TransPennine Express (disambiguation): A hatnote at the main TPE article linking to the two could suffice JuniperChill ( talk ) 16:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation , Disambiguations , England ,  and Scotland .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:43, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  JuniperChill ( talk ) 18:44, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  JuniperChill , I think you hint at WP:2DABS yet I see 3 items at the disambiguation page.  Can you clarify?  gidonb ( talk ) 13:50, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Gidonb I said 'two OTHER topics' per WP:TWOOTHER .  I think you are confused that on the main TransPennine Express page, it will have links to the two pages TransPennine Express (2016–2023) and First TransPennine Express via a hatnote.  Basically, TPE has a primary topic with two other topics is another way to put it.  JuniperChill ( talk ) 14:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Sure, yet we do not have a rule against disambiguation pages with three items either.  gidonb ( talk ) 15:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  No policy reason to delete this valid disambiguation page.  Shhhnotsoloud ( talk ) 20:37, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Please refrain from unnecessary AfDs.  There are way too many AfDs.  gidonb ( talk ) 20:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Shhhnotsoloud, nothing in the nomination is a reason to delete.  Thryduulf ( talk ) 10:12, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Ok fine, here is a policy example located at WP:TWOOTHER : " If there are two or three other topics, it is still possible to use a hatnote which lists the other topics explicitly, but if this would require too much text (roughly, if the hatnote would extend well over one line on a standard page), then it is better to create a disambiguation page and refer only to that. " So my proposal hatnote would have been: This page is about the 2023 operator.  For the 2016–2023 operator, see TransPennine Express (2016–2023) .  For the 2004–2016 operator, see First TransPennine Express .  It may vary but for me, its 1 1/3 of the way there.  An alternative is to create a page called TransPennine Express franchise or TransPennine Express (brand) if its allowed.  Then the dab page can redirect to it after its been created as what happened to ScotRail (brand) .  JuniperChill ( talk ) 17:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] If there are two or three other topics, it is still possible to use a hatnote which lists the other topics explicitly, but if this would require too much text (roughly, if the hatnote would extend well over one line on a standard page), then it is better to create a disambiguation page and refer only to that.  It means that there is no strict need to create disambig pages for three topics.  But once these pages are there anyway, these should not be deleted.  That's not in the policy.  Please use everyone's time in a more constructive manner! gidonb ( talk ) 17:50, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Alright, I think the disambig page can be kept, but I propose to change the hatnotes so that it now links directly  to the two former TransPennine Express TOC as if the disambig page never existed. .  JuniperChill ( talk ) 09:19, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That's nothing for an AfD.  WP:JUSTDOIT !  The nominator has withdrawn this AfD gidonb ( talk ) 16:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , no valid reason given for deletion.  Weshmakui ( talk ) 23:04, 27 June 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: withdrawn