Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Lurking

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 delete. Kevin (talk) 02:30, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

The Lurking

The Lurking (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

None of the entries on this so-called dab page belong here. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

• Delete Not a proper dab. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 02:07, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
• Keep in the absence of an actual article called "the Lurking"; "the Lurking" could be a reasonable redirect to any of the listed entries. (But I'll admit I'm not referencing policy there - if anyone wants to cite the relevant policy on disambiguation pages that'd further my education.) - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:25, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

• From WP:DAB#What not to include: "A disambiguation page is not a search index. Do not add a link that merely contains part of the page title, or a link that includes the page title in a longer proper name, where there is no significant risk of confusion[…]Add a link only if the article's subject (or the relevant subtopic thereof) could plausibly be referred to by essentially the same name as the disambiguated term in a sufficiently generic context." I don't think that's the case here, since none of those is called just "The Lurking." Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 03:35, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

• Delete per Ten Pound Hammer's reference to policy above (which he also copied to my talk page). Thanks for improving my grasp of the relevant policies! - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:40, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 16:31, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
• Delete as partial title match lists. They aren't dabs and they aren't valid list articles. See also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of titles with "Darker" in them, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of placenames containing the word "new", Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of places beginning with Costa, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Designated, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/On wheels, User talk:JHunterJ/Archive 7#In space and In space, User talk:JHunterJ/Archive 2#Breaking and List of phrases including breaking. -- JHunterJ (talk) 16:41, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per above. No need for this page, where no confusion exists. I'm surprised we don't have something that would go by this title, or something to which this title should be redirected - but nothing jumps out at me. Perhaps it's... Lurking? UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 17:14, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - Partial title match thing. If all three were called "The Lurking Fear", a disambig might be appropriate, but it only serves to confuse in its present state, Lord Spongefrog, (I am the Czar of all Russias!) 12:51, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
• Delete: The Lurking (film), who's hatnotes this probably was, has been deleted. -- Jeandré (talk), 2009-10-27t14:30z

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.