This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete "Regalian".

  • If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Deletion rationale".
  • If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion".
  • If a consensus has been reached, an administrator will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution".

In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page.

Deletion rationale Edit

Since we've previously established that the "Pronoun" is only valid if it is used independently, leaving "Pronoun thing" to only be valid as itself unless "Pronoun" is intentionally used separately, this page, which is purely establishing a "Pronoun" to exist based on four "Pronoun things", has therefore been previously deemed unacceptable based on that logic. --Alan (talk) 12:14, November 7, 2018 (UTC)

Personally, I would like to see root terms like this applied more meaningfully, because yes, we don't know what a Regalian is, but we do know that they 4 or 5 items that are bearing the term in their name somehow must all share something in common that we are not choosing to address. --Alan (talk) 18:25, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

Discussion Edit

  • Comment: What about what has been done with Ventanan instead? --LauraCC (talk) 18:18, November 8, 2018 (UTC)
The search function works, at least currently, in such a way that if you begin typing Regalian in the search bar, every term listed appears in the drop down list, I suppose the same applies to Ventanan. --Alan (talk) 18:25, November 8, 2018 (UTC)
The Ventanan solution is the one that makes sense to me. This doesn't deserve an article, but the disambiguation quite elegantly draws attention to the apparent relation without actually having to make any claims about it. And it's not just about search either; a link to a disambiguation is a handy way to point readers towards related content with one link instead of three (a world of difference in the flow of bg notes), and with minimal risk that yet to emerge additional references will be missing from some articles they're relevant to. -- Capricorn (talk) 11:24, November 9, 2018 (UTC)
  • One might almost need a category for capitalized adjectives? --LauraCC (talk) 18:27, November 8, 2018 (UTC)

Admin resolution Edit