Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Agitation

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 of the debate was — keep.

Agitation

Disamb page that disambs between to dic defs and an article. Not really needed. Links to this page should be redirected and the page deleted. [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 21:09, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)

• No, redirect this, don't delete. The Recycling Troll 21:23, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. These "dicdefs" have wider meanings and eventually deserve their own articles. For example, Agitation (whatever) in the sense of mixing. I created this disambig for the sole purpose to separate out the Communist political usage of the term. To redirect Agitation to Agitprop is bad idea. Backlinks cleary show there are at least two more meanigs that I listed. I am not in a position neither write stubs for these articles, nor select which meaning is primary. Also, my redirect to Agitprop is faulty as well. there should probably be Agitation (political) or smth. instead.Mikkalai 21:47, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Check out "What links here;" reveals several articles link to "agitation" in the physical sense. Fishal 06:37, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. - Ta bu shi da yu 10:18, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• Keep —siroχo 00:39, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)
• Annnnnnnnnnnnd Keep. -- Radman1 15:55, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
• K/R One of these senses is certainly notable. I might remove the emotional state, since that's better placed in Wiktionary. If there are uses of the term "agitation" in science which do not share the common-sense meaning (to shake or disturb considerably) then K. Otherwise R to agitprop. Chris 04:03, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
  • I'd really like to see an encyclopedic article on emotional agitation. How do you like an article in a medical journal: Treatment of agitation in dementia? It clearly shows that the term is way more than dicdef. Mikkalai 04:52, 28 Oct 2004 (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.