Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/平安

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. Stifle (talk) 12:09, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

平安

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

According to WP:UE "Names not originally in a Latin alphabet, such as Greek, Chinese, or Russian names, must be transliterated." Transliterating this page wouldn't make sense though, because it's disambiguating two different transliterations. In my view the page should be deleted unless someone has another solution for renaming it using the Latin alphabet. T.C.Haliburton^{talk nerdy to me} 11:22, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also nominating the following page which has the same issue: 北斗 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) T.C.Haliburton^{talk nerdy to me} 11:26, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What about redirecting 平安 to Ping'an (Chinese) and then cross hatnote dab or "See also" links between Ping'an and Heian (Japanese) (priority to Chinese because Japanese kanjis originate from Chinese characters)? And FYI Pyongan (Korean) also has the hanja 平安. No objection to deletion if things don't work out. 北斗, however, almost definitely redirect to Big Dipper (mentioned in section Names > Asian). 野狼院ひさし _{Hisashi Yarouin} 11:53, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: I agree with Hisashiyarouin's proposal above, and have already taken the liberty of creating a "See also" section on the Heian page. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 03:13, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are non-Latin titles allowed even as redirects? T.C.Haliburton^{talk nerdy to me} 03:36, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was unsure about that myself. But then I tested some basic words, and found that 中国 redirects to China and 日本 redirects to Japan. So I assume they are. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 05:21, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per MOS:DABOTHERLANG. Boleyn (talk) 11:06, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:DABOTHERLANG appears to be a guideline for determining what kinds of foreign-language terms should included as entries in the disambiguation page, and unrelated to the merits of the disambiguation page as a whole. The pages Ping'an and Heian do exist as valid pages, so I don't see this as an issue. Mz7 (talk) 02:56, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, standard member of Category:Disambiguation pages with Chinese character titles. WP:UE is about article titles, not about redirects or disambiguations, which are basically redirects with two targets. There isn't a good reason to delete this dab, and it will save time and confusion on readers' part to ask the question "do you mean Japanese or Chinese 平安?" only to people who actually searched for 平安 (rather than redirecting to a more complex dab.) Siuenti (talk) 22:57, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment see also Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2010_June_15#Category:Disambiguation_pages_with_Chinese_character_titles Siuenti (talk) 22:59, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I think the underlying rationale expressed above for doing away with this page is that the title violates our policies on what kinds of titles are acceptable. However, I find Siuenti's reasoning sound: since this is a disambiguation page and not a full-fledged article, the title is not necessarily contravening anything. The old CfD discussion provides us with a past consensus and precedent for keeping these kinds of disambiguation pages. Here's how I see it: non-Latin redirects are generally accepted by the community if their language relates to the target—e.g. how 中国 redirects to China. So what happens when a non-Latin title would be acceptable as a redirect to multiple targets? If this were an alternative name in English, we'd definitely be creating a disambiguation page. If anything else, I see this as a WP:IAR situation. Mz7 (talk) 02:45, 30 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, my opinion would be that if a title would typically be acceptable as a redirect (as this one would), then it is also acceptable as a disambiguation page. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 01:57, 31 December 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Keep. If there is no unambiguous transliteration, then retaining the original script is the logical solution. This is a matter of how the dab article should be titled, and not a reason for deletion, for which I see no convincing argument here. No objection to any redirect solution decided on by more knowledgeable editors. Sandstein 09:13, 31 December 2014 (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.