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 Merge→Geography of Kerala—There is not necessarily consensus on how to do the merger, but there is consensus (with dissenting opinions) that the content should be merged as noted. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 20:57, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of kayals in India (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

kayal is a word that means a lake in the Malayalam language which is spoken mainly in one state of India. It is no different than a lake. A kayal is not an English word nor is used extensively in India to mean a lake. The info in the article can very well be merged with Geography of Kerala. ¿Amar៛^{Talk to me/My edits} 09:27, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletions. -- ¿Amar៛^{<span style="color:blue">Talk to me/My edits} 09:38, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Update - As per discussion below, I am for the time-being OK with a Merge and redirect -- ¿Amar៛^{Talk to me/My edits} 06:01, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Category:Lakes of India (and for this specific set of lakes, Category:Lakes of Kerala) is good enough. Tintin 09:46, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Category:Lakes of Kerala does the job well. utcursch | talk 10:32, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect into Geography of Kerala. Redlinks cannot be included in a category. Bláthnaid 20:54, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge and redirect per Blathnaid. I started the Kerala list and was actually coming here to agree with the deletion proposal, but I think there are enough redlinks in the list to justify a merge/redir. I'm not an expert on Indian subjects, but it's safe to assume that a lake (by any name, English or otherwise) is notable enough to eventually have an article. Kafziel ^Talk 21:08, 3 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  Response to Bláthnaid and Kafziel ^Talk: Merging the article into Geography of Kerala is an absolute necessity. But why do we need a redirect of an article which has a word kayal in the title which makes no sense in English. It is like having an article List of lac in Great Britain, lac being the French word for lake. If we follow that precedence, we will have articles like List of keres in India (kere meaning lake in Kannada), List of jheels in India (jheel meaning lake in Hindi) and like wise.. Lets not set a precedence here. The redirect makes no sense. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛^{Talk to me/My edits} 02:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Um, I think you may be thinking of "loch", not "lac". In which case, have a look at List of lochs in Scotland. Kafziel ^Talk 07:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am thinking of lac, not loch. As you can see, List of lacs in Great Britain does not make any sense, since lac being a French word does not have anything to do with Great Britain. In a similar way, List of kayals in India makes no sense. The article better be List of lakes in India. The association of the word loch with Scotland is legendary and makes sense to have an article called List of lochs in Scotland. Not so with the word kayal, more than 90% of Indians will not even know that kayal means a lake. To add to this, Dictionary.com has no reference to kayal, indicating that it is not an English word. Hope this clarifies... -- ¿Amar៛^{Talk to me/My edits} 08:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of kayals in India cannot be deleted after the information in it is merged because the article's history has to be kept in order to comply with the GFDL. The redirect allows the page history to be found. Bláthnaid 10:17, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. According to this guideline, there are ways in which a Merge and delete can be done. I have shown above, why the article title does not make any sense and I do not see a compelling reason for it to be redirected to any other article. For the nth time, what is a kayal (in English) and why do we need an article with that word in the title? -- ¿Amar៛^{Talk to me/My edits} 13:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We don't. A redirect is not an article. Kafziel ^Talk 19:26, 4 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think we have a difference of opinion here. If this does not get clarified, I will take this up at WP:RfD for a consensus. To resolve this deadlock, I am for the time-being OK with Merge and redirect. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛^{Talk to me/My edits} 05:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see what an RfD would clarify. Blathnaid is correct about the licensing issue, and the "guideline" you link to above isn't a guideline at all; it's just an essay, and it's only three weeks old at that. But even under the terms of that essay, the burden is upon you to demonstrate specifically how keeping the redirect is totally unacceptable. The "use English" reason doesn't quite hold up (despite your assertion on my talk page, "obi" and "enchilada" are not proper nouns). If you realize you were wrong on this issue, then the matter can drop. If not, you're not doing us any favors by agreeing "for the time being" (i.e., "until a later date when nobody is watching"). Kafziel ^Talk 08:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent)Hello, the burden is on you to show that the word kayal makes any sense at all. You have said that you do not know a word in Malayalam but were knowledgeable enough to introduce that word in the article title!! I changed my opinion to merge and redirect since everyone agrees (including you and Blathnaid) that the article contents need to be merged to some article. The disagreement is on whether the original article should remain or not. Since you are not willing to agree that you made a mistake on that article name, I did not want to pursue the matter further here and take it to the correct forum. The right place to discuss about "redirects" is WP:RfD and hence I will pursue the matter there. I will inform you when I put it there, so that you can put in your comments. The use English does hold up according to this guideline. You were the one who introduced a word like kayal into the article title, when nobody was watching and without knowing anything about what that means. I am just trying to correct that mistake. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛^{Talk to me/My edits} 08:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there's no disagreement on whether the article should remain. Everyone (including me) has said the name should be changed. And the right place to discuss name changes is WP:RM. The only disagreement here appears to be whether or not I'm the devious mastermind of some secret conspiracy to introduce Malayalam words into the English language. I'm pretty sure I'm not. Kafziel ^Talk 09:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know that you do not agree with the name. All this time, I was thinking that you were interested in a "redirect" than in a "rename". And nobody is blaming you that you are involved in any conspiracy theory. Atleast, not me. Thanks -- ¿Amar៛^{Talk to me/My edits} 09:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From an admin standpoint, a redirect works the same as a rename. If we rename this "list of lakes in Kerala, India", this information will be moved to "list of lakes in Kerala, India" and "list of kayals in India" will become a redirect. There's no policy in place requiring that the original title be deleted, so saying "merge and redirect" is tantamount to saying "rename". If you can get Tintin and Utcursch to withdraw their "deletes" above, we can speedy this and I will move the article over the redirect at List of lakes in India (or you can move it to List of lakes in Kerala, India, if you prefer). Kafziel ^Talk 09:41, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge and redirect into Geography of Kerala per Bláthnaid. Category won't do. Antariki Vandanamu (talk) 10:52, 5 December 2007 (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.