Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chione (daughter of Daedalion)

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 speedy keep. Nyctimene (talk) 19:04, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chione (daughter of Daedalion)

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

Unnecessary repetition - page should be deleted and redirected to the Daedalion article which contains the story in full. Nyctimene (talk) 11:11, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn by nominator - Speedy keep as nobody voted to delete followed by a redirect.

~~Keep~~, or redirect to Daedalion with the history intact. A lot of our Greek mythology articles are stubs which could probably be expanded. I don't see any good reason to nuke the history. Ivanvector (talk) 16:43, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your concern but I can assure you Chione is not mentioned independently of Daedalion in any classical source, save in passing reference to her children. As such however much work you did to the Chione article, however much you expanded and improved it, the article would never be able to add anything new to the page on Daedalion. I urge you to go look at the Daedalion article if you have not already done so. I hope, after reading the tale provided therein, you would agree that they are really two characters in one story and hence it doesn't make sense to have two pages detailing the same thing. Nyctimene (talk) 16:54, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. I did read it before commenting earlier, and you're right that the current articles seem inextricably linked. I'm no expert in Greek mythology so I'll take your word for it that no separate stories are likely. I don't see any reason not to keep the history though. Ivanvector (talk) 17:35, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I guess I just figured the history wasn't adding anything. Getting rid of it then seemed sensible simply to remove clutter and not keep content unnecessarily on Wikipedia's servers. If you still disagree though I'd be happy to support a blank and redirect as you suggest. Nyctimene (talk) 17:46, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting doesn't actually remove content from the server, it just gets marked as deleted - it can be viewed by admins, undeleted, etc. but it's still taking up space. I guess it really doesn't matter one way or the other whether the history should be visible or not, I just think we default to keep histories of redirected articles unless there's a reason to delete, like the history contains copyright violations or violations of the biographies of living persons policy. Ivanvector (talk) 18:09, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, I'll withdraw this nomination and proceed with the redirect this evening. Nyctimene (talk) 18:25, 29 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.