Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 27[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 27, 2014.

Obama Derangement Syndrome[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. Involved close per WP:IAR/WP:NOTBURO, given the backlog, and with unanimous consensus after a full listing period. Contact me with concerns. --BDD (talk) 16:55, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This was previously discussed at the target page, but it isn't anymore. I'm not sure whether it would be better to restore that content or delete the redirect. It's ASTONISHing and misleading as is. BDD (talk) 19:13, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious, why hasn't this page been deleted yet? It's old content seems like someone was writing a joke article. -- Kndimov (talk) 21:41, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The content was only tangential to the page in question; the redirected phrase is a short-lived neologism. It had a brief period of limited currency, but we don't need to have a redirect for every phrase of bile produced by the toxic mudslinging of USAnian politics. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:49, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per BrownHairedGirl and WP:ASTONISH. Not mentioned at target, I am not sure if BDD meant there was content on the article page, or discussed on its talk page – it's unfortunate that discussion is lost (which is why I tend to abstain from changing article content while things are under discussion, tempting though it sometimes is). Si Trew (talk) 07:36, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The concept was included at the target article at the time this was converted to a redirect. --BDD (talk) 16:03, 7 April 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.

;qjkxbmwvz[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. --BDD (talk) 19:11, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is this really a reasonable redirect to have? LADY LOTUS • TALK 18:30, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

::Delete. Doesn't seem to to me; wbhatever keyboard layout you use (and I struggle with several) the aim surely is o come out with something sensible not gibberish. Sure we all make typos but this is just nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 22:40, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have qwertyuiop or azertyuiop for example. Si Trew (talk) 22:42, 20 March 2014 (UTC
  • Keep. Well strike me down and I better get my Queen of Sheba costume on. We do actually have qwertyuiop, which redirects to QWERTY. azertyuiop is a DAB (probably unnecessarily) to the AZERTY layout and a horse so called: I would deete the dab and hatnote under WP:TWODABS but don't like to do that kind of thing while things are under discussion. But since other keyboard layouts are mentioned one way or another, so this is perfectly reasonable on that score. Were it just sitting on its own with no comparisons, I would say delete, as I initially did. etaoin shrdlu also has an article (the layout for Linotype machines) and is mentioned in the lede at SHRDLU which is about something else but properly kinda cross-referenced. Si Trew (talk) 22:44, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I really doubt somebody will search for this term. Lighthouse01 (talk) 23:48, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:50, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep' very querky and not very useful - high 20s in pageviews per month - but there doesnt appear to be a reason to delete. John Vandenberg (chat) 08:31, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - plausible search term, if unlikely. It seems like the right place to send people. WilyD 10:10, 1 April 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.

Страдание[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. Thryduulf (talk) 10:45, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not especially Bulgarian or Russian. Gorobay (talk) 16:44, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete this is a generic topic with no particular affinity for Russian over other languages. WP:NOT a translation dictionary. WP:UE this is the English Wikipedia, not the Russian one, so no utility is given to Russians trying to find information written in Russian unless they are using English Wikipedia as a translation dictionary to find the Russian. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:41, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not a useful redirect in an English language project. John Vandenberg (chat) 08:12, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep - directs readers to the content they're looking for. No one has suggested a reason to delete this, nor are any obvious. I suspect none exist. Certainly actively screwing over the readership would require a compelling reason, and there's no evidence of such a thing. WilyD 09:50, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • If I was looking for this term, I'd search on Google or use Russian Wikipedia, it's easy to change to English. So, delete. Lighthouse01 (talk) 17:05, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Funnily enough, you're not the only person who uses Wikipedia. WilyD 10:08, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. EN.WP's database is not a translation tool. — Scott • talk 16:02, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - If I was looking for people to find this term, I'd make a redirect so Lighthouse01 and others searching on Google will FIND OUR PAGES... but I guess that outcome is unimportant to those confusing deleting cheap redirects with actually editing usefully in this project. // FrankB 22:08, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Er, you are aware that we have whole other editions of Wikipedia in different languages, yes? And the first Google hit I get for Страдание is... wait for it... ru:Страдание. — Scott • talk 22:56, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. We have redirects for concepts closely related to a foreign language for a simple reason: they deserve to be mentioned in the article. How could we have a comprehensive article on Moscow without including the local name, "Моcква"? Someone who knows this can take an unfamiliar term and use our search function for it, and it will reveal the relevant article. If we have no redirect, it's a good indication that it's not a term for a concept related to the language. If we have a redirect to a topic that's not specific to the language in question, we confuse the searcher, who's basically left to wonder whether it's a local term or not. Just remember: if a comprehensive article wouldn't mention it, a foreign-language redirect isn't a good idea, and in this case we have no reason to mention cтрадание in our article on suffering. Nyttend (talk) 13:08, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is written in Russian, I think (not Bulgarian). We can't have a million redirects for every article in every foreign language. -- Kndimov (talk) 21:45, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • We certainly can't, given the total number of languages is at most several thousand. But that fact is apparently unrelated to the redirect at hand, so why would you favour deletion? WilyD 10:09, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:FORRED. --BDD (talk) 16:39, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Scott and BDD. THe place to find Russian articles is the Russian Wikipedia. The place to find Bulgarian articles is the Bulgarian Wikipedia. We have Interwiki links and I find them, when I translate an article,far more of a fiddle than when we just stuck them at the bottom after the categories. than the new Interwiki database thing, but hey ho that is my problem. It is indicative, therefore, that if there is not an Interwiki link the article doesn't exist at RU:WP so what is the point of having its Russian name in EN:WP? Si Trew (talk) 23:02, 10 April 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.

