Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 September 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 10[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 10, 2009

Beijing Youth Daily[edit]

The result of the discussion was Withdrawn rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 22:07, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. These are not the same publication (see zh:中国青年报 and zh:北京青年报, and have different websites (the former is cyol.com, the latter bjyouth.ynet.com). Better to keep this as a redlink so someone can start its own article. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 16:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete -- As per nom. This should be a red link until someone writes a stub appears. In fact, if someone a little more knowledgeable (or who can read the Chinese article) wants to be bold and create the article, we can end this early. —mako๛ 21:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I could do a word-for-word translation from the Chinese article and tag it as a stub. Unfortunately I don't have time right now to do much more than that. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 15:41, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      I think that would be great! —mako๛ 19:06, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Cashley Cole[edit]

The result of the discussion was Keep. Ruslik_Zero 18:57, 16 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, this is an "undesirable" nickname created by opposing fans that doesn't seem to be that widespread. There was previously vandalism in the article changing the subject's name to this. Iheartwiki19 (talk) 20:52, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I'm not sure if this should be kept or deleted, but I note that there are 136 gnews hits for this nickname, including hits in The Telegraph[1], The Daily Mail,[2] The Hindu[3] and ESPN.com[4]. Also looks to be about 8400 non-wiki ghits. However, Google AdWords is telling me that the global monthly search volume for this nickname is about 1000. So looking at web hits makes this nickname seem widespread, but looking at searches (and the reason for keeping this redirect would be because readers are searching for this nickname) it doesn't seem as widespread. Not sure which should carry more weight.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:31, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- I nearly posted a Delete after reading the nominators description (and before Fabrictramp posted the followup. After digging around, I don't think I can agree. There's a steady trickle of traffic (1+/day) to this article. A search for the term returns nearly 200,000 hits on Google. There's no ambiguity on where this link should point. The nickname is also discussed in the article with references. Even a negative nickname, this widespread, can be an appropriate redirect. I think that this in case, it should be. If the nickname is notable to be discussed (with references) in an article, it's probably notable enough to be a redirect. —mako๛ 21:36, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Mako. --Zach425 talk/contribs 17:32, 11 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Agree with Mako, if it's in the article it's ok as a redirect. rʨanaɢ talk/contribs 15:43, 12 September 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_September_10&oldid=1136448555"