Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 November 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 26[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 26, 2010

Wikipedia:Strawpoll[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Retarget to Wikipedia:Straw polls. (non-admin closure) →GƒoleyFour (GSV) 20:42, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I can see no valid reason for this to redirect here. It's wholly misleading, to start with ╟─TreasuryTag►Speaker─╢ 23:36, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:R from slang[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Delete, arguments for deletion are strong as there are indeed two separate categories in existance, thus there is a difference between alternative names and alternative spellings. Being a plausible search term isn't particularly relevant here because of the nature of template usage. --Taelus (talk) 10:37, 15 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – implausible redirect with no links or transclusions. A redirect from a slang term is not necessarily a redirect from an alternative name. ROFL redirects to LOL but ROFL is not an alternative name to LOL. Sk8r redirects to Sk8ter but Sk8r is not an alternative name to Sk8ter. Many slang terms are redirects but they are not all redirects for the same reason so no one target works for {{R from slang}}. McLerristarr | Mclay1 07:32, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment but your examples are the same things. ROFL is a hyponym of LOL, Sk8r is an alternative spelling of sk8ter (as stated on the page itself). 76.66.194.212 (talk) 07:36, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - plausible search term. Bridgeplayer (talk) 00:53, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Instead of trying to decide whether a particular term is sufficiently non-mainstream (or insufficiently mainstream) to qualify as "slang", I think it is better to use the more descriptive classification scheme we have in place: alternative name, alternative spelling, modification of the target name, and so on. The redirect is not currently being used, so nothing is lost by deleting it. -- Black Falcon (talk) 16:47, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Last North American veterans by war[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:20, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate The United States is not all of North America, there's already another list for Canada (List of last surviving Canadian war veterans); this should be rolled back to oldid=396087478. 76.66.194.212 (talk) 06:52, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Disambiguate Canada, Mexico, Guatemala are all part of North America. Canada in particular declined to join the USA when it was formed and fought 2 wars (1 2) to maintain its freedom so it would be absurd to either merge Canada into the US article or to ignore it. Kiore (talk) 07:54, 26 November 2010 (UTC) Update Kiore (talk) 01:34, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Disambiguate - I believe an author in the past tried to consolidate the North American lists but now that the community has nixed that idea I think we can disambiguate it. --Kumioko (talk) 13:48, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete useless. The reader would look up the individual countries anyhow and this is too loose of a way to organize. Royalbroil 13:50, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's not really a proper case of diambiguation because we're not dealing with ambiguous article names here. It's really a list. Frankly, the best solution would be to delete it, as it is completely unnecessary - it only exists because the editor who originally wanted to merge the Canadian and U.S. lists didn't understand the proper process and initiated simultaneous AfD, merge and RM discussions, and then further muddied the waters by moving the U.S. list to this name in anticipation of a consensus that never came. This redirect only pointed to the U.S. list until the merge discussion was resolved (which it now has). It wouldn't be the end of the world if it survives as a list, or even some overkill DAB page, but it's completely unnecessary and the best case scenario would be to delete it. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:56, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per earlier version - potentially helpful page. Bridgeplayer (talk) 00:51, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I agree with Skeezix100 that the earlier version was not a proper disambiguation page but rather a very short list of lists of last surviving war veterans of North America. The page also is not useful as a redirect, particularly as it was recently created (so there is little likelihood of breaking significant incoming links). -- Black Falcon (talk) 16:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Skeezix. Watched the situation unfold and agree that phrases that have zero point in existing qua phrases should not be redirects. I am usually broad-minded about letting live with redirects, but the nonsynonymy is decisive: the idea that a N.A. list by war should exist is OR unsupported by the community. JJB 05:21, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
  • Delete per Skeezix. David in DC (talk) 01:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Academia’s history.[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Deleted vs. re-targeted due to the trailing period. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:22, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wonky redirect; you'd think the most obvious target would be Academia#History rather than a secondary school, but it's not really a well enough formed redirect for that either. Created in October by a page move, nothing links here. Hairhorn (talk) 04:07, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete – useless redirect and no links means it is safe to delete. McLerristarr | Mclay1 06:28, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Academia#History as plausible typo. Bridgeplayer (talk) 00:52, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. The move history is preserved in the page history of the target page, and the page existed as an article for a short time only (8 minutes). I would agree with Bridgeplayer were it not for the hard-to-spot non-standard punctuation: a "curly" apostrophe and a period. -- Black Falcon (talk) 16:30, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2010_November_26&oldid=1144719726"