США[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. The consensus is that WP:FORRED applies in most cases of foreign language redirects, and it has not been shown either that there is a strong connection between the Russian language and the USA, or that there is a reason for this to be an exception to the general case. Thryduulf (talk) 10:48, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not Russian. Gorobay (talk) 16:42, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete the USA is an English speaking country that does its official business in English and uses English in the main. There is little affinity for Russian -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:46, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To clarify: English is not an official language of the United States: it does not have one. Nor does the United Kingdom. But de facto, most business is done in English, but where I lived in the US a lot was done in Spanish. Si Trew (talk) 22:47, 10 April 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.

Природне освітлення[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) 19:09, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not especially Ukrainian. Gorobay (talk) 16:37, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete pryrodne osvitlennya means "natural light" which could mean fire or other things that are natural... and this topic has no particular affinity for Ukranian over other languages. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:45, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not a useful redirect in an English language project. John Vandenberg (chat) 08:12, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. EN.WP's database is not a translation tool. — Scott • talk 16:03, 29 March 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.

Template:Wpcy[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) 19:09, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Country Music. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible. The Banner talk 14:21, 27 March 2014 (UTC) So much for today, and this was only the harvest for March.[reply]

  • delete as useless and confusing (CY = Welsh per {{lang-cy}}). Frietjes (talk) 16:01, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes, it's not WP:WikiProject Wales -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:23, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I cant see any reason why 'CY' would refer to country music. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:59, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - "C" and "Y" are the first and last letters in the word "country". This RfD is extremely similar to the 2013 RfD about Template:Cop and the 2014 RfD about Template:wprk, which I am incorporating by reference for the sake of brevity. There are several templates like this, such as {{Tb}} which is not about tuburculosis, {{pot}} which is not about cannabis, {{hat}} which is not about headwear, etc. WP:R#D8 does not apply as this is not an article space redirect. WP:R#D2 does not apply as confusion is less likely to occur in other name spaces.
  1. "Unless a WikiProject [or anyone else, for that matter] has actually expressed interest in usurping [these redirects], I don't see [them] doing any harm." To date, no other use for {{wpcy}} has been suggested at all. Per WP:R#KEEP, "If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do".
  2. "Many, possibly most, templates with names starting "wp" (in any capitalisation) are associated with WikiProjects and including a W for the Wikipedia namespace is at best very uncommmon. This means that the alleged confusion is not very plausible at all. So absent evidence of any harm there is no reason to delete."
  3. "There seems to be no evidence of confusion, just conjecture on the part of nominator, and no argument grounded in WP:R. Laziness is the exact purpose of redirects, to be perfectly honest, and the creator of a useful redirect that saves one or two characters should be commended. We don't delete redirects based merely on conjecture. Someone obviously found these useful given they were created."
  4. "One of the lowest things one can do is steal another mans tools. So you have no use for it. That it's being used on two dozen talk pages is good enough, and there is zero reason to take away something that has no higher use. Such Nominators should be required to be the one to hand edit and remove any deleted tags."
  5. "Redirects are not only cheap but this is a redirect from and to template namespace. That would tend to indicate to me that anyone using it is an editor rather than a general reader and they are hardly likely to get it confused with cop. There are lots of little abbreviated things pulled up over the years such as {{tlc}} or {{tlx}} or whatever as useful shorthand for editors." --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:47, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. "CY" is short for many things, but "country" is not one of them. Also, "steal another mans [sic] tools"? Give me a break. How about, "if it ain't broke don't fix it"? Because I can't for the life of me see what problem Jax was attempting to solve by creating all these badly-named and redundant shortcuts. — Scott • talk 15:30, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per there being no benefit to deletion. If someone wants to retarget it somewhere they should start a discussion about a specific proposal. The redirect is not broken and does not need fixing. Thryduulf (talk) 16:43, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. A useful redirect is a redirect that one would use for themselves. Why would someone need to create so many redirects to the same target and find each useful for themselves? "Hmm, for this one I'll think I'll use WPCY. Oh, this one should have C&W." No one is taking away your tools, Jax, but you don't need 5 different hammers for one nail. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 04:41, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - While I may have gone overboard with the number of redirects, each redirect should be decided on its own merits. If there is a better target for the redirect, I am all for it. {{C&W}} is the shortest redirect to {{WikiProject Country Music}} so far, is much shorter than any of the redirects that existed previously and is analogous to {{R&B}}. {{wpcy}} is analogous to {{wprk}}, which was kept.
On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with entries dating back to February, which needs to be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:08, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep. Frivolous, POINTy nomination. Start an RfC if you want to codify an alleged consensus that these sorts of template redirects don't belong. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 06:23, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There is harm in non-intuitive abbreviations, shortcuts and redirects.
1. Because when used (as is the intention, right?), any other editor ends up with an inexplicably strange template name (for transclusion or linked). That is a mental load one should prevent, that is 'helping' others into confusion.
2. Also, when another editor would like use that shortcut for a sensible template shortcut, they find it occupied. Understandably, not every editor would take it to RfD, so the more reasonable option is prevented.
3. Adding to the confusion are the uppercase/lowercase variants. Shortcuts are in uppercase with reasoned exceptions, full stop. What am I supposed to understand when I see WikiProject abbreviated to "Wp"? How does that help me? (and omitting the "WP" in the abbreviation is a sin for misleading).
4. Shortcuts don't do typo's & spelling constructs. This is not about content space. Is someone gonna learn the typo to use the template? Must note, I am quite convinced that these were created by Jax 0677 in good faith. -DePiep (talk) 07:48, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply -
  1. There are many "inexplicably strange template [names]" which I mentioned above.
  2. Several of my templates ({{wpk}}, {{pk}}, etc.) have already been renamed, and I have not opposed such redirecting.
  3. "The whole shortcut casing issue is a Wikipedia namespace issue, and is one that is both an obvious extension of most of the WP:R#DELETE reasons and the result of longstanding convention. That is, when we actually use our alphabet soup links, we always type them in uppercase, and they're always recognized by their uppercase typings. Template redirects, on the other hand, have a longstanding convention of being lowercase." "They only work alike in some situations, not all, and having both of them is completely harmless. Which to use is therefore a case of personal preference, and that is not something that RfD should even contemplate prescribing".
  4. "Anyone using it is an editor rather than a general reader and they are hardly likely to get it confused". The redirects should all be considered on a case by case basis, and if there is a better target for one of the redirects, again, I am all for it. --Jax 0677 (talk) 03:55, 3 April 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.

