Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 July 11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 11[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 11, 2014.

Cernăuţi[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. --BDD (talk) 20:52, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all as mojibake. Gorobay (talk) 21:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. I believe we should have CSD criterion for mojibake. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 21:59, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep years and years old harmless, don't be hatin' on the mojibake. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:44, 11 July 2014 (UTC).
  • Delete Should be Speedy Deleted per R3, implausible typo. Same reason we shouldn't have l33tspeak or pig Latin redirects. Bgwhite (talk) 07:16, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all per Rich Farmbrough. And R3? 2008 isnt "recently created". Christian75 (talk) 19:18, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment At least one of these is, unfortunately, at least somewhat plausible, given that it show up in professional databases [1], and the redirects at least do help utterly baffled Googlers get to the right place without them having to track down some obscure encoding-detector. OTOH redirects are a horrible hackish solution to this problem, and all these endless permutations of mojibake would be better handled by some sort of Mediawiki-level solution. quant18 (talk) 02:33, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as implausible typos. All browsers made in the last 13 years correctly handle Unicode. � (talk) 16:41, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's wrong. Many browsers in the last 13 years have not supported unicode. Some still don't. If you mean those that run on NT-based Microsoft Windows, then you'd have a point. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:50, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No need to keep mojibake around. Jackmcbarn (talk) 04:51, 17 July 2014 (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.

פארטוגאל[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 per G6 [non-admin closure] � (talk) 16:46, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. These were improperly nominated for deletion and were not deleted. Gorobay (talk) 20:20, 11 July 2014 (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.

Artists biggest hit[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. --BDD (talk) 20:51, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: a misleading redirect; we have no reason to think that someone who searches for the phrase "artists biggest hit" is interested in this particular song. R'n'B (call me Russ) 19:58, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: current target is indeed inappropriate, and the term is not a plausible search term for any encyclopedic topic. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 20:19, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete with no prejudice against recreating as a redirect, list, article or dab page. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 22:55, 11 July 2014 (UTC).
  • Delete highly inappropriate. "artists" is more than one person, and this clearly isn't the greatest hit ever. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 05:07, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above.--Lenticel (talk) 00:57, 15 July 2014 (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.

Canadian current events[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 List of years in Canada#Current decade. The default for redirects is to keep. This is a long-standing redirect, over 8 years old, and the original title of an article. Such redirects are only deleted if they are in some way harmful (WP:RFD#HARMFUL) and no harm, that can't be fixed, has been demonstrated. Two different targets have been suggested but I find the arguments for List of years in Canada#Current decade, to be the stronger. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 16:29, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is a time sensitive page that currently redirects to 2010. Even if it did link to 2014, the year is a poor proxy for current events as there are things like the Charbonneau Commission that have been ongoing for years. As such, I propose it be deleted. I erroneously posted this on Afd; you can see its entry here. - Sweet Nightmares 17:43, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Skeezix1000: I meant no offense to you or Anne; the result of the closure over there was not made due to consensus (indeed, 2 vs 1 is hardly consensus anyhow), it was closed because I put the discussion in the wrong place (WP:AfD instead of WP:RfD). Of course I copied the text verbatim. Either way, there is no need to take offense to this nomination. It was meant to open a discussion on a project that was perhaps too ambitious and was left to fall. - Sweet Nightmares 23:37, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No offense was taken, nor did I think there was consensus. I ought not to have been so snarky above - sorry. Obviously you were not required to agree with any of the comments in the last nomination, but it seemed odd that you didn't even respond to those comments in renominating it (and it's not as if we were notified of the renomination - I happened upon it because I by chance checked back on the old discussion). Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:09, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Skeezix1000: I did put it on the WT:CWNB. - Sweet Nightmares 15:21, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're assuming that people that contributed here will check that page regularly. I check that page about once a week (sometimes more, sometimes less) and I completely missed your subsequent note there. It was good place to post a notice, esp. to widen the discussion, but if you are going to re-initiate a discussion you should really notice or tag the previous participants. Having said all that, I think it's pointless that the previous discussion was closed. Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:05, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In any event, I have managed to take the discussion way off course with my initial comment. Sorry. --Skeezix1000 (talk) 15:10, 21 July 2014 (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.

Wikipedia is not facebook[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. --BDD (talk) 20:49, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate CNR TheChampionMan1234 07:51, 11 July 2014 (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.

Kazik Na Żywo[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. (CSD G1 (patent nonsense (non-admin closure) TheChampionMan1234 07:22, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible typo. � (talk) 07:08, 11 July 2014 (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.
  • WHOAH This is patently not patent nonsense! Listing at RFd then adding a CSD tag is very bad practice. Please request undeletion and let the discussion of the 10 year old harmless redirect occur! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:03, 11 July 2014 (UTC).

Republic of Germany[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. --BDD (talk) 20:47, 23 July 2014 (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.

IPod 5[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 List of iPod models. Everyone agrees that the present target is no good and the retarget looks a plausible search term. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 22:40, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The title just says "iPod", it could refer to the 5th generation of any iPod. TheChampionMan1234 06:47, 11 July 2014 (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.

Iphone linux[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 Linux kernel#Portability. All agree that the present target is unsatisfactory and the retarget looks a useful search term. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 22:49, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of the word 'Linux' at the target. TheChampionMan1234 06:43, 11 July 2014 (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.

Aerospace Physiologist Insignia[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. --BDD (talk) 17:17, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such insignia nor Badge for Aerospace Physiologists (ie those in Air Force Specialty Code 4M0X1 just use a medical badge). At some point long ago Aerospace Physiologist got conflated with the Navy Aerospace Experimental Psychologist, aka Navy Aviation Psychologist, (which does have a badge), however a Physiologist is not a Psychologist. Gecko G (talk) 04:10, 11 July 2014 (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.

Wikipedia:WPTW[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 no consensus. Arguments on both sides are valid, but in absence of evidence that this is causing trouble, I'm upholding the status quo. --BDD (talk) 17:12, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Wikipedia:WikiProject Taiwan, due to that touchwood is not mentioned at the dab page for TW and is not a common usage anyway. TheChampionMan1234 02:51, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET per nom -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:27, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: this redirect follows common naming pattern for WikiProjects and their task forces. Given that Torchwood is composed of two distinct words "torch" and "wood", I see no problems with current state of affairs. That said, WikiProject Taiwan has well-established shortcuts WP:TAIWAN and WP:TWN, so I don't see any urgent need of their to occupy this redirect. Also note: WP:WPTW is forever embedded into pages' edit histories, so retargetting it will violate WP:SURPRISE, which is last thing shortcuts should do, particularily without good reason. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 18:38, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per user Czarkoff. A lot of shortcuts arent listed at the article disambiguation pages, e.g. RFD (redirect for deletion) isnt listed at RFD (and shouldnt)... Christian75 (talk) 19:31, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Might be an improvement. I don't see a WP:SURPRISE issue; there's hatnotes to handle people who get misdirected, and the actual Torchwood WikiProject members apparently use the WP:TORCHWOOD shortcut instead. OTOH there's no widespread practice of redirecting WP + ISO 3166-2 abbreviations to the country WikiProject (c.f. WP:WPCN, WP:WPBE, WP:WPDE, WP:WPIN, WP:WPCA). quant18 (talk) 02:38, 13 July 2014 (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/2014_July_11&oldid=1037875448"