Deletion of Interracial (2nd nomination)

Comment: Why would a reader look in an encyclopedia (as opposed to a dictionary) for an adjective? Most people know that encyclopedia articles are always nouns, broadly construed. Obviously some people believe that some readers do look for adjectives like this, or they wouldn't create dab pages like this. How then can we best help that reader find whatever it is they're looking for? This dab page, PTMs and all, looks actually quite likely to be useful for that reader. Should it stay: ? Does it do any harm (except to encourage the creation of more dab pages for adjectives, ? Note that this article was Kept at AfD only 7 months ago: why bring it up again? I've improved it, by adding an {{tl|in title}} link as a "See also", an asset to almost any dab page
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules (WP:IAR||WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS)

Comment: Determining whether an entry is a |partial title match isn't about the exact structure of its article title. It is about determining whether the topic can be referred to by 'Interracial' alone. That's possible with the entries on this disambiguation page, because interracial is an adjective. (We can classify marriage as 'Interracial'.) We do have more adjectives as disambiguation pages, as mentioned at . Furthermore, per PamD, this disambiguation page serves the reader by pointing to relevant Wikipedia articles. Redirecting such a common word to Wiktionary doesn't. We can't compare it with less common adjectives like Normoxic, which probably wouldn't survive RFD if is was a redirect to an article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Disambiguation (WP:PTM||WP:NOUN)