Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Wolff (disambiguation)

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The result was withdrawn by nominator. While I don't agree that this is a useful DAB page, it appears it meets guidelines, so whatever. Beerest355 Talk 15:20, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ed Wolff (disambiguation)

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

Useless disambiguation page. "Phantom Creeps" article contains nothing about the stuntman, and the Edward Wolfe can simply be listed as a distinguish at Ed Wolff. Beerest355 Talk 18:47, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep Phantom Creeps does meet MOS:DABMENTION and MOS:DABRL about the stuntman, and there are 3 valid entries (one just added) plus valid see also. A proposed merge to Edward Wolfe I could have understood (although this (now) clearly meets the guidelines on its own) but deletion wouldn't help user or editor. Boleyn (talk) 19:22, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have nominated Ed Wolff, the main topic, for deletion, as after a careful review I was unable to find any sources. Beerest355 Talk 21:42, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:33, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just to make this slightly more complicated, I've nominated this page to be moved to Edward Wolff (disambiguation). The economist isn't mentioned as 'Ed' in his article, and Edward is thus the more prevalent usage on the dab. Boleyn (talk) 06:49, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep, entries are as per MOS:DABMENTION and MOS:DABRL -- JHunterJ (talk) 12:19, 12 July 2013 (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.