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 delete. postdlf (talk) 15:53, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Age of Ultron (disambiguation)

[edit]

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

Per WP:TWODABS not needed. No links to it, so the only plausible way someone could reach it is via a search, in which case they're at the wrong place. The articles already link to each other in natural/sensible ways. JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 17:30, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The wp:TWODABS guideline is clearly about the fact that sometimes a dab with just two topics is not needed. There is no harm in having such a dab; it is not necessary to delete it. The guideline goes on about a circumstance when the two-item dab page could be deleted: "If a disambiguation page does not appear to be needed because there are only two topics for the ambiguous title and one of them is the primary topic, but there could reasonably be other topics ambiguous with the title on Wikipedia now or in the future, an ((about)) hatnote can be used to link to a disambiguation page (either in addition to or instead of a link directly to the other article). At the same time, the ((Only-two-dabs)) template should be added to the top of the disambiguation page, which will inform users that the page has only two ambiguous terms, and may be deleted if, after a period of time no additional ambiguous topics are found to expand the disambiguation page...." Well, that has not been done. Post the ((Only-two-dabs)) template to the dab page, and let it rest for 6 months or a year (or, better, forever). There is no urgency to delete this; there could be other meanings; the suggested process has not been followed.

But, hmm, I am not clear if one of the terms is clearly the primary usage. If there is not one being clearly primary, then follow wp:TWODABS: "If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, but per the criteria at wp:Is there a primary topic? there is no primary topic, then the base name should lead the reader to the disambiguation page for the term. For example, ....". Offhand it seems to me that neither term is primary, so the two-item dab page should simply be kept. --do ncr am 22:09, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

comment the 'harm' is how I found it: I was searching for the comic series, typed 'age of ultron' into the search box and three things were listed. The one I wanted was first, the movie third, and the DAB page second. Both the possible pages I might have been looking for were listed, but I might have by accident, especially if I were not familiar with what a disambiguation page is, ended up at this page, and so required a wait and further click to get to the page I wanted. Clearly a few people do end up there as the page view stats are low but not zero. Apart from that it serves no purpose. Before this AfD got it listed in various places there were no links to it, so readers could not navigate to it. In particular Age of Ultron does not link to it, it just links to the one other article directly.

If there's no primary then Age of Ultron should redirect to the dab page but that would require the comic page be moved, requiring I think another discussion. It's possible though that especially once the film release approaches the film will become primary. In which case the comic page should be moved and Age of Ultron should be a redirect to the film, and there will be no need for a disambiguation page.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 22:48, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

note I've posted notes on the two related talk pages to get more feedback on which if any of the pages is the primary topic.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 22:55, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Don't know why this could be a keep. From WP:TWODABS: "If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, and one is the primary topic, then a disambiguation page is not needed." Here we have an obviously primary topic at Age of Ultron and then Age of Ultron (disambiguation) which links to only one other page. If Age of Ultron isn't actually the primary topic (though a title rather than a subtitle seems like it would be), it should be given a parenthetical and Age of Ultron turned into the disambig (but, again, a hatnote is what makes sense to me). --— Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 00:48, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per Rhododendrites. Unnecessary, and pretty clearly the sort of thing that WP:TWODABS is talking about. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 05:00, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TWODABS and WP:PRECISE, the second article is only a partial title match. Cavarrone 05:06, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: the hatnote at Age of Ultron does all that is needed, this page is superfluous and adds nothing to the encyclopedia. PamD 16:47, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TWODABS nd MOS:D policy on partial matches. Boleyn (talk) 18:31, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I believe we should keep this, as it makes things more clear for me, ergo, what is going on and why I am thinking about it in the forst place. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.82.23.180 (talk) 07:54, 22 October 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.