Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 June 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 19

[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 19, 2012

Quit Kashmir Movement (2010)

[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. Thryduulf (talk) 11:13, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Redirect had been created as a result of a Page move [1]. The redirect should be deleted as this was not the name of the event. The old title of the article was created for propaganda purposes and the title of the redirect is not supported by any reliable source. The page should have been moved without leaving a redirect. Some other editors have also expressed concern against the earlier title on Talk:2010 Kashmir unrest. The redirect can be deleted as it is neither neutral nor is verifiable. DBigXray 13:11, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. A google search on the exact phrase (excluding Wikipedia-derivatives) returns rather a lot of sources using this phrase, all of them apparently referring to the topic discussed in the target article. While most of those sources are casual (blogs, etc), they do substantiate that the phrase is in established use. The standards of reliable source and NPOV are relevant for article content and sometimes even for article titles but they are not relevant to redirects. The applicable policy is WP:RNEUTRAL which tells us that non-neutral and even pejorative redirects can have value if they point readers to the balanced and neutrally-written article where they can learn the correct title. RNEUTRAL 1 and 3 both apply. Rossami (talk) 19:44, 19 June 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.

Director (education)

[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 disambiguate. Thryduulf (talk) 11:17, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is very misleading and unhelpful to explain "director" in the context of education. See Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous#director (education) Quest for Truth (talk) 12:10, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • The term is commonly used in the international schools system. See, for example, United Nations International School, [2] [3] and [4] (the last one is actually Director-General). --Viennese Waltz 13:51, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Director isn't mentioned in the Head teacher article. "Director" alone seems to refer to head teacher but is used in titles such as "Director of ..." for other senior roles in schools or education authorities. Anywhere it links to should probably mention this, either with hatnote or within text. The closest definition for this is at Director (business); maybe that page could be expanded to include senior roles in other organisations. Peter E. James (talk) 14:21, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first version of this page was a quasi-disambiguation page in paragraph format. Director can refer to "head teacher" but it can also refer to other roles in the leadership of an educational institution. I recommend conversion to an explicit disambiguation page. Rossami (talk) 19:51, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Draft of possible disambiguation content posted under the RfD tag. Note: In addition to the concerns above, the edit history shows that content was at some point merged to the current target. Add "keep pagehistory to ensure compliance with the attribution requirements of GFDL and CC-BY-SA" to my opinion above. Rossami (talk) 20:01, 19 June 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.

Kayla Huntington (Desperate Housewives character

[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. Being useless is usually not a reason for deleting a redirect, and there seems to be no consensus here that this redirect is actually harmful. Jafeluv (talk) 07:26, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect should be deleted because it is missing a close parens and is therefore not useful to anyone. Kayla Huntington (Desperate Housewives) has all of the useful history, and this is merely a move artifact. -LtNOWIS (talk) 00:15, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • It was created as the artifact of a pagemove in Dec 2007. It has created no controversy or confusion in all the 4 1/2 years since. It is not in the way of other article content. While I would agree that there is little value to keeping it, there is zero value to deleting it. "Little" still being bigger than "zero" leaves me at keep unless an actual reason to delete is offered. Yes, redirects really are that cheap. Rossami (talk) 06:48, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete- Zero incoming article links; in the search box, by the ninth character, its only competition is...the character, similarly redirected. At seven and eight characters, only obfuscates that it's the same subject. Dru of Id (talk) 14:22, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep per Rossami. The search box is far from the only method people use to find Wikipedia articles and internal links are not the only ones that matter (indeed they perhaps matter less as we know what they are and so can update them as needed). This should be tagged as {{unprintworthy}} though, which has the useful side-effect of removing redirects so identified from the search suggestions. Thryduulf (talk) 15:47, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It is thusly tagged. - TexasAndroid (talk) 15:57, 19 June 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.

Luis Capela

[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 "Both speedied - no target." Peridon (talk) 18:42, 19 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of these redirects. The target page has been deleted and was done by a retired user. So that I cannot report this to him. (Shall I inform him about this proposal?). The page was deleted after a proposed for deletion discussion. Reason- Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable footballer who hasn't played in a fully-professional league. Vanischenu mTalk 17:07, 19 June 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_June_19&oldid=1138578322"