Template:WPCY[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) 19:08, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Country Music. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible. The Banner talk 14:21, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as useless and confusing (CY = Welsh per {{lang-cy}}). Frietjes (talk) 16:01, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes, it's not WP:WikiProject Wales -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:23, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I cant see any reason why 'CY' would refer to country music. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:59, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - See my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:49, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Malformed. "CY" is short for many things, but "country" is not one of them. — Scott • talk 15:24, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per there being no benefit to deletion. If someone wants to retarget it somewhere they should start a discussion about a specific proposal. The redirect is not broken and does not need fixing. Thryduulf (talk) 16:44, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Frietjes. Nonetheless, this is a frivolous, POINTy nomination. Start an RfC if you want to codify an alleged consensus that these sorts of template redirects don't belong. I have individually reviewed this specific case and disagree that there are any independent reasons for deleting it apart from The Banner's spurious claim that WikiProject templates should be held to the same standards as articlespace redirects. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 06:30, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I find your statement (per WP:POINT link) that The Banner is disrupting Wikipedia is unfounded, and more of a drive by capitalized yell. That is for the linked title. Had you read what you linked to, you'd know that the nom is exactly WP:NOTPOINTy. Then, denying a discussion by sending others to start an RfC is an self-illustration of, well, you guess. -DePiep (talk) 01:01, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is. Mendaliv, you would do everyone involved in these discussions a favor by demonstrating a commitment on your part to civility and striking that accusation in every place that you've made it. — Scott • talk 10:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mendaliv, Frietjes did not say Retarget. -DePiep (talk) 16:11, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The rationale suggests a retarget. Hence retarget. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 16:14, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mendaliv you forgot to respond to Scott. -DePiep (talk) 16:54, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Fancy that. — Scott • talk 17:38, 3 April 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.

