Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 July 1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 1[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 1, 2009

塔什库尔干塔吉克自治县[edit]

The result of the discussion was Keep. Lenticel (talk) 02:39, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Per Naming conventions. Gordonrox24 | Talk 14:44, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep it this is for the Chinese users of English Wikipedia and to provide the Chinese equivalent in English Wikipedia.--Joseph Solis in Australia (talk) 14:47, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The naming conventions you point to describe what to name the article on a given topic. Here, the article is called Tashkurgan Tajik Autonomous County, which is clearly English. Foreign-language redirects are not forbidden; indeed, Nürnberg, delikatessen, Firenze, Franz Josef Strauß and Chomolungma all redirect to the correct English name. Those are all examples listed in the naming convention you point to. Jafeluv (talk) 15:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the term occurs on the article, is the original language name for the subject, and useful considering that the term can be rendered in several different ways in English. 76.66.193.20 (talk) 21:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and tag {{R from alternative language}}. Kusma (talk) 15:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep The naming conventions apply to articles, not redirects. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:42, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep. Proper names in their original language are appropriate and useful. ~ Ningauble (talk) 18:02, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Template:O rly?[edit]

The result of the discussion was delete all.--Aervanath (talk) 11:15, 12 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. {{Fact}} has a lot of useful aliases, but these are unnecessarily pointy and sarcastic. I don't see why anyone would advocate tagging text with "O rly?" tags. Using either {{fact}} directly or one of its many aliases like {{citation needed}} or {{cn}} would be more appropriate. These seem like joke redirects in the first place. Jafeluv (talk) 09:46, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - A useless, joke redirect. The case could be made that it's contrary to WP:BITE. Lәo(βǃʘʘɱ) 18:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Funny, but no real purpose. GlassCobra 19:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:HARMLESS Why so serious? (Disclaimer: I created a couple of 'em, if I remember correctly.) –Juliancolton | Talk 19:49, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I agree with Julian. It's not harming anything, and even if they were to be used in the main article space, their function would serve the same as a regular {{fact}} tag (the functionality of the tag is far more important than the transcluded name). EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:58, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Likely to be seen as bitey by many. Tags should be objective, especially when disputatious. ~ Ningauble (talk) 18:14, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, GlassCobra, and Ningauble. The templates are not particularly useful alternatives for {{fact}} and they could be perceived as bite-y. It is usually beneficial to have a few alternative names for commonly-used templates like {{fact}}, and we have several of them, but there is something to be said for consistency and professional standardization. Jokes, even ones that are visible only in the edit window, should be kept out of the mainspace. –BLACK FALCON (TALK) 19:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; there's more than enough redirects to {{fact}} anyway. Stifle (talk) 08:10, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Jabuary 21[edit]

The result of the discussion was Delete. Lenticel (talk) 02:43, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is an unlikely typo with no incoming links. JIMp talk·cont 08:27, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Implausible typo, unlikely to be useful. Jafeluv (talk) 09:50, 1 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a typo, it is pretty likely, actually... have you bever typed ab b instead of a n? Kusma (talk) 14:04, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete:This isn't needed. If you type Jabuary into the search bar you will get a "Did you mean January" note.--Gordonrox24 | Talk 14:36, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Unlikely typo, taken care of by software. GlassCobra 19:35, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per the above statements. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per Jabuary 20 and Jamuary 21. Tavix |  Talk  23:08, 3 July 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_July_1&oldid=1142588031"