Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 October 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 26

[edit]

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

Horse Island (Sacketts Harbor) Light

[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The result of the discussion was nomination withdrawn with no outstanding contrary views. NAC. Bridgeplayer (talk) 17:23, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely redirect, a reader will either look for Horse Island Light, or Sacketts Harbor Light Muhandes (talk) 23:55, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - this was the target's title until the nominator moved the page. Harmless, so there is no benefit from deletion which could cause harm by breaking links in external sites. Since deletion does no good, leave well alone. Bridgeplayer (talk) 19:41, 27 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there a policy I am unaware of about preserving links in external sites? I thought unlikely targets are removed, but please let me know so I'll stop nominating unlikely redirect targets. --Muhandes (talk) 09:21, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is some explanation at WP:RFD#HARMFUL. We have a cooperative relationship with the mirrors and don't take actions that might break their links without good reason. The grounds for deletion, and reasons not to delete, are given in the subsequent sections. As you will note, for established titles being an 'Unlikely redirect' is not a grounds for deletion. Redirects are cheap so they should only be deleted when they are harmful. Bridgeplayer (talk) 23:32, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

List of books by title

[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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:17, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This cross name space redirect leads to a set of lists which were deleted from mainspace 3 years ago Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of books by title: 0-9 (2nd nomination). Deleted material should not by accesible from main space via a redirect.Yoenit (talk) 17:56, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Untitled-1.gif

[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 speedy delete under G6. — ξxplicit 19:32, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect Acather96 (talk) 17:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Scott Perrilloux

[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 retargeted by Rammer and agreed to by the nominator. NAC. Bridgeplayer (talk) 22:47, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both. Apparently Scott M. Perrilloux is the name of the district attorney in a particular district of Louisiana. An enthusiastic user even added his picture to the District attorney article. However, that does not make these redirects useful to readers. An article about this particular individual might be useful, but the district attorney article is not about him, and the redirects are misleading. R'n'B (call me Russ) 13:49, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wikipedia:GAG

[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 - it seems that Wikipedia:Good article criteria is the best target. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 06:18, 3 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how "GAG" has to do with the banning policy. Very implausible. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 01:59, 26 October 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_October_26&oldid=1074238961"