Template:C&W[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. There is a consensus that it is inappropriate for this title to redirect to a WikiProject banner. There was no consensus about whether it should redirect instead to Template:Countrymusic (or some other target), so any alternatives should be considered through the usual WP:BRD cycle. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:36, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Country Music. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible. The Banner talk 14:21, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as useless and confusing. Frietjes (talk) 16:01, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete wikiproject template redirect shortcuts should include WP or WPP, this uses neither -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:39, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete or retarget to Template:Countrymusic, or a better country music template. John Vandenberg (chat) 15:28, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - "C&W" stands for "country and western". See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. {{R&B}} redirects to Template:WikiProject R&B and Soul Music. --Jax 0677 (talk) 14:56, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Neither should redirect to a wikiproject banner template, there being C&W music templates for content, and same with R&B. The existence of this redirect precludes mainspace usage for content. -- 70.24.250.235 (talk) 04:41, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Per 70.50, a WikiProject shortcut should begin with "WP". Also, WikiProject Country Music is not "WikiProject Country and Western" (you'll notice how country and western is a redirect to country music). Titles of shortcuts should refer directly to their targets, not synonyms or alternate names. — Scott • talk 15:20, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per there being no benefit to deletion. If someone wants to retarget it somewhere they should start a discussion about a specific proposal rather just vaguely handwave that "C&W" might refer to other things as well - no evidence has been presented that anybody actually is or has been confused by this. Thryduulf (talk) 16:46, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I am. -DePiep (talk) 08:05, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep Frivolous, POINTy nomination. Start an RfC if you want to codify an alleged consensus that these sorts of template redirects don't belong. I have individually reviewed this specific case and disagree that there are any independent reasons for deleting it apart from The Banner's spurious claim that WikiProject templates should be held to the same standards as articlespace redirects. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 06:30, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep Redirects are cheap, and I don't see how this is confusing, so no deletion criteria are met. At the same time, it's a recently created and not very useful redirect, so deleting it wouldn't really harm the project either. It's true that "redirects should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible"... but once that has already happened, there's no benefit to undoing it. Sideways713 (talk) 10:47, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sideways, the "WP" is missing. Sending editors in the wrong direction. -DePiep (talk) 07:54, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. WikiProject shortcuts should start with "WP". Confusing capitalisation. See also my redirects can harm clarification above. -DePiep (talk) 08:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - Why is {{R&B}} not at RFD? Without a better target, I feel this can stay. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:21, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Stay on topic. Your side note is inappropriately demanding and extremely rude to a volunteer community, and a bit hypocritical from one of the laziest editors I've ever come across here. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 07:28, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Template:Countrymusic. I don't see why not. --BDD (talk) 18:57, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete or retarget to Template:Countrymusic. However, we should really stay with the current shortcut convention for WikiProject templates. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:15, 4 April 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.

Template:C&w[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) 18:55, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Country Music. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 14:21, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am see my reply there. "WP" is missing. And don't expect confused editors to bring evidence to you. -DePiep (talk) 08:08, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep Frivolous, POINTy nomination. Start an RfC if you want to codify an alleged consensus that these sorts of template redirects don't belong. I have individually reviewed this specific case and disagree that there are any independent reasons for deleting it apart from The Banner's spurious claim that WikiProject templates should be held to the same standards as articlespace redirects. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 06:30, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you claim a speedy when there is a discussion rolling in front of your eyes, and without referencing a speedy criteria at all? It looks like you use the word "frivolous" a bit too ~. -DePiep (talk) 07:52, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. WikiProject shortcuts should start with "WP". Confusing capitalisation. See also my redirects can harm clarification above. -DePiep (talk) 08:40, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - Why is {{R&B}} not at RFD? Without a better target, I feel this can stay. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:22, 3 April 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.

Template:Wcy[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) 18:43, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Country Music. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 14:20, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as useless and confusing. Frietjes (talk) 16:02, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Nowhere would "cy" mean country music and WikiProject banner shortcuts typically start with WP. If the creator is looking for shortcuts to use for himself, he should just stick to one and use it. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:10, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes, it's not WP:WikiProject Wales ; further it should be using "WP" not "W" for wikiproject, so is inconsistent with WP and WPP uses otherwise generally used for wikiprojects. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:24, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I cant see any reason why 'CY' would refer to country music. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:59, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - "C" and "Y" are the first and last letters in the word "country". See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:03, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Completely malformed. — Scott • talk 15:21, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per there being no benefit to deletion. If someone wants to retarget it somewhere they should start a discussion about a specific proposal. Despite not being an obvious shortening, the redirect is not broken and does not need fixing. Nowhere is it required that redirects be obvious, just that they be plausible and this clearly is. Thryduulf (talk) 16:48, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"WP" is missing. Confusion, mental load for the editor (every editor). -DePiep (talk) 08:09, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If someone wants to retarget it somewhere they should start a discussion about a specific proposal. You think an editor embarks upon an RfD that easy? To replace a nonsense-shortcut with sense? I don't think so. That is where we loose improvements. -DePiep (talk) 08:16, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Frietjes. Nonetheless, this is a frivolous, POINTy nomination. Start an RfC if you want to codify an alleged consensus that these sorts of template redirects don't belong. I have individually reviewed this specific case and disagree that there are any independent reasons for deleting it apart from The Banner's spurious claim that WikiProject templates should be held to the same standards as articlespace redirects. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 06:30, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Frietjes does not say Retarget. -DePiep (talk) 08:10, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. WikiProject shortcuts should start with "WP". Confusing capitalisation. See also my redirects can harm clarification above. -DePiep (talk) 08:40, 31 March 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.

