Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 February 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 7[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 7, 2009

Cheese Touch → Diary of a Wimpy Kid (series)[edit]

The result of the discussion was Kept. The is the title of one of the books. It can be converted to an article if articles on the individual books are ever desired. A search term is much more likely to be used for the book than the one-off phrase in a television episode. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:23, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural Nom, listed incorrectly at AFD with this rationale: I think this page should be deleted. If anything, it should redirect to one of the books, or be in a Concepts in Diary of a Wimpy Kid page or something. It doesn't belong the way it is, as a redirect. E.B. (talk) 12:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC) ascidian | talk-to-me 00:49, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

T:DYKT → Template talk:Did you know[edit]

The result of the discussion was Keep. No consensus for deletion. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cross namespace redirect to a template talk page. I also nominate T:TDYK → Template talk:Did you know with the same rationale. Link on target can be piped instead, eliminating the need for a cross namespace redirect. B.Wind (talk) 20:37, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Note that there 45 of this type of cross-namespace redirect with the "T:" prefix. See Special:PrefixIndex/T:. The community needs to come to some kind of agreement on the policy for these redirects. •••Life of Riley (talk) 22:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • The others redirect to templates; these two (and a now-deleted third one) redirect to a talk page; so if there is consensus of "T:" being an abbreviation for "Template:" it still wouldn't apply to this nomination. B.Wind (talk) 00:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Whoops! You are correct. I am embarrassed that I missed that. However, I do think that we need discussion of those T: redirects. •••Life of Riley (talk) 01:33, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I can see this being valid if this were to a template, but not to a talk page. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 15:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's a talk page that people want to check every day (hence the use for a shortcut), but maybe not have in their watchlist because it's edited so frequently. Punkmorten (talk) 00:39, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • The explanation does not justify a cross namespace redirect from template space to template talk space. There are too many other, "legitimate" options to connect with the template talk page, a direct connection from the template itself being one of them.147.70.242.54 (talk) 20:03, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Not sure what convention (if any) there is for talk page shortcuts - can we move it to "TT:DYK", or "TTALK:DYK", or "T TALK:DYK", or something like that? Brian Jason Drake 11:47, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Am I right in understanding that the target talk page is used for DYK nominations? If so, that is the problem: A template talk page should be used only for discussing the template. The target page should be moved to Project space (like Wikipedia:Did you know nominations), and the shortcut should be something like WP:DYKN. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TEB728 (talk • contribs) 00:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment T:TDYK is the most commonly used shortcut for Template talk:Did you know; I have never heard of T:DYKT before, and it appears to have very few pages linking to it (compared to other shortcuts). As for T:TDYK, that is very widely used and should stay; even if you change it to TT:DYK (which would probably be more logical), you'll be stuck with hundreds of double redirects. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 03:05, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep redirects as they are now. There is no real justification to change years of precedent that has worked out just fine. Don't fix what isn't broken. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep T:TDYK per Ottava, don't care about T:DYKT. —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 03:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep- TT:DYK is an interwiki link to the Turkish Wiki, which was fixed by a soft redirect back to en. Current format is a good workaround. (Don't like T:DYKT though). • \ / (⁂) 03:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless the target is moved to Project space (by consensus at Wikipedia talk:Did you know). If it is moved, I would agree to retargeting there (at least temporarily) to minimize inconvenience. —teb728 t c 21:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

ID tag → ID3[edit]

The result of the discussion was Re-target to Identification tag which is already a disambiguation page. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:32, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would disagree with this redirect, because ID tag can also mean Dog Tags, not just ID3 (whatever that is). Riotrocket8676 You gotta problem with that? 19:33, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wikipedia:WTFIMAGE → Wikipedia:Unusual articles[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect seems superfluous, unhelpful and fairly unrelated to the redirect target, which, as it happens, already has an abundance of other shortcuts. —Anonymous DissidentTalk 13:41, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - this would be a natural redirect to Wikipedia:Unusual images... if the latter existed. It doesn't seem to be appropriate for Wikipedia:Image; the closest connection that does exist is MediaWiki:Bad image list... but then it would be a cross namespace redirect if Wikipedia:WTFIMAGE were retargeted to it. B.Wind (talk) 18:24, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. My guess is that the redirect was inspired by the image of the cow at the target page. However, the redirect is neither intuitive nor a good shortcut (11 characters versus 5 for WP:UA). As the nom says, the page already has plenty of other shortcuts. –Black Falcon (Talk) 20:22, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I like it; it is a subset of {{WTF}} that might help users (me included) remember it.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 15:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please note that WP:ILIKEIT is not a valid reason for keeping a redirect or an article.B.Wind (talk) 02:28, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - not a particularly helpful, or needed, shortcut. Robofish (talk) 06:20, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Energy in Denmark → Danish Ministry of Transport[edit]

The result of the discussion was Re-target to Danish Ministry of Climate and Energy. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:39, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I propose to delete this redirect. This page was redirected to the Danish Ministry of Transport, which was responsible for energy issues. However, it does not deal with energy anymore because the new ministry, Ministry of Climate and Energy, was established. There is no article about the new ministry right now. Also, in long term the Energy in Denmark should be an separate article and not a redirect to the ministry. Beagel (talk) 09:01, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Clive Worth → Pontyates#Notable People[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:40, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete worthless redirect by an account whose only purpose is promote his own name and his son’s. —teb728 t c 06:01, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete per nom. Not notable either. -- OlEnglish (talk) 19:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Clive worth → Pontyates#Notable People[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 15:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete worthless redirect by an account whose only purpose is promote his own name and his son’s. —teb728 t c 06:01, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete per nom. Not notable either. -- OlEnglish (talk) 19:52, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Kevin McGrath (British) → Kevin McGrath (financier)[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted as too generic so unlikely search term. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect was formed when an article was renamed. "(British)" is too generic to be useful; so deletion is the best option here. Kevin McGrath exists as a dab page, at least for the time being as this target article has been prodded. B.Wind (talk) 05:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Keep, same reason as below (tracks a pagemove). Robofish (talk) 06:19, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - "(British)" is too generic to be useful per nom. I don't think tracking page moves is a reason for keeping redirects? If kept, I suggest re-targeting to the DAB page Kevin McGrath, which will keep things sensible when the next Kevin McGrath is added. --Rogerb67 (talk) 12:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Kevin McGrath (American) → Digital Angel[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted as too generic so unlikely search term. -- JLaTondre (talk) 14:17, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Original article was redirected as a copyvio, then moved to more-specifically disambiguated Kevin McGrath (CEO). The (American) disambiguation is too general to be helpful; so deletion is probably the best option here. B.Wind (talk) 04:59, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Keep, if for no other reason than it tracks a pagemove. Robofish (talk) 06:19, 15 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - "(American)" is too generic to be useful per nom. I don't think tracking page moves is a reason for keeping redirects? If kept, I suggest re-targeting to the DAB page Kevin McGrath, which will keep things sensible when the next Kevin McGrath is added. --Rogerb67 (talk) 12:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Life-Size (movie → Life-Size (film)[edit]

The result of the discussion was Delete. Lenticel (talk) 08:26, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not needed, plus no links to it. Must've been as a result of a typo? OlEnglish (talk) 02:04, 7 February 2009 (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/2009_February_7&oldid=1141906827"