Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 March 13

March 13[edit]

Wikiproject Foo → Wikipedia:WikiProject Foo[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. —freak(talk) 07:58, Mar. 16, 2007 (UTC)

I am continuing the clearout of cross-namespace redirects to Wikiprojects. These are not as problematic as those I nominated yesterday as they state that they are "Wikiprojects". Readers will only mistake them for encyclopedic contents if they think we write articles about our own projects (a problem in itself). In any event, such redirects should be discouraged and are not especially useful- there are plenty of legitimate shortcuts available to Wikipojects. I apologise for the length of this list :-). WjBscribe 02:08, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the lot of them. These aren't useful xnrs. >Radiant< 11:33, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and close immediately, as per Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2006_November_11#Wikiprojects_.E2.86.92_Wikipedia:WikiProject. Decision was that there was no consensus, but also no need to raise the question again without an existing conflict of names. Girolamo Savonarola 11:46, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. I don't think that discussion requires this nomination to be closed because (1) concensus can change in neary 4 months and (2) that discussion was about only Wikiprojects → Wikipedia:WikiProject (a redirect not nominated here) to which different arguments apply, especially about usefulness. We'll get to that one in good time... WjBscribe 16:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, a discussion that resulted in "no consensus" certainly should not be setting a precedent. We don't want things like this coming up in search. -- Renesis (talk) 15:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. The WP: shortcuts are standard for redirects to the Wikipedia namesapce, and those are much quicker to type in the search box than these. Anyone looking for a particular project which they don't know the shortcut for only needs to type 'Wikipedia:WikiProject Possiblename' or use the directory links at Wikipedia:WikiProject and note the shortcut. Redirects like these should not clutter up the article space. matt br 17:02, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all, unnecessary cross-namespace redirects – Qxz 19:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all cross-namespace and just plain un-needed to redirect. Alex43223^{T | C | E} 22:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all. Non-problematic. Useful as shortcuts are easily forgettable, and typing "Wikipedia:" in front is a pain. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 03:20, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- So use the WP: shortcuts (as in WP:WPTC for Wikipedia:WikiProject Tropical cyclones). Delete all, unnecessary cross-space redirects. —Cuiviénen 04:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I already said these shortcuts are easily forgettable. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 04:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - That would explain why everybody uses them all the time, no? >Radiant< 09:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      - Have a cite for that? :) Seriously, it's easy to assert that everybody uses them all the time, but without statistics, it's hard to buy it. And it doesn't address the idea that a redirect from the project name without "Wikipedia:" in front of it is easy to remember, and thus should be kept. Stevie is the man! ^{Talk • Work} 17:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        Yes, it does. If something else is equally easy or easier to remember (and we can contend on this, but, frankly, I don't understand what's so hard about acronyms or WP:Louisville), there's no need to keep cross-space redirects, which are an express violation of Wikipedia standards. —Cuiviénen 23:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        Actually, we do have statistics - the whatlinkshere for each acronym shows how widely it's used. >Radiant< 08:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all very useful links, and this issue was already discussed and verdict was to keep. M.K. 11:20, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Omagh Bombing/names → Talk:Omagh Bombing/names[edit]

The result of the debate was speedily deleted by NawlinWiki as a redirect to the Talk: namespace. matt br 17:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This was moved out of mainspace to the pseudo subspace following this AFD, but neither the software nor WP:SUBPAGES supports mainspace subpages, so lets delete the redirect to be thorough. Chaser - T 11:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Koh Tral → Phú Quốc[edit]

The result of the debate was keep. John Reaves (talk) 02:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Koh Tral is a Cambodian Island and shouldn't be redirected to Phú Quốc which is a Vietnamese Island Hardworking 04:32, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Originally closed by me as redirect had been converted into stub. I have reopened and relisted following new information contrary to the nom. WjBscribe 22:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So fix it. That doesn't require deletion. Rossami (talk) 23:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- And now I see that an anon editor has already made a start. Rossami (talk) 23:55, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Koh Tral is the Cambodian name for the island now known as Phu Quoc and currently administered by Vietnam. It doesn't appear that the Cambodian government is pursuing claims to the island. DHN 20:55, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Does indeed appear that the two names refer to the same island, which is now administered by Vietnam under the name Phú Quốc. I have added mention of the Cambodian name for the island at Phú Quốc. See [1] for an official document confirming that both names refer to the same island. WjBscribe 23:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Koh Tral historically belonged to Cambodia and was placed under the administration of France, by the French Protectorate until Vietnam claimed Koh Tral administratively and gave it a name of Phu Quoc. But considering Cambodian traditional title and the island’s location, the island is still the subject of territorial disputes between Vietnam and Cambodia, and shouldn't be forgotten from the Cambodian side yet. Drawdrak 19:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.