Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heterogeneity

I assume this could never be more than a dicdef. (Alternatively, this could be kept if Heterogeneous goes. One should be a redirect to the other.) -- Jao 22:49, 15 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I added this page becaus I used the term in another article and did not know how to refer to Heterogeneous properly (I am not a pro yet). Maybe, making it a redirect to Heterogeneous will do the job. -- netlad
Comment: I initially thought delete, dicdef pointing to heterogeneous which is itself another dicdef. But then I looked at homogeneous and homogeneity. Lots of good links to both of these. The mystery thickens: If this is kept, my gut feeling was also that heterogeneous should IMO become a redir to it, but with these other two it's the opposite, I suspect homogeneneity should redirect to homogeneous. Hmmmm? Suggest no need to list heterogeneous here until we sort this one out, anyway. There have been no talk page discussions (yet) for any of the four. Andrewa 00:22, 16 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
Should use move heterogenous to heterogeneity as that is the former is an adjective whilst the latter is the noun, i.e. the name of the phenomenon. Whilst you're at it, there's a similar problem with heredity and hereditary where the latter adjective is used, when it should be a redirect to the former. Duncharris 20:36, May 16, 2004 (UTC)
- Original poster concurs. I should have listed Heterogeneous in stead. Or I should just have listed them for merging. Thanks for setting my thoughts straight. -- Jao 20:45, 16 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that merging the more useful text for heterogenous into heterogeneity and keep the noun would be the best solution here. I think this should be common practice for any such case where an adjective and a noun is present. --Netlad 22:22, 16 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I think you're right on all points. Perhaps homogeneous is an exception to this rule? Andrewa 11:52, 19 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]