Template:Pk[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 as confusing. Ruslik_Zero 19:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another confusing redirect that looks to point to WikiProject Korea or Wikiproject Punk Music, but suddenly sends you to Pakistan... The Banner talk 14:16, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as useless and confusing (PK is Pakistan). Frietjes (talk) 16:02, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes. I repointed this one to the current target as PK as can mean too many things and WP:PK redirects to a Pakistan-related page. This one doesn't even use the typical "WP" shortcut expected for the original target. Not sure why anyone would think something that start with a P should point to the Korea WikiProject. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for the same reasons as Template:PK below. John Vandenberg (chat) 23:12, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (or redirect to "Template:WPPUNK") - See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. If Template:Administrative units of Pakistan is not the right target, let's redirect it to the original location. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:04, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per JV below at Template:PK. — Scott • talk 15:31, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There can be no benefit to the encyclopaedia brought be deleting this redirect, so we should not do that. If the current target is not the best then propose retargetting it to the template that is, but Pakistan seems to be the obvious target to me. Thryduulf (talk) 16:51, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
{{Pk}} and {{PK}} have different targets. You know and support that. In other places uc/lc redirect to the same page. That does not help anyone at all. Why should someone have to learn the difference? (don't forget, "WP" is missing. Another help idea?) -DePiep (talk) 08:28, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There is no requirement for "WP", despite your repeated claims to the contrary (just because you shout it loudly and often does not make something true). There is equally no requirement for UC and LC versions to have the same target, but if you want to standardise them then you should be nominating one or the other for retargetting not nominating both for deletion. I also note again that there is no evidence of any actual confusion. Thryduulf (talk) 09:55, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or retarget to Template:Pakistan topics. If it's going to point to something Pakistan-related, it might as well be general. Who's to say someone is looking for its administrative divisions? --BDD (talk) 18:41, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. We should really stay with the current shortcut convention for WikiProject templates, and the use of a two-letter redirect here is confusing, since PK has multiple meanings. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:16, 4 April 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.

Template:Wpk[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 as confusing. Ruslik_Zero 19:27, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Korea. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible. With another template (PK) pointing to the Wikiproject Punk Music, I expected this to be another redirect to this WikiProject, so this is rather confusing and a recipe for mistakes. The Banner talk 14:15, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as useless and confusing (PK = Pakistan). Frietjes (talk) 16:05, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Note that this originally pointed to Wikiproject Punk music and I changed it to the Korea WikiProject because project shortcuts start with WP not W, so it makes more sense to redirect to a WikiProject that start with "K". Template:Wpr was kept just because it wasn't being used for anything else, even though "R" can stand for lots of things. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:06, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Move without creating redirect to {{WPKO}}, as KO is the country code for Korea. John Vandenberg (chat) 23:15, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (or redirect to "Template:WPPUNK") - See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. If Template:WikiProject Korea is not the right target, let's redirect it to the original location. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:06, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Move without creating redirect to {{WPKO}}. — Scott • talk 15:38, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep current target. WPK is conventional naming for a WikiProject to a topic beginning with "K" and Korea fits that bill perfectly. I don't see why either punk music or Pakistan would be inferred from this acronym (indeed they would seem rather implausible targets to me). Thryduulf (talk) 16:54, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Adding another mis-abbreviation to the list. -DePiep (talk) 07:58, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That comment makes no sense at all! Thryduulf (talk) 09:59, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Confusing capitalisation. See also my redirects can harm clarification above. -DePiep (talk) 08:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as confusing. WikiProject Punk music was never a great place to point this. I figured there would be a good place to retarget, but with WP:WPK red, maybe that's not the case. I really don't see the benefit in moving this, either. It's not like there's any significant history that needs to be retained, so if anyone wants Template:WPKO to redirect to Template:WikiProject Korea, go ahead and be bold. --BDD (talk) 18:38, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. We should really stay with the current shortcut convention for WikiProject templates, and the use of a three-letter redirect here is confusing, since it could have multiple meanings. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • The current convention is not breached here. The argument that abbreviations can have multiple meanings has been rejected as irrelevant multiple times previously because we use hatnotes to help people find what they are looking for (see WP:SK for example). Thryduulf (talk) 09:59, 5 April 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.

