Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 July 23

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 23[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 23, 2008

Khojaly Genocide → Khojaly Massacre[edit]

The result of the debate was Keep, redirects are not bound by NPOV. Non-admin closure. Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 04:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

613 dead is not a genocide. Using the term genocide for events that are not a genocide diminishes the term and hence is a great disservice to people and nations that actually have experienced a genocide. The term is used mostly by propaganda sites. google search. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 23:29, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Of course it's not a genocide, but it seems as though the Azeris do call it one. redirects are cheap and do not have to be completely NPOV (within reason). Moreschi (talk) (debate) 23:36, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Redirects don't imply a POV or the correctness of a term, they are used just to help the visitor reach the article. Since the name "Khojaly Genocide" is used by some sources, the redirect should stay. bogdan (talk) 23:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep because it documents a pagemove that the nominator made mere minutes before attempting to delete the redirect. Pagemoves automatically leave a redirect behind for many very good reasons. Most important among them is pointing the previous editors and readers of the page to the new title. When you delete the redirect, new users often think that the database "hiccupped" and they repost the moved content. This either results in a fork with the two versions drifting out of synch or another unexplained deletion and a bitten new editor. Neither is good for the project. As Moreschi said, redirects are not held to the same strict standards as article titles and content. Rossami (talk) 23:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The term is by propagandist origin (some kinf of SOAPing) especially as reliable sources like NYT call the events Khojaly battle, not even massacres. silly propagand by Azerbaijani KGB of 1990's! Andranikpasha (talk) 12:57, 26 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

iTLD → Top-level_domain#Infrastructure_TLD[edit]

The result of the debate was Retarget to Top-level domain. I think it is better to retarget it to the parent article rather than the heading as the discussion suggests that it might mean two different things. Lenticel (talk) 08:08, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

unusual alias of .arpa 212.82.251.44 (talk) 11:51, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Being "unusual" is not a reason to delete a redirect. By the way, a quick google search suggests that it's not even all that unusual. (About a quarter of the ones I spot-checked were false positives but the other half appear to substantiate the use of this abbreviation.) Rossami (talk) 15:28, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The top hit is International TLD, not Infrastructure TLD. That can be confusing when folks look for the former. I found no hint for the WP:NEO acronym in the top hits, but there is always a chance to get mirrors of Wikipedia errors in a Google search. Just in case, no significant edit history to preserve here, and no energy to disambiguate dubious acronyms. --212.82.251.44 (talk) 16:21, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Interesting... You're right that most of the hits explain the abbreviation as "international ...". But when you look at the context, they all seem to be using it as if they meant gTLD or proposed top-level domain. How about if we just retarget to Top-level_domain and let our readers drill down to the subsection that applies to their question. Rossami (talk) 21:39, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Retarget to Top-level domain, I did that before the RFD, merging an "infrastructure TLD" stub into a new TLD section. Or do you mean retarget as in remove #Infrastructure_TLD, and let readers find what they are looking for in the complete TLD article? Apart from an IDN link there's not much about any "i18n TLD" in the TLD article yet, only the IDN test TLDs. --212.82.251.28 (talk) 17:21, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Dana Falkenberg → sep11:Dana Falkenberg[edit]

The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to non-Wikimedia project. See Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2008_July_11#Akimichi_clan_.E2.86.92_wikia:Naruto:Akimichi_clan. Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 02:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Wikipeida is not a memorial. --UsaSatsui (talk) 05:44, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Though it should be noted that this is a different situation than the Naruto redirect. The September 11th wiki used to be an official Wikimedia wiki, but was eventually "spun out" to its own site. -- Ned Scott 08:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, wasn't wikia originally a WikiMedia project? Or was that just indirectly?--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:03, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Wikia was completely separate, though there is one or two wikis hosted on Wikia that were once hosted by the Foundation. -- Ned Scott 07:23, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Abstain. This was moved to another WikiMedia project via the transwiki process. The precedent cited in the nomination does not apply. At the time it was moved, transwiki did not automatically move the pagehistory. The assumption built into the transwiki rules at the time was that we would preserve the pagehistory (hidden behind the cross-wiki redirect) in order to help our sister project comply with the attribution requirements of GFDL. We had the option to instead move the attribution to the new project via copy-paste of the pagehistory but it was not required. Note: If someone takes the time to move the attribution history over to the new location, please change my opinion here to "abstain". Rossami (talk) 15:34, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • First off, it's not a "sister project" anymore. Second, there is -one- edit of any significance in this article, and that's what was copied over. The rest are redirects or minor. Quite simply, making sure an anon who made a page that shouldn't have been made 7 years ago gets proper attribution for his "contribution" in another wiki isn't our responsibility, it's theirs, and certainly not a reason to keep this page. --UsaSatsui (talk) 17:00, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • {edit conflict)Rossami, I think you're overlooking the fact that the sep11 wiki is no longer a WikiMedia project, so I don't think your reasoning applies here. WikiMedia is now under no obligation to help them comply with the GFDL, that's their responsibility, not ours.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:02, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I know that it's not longer a sister project but it was at the time that this page was moved. It is my opinion (and it's only opinion - there's no policy to back this up) that we should continue to help them comply with GFDL as a matter of good corporate citizenship. I'll also admit that my opinion was influenced by a concern that there were many more of these across the project and I didn't think it's worth the time to argue over them all. Having had more time to search for examples, I am now less concerned about the potential precedent. I'll move the attribution history of this one over to the sep11: site myself. Rossami (talk) 20:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Update: The sep11 wiki has been locked for maintenance for several days now. It may take longer than expected to move the attribution history. If the community is okay with a little patience, I will clean up this page myself once their wiki is unlocked. Rossami (talk) 01:05, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per nom. Nsk92 (talk) 02:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No prejudice against recreation as an independent article should she become posthumously notable by some strange twist of fate. --Blanchardb-Me•MyEars•MyMouth-timed 03:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Ryan Eigenmann, et al. → Lobo (TV series)[edit]

