks (unless a merger or redirect is appropriate)". Merger or redirection would be appropriate in this case and so there's no reason to delete. The only problem is that there's more than one possible target as the topic is naturally covered at both
Danube#Names_and_etymology and
Nostradamus#Notes. So, the simplest and most sensible choice is just to leave the page as it is and improve it per our policy
WP:ATD, "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page."
Andrew🐉(
talk)
11:22, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- I could get on board with a redirect to Danube River, but not Nostradamus. One is properly the subject of the article, the other is not. Thunderbunny ( talk) 04:58, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
- If we have two articles for the same thing then that's a
fork which states "If the content fork was unjustified, the more recent article should be merged back into the main article. But merger is not done by deletion – see
WP:MAD. The closest
reason to delete is "Content forks (unless a merger or redirect is appropriate)". Merger or redirection would be appropriate in this case and so there's no reason to delete. The only problem is that there's more than one possible target as the topic is naturally covered at both
Danube#Names_and_etymology and
Nostradamus#Notes. So, the simplest and most sensible choice is just to leave the page as it is and improve it per our policy
WP:ATD, "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page."
Andrew🐉(
talk)
11:22, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Wikipedia policy is generally against having two articles for the same thing, as this is confusing, more difficult to maintain, etc. I would say most major geographic features in the world were called something else by somebody else at some point in time. And then there's the implications from the talk page and article history that this article isn't really about it's subject.
Thunderbunny (
talk)
03:02, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
- Delete Not seeing a reason to keep here. Article is not about Hister, which is described at Danube#Names_and_etymology, but about a poem that happens to use this word. I'm not seeing where Nostradamus's works are individually analyzed in an encyclopedic way. Reywas92 Talk 20:23, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
- delete this WP:COATRACK for Notradamus-cruft. Mangoe ( talk) 00:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
- Redirect to Danube#Names_and_etymology where, as Reywas92 points out, there is a discussion of Hister. Smartyllama ( talk) 19:49, 9 February 2021 (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.