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 delete. Sandstein 22:55, 21 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Trocadero (name origin)

Trocadero (name origin) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Completing nomination on behalf of an anonymous editor, who provided no rationale. The article itself has no sources, and indeed no defined topic - it's not about a specific Torcadero, or a specific use of the name. This article was forked in 2007, as a result of Trocadero becoming a disambiguation page. The origins of the name are discussed at Trocadero, however, which makes this non-specific article redundant. The only incoming link to this article is from that disamb page. Based on all that, I believe this can be deleted without the loss of any information. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 14:32, 14 February 2018 (UTC) reply

• Delete per nomination. It's hard to imagine that this would be the page where any reader would go for this information, as the Trocadero page is the obvious choice. I created this page in 2007, just to unburden the dab page, and it seems superfluous now. Chris the speller  ^yack 14:50, 14 February 2018 (UTC) reply
• I'm the nominating IP. Wikipedia did not allowed me to continue with the process by creating this page, so I just went away. I suggest you fix the process. - 91.10.6.125 ( talk) 00:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC) reply

It has been a longstanding practice not to let anonymous editors create pages. This is meant for articles, because it is easy to create a massive number of articles very rapidly, and that could be abused. But it also extends to project pages like this one. That is why we have systems like WP:BADAFD, which flags AFDs that haven't been completed yet. Most of those are like yours. So I and others will complete them for you, or ask for your reasoning and do it that way. I understand that it's inconvenient, but the alternative isn't really an option. Thanks for nominating this article. UltraExactZZ ^Said ~ Did 13:22, 15 February 2018 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple ( talk) 04:06, 21 February 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.