- 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:02, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Semaphore (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Content fork of flag semaphore, where this has redirected for eight years, with little more than a dic def and apparently copied from that article without attribution. Redirect should be restored. MB 19:19, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Merge to Flag semaphore, I guess? We obviously need to cover the topic of semaphore in this encyclopedia, but it's not clear to me what the difference is between flag semaphore and any other kind of semaphore. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 21:16, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: semaphore should be the main article, the article flag semaphore is the fork. Flag semaphore is just one type of semaphore! Blockhouse321 (talk) 23:38, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I didn't start a WP:MERGE because there is nothing to merge that isn't already in the article. The wording is so similar that this article was probably based on that one. So I think the proper action is Redirect. MB 22:26, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: This article is notable has plenty of potential for expansion and that is all that is required for the article to be kept. The article is only a few hours old and a +stub; give editors a chance to expand the article over time. Rome was not built in day! Blockhouse321 (talk) 23:35, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree that this AfD should not have been started before you had a chance to show what you wanted to do with the article and I often !vote for a procedural keep when that happens. I'm guessing, though, that nothing that you want to cover would not fit in the much better developed optical telegraph, and I'd like to avoid a confusing taxonomy of articles when one more general article would serve. — Charles Stewart (talk) 07:50, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Semaphore has several different variants, not just optical telegraph; hence, the need for a separate main article for semaphore. Blockhouse321 (talk)! — Preceding undated comment added 10:07, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Optical telegraph, which is a more general concept than 'Semaphore telegraph' and less ambiguous than the broad term 'Semaphore'. Note that the article proposed for deletion is more general than Flag semaphore, since Þjarkur added a section on Railway semaphore signal since the AfD began. — Charles Stewart (talk) 07:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Since 2012 this page has redirected to Flag semaphore. If it's deleted, putting it back the way it was seems like the best move. The optical telegraph is a more obscure topic. ApLundell (talk) 20:56, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I found a BBC article titled How Napoleon's semaphore telegraph changed the world at https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22909590 and added some information into the article. The article list the different methods of semaphore, so is a valid list article, aiding in navigation. Dream Focus 12:06, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep According to the Encyclopedia Britannica article "Semaphore" it is more than flags. Our article reflects the Encyclopedia Britannica article on Semaphore, a topic the Britannica considered worthy of attention as a primary topic. Wikipedia, strangely, has not had a primary topic for a long time. User:Blockhouse321 has done a great job expanding the article. -- GreenC 16:15, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This article is definitely needed and is well-sourced. Thriley (talk) 00:48, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep This might have profited from being left to mature for a few days before being thrown to the wolves. In any case, the editor has turned it into a perfectly fine hub article for related topics during the past week. Nice work. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 00:38, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - changed opinion following argument of ApLundell — Charles Stewart (talk) 08:15, 29 December 2020 (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.