Template:Caw[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. Ca-caw! --BDD (talk) 18:34, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Country Music. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible. And to be true, I had never guessed that this template had something to do with country music... The Banner talk 14:13, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as confusing, (and I await for WPCNT). Frietjes (talk) 16:39, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not about crows, or the move Caw, and WikiProjects should have "WPP" or "WP" in their redirect shortcut names. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:37, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I'm guessing the CAW is for 'Country And Western', for which 'C&W' is the much better known abbreviation. After a bit of googling, I dont see evidence of people using CAW to refer to Country and Western music. John Vandenberg (chat) 23:29, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - "caw" stands for "country and western". See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:08, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. If "caw" stands for "country and western", then I guess that {{dab}} stands for "drum and bass", right? Oh, wait. — Scott • talk 15:42, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per there being no benefit to deletion. "CAW" is a perfectly plausible abbreviation for "country and western" and so it is a valid redirect. The comments about crows and drum and base use exactly the same WP:OTHERSTUFF nonsense that was explicitly rejected at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 March 18#Template:Cop. Thryduulf (talk) 16:58, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No one anywhere is going to know that CAW is supposed to mean a shortcut for the country music wikiproject. Deletion does know harm because these have only existed for a short time when dozens of these were created by a single person with no real rationale to do so, since reasonable redirects for most of these already exist. In fact, only one of the recent redirects to this target makes true sense: WPCM (nevermind: the Christian music or Classical music projects could usurp it). --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 04:32, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep Frivolous, POINTy nomination. Start an RfC if you want to codify an alleged consensus that these sorts of template redirects don't belong. I have individually reviewed this specific case and disagree that there are any independent reasons for deleting it apart from The Banner's spurious claim that WikiProject templates should be held to the same standards as articlespace redirects. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 06:30, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you write "speedy" in bold below an eight-entry discussion? -DePiep (talk) 08:00, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My opinion is super duper important! Listen to me! Either that or complete ignorance of the appropriate use of the word "speedy". — Scott • talk 10:19, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - If this is the case, why is {{R&B}} not at RFD? Without a better target, I feel this can stay. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:32, 3 April 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.

Template:PD-Albania-extempt[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. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 16:58, 5 April 2014

Looks like a typo ? Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:11, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I added the tag {{R from typo}} per nom's rationale. -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:36, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not a common mispelling (e.g. extempt isnt a mispelling redirect), and isnt a commonly used template with less than 50 uses which should all be moved to commons. The redirect currently received < 3 hits per month. Now that it has been categorised, that number will go up. :/ John Vandenberg (chat) 23:44, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. We should present workarounds for readers' spelling errors, not editors'. — Scott • talk 15:44, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per as Scott describes. -DePiep (talk) 08:20, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I don't see a good reason to treat editors and readers differently, nor is there always a clear distinction between the two groups. --BDD (talk) 18:28, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Editing and reading the site are discrete modes, even if the people that participate in both modes are the same. Likewise, search input errors and programming errors may appear similar, but they are conceptually quite distinct and need to be treated differently. Specifically, tolerance to programming errors should be close to zero. Allowing redirects like this one encourages bad habits and creates technical debt. — Scott • talk 10:08, 4 April 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 (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Wikipedia:REFLIN[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) 18:22, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A rather misleading title that suggest that it is about links in references, but is in fact a link to a template used when a section has no references. The Banner talk 14:10, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete, no need to typo squat. Frietjes (talk) 16:38, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, WP:REFLIN will autocomplete to WP:REFLINKS; there is no search benefit in creating this redirect, and if someone is using the URLbar, they are ubersmart and should be able to get it right, or they can press Search to find the right page if they have forgotten the page name. John Vandenberg (chat) 00:42, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - Taking away another user's tools. See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:10, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The tool can stay. Not the name. -DePiep (talk) 08:24, 31 March 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.

Template:CoP[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; I'll leave to the discretion of the closer for Template:Cop whether to delete this if there's consensus to delete that one as well. --BDD (talk) 18:16, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to template:Collapsible option. Another similar template is already under discussion (template:Cop). Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 14:07, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That explains the 'keep', but not the 'strong' or 'speedy' parts. -DePiep (talk) 08:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep Frivolous, POINTy nomination. Start an RfC if you want to codify an alleged consensus that these sorts of template redirects don't belong. I have individually reviewed this specific case and disagree that there are any independent reasons for deleting it apart from The Banner's spurious claim that WikiProject templates should be held to the same standards as articlespace redirects. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 06:30, 30 March 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.

Template:Whh[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) 18:14, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Hip Hop. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 14:03, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as confusing, should start with WP, not simply W. Frietjes (talk) 16:39, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:26, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete based on my rationale below for deleting the uppercase version of this: Template:WHH. John Vandenberg (chat) 15:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - Taking away another user's tools, where "hh" stands for "hip hop". See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:12, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes. — Scott • talk 17:01, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Deletion would be harmful. "uselessness" is subjective and not a valid reason for deletion of a redirect and, as this template is used it is by definition useful. If someone wants to retarget it somewhere they should start a discussion about a specific proposal. Thryduulf (talk) 17:07, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep Frivolous, POINTy nomination. Start an RfC if you want to codify an alleged consensus that these sorts of template redirects don't belong. I have individually reviewed this specific case and disagree that there are any independent reasons for deleting it apart from The Banner's spurious claim that WikiProject templates should be held to the same standards as articlespace redirects. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 06:30, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes and JV. Use {{WPHH}} and just stick with that. How many tools does one person need? --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:02, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. WikiProject shortcuts should start with "WP". See also my redirects can harm clarification above. -DePiep (talk) 08:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - If there is a better target for {{whh}}, I am all for it. Each redirect should be judged based on its own merits. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:36, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Jax 0677: Stop that. Pasting an irrelevant comment about other deletion queues into multiple debates is pretty much a definitive example of WP:POINT. — Scott • talk 17:32, 3 April 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.

