Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alessandra

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 undecided: 7:7, so the article is KEPT

Alessandra

del. Improper usage of disambig page: neither of the persons is identified as "Alessandra". the proper name would be List of persons with the first name Alessandra. Are we going to have such ones? mikka (t) 22:53, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• delete concur --Doc (?) 23:03, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Unlike Dannii and Cher, neither of these people are commonly known solely by their given name. Disambiguation page without anything to disambiguate. Delete. Uncle G 06:37, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)
• Keep. First, it is useful, for anyone who can only remember a first name and want to know what encyclopedic people have that name. Second, there is the precedent set by the many, many other first name disambiguation pages on Wikipedia, such as Aaron, Ada, Alice, Alicia, Alison, Alva, Alvin, Amanda, Amy, Ashton, and those are just the first names I can think of off the top of my head. Compare with articles like Michael which have long lists of people with that first name. Third, the list is expandable: there are no doubt more encyclopedic people named Alessandra and probably places named Alessandra as well. Fourth, the article is expandable, by giving the history/entymology/source of the name Alessandra. Fifth, it's a disambiguation page. Wikipedia is not paper, so how is this hurting the project? —Lowellian (talk) 12:55, Jun 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • You are mising the point. Disambig pages are to list identical terms. Ada contains list that are known as "Ada". The same is with Aaron (disambiguation). If some list hase something else, it mst be cleaned up. Some of these lists come from eraly days of wikipedia, when the role of disambig pages was not very clearly understood and formulated. If you wasnt an "expandable" articles, with explanations, then traditionally the proper name would be "List of ....". mikka (t) 15:46, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - Agree with Lowellian. Celestianpower 15:48, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • You and xe don't get it. The etymology of the name belongs in a dictionary, i.e. in Wiktionary in the Wiktionary appendix on first names. Disambiguation pages are for articles which would otherwise share a title. Every single one of those articles that Lowellian thinks are equivalents are in fact not, and do not set a precedent for what xe has done here at all. They are name disambiguations for encyclopaedia articles for people, places, and things known solely by that name (although Alice, Alicia, and Michael are in need of some serious trimming because they also "disambiguate" between things that aren't actually ambiguous in the first place) and that would be at that title were it not for one another. (Michael has a whole list of kings and emperors known solely by that given name, for example.) There are no people, places, or things commonly known as Alessandra here. Lowellian's name disambiguation is empty. Uncle G 17:37, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)
• Keep - Agree with Celestianpower. SchmuckyTheCat 19:39, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, useful, likely search term. Kappa 20:34, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • For what, exactly? Searching for "Alessandra" brings up the other articles with other titles. What article do we have that goes by the title "Alessandra"? From Wikipedia:disambiguation:

    Do not disambiguate, or add a link to a disambiguation page, if there is no risk of confusion.[...]Disambiguation pages are not search indices -- do not add links that merely contain part of the page title where there is no significant risk of confusion.

  • The only two entries on this page are Alessandra Ambrosio and Alessandra Mussolini. There is no risk of confusion between those two, and neither are commonly known simply as "Alessandra". There is nothing to disambiguate here. Uncle G 23:24, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)
    • This situation is similar to that of a redirect. From Wikipedia:Redirect:

      Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful — this is not because the other person is a liar, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways.

    • You might not find the looking up Alessandra useful, but you do not know others' browsing habits, and I and at least some other people who have voted here do find it useful. Now, Alessandra could redirect straight to an article, but there are multiple famous people named Alessandra. That is why it has to be a disambiguation page, and that is why it has to be kept. —Lowellian (talk) 01:21, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, I entirely agree with Uncle G, and the distinction between Wikipedia and Wiktionary is well-established. Radiant_* 14:04, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: User:Lowellian has now removed the relevant guideline from Wikipedia:Disambiguation and started a discussion about this principle on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation.—Wahoofive (talk) 18:17, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete in an imperative way with these contents. If a person is known only as Alessandra (and, I'd say, its variants), then that person should be disambiguated. However, "people who have this first name" is utterly absurd. First name dabs are not "List of" articles in disguise, and one of the few things I would edit war over is precisely that. It's one thing to have Elvis disambiguate Elvis Presley and Elvis of Montfort or Elvis of Hippo, because he is known by that name exclusively (Madonna is the better example, of course), but it's quite another to have "yuk yuk all the people named Bob" clobbering the valid disambig of an article. Geogre 02:38, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • So who decides? This is a dab page specifically because two people were edit warring over a redirect. Obviously SOME people thought these people were notable first name users, but because you don't you want to delete? SchmuckyTheCat 04:07, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. The examples Lowellian made makes my point. Disambigs for names are not used for people's first names unless they have no given or widely known last name. They are, however, used for places, things, etc. -R. fiend 18:11, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. As explained very well by others, first names are generally not suitable for disambigs. Quale 16:05, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. This issue has been discussed at length at Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation, and trying to spread it here is an abuse of the VfD process and a violation of WP:POINT. Also, I really think it's okay to have a disambiguation page for first names as long as the name is relatively uncommon. It's a useful navigation aid here. Deco 00:38, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, as per my POV on Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation. While I see both sides, I don't see any real harm in it. violet/riga (t) 00:49, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Ambi 00:54, 16 Jun 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.