Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 January 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 25[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 25, 2012

6th gen[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 Sixth generation--Salix (talk): 11:43, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Why would the generic redirect of '6th gen' be tied to the context of video games? I will open this discussion first, but '7th gen' and '8th gen' redirects were also created. I don't believe this is an appropriate redirect and I didn't see a speedy category that would fit. -- ferret (talk) 20:44, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's nothing else called Sixth generation. I mean sixth generation ALONE.--Gaming&Computing (talk) 20:47, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. But there's hundreds of articles covering "sixth generation" of other contexts. The 6th generation of a car, or a family line, iPods, the Sixth Generation film movement, etc, etc. Just type "sixth generation" in the search box above to see several articles that come up before the History of Video Gaming. -- ferret (talk) 20:52, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
One a related note I've dealt with the 7th gen redirect and retargeted to the dab page Seventh Generation but I could not find anything for the 6th or 8th gen pages.--69.159.111.241 (talk) 01:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - There are an endless number of "6th generations" out there, as Ferret says. There's no reason to automatically link this redirect to video games. Sergecross73 msg me 21:44, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete there are lots of 6th gen things, like 6th generation of descendents. 70.49.124.157 (talk) 08:14, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Too general/vague; doesn't seem to be a good disambiguation page candidate. --Cybercobra (talk) 08:43, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Sixth generation, which I just created, unaware of this discussion (or this redirect).—Ketil Trout (<><!) 19:56, 29 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Sixth generation per Ketiltrout.--Lenticel (talk) 02:45, 30 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Sixth generation with a specific notice on the target's talk page that this one should follow its fate. As the good target already exists, no sense in deleting. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 00:53, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Dj aphlatoon[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, G8 by User:Paul_Erik. Lenticel (talk) 01:03, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects to deleted page Epeefleche (talk) 19:17, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged the page for speedy deletion.--69.159.111.241 (talk) 01:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Aphlatoon[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. Deleted per G8 Guerillero | My Talk 03:05, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects to deleted page Epeefleche (talk) 19:13, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged the page for speedy deletion--69.159.111.241 (talk) 01:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Internet meme redirects[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 U mad, Forever alone, Troll Dad, Imma Firin Mah Lazor and IMMA FIRIN MAH LAZOR. Delete the rest. Retarget U mad to Troll (Internet) and Forever alone to Internet meme. Ruslik_Zero 18:47, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Internet memes which don't merit enough notability to be mentioned on their target articles. We don't need redirects from internet memes to these articles. If we did, these articles would have hundreds of redirects for no substantial reason. — Moe ε 17:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Notability is not a requirement for mere redirects. Also, redirects are cheap. Keep Forever alone and Troll Dad since they have specific, strongly related targets. --Cybercobra (talk) 08:39, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also, retarget U mad to Troll (Internet) as it is a phrase used in trolling. --Cybercobra (talk) 08:40, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • You have to be joking. Forever alone is actually the stupidest of those redirects. Where on the internet is "Forever alone" actually a phrase having to do with Involuntary celibacy? One reliable source to prove that and I'll drop this entire RFD. I say that in full confidence of you not being able to prove anything. This isn't about redirects being cheap, this is about people who have nothing better to do creating unnotable articles about memes then having them all get redirected to these target articles. Like I said, we don't need every meme the internet has redirecting to these articles, that isn't what they are for. — Moe ε 14:19, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Special - Change Forever alone to redirect to Internet meme, keep Troll Dad and U mad, but delete everything else, as they are uncommon.--Yutsi Talk/ Contributions 16:09, 3 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the lot - I'm not convinced any of these are particularly useful redirects, as none of them are mentioned in their target articles in any case. Robofish (talk) 01:05, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep selectively. Forever alone has 16M google hits and it looks like there would be enough material for an article. Redirecting to internet meme seems a better target as its more about the meme that about the target. IMMA FIRIN MAH LAZOR has 168,000 google hits and there is considerable coverage with a page discussing its history[1] which seems to date back to 2007. I can see that kids will type this sort of thing into a search box, just to see what happens, they may even get some education if they read Internet meme. Its looking like most of these have considerable internet prescence. Less convinced by John McCain and His Vegetable Friends which does not appear to have much online commentary, just a fairly popular youtube video. --Salix (talk): 12:20, 9 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget U mad to Troll (Internet) and Forever alone to Internet meme or possibly have its own article. Keep Troll Dad and delete the rest. oyasumi (talk) 19:05, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2012_January_25&oldid=1138578215"