Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 January 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 15[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 15, 2011

Template:EasternWashingtonWikiProject[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 closed as unnecessary. Thryduulf (talk) 12:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template that is associated with this redirect is also nominated for deletion. WikiProject banner has been superseded by the |eastern-washington= parameter of {{WikiProject Washington}}. Admrboltz (talk) 23:43, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's not necessary to nominate this for deletion too. If the template is deleted, any redirects to it will be deleted too. Mhiji 01:27, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed, although feel free to note the existence of the redirect on the TfD nomination. If a page is deleted and redirects to it overlooked, you can nominate them for speedy deletion with {{db-redirnone}} - see WP:CSD#G8 "Pages dependent on a deleted page. Thryduulf (talk) 12:26, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

“crazy paving” pattern[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) 22:38, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't make sense... and it includes curly quotes. Very implausible. Mhiji 14:37, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete, I'm guessing that the eczema produces a crazy-paving like pattern on the skin? However, this is not even hinted at in the article and searches for crazy paving eczema all give details of Eczema craquele or Asteatotic eczema (these may be synonyms?), which would make this misleading too. I'm marking my opinion as weak though as I'm prepared to be proved wrong by someone who has actual knowledge, hence the deletion sorting listing. Thryduulf (talk) 19:19, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 19:19, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unlikely redirect.--Lenticel (talk) 01:33, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Template:France[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 Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:37, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Really bad name for WikiProject. It's better to leave free for later use. Magioladitis (talk) 02:38, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep unless someone requires the name for another template. No reason to delete. Mhiji 02:45, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • The name is out of the standards we have for WikiProjects. -- Magioladitis (talk) 02:51, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • What "standards"? Other WikiProjects have similar redirects, e.g. {{albums}}, {{songs}}, {{Germany}}, {{China}}. Are you saying they should go too? You haven't provided a valid reason to delete. Mhiji 03:22, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Hm... are there more? Then, IMHO, all have to go. We should only keep names that contains: WP, Wp, WikiProject, WikiProject or similar words to distinguish from other templates. -- Magioladitis (talk) 03:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yeah, there's quite a lot more. I've just had a quick look and have found {{Argentina}}, {{Architecture}}, {{Anthroponymy}}, {{USAnimation}}, {{Animals}}, {{ANEGY}}, {{American football}}, {{Altrock}} under A. If you want to find the others, if you look at the templates here, then click "What links here" and then "Show redirects only" for each one, it will show up any more. I do agree though that it's best if these redirect to any other template other than a WP banner. I don't think deletion is necessary if there is not a more suitable target though. A lot of them could have better targets though - e.g. {{altrock}} should redirect to {{Alternative rock}} rather than {{WikiProject Alternative music}}. Mhiji 13:26, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • This is the standard form for the oldest wikiprojects. 65.93.14.196 (talk) 05:40, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep until some other use is found for it. This is the standard form for wikiproject banner templates from the olden days. 65.93.14.196 (talk) 05:43, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep until a better use is found for it (at which point it can be easily overwritten). As the anon editor notes, this used to be the commonly accepted old form. Rossami (talk) 06:02, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Talk page[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 Keep. Ruslik_Zero 19:41, 7 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I know this was historically part of an old merge, but it is ridiculous to redirect it to MediaWiki#Talk page and it should redirect to Help:Using talk pages D O N D E groovily Talk to me 01:25, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • So be bold and retarget it. Or if you're unsure, propose the change on the respective Talk pages. But you don't need permission here before retargetting. Rossami (talk) 01:57, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Dondegroovily did and it was reverted. Mhiji 02:50, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nomination. You don't need an RfD for this, btw. Thryduulf (talk) 02:24, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment, reading the discussion below I am currently unsure of what my opinion is, consequently I've struck my recommendation above. Thryduulf (talk) 04:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, apparently I do, cause I got reverted (see above) D O N D E groovily Talk to me 03:42, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The redirect is in article space. It's best to link to the section in article space which is about talk pages. Mhiji 02:48, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • But the Mediawiki page is not an article. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 03:42, 15 January 2011 (UTC) Oops, I guess it is D O N D E groovily Talk to me 03:43, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Question Are talk pages unique to MediaWiki or are they a feature of wikis generally? If the latter, then a redirect to something specifically about MediaWiki is probably not best. Thryduulf (talk) 04:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Having areas where editors can comment on, discuss and negotiate about the content of a page is a common feature of wikis generally. This is a natural function of the collaborative nature of wikis. Not all use a "talk page" per say, however. Confluence wiki, for example, uses a threaded "comments" section at the bottom of (and displaying with) the article page. Rossami (talk) 06:10, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment If this is pointed at somewhere in article space, the target should have a {{selfref}} hatnote along the lines of {{selfref|"Talk page" redirects here, for talk pages on Wikipedia see [[Help:Using talk pages]]. Thryduulf (talk) 04:46, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • comment this happened to me - I was looking for talk page etiquette guidelines - very confusing - I'd prefer the help page as per principle of least confusion.Sf5xeplus (talk) 17:02, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As implied above, this is what comes up when you type "Talk page" in the search box. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 17:44, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Wiki and add hatnote. I've thought more about this, and it seems that the article about wikis in general is the best place for this, with a hatnote pointing at the help page as I commented above. Note that wiki is also the target of the Talk Page and edit summary redirects, only the latter is currently referred to in a hatnote though. Thryduulf (talk) 18:58, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Although the subject of talk pages may be more generally applicable to wikis as a whole, I think that MediaWiki is the better target. MediaWiki contains several mentions of talk pages and the talk namespaces (mainly in the 'Content Organization' section) whereas Wiki contains none. I don't feel too strongly about this, however, and would be OK with any outcome that results in the redirect pointing to a page in the main namespace (and not Help: or Wikipedia:). -- Black Falcon (talk) 20:59, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Is it possible to exclude this page from search results? That's my main objection, that this is the first result when people search for "Talk page". If it could be excluded from searches, there wouldn't be any problem. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 23:09, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Sistema Ox Bel Ha[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 : wrong forum, now at Wikipedia:Requested moves. Thryduulf (talk) 19:27, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move Ox Bel Ha Cave System to Sistema Ox Bel Ha (which is the official name used by both the National Speleological Society and the Quintana Roo Speleological Survey; see also Sistema Sac Actun, Sistema Dos Ojos, Sistema Nohoch Nah Chich. Afterwards create redirects from Ox Bel Ha and Ox Bel Ha Cave System to the moved page. Alfie↑↓© 17:23, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • If I understand you correctly, this is a move request and should be listed at WP:RM. See that page of details on how to list it there. Mhiji 17:52, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure — maybe I'm really at the wrong place. ;-) Yes, I want to move Ox Bel Ha Cave System to Sistema Ox Bel Ha, but right now the latter is a redirect to the former. Therefore I didn't want to push the wrong button ending up in chaos. Alfie↑↓© 18:06, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Make the move request, and if approved, the admin will take care of all the redirects. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 18:28, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
THX, case closed. Alfie↑↓© 18:43, 15 January 2011 (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/2011_January_15&oldid=1091633062"