Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vĩnh Hòa

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 keep‎. I see a consensus to Keep this disambiguation page. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:39, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Vĩnh Hòa

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

All of the entries on this dab page are redlinks, apart from one to the Vĩnh Hòa, Nha Trang location. This disambiguation page does not list articles associated with the same title. It is effectively being used as a category page, ~~so it would be better converted to a category~~. Northernhenge (talk) 11:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Business, and Vietnam. Northernhenge (talk) 11:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete those red links will less likely to be created as it lacks notability or even mentioned in the articles per se so it clearly violates MOS:DABRL Warm Regards, Miminity (talk) (contribs) 12:11, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~: DAB with one entry, nothing to DAB. I don't see any particular benefit to creating a category for this either. -- D'n'B-t -- 12:51, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:00, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It is not a problem if dab page entries are red links, as long as they include one blue link to an article which mentions the topic. I've cleaned up this dab page, and the remaining red-linked communes are all mentioned in their district pages (though not sourced in most/all cases). For all I know this means "North area" or something similarly generic, but it seems useful to offer a dab page given that this placename is used for so many identifiable communes. It's now a properly formatted dab page with valid entries. PamD 08:22, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks – I can see now that wp:PRIMARYRED could apply. I’ve added a link to Vĩnh Hòa, An Giang. I see there are other articles for similarly names places, for example
but it would need a native speaker or subject expert to say whether or not they are the same name, and whether (as PamD says) the name is significant in itself. I still think a category would be a better way of grouping these together though via their larger province areas, given the unlikelihood of notability being established for each individual commune/ward. The articles we do have pretty much just say the places exist. --Northernhenge (talk) 10:03, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure what you mean, as you can't have red linked entities in a category. You wouldn't want a category of "Districts which include a commune called Vinh Hoa". Given that these all get a mention on their district page, it seems a useful and correct dab page. PamD 10:21, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You wouldn't want a category of "Districts which include a commune called Vinh Hoa" – True! --Northernhenge (talk) 11:17, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Northernhenge I still don't understand what you meant when you said a category would be a better way of grouping these together though via their larger province areas. Could you clarify? PamD 12:02, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think it would have resembled "Districts which include a commune called Vinh Hoa" which, now I’ve seen it written down, doesn’t look sensible. --Northernhenge (talk) 16:40, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And as you suggest, those of us who aren't familiar with Vietnamese have no right to make assumptions as to whether these other places are the same or different - but I've recently almost confused placenames Unsworth and Usworth in my own country, so there's no reason to suppose that they are the same. Best left well alone, as long as dab pages are correctly formatted and we don't have red links without a mention in a blue-linked article. PamD 10:32, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The Vietnamese vi:Vĩnh_Hòa_(định_hướng) has 14 blue links, of which 4+2 seem substantial (non-stub) articles. These are not the usual dab redlinks because of non-notability, but because of language barrier and (deemed) low importance for en-wiki. But that's not the problem of the Dab page, so I appeal to WP:IAR in this case. – sgeureka ^t•c 13:19, 6 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:02, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as a Disamb page it may required cleanup but not a goog idea to delete. 2402:AD80:A1:8D76:1:0:E275:1FDD (talk) 22:17, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aydo h8^[contribs] 00:44, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Even if the red links were removed, there are still two articles that "Vĩnh Hòa" could refer to with no primary topic, so a disambiguation page is required. I wouldn't've relisted here. C F A 💬 03:15, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. The discussion changed as soon as PamD dealt with the issues. No need to relist. —Northernhenge (talk) 10:09, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As CFA notes, we have two valid disambiguation targets and no primary topic. If one or both of the disambiguated articles are AfD'd, we can come back to this page, but for now there's no valid rationale to delete. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:42, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Striking my previous del !v as there are now two entries, rather than one. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.