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. Cirt (talk) 00:17, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Greenie[edit]

Greenie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

This purports to be a Disambiguation page, but it doesn't disambiguate anything. There is not a single blue-linked entry to an article called Greenie. Four terms are not even linked. Most of the rest are dubious slang/nicknames. The wording at the bottom of every disambig page is: This disambiguation page lists articles associated with the same title. This one fails, given that there is only one article with Greenie in the title and thus no need to disambiguate. Emeraude (talk) 10:37, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The purpose of this page is to provide links to likely intended targets when someone searches for 'Greenie'. Although we don't have an article specifically title 'Greenie', it still serves a purpose. Sone of the entries could perhaps be taken out, but I don't see a reason to delete it.--Michig (talk) 12:21, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. —Polarpanda (talk) 13:23, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I think this needed a big clean-up (which I've now given it) but is a useful dab. Boleyn2 (talk) 13:35, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Boleyn2 and their significant clean-up. This is exactly the sort of thing we have disambiguation pages for, so no reason to delete. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 14:55, 3 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, having the "La Salle Greenies" and the "Greenie Bus" is sufficient, and the current version is definitely useful. WP:USEFUL isn't really applicable to disambiguation pages. Nyttend (talk) 18:32, 3 February 2010 (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.