Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 November 2

< November 1

November 3 >

November 2

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 2, 2008

Template:HP Animal → Template:HP character

The result of the debate was delete.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 07:46, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unused infobox redirect Magioladitis (talk) 22:06, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, same reasoning as below. Terraxos (talk) 01:47, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Redirects are cheap. -- Ned Scott 02:39, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:HP Elf Character → Template:HP character

The result of the debate was delete.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 07:45, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, confusing redirect. Magioladitis (talk) 22:03, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - another template formerly existed at this name, but it has no useful history worth preserving. Terraxos (talk) 01:47, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Redirects are cheap. -- Ned Scott 02:39, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Leggiuno-Sangiano → Leggiuno

The result of the debate was delete. No objections.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 07:43, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Leggiuno and Sangiano are neighbouring Italian municipalities. Leggiuno-Sangiano has no significance and reference was only made in Dario Fo who was born in Sangiano (and not in Leggiuno) according to it:Dario Fo; I corrected this already. I propose to delete the redirect Leggiuno-Sangiano E.J.Hoekstra (talk) 21:30, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bank failure redirects

The result of the debate was keep pending article creation.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 07:32, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bank failure → Bank run
Bank failures → Bank run

Not all banks fail due to a bank run. They could fail due to massive amounts of loans going bad or due to fraudulent accounting being discovered. Therefore, a financial expert needs to write an article about bank failures in general. Jesse Viviano (talk) 19:15, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then be bold and write one. Or at least start a disambiguation page. Though I suspect that a retargetting to a more general page on business failures may ultimately be more appropriate. In the grand scheme of things, banks aren't really all that different from other companies. They fail from mismanagement, sagging sales, failure to control expenses, over-leverage, etc. Rossami (talk) 02:53, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I would love to do this, but all I could write is a stub on how and why bank failures occur in the United States. I would need help for such an article to be globalized. Also, bank failures can cause lots of collateral damage (wipe out the depositors if there is no deposit insurance or wipe out the payroll account for a company because forcing layoffs because splitting such an account up to keep it under deposit insurance limits is impractical), so retargeting to an article about business failures is not a valid option. Maybe I could do this U.S. centric stub after this matter is decided. Jesse Viviano (talk) 15:06, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Be bold. A stub is fine. So is a US-centric article. It least it's a start. So long as you get past the basic criteria. You got a draft ready? --UsaSatsui (talk) 21:49, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If it's a stub, just include a tag that states that it lacks a global perspective... and drop a line at a few WikiProjects asking for input. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 15:59, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I will consider writing one this weekend. Right now, I am pooped out after working from 5:30 AM to around 8:00 PM straight yesterday as an election official to facilitate the vote in my election precinct in my town. Jesse Viviano (talk) 03:40, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Stubify (write a stub with this title), but don't delete - it's a plausible search term. Terraxos (talk) 01:46, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

WikiProject → Wikipedia:WikiProject

The result of the debate was Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:07, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why do we even have these cross namespace redirects? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 16:23, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unnecessary redirect to non-content. MBisanz ^talk 22:23, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Cross namespace redirect. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep again. This is where the page existed before the creation of the independent namespaces. It has been nominated for deletion in Nov 2006, Mar 2007, Dec 2007, May 2008 and Jun 2008 without ever achieving consensus for deletion. Nothing has changed since any of those prior debates. There is no possibility that a reader will follow this link expecting to find anything expect the Wikipedia page. The link is heavily used throughout the project's history. There is no advantage to deleting it and no reason to confuse and frustrate our new readers any more than we already do. Please leave this redirect alone. Rossami (talk) 03:09, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Rossami (talk · contribs). Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk) 09:58, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Rossami is right (again.) Non-trivial history with no confusion arising from the redirect's presence. Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:00, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I found this discussion by typing "wikiproject" into the search bar. Had it been a redirect I would have found what I was looking for.--otherlleft (talk) 11:48, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Useful redirect w/ no chance of confusion with an article. --Philosopher ^{Let us reason together.} 19:57, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Rossami - a clearly useful and appropriate cross-namespace redirect. Terraxos (talk) 01:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (I have to admit I have hit it more than once...but should it be a link to "list of projects" with a "see also" for Wikipedia:WikiProject? Maybe even a "nutshell" of "what is a Wikiproject"...Would a WP:DAB be more appropriate?Mjquin_id (talk) 18:30, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Usage

Separate question: Can we tell from logs; How often this link is hit? Does a highly used Redirect automatically prevent it from Deletion?...Should it? 100 times per day means something; relative to once per month...Mjquin_id (talk) 18:34, 8 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

List of bots on Wikipedia → Wikipedia:Bot policy

The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Improper, obsolete direct to a project page, no history to preserve. MBisanz ^talk 01:58, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Cross namespace + the target is not a list of bots. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:13, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there is no valid target for this redirect. I saw no list of bots in Wikipedia space (I saw lists containing Wikipedia bots, but with extra entries with non-bot characteristics). 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 17:46, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

C:adopt → Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user

The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also C:ADOPT → Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user

Unlikely CNR to a wikiproject, improper capitalization and incorrect pseudo-space prefix. MBisanz ^talk 01:50, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. If we're going to have such a convenience redirect, it should be in the standard format, via the CAT: pseudo-namespace prefix. Nonstandard ones should go. — Gavia immer (talk) 19:12, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It took a long time to get rid of T:... No C:... please. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:04, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete shortcut CAT:ADOPT already exists. Tohd8BohaithuGh1 (talk)

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

C:Images → Category:Wikipedia images

The result of the debate was no consensus.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 07:28, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate CNR, Category redirects use the CAT pseudo prefix, C: is an improper prefix. No history to preserve. MBisanz ^talk 01:47, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - it's just a convenience for users who frequent the image categories. CNRs are undesirable if they're confusing to users, especially readers (hence the "out of article space" qualifier in the guideline); it seems very unlikely that this would confuse anyone, since "C: --> Category:" shouldn't surprise anyone. Similar reasoning was applied here with C:CSD. — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 05:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If we're going to have such a convenience redirect, it should be in the standard format, via the CAT: pseudo-namespace prefix. Nonstandard ones should go. — Gavia immer (talk) 19:12, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Why? — xDanielx ^T/_C\^R 20:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - It is easier to track (and hopefully move eventually to a real namespace) these sorts of redirects if they follow a common rule. CAT:IMAGES or CAT:Images would be fine, its just the C: shortcut is is unusual. MBisanz ^talk 22:22, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It took a long time to get rid of T:... No C:... please. Cross namespaces cause many problems. -- Magioladitis (talk) 22:06, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The arguments made in the C:CSD deletion discussion seem to apply equally well here. Our volunteers clearly find them helpful and there is no reasonable possibility of confusion here. That outweighs the theoretical disadvantages of being a crossnamespace redirect. Rossami (talk) 16:07, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Featured desktop backgrounds → Category:Wikipedia featured desktop backgrounds

The result of the debate was delete. WJBscribe (talk) 23:02, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate CNR to a maintenance tracking category, no history to preserve. MBisanz ^talk 01:46, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as inappropriate cross-namespace redirect; the page doesn't need this shortcut when it already has WP:WALLPAPER, anyway. Terraxos (talk) 01:44, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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