Template:Jz[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) 18:13, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Jazz. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 14:03, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as confusing, should start with WP or be JAZZ. Frietjes (talk) 16:40, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:27, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per the above and my rationale elsewhere on this page. {{WPJAZZ}} is a good shortcut; Jz should be left available for a target that is more suitable. John Vandenberg (chat) 15:11, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, although I'm kind of tempted to say retarget to {{Jay-Z}}. :) — Scott • talk 17:11, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - Taking away another user's tools. See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:13, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Deletion would bring no benefits. "uselessness" is subjective and not a valid reason for deletion of any redirect. If someone wants to retarget it somewhere they should start a discussion about a specific proposal. Thryduulf (talk) 17:08, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep Frivolous, POINTy nomination. Start an RfC if you want to codify an alleged consensus that these sorts of template redirects don't belong. I have individually reviewed this specific case and disagree that there are any independent reasons for deleting it apart from The Banner's spurious claim that WikiProject templates should be held to the same standards as articlespace redirects. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 06:30, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. WikiProject shortcuts should start with "WP". See also my redirects can harm clarification above. -DePiep (talk) 08:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - Why is {{R&B}} not at RFD? Without a better target, I feel this can stay. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:37, 3 April 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.

Template:Pnk[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) 18:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Punk Music. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 14:01, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as confusing, should start with WP, or be PUNK. Frietjes (talk) 16:40, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Agree with the above. -- Kndimov (talk) 21:06, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes, looks like it should be about P!nk -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:27, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete a shortcut that removes only one letter from the word? wtf! Just use Template:WPPunk John Vandenberg (chat) 13:51, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - Taking away another user's tools. See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:15, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. "WTF" pretty much covers it. — Scott • talk 15:50, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep these nominations with invalid rationales ("uselessness" is subjective and not a valid reason for deletion of any redirect) are harmful to the project, and deletion would be even more so. If someone wants to retarget it somewhere they should start a discussion about a specific proposal. Thryduulf (talk) 17:10, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. WikiProject shortcuts should start with "WP". See also my redirects can harm clarification above. -DePiep (talk) 08:43, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - Why is {{R&B}} not at RFD? Without a better target, I feel this can stay. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:39, 3 April 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.

Template:Wccm[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) 18:02, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Christian Music. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 14:00, 27 March 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.

Template:WHH[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) 18:01, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Hip Hop. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 13:59, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as confusing, should start with WP not just W. Frietjes (talk) 16:41, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:29, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, just use {{WPHH}} - its only one letter less, and fits within the existing naming conventions (which are not all written down, but hopefully documentation is added after this batch of discussions). John Vandenberg (chat) 13:57, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - Taking away another user's tools, where "HH" stands for "hip hop". See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:18, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The confusion and inconsistency caused by removing one letter from "WPHH" outweighs the "benefit" of the shorter title by a factor of approximately an umpty-jillion to one. — Scott • talk 15:52, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Deletion would be harmful. "uselessness" is subjective and not a valid reason for deletion of a redirect and, as this template is used it is by definition useful. If someone wants to retarget it somewhere they should start a discussion about a specific proposal. Thryduulf (talk) 17:10, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as confusing. Using Jax's rationale this should redirect to Template:Happy Holidays. "WP" should infer a WikiProject banner redirect not "W". --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:06, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - If there is a better target for {{WHH}}, I am all for it. Each redirect should be judged based on its own merits. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:44, 3 April 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.

Template:Win[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 Template:Won. Ruslik_Zero 19:20, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Industrial. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 13:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

delete and salt, frequently confused with {{won}} (see [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]). Frietjes (talk) 15:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes. Too much potential confusion. WikiProject Banner shortcuts like this should use "WP". --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 18:18, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:30, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes. John Vandenberg (chat) 13:58, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - Taking away another user's tools. See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:19, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to {{won}}. If it's frequently confused with that, we might as well work around the error. (Note: coping with confusion over a similar title is not the same as permanently patching a typographical error.) — Scott • talk 15:55, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. If this is frequently confused with another template then retargetting one or the other to avoid that confusion should be proposed and discussed. Deleting a redirect that is in use harms the encyclopaedia, and should only happen when that harm is outweighed by any benefits. In this case, there would be no benefits to anyone from deletion - users confusing it for {{win}} (or anything else) still will not achieve what they are attempting and those using it correctly will be penalised for no reason. Thryduulf (talk) 17:15, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - If there is a better target for {{win}}, I am all for it. Each redirect should be judged based on its own merits. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:47, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
One well-known contributor here who does a lot of the closures has unfortunately been away. I don't like to do it myself; I am not an admin but I could close off some (and hatnote the articles etc etc or whatever the outcome is, or propose them at CSD with a ref to here etc) for those that are uncontroversial as a bit of Wikignoming, if you want. Si Trew (talk) 07:45, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Template:Won, per Frietjes's findings. --BDD (talk) 18:00, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or retarget to {{won}} as suggested. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:18, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete but not salt. I am not suggesting to create a template for "Walruses in Nova Scotia" or "Windows in Namibia" but although it might be a common typo, mirabile dictu the Wikipedia search engine is good enough to cope with these typos now. Si Trew (talk) 07:45, 6 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment, using this for anything other than a redirect to {{won}} is going to be a constant headache, just fixed another one. Frietjes (talk) 14:56, 15 April 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.

