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 no consensus. The option to merge and redirect is beyond the purview of the Articles for deletion noticeboard. (jarbarf) (talk) 23:28, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew (given name)[edit]

Per WP:NOTDIRECTORY this list of people with the first name Matthew should be gotten rid of. There are literally thousands of notable people with that first name. It would be as ridiculous as listing every person named John in the John article. The list of people with the Matthews surname is different. Firstly, there are far less people with the surname Matthew, than with the given name Matthew, making the list somewhat manageable. Secondly, and more importantly, the justification for having the surname list is that people who are looking for someone specific and can't remember the first name of the person, will find the person through the list. However, it is far less probable that someone would remember the first name of a person and forget the last name of a person. Matthew (name) covers the background and history of the name. A redirect would be pointless becasue the parentesess makes it an improbable search term. Therefore, Delete. brew crewer (yada, yada) 04:59, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Matthew (name). Capitalistroadster (talk) 05:15, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Matthew (name). Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 15:01, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as suggested and delete the directory list of names. (!!!) coccyx bloccyx_(toccyx) 18:09, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree wtih BrewCrewer entirely on this. Why would anyone do a search for "Matthew (given name)"? I know, redirects are cheap and all that crap, but do we want to encourage someone to add a list of famous Matthews to the other article? I'm sure the author meant well, but this isn't an encyclopedic topic. Mandsford (talk) 00:36, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This was created as a result of explicit instructions in WP:MOSDAB. This acts like a safety valve to save the dab page from destruction, and nominating it for Afd without reading and understanding WP:MOSDAB is a bad idea in the same way that it is a bad idea for someone who has no knowledge of engineering or physics to defeat a safety valve "to save steam". Chris the speller (talk) 04:08, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Where are these "explicit instructions"? And do these "instructions" trump the consensus here at this afd? Turning to the underlying issue, it is pointless to create a "safety valve" to prevent the dab page from destruction when the "safety valve" itself selfdestructs. The solution is simple - no links to people with the first name Matthew, anywhere, neither in this deleted page or in the Matthew dab page. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 04:55, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please see Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Better here than there. Articles don't need "safety valves", just remove inappropriate links in Matthew (name) and be done with it. --Phirazo 01:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --Phirazo 01:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. I think it's a plausible search term for someone familiar with the parenthetical article title system but not innately familiar with what goes within them (i.e, someone knows enough to put something in parenthesis, but not what). "Given name" is a perfectly valid substitute for name, although the US-centric systematic bias in Wikipedia may be against its use. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 07:43, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is plausible, but not very. I can't see why someone wouldn't just type "Matthew", and see what they find there. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 20:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not everyone searches that way; especially people on slow internet connections. When I'm in Maine with my family (where a page on dialup can take 30 seconds to load), I try to be as exact as possible; if I'm looking for a list of states by population, I'm going to go to "List of states by population"; I'm not going to screw around going through the list of states hierarchy. Same with names. I'm not going to go through a series of disambig pages from "Matthew". I'm going right to the source, and if I happen to be someone not brought up in the US, then "Matthew (given name)" is exactly where I'd go for information on the name. It's probably a little difficult to grasp for a monoglot or someone brought up in the US, but it's certainly a viable search term. Celarnor ^{Talk to me} 21:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rename to List of people called Matthew. Article with current title should have info on the meaning, origin etc of the name (as Matthew (name) does, not just a list of owners.Yobmod (talk) 16:09, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep this is a disambig page --T-rex 19:02, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a dab page, all the links are of a different name. Matthew Smith is a dab page and its need is unquestioned because searchers need a way of finding the one the Matthew Smith that they are looking for. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 19:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But if you search for Matthew you are lead here. As such this is a disambig page --T-rex 02:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only people known by the name "Matthew" on its own should be on the disambiguation page Matthew. Disambiguation pages are to help with ambiguous links. Nobody should link to Matthew if they are referring to a specific individual. This Given name page is a useful index, but that's different from disambiguation. - Fayenatic (talk) 08:19, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This page is in keeping with guidelines on WP:MOSDAB. This page is especially important because there are entries (such as Matthew of Kraków and Saint Matthew) who are known by their given names only. Even if this were not the case, no stipulation of what constitutes a "manageable list" has been provided. This page should not be deleted if guidelines remain as they are. Neelix (talk) 19:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a disambiguation page. "Pages only listing persons with certain given names or surnames who are not widely known by these parts of their name otherwise are not disambiguation pages.". This is just a list of people name Matthew.--brew crewer (yada, yada) 19:30, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Right, it's not a Disam' page; it is an anthroponymy page, so...

Merge (selectively) to Matthew (name), and redirect following merge to retain page history in accordance with GFDL. Please allow the relatively young WikiProject Anthroponymy time to manage these articles. Nominator said, it is far less probable that someone would remember the first name of a person and forget the last name -- just wait until you're older; believe me, it happens! Personally I prefer the more selective lists such as this version of "Sarah" to a comprehensive list; the comment at Talk:Matthew (given name) is just right: The given name list need not be exhaustive, but rather representative, supportive of a view of the breadth over geography and time of the use of the name. The WikiProject has not yet reached a consensus on how long a list should be in the case of a common name, but there is consensus that there should be a list. Editors who come across other name articles in poor condition are invited to bring them to the project's attention at Wikipedia:WikiProject Anthroponymy#Articles needing attention, perhaps noting that they will be recommended for deletion unless action is taken by X date. - Fayenatic (talk) 23:05, 24 June 2008 (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.