Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British independence (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:54, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

British independence

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
British independence (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This title, in the form of an article rather than a dab page was Afd-ed and deleted just a few days ago for it's nature as a POV-fork of Aftermath of the United Kingdom European Union membership referendum, 2016, replete with WP:SYNTH and the poorly supported promotion of a neologistic term. None of the terms listed in its new dab-page rebirth is notably referred to as "British independence".The use in the referendum context was comprehensively dismissed in the Afd debate. The idea that English, Scottish or Welsh independence is ever termed British independence is contradictory and illogical as well as plain incorrect. There was no such entity as Britain to become independent on the departure of Rome. And some obscure fantasists in the English Midlands, seriously? Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:15, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This attempt at redefintion seems particularly unconvincing and perverse. By the same token, do the three subsections now mean independence from England, Wales and Scotland? Mutt Lunker (talk) 22:11, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Britain, in any of the time that it has been unified, has always been independent, and if this is (as obviously) about Britain's relationship with the European Union the fact that such independence always existed is confirmed by the fact that the UK has the right to leave the EU without asking permission from anyone else. None of the linked articles contains anything that could be possibly called "British independence". 20:41, 12 October 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.17.222.157 (talk)
  • Delete. The fundamental problems raised in the AFD for the article at this title aren't mystically resolved by making a disambiguation page consisting of entries that are, at best, partial title matches. This is an effort to push use of a term, not the intended purpose of disambiguation. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 21:26, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This ain't no dab page, even if you squint really, really, really hard. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:25, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:02, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
However deplorable the term may be, surely no one can argue that "British independence" is a name uses for Brexit, and possibly other things.--02:04, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
— Note to closing admin: Prisencolin (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 11:34, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A fringe term among an an isolationist minority perhaps but not in common use and not a likely search term when most people will use "brexit".Charles (talk) 08:20, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Not a likely search term" You guys are joking right?- -Prisencolin (talk) 21:43, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I wouldn't be entirely averse to a redirect from this title to Brexit. But that's unrelated to the current quasi-dab content here, so deletion is still warranted. And I'm not so naive as to believe that redirect could be implemented without drama (or likely maintained without protection). Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:55, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The page with the title "British independence" should be a dab page because it's not clear whether it should redirect to the Brexit process, the vote, or the aftermath page. Also, contrary to what others have said, it does seem like the phrase has been used by reliable sources to describe independence from the Romans.--Prisencolin (talk) 23:38, 14 October 2016 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/British_independence_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=1069517296"