The result of the debate was Deleted. There seems to be no disagreement that these actors are more notable than just these single roles. While it would be nice to have stubs instead, redlinks do serve a purpose. They tell folks we don't have an article and encourage the writing of one. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:50, 2 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not tell anything about this person, just the character he plays. That also goes to the following redirects:

上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 04:35, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep They are reasonable redirects. People go searching for character information all the time. Prsumably, these fictional characters are not notable enough per WP:FICT to stand alone. Having redirects will prevent people from creating these articles. hbdragon88 (talk) 05:03, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, perfectly reasonable redirects, if these people are only notable for their appearances in Lobo. Oh, and they're not fictional characters as far as I can tell, these are the names of the actors. Obviously it would be nice to get the articles created if any of them can be established as notable actors. --Stormie (talk) 05:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It's standard practice to redirect non-notable actors to a project they're associated with. --UsaSatsui (talk) 05:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: I dunno but Ryan Eigenmann, Angel Aquino and Eric Fructuoso‎ shouldn't be solely redirected to Lobo (TV series), especially Fructuoso‎ since he was a part of a Filipino boy band back in the day which I think is also a red link. Eigenmann is also quite an accomplished actor (by accomplished I mean he has appeared in a lot of TV series/film. The others can be safely redirected to the Lobo page. --Howard the Duck 06:00, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The actors (not fictitious characters, mind you) are more notable than just appearing on Lobo, especially the last three. Meanwhile, Jerry Lopez Sineneng (the series' director) has done a lot of programs for ABS-CBN and should have an article of his own than a mere redirect. Starczamora (talk) 07:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The actors are neither non-notable nor fictional. I believe that they should not be a redirect on the grounds that they are not just known for their roles in this soap opera. Keeping these redirects is as insulting to a Filipino as redirecting Sean Connery to James Bond is for the English. I believe that we should keep the entries as red-links until Filipino Wikipedians could find the time to provide a decent stub or article.--Lenticel (talk) 14:38, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • If they're notable, stub them. Red links help nobody. And your example is very poor: First off, Connery has -clearly- played multiple roles, second, he's not the only Bond, and third, I wouldn't find that offensive in the least. --UsaSatsui (talk) 14:41, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • We're not exactly numerous here and very few are entertainment specialists. Also, online Philippine sources are hard to come by (one of my biggest frustrations actually). By the look of your reply I think I got my example head on (Analogy isn't the best thing to describe stuff especially when you have different cultures right?). These guys are notable not only because of Lobo as is Connery is not only notable because of Bond. Now would it piss you off if people simply talks about Connery as "that Bond Guy"?.--Lenticel (talk) 14:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Might piss -him- off. Myself, I wouldn't care one whit, nor would any rational person I can think of. If he were a redirect to James Bond and had other roles, I'd just create an article or stub about him and overwrite the redirect...which is what I suggested (and to me, he's "Indy's Dad"). --UsaSatsui (talk) 17:07, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • Exactly what Lenticel points out. Those actors are not just the characters they portray on Lobo. Starczamora (talk) 16:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. As UsaSatsui said, this is standard practice for non-notable/semi-notable actors. If someone wants to expand the article, there is no need to delete the redirect before overwriting it with new content. Until someone does, a redirect is marginally more helpful to our readers than a redlink. (The argument that the redirect is somehow insulting or offensive is uncompelling.) Rossami (talk) 15:46, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that some of the actors listed are actually notable, as they have appeared in more television shows and movies than just Lobo. Starczamora (talk) 16:21, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The remedy is to write one-sentence substubs about actors with extensive acting credits. --Howard the Duck 16:54, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
But if there is no real information or context in the one sentence substub, it would be subject to speedy deletion. 147.70.242.40 (talk) 16:52, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not know Bagas, Bunda, Goma and Flores. The others, I can recognize, and I'm certain that they deserve to have their own WP articles (and hence, their redirects deleted). (I'm not at home right now, though, so I don't have the luxury of time to create new articles right now.) --- Tito Pao (talk) 03:00, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Josef Krämer → Josef Kramer[edit]

The result of the debate was redirect converted into article. Thanks, User:Doma-w! Pie is good (Apple is the best) 02:46, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Josef Krämer is an athlete who won Olympic medals before Josef Kramer (the concentration camp kommandant) was born. Although there is no article written about Josef Krämer (unfortunately, I have no biographic information), the current redirect makes it appear as if the athlete was a Nazi to a casual reader not looking at the birth year. Kjetilho (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig I think the solution here is just to add a disambig hatnote to the top of Josef Kramer (which I'll do in just a minute). Do you have any information at all? I.e. birth year, years he won medals, any more detail at all besides his name and the fact that he was a runner? If so, put it into a stub, or even a sub-stub would be acceptable.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:08, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I think you got the redirect backwards, because the Nazi was Kramer, not Krämer, so I reversed the section heading and the names throughout Kjetilho's comments. If this was incorrect, please revert and let me know. --Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:12, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your correction, Aervanath. User:Doma-w has been kind enough to make a stub article. I guess that resolves the issue? Kjetilho (talk) 23:42, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2008_July_23&oldid=1141906982"