Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Compulsory dance

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 procedural close. Since one article was cut-and-pasted from this article, a history merge is needed to fix this. So Why 14:51, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Compulsory dance

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This article should be deleted because the original version discussed the Compulsory dance (CD) of 2 very different sports: Ice dancing and Artistic roller skating. 2 other articles have just been created--Compulsory dance (ice dance) and Compulsory dance (artistic roller skating) that contain information in the original article, now separated into 2 articles. The creation of the new articles enhances the quality of articles about both sports. As a result, the original article should be deleted. Thank you. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 05:51, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2018 July 18. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:57, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Figureskatingfan: Why not make it a disambiguation page?--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:07, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Jasper, I never even thought about that! What a good idea, I'll go do it now. Please disregard the request, then. And thanks. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:33, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Dance-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:08, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If this article is still at AfD, I'd like to make a suggestion: rather than have a disambiguation page called "Compulsory dance" pointing to 2 separate pages for ice dance and artistic roller skating versions, would it be possible to keep the main "Compulsory dance" article as the ice dance version with a hatnote at top along the lines of: {{about|the ice dance competition segment|the artistic roller skating competition segment|Compulsory dance (artistic roller skating)}}

which would read... This article is about the ice dance competition segment. For the artistic roller skating competition segment, see Compulsory dance (artistic roller skating).

This would result in just 2 articles called "Compulsory dance" and "Compulsory dance (artistic roller skating)", rather than the 3 we have now, and there would be no need for a disambiguation page. I just think it might be a bit "neater". Rodney Baggins (talk) 22:49, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm fine with either way; I just thought creating the disamb page would be easiest. I also didn't want to give the impression that the ice dance is more important than the artistic rolling skating one. The disamb page also leaves room for other articles about other compulsory dances in other sports, like dancesport, which I understand has a CD, even though it's not represented on WP. So I'm slightly in favor of the disamb article, although if consensus supports Rodney's idea, I'm okay with it. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:58, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rodney Baggins: But is one or the other clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC?--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:52, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would argue that ice dance is more widely known than artistic roller skating, there is more information out there on it, and it is included in the Olympics, whereas artistic roller skating is not. I would therefore say that Compulsory dance (ice dance) is the primary topic. However, I may be biased because I am a big figure skating fan myself, so it is probably not entirely appropriate for me to give an opinion! Quite happy to leave things as they are, whatever Christine prefers really. Rodney Baggins (talk) 22:29, 24 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a FS nut myself, but I agree that ice dance is the primary topic. Yes, it's bigger than artistic roller skating, and has more content out there, but I suspect that an editor knowledgeable about roller skating would know where to look and how to find sources that I, who skated at roller rinks and skated around my neighborhood as a child, could. According to the small amount of research I have done while creating the roller skating article, there has been movement towards making roller skating into an Olympic sport. However, I support the disamb page because it leaves it open for experts to show up and work on rs articles. Thanks for the lively discussion, all. I'm excited that we're working towards improving fs articles. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 01:15, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lourdes 16:29, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear. I'm quite happy to leave Compulsory dance as a disambiguation page pointing to the FS and RS articles, if that's the preferred option. I was just providing an alternative idea when I suggested keeping the main article for FS with a hatnote pointing to the RS article. Sorry if I've put a bit spanner in the works. As you were...! Rodney Baggins (talk) 07:48, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No Rodney, you're good. You've made an excellent summary of our discussion. Keep up the good work. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:48, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Red Phoenix ^talk 02:26, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Regarding disambiguation, WP:TWODABS disfavors two-link disambiguation pages, as it is almost always possible to determine a primary topic where there are only two possibilities. The primary topic should be at the primary topic title. bd2412 T 02:31, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, for as long as I've been around, I was unaware of that policy. Well, then, in that case, how about we delete the original article and put a hatnote at the artistic roller skating article. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:50, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also wow, for as long as I've been around (6 months), I was also unaware of that policy, but I must admit I'm not exactly disappointed! If the FSCD article is considered primary then maybe a hatnote at top along the lines of: {{about|the ice dance competition segment|the artistic roller skating competition segment|Compulsory dance (artistic roller skating)}} and possibly another hatnote at top of RSCD article: {{about|the artistic roller skating competition segment|the ice dance competition segment|Compulsory dance (ice dance)}} ...? Rodney Baggins (talk) 10:32, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the discussion above that two articles with hatnotes is right. It looks like WP:QUALIFIER implies moving the ice dance content (only) back to Compulsory dance, though I admit I'd slightly prefer to redirect Compulsory dance to Compulsory dance (ice dance) instead, for precision's sake. No strong preference. One side-note - the new article Compulsory dance (artistic roller skating) has no references. It'd be great if that can be fixed. › Mortee _talk 03:10, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Mortee, I agree with your agreement. ;) I also have the same slight preference as yours. The reason why the ASR article has no references is because the content in the original article had none. I did a simple cut-and-paste. I again agree, it should be fixed, but as someone who no knowledge and interest in the topic, and because I have other stuff I wanna do here (like continue to improve fs articles), it won't be me, sorry. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 03:53, 8 August 2018 (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.