Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 January 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 27[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 27, 2011

H.262/MPEG-2 Part 3[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 20:19, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural nomination, as this was erroneously listed at AfD. Nomination rationale copied from AfD is as follows:

"H.262/MPEG-2 Part 3" is a wrong name and there is no such specification. The redirect to "MPEG-2 Part 3" is also wrong. There is only "H.262/MPEG-2 Part 2" standard and its name includes two different names of the same video compression standard - ITU-T name "H.262" and ISO/IEC name "MPEG-2 Part 2". "MPEG-2 Part 3" defines only an audio compression formats. But the H.262 standard (a.k.a. MPEG-2 Part 2) does not define an audio compression. H.262 defines only the video compression.[1] I wrote a message about this misleading article to the creator (User_talk:Mikus), but he did not reply. I edited this article on January 24, 2011 (as an anonymous user) and I removed some inappropriate information. I also edited the MPEG-2 article and removed the only wikilink to this misleading article. I requested the move of "H.262/MPEG-2 Part 3" to "MPEG-2 Part 3". It was accepted today (See History of edits). Kuyrebik (talk) 12:42, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For my part, I am neutral. —KuyaBriBriTalk 15:45, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep to preserve edit history. It also seems likely that if someone knows about part 2 by this name and they know of the existence of a part 3 then it's not unlikely they'll look for it by this name. Thryduulf (talk)
  • Keep both to preserve history and per Thryduulf's argument about the plausibility of the mistake. Rossami (talk) 20:05, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Sutton Register Guard[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. Ruslik_Zero 20:34, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is no explanation of the redirect in the target, and there doesn't seem to be any link between the redirect and the target either. No informatice webhits for the link (only Wikipedia copies), no history of a Sutton Register Guard, not even a place called Sutton in Oregon (a creek and a trail and so on, but that's about it). Fram (talk) 09:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Googling for "sutton register guard" -wikipedia brings up only three results, one is a facebook community page that looks to have been automatically harvested from the Wikipedia article, the second is a list of places starting with Sutton that is not unlikely taken from the Wikipedia page title and the final one is for the letters page of a newspaper in which a correspondent references an article by someone with the surname "Sutton" writing in the Register-Guardian (abbreviated to Register-Guard.). The page was created in 2008 as a redirect so there is no history to preserve. Thryduulf (talk) 16:03, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Special forty-man unit[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 all. Ruslik_Zero 20:36, 11 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. These confusing redirects have for theur target a section which is no longer in the article. They are confusing, as there is no logical reason to have the target as most obvious result for e.g. "40-man group", which is e.g. also one of the more common units in World of Warcraft. I have not nominated the similar redirects with "Taliban" in their name, as these are more obviously linked to the target, but the three nominated ones are confusing and have no explanation in the target, so should be deleted. Fram (talk) 08:28, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Face Off (TV Series)[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 and tag. Lenticel (talk) 02:50, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I created this article by clicking through a red link on a disambiguation page and didn't notice that the "S" was incorrectly capitalized. Anyone searching for this article is going to hit the correct capitalization at the same time they hit the incorrect one. This serves no purpose. I Want My GayTV (talk) 04:21, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Kudos to you for noticing the mistake but redirects to protect our readers from capitalization variants are one of the primary uses of redirects. As your experience demonstrates, redirects do more than merely support the search engine. The redirect could be tagged with {{R from capitalization}} to minimize the impact on autofill but that's optional. Rossami (talk) 14:11, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and tag per Rossami. Redirects from other capitalisations are among the most useful of redirects. Thryduulf (talk) 16:05, 27 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_27&oldid=616124023"