Template:Wind[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, without prejudice to re-creating it as a redirect to something else. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:59, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Industrial. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 13:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as confusing, better as a redirect to a project about wind power. Frietjes (talk) 16:10, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Template:Wind power. --BDD (talk) 18:14, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete per Frietjes; there are many many many things this could be used for for content -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:31, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete per Frietjes, but retargetting to Template:Wind power is also sensible. John Vandenberg (chat) 14:00, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (or redirect to "Template:Wind power") - See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. If Template:Wind power is not the right target, let's keep it. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:23, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or retarget. "uselessness" is subjective and not a valid reason for deletion of a redirect because doing so brings no benefits. Arguments that "wind" could mean many other things are WP:OTHERSTUFF and as such are not valid rationales for deletion either. If there is a desire for this to be converted to a template or retargetted elsewhere, then this should be discussed and then implemented if there is consensus, but it does not require deletion. In this case, BDD's proposed retargetting looks to be a good suggestion and one I am happy to support. Thryduulf (talk) 17:18, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. We should really stay with the current shortcut convention for WikiProject templates, and the current use is confusing, since it could have multiple meanings. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 23:19, 4 April 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.

Template:IN[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) 17:57, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Industrial. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 13:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reply - If there is a better target for {{IN}}, I am all for it. India is much larger than Indiana, and better known on a global scale. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:48, 3 April 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.

Template:RK[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) 17:54, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Rock Music. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 13:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete as confusing, we already have {{WPROCK}}. Frietjes (talk) 16:12, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:33, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes. RK isnt a logical shortcut for Rock music. John Vandenberg (chat) 01:39, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - Taking away another user's tools. See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:25, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Jax 0677. "RK" is a well used abbreviation for "Rock music" (particularly by artists and fans at the heavier end of the genre), so this meets the "plausible" standard required of a redirect. On the other hand "uselessness" is not a relevant criteria on which redirects are judged. Thryduulf (talk) 17:27, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Frietjes. — Scott • talk 19:53, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete. as mentioned, and adding: "WP" missing from the shortcut. -DePiep (talk) 15:46, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - If there is a better target for {{RK}}, I am all for it. Each redirect should be judged based on its own merits. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:49, 3 April 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.

Template:PK[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) 16:58, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect that points to WikiProject Punk Music. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible The Banner talk 13:57, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to a totally different template proves that the original intent was useless. -DePiep (talk) 08:17, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per JV. Malformed; should start with "WP" to distinguish it from an article space template. Also, "First letter/last letter" is an incongruous and unexpected method of abbreviation. — Scott • talk 15:34, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per my rationale at #Template:Pk, which applies even more strongly here. Thryduulf (talk) 17:28, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So you approve of different targets by lowercase/uppercase shortcuts. I don't. -DePiep (talk) 08:19, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - If there is a better target for {{PK}}, I am all for it. Each redirect should be judged based on its own merits, but should not necessarily be identical nor different. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:50, 3 April 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.

Шмели[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) 16:57, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not especially Russian. Gorobay (talk) 13:35, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. No reason to have a foreign language titled redirect. (unless stealing hits from other Wikipedia is now English Wikipedia redirect policy, which wouldnt surprise me TBH.) John Vandenberg (chat) 04:16, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - redirects that direct readers to the content they're looking for is a necessary part of an encyclopaedia; if the users can't find the content, why bother having content at all? No one has suggested any reason we might want to delete this, nor can I make any up. WilyD 09:47, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I doubt that someone using the English Wikipedia looking up bumblebees would use the Russian spelling. --70.49.72.34 (talk) 03:39, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. EN.WP's database is not a translation tool. — Scott • talk 15:59, 29 March 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.

C: article 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 Pointless . Assuming that this gets implemented, there's nothing we can do, and if something should prevent this from getting implemented, we might as well retain the redirects, since they're helpful. If you think that this is a bad idea, please try to keep it from getting implemented, since the tech people won't pay attention to an RFD.Nyttend (talk) 04:57, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Following the discussion below, these are article redirects beginning with "C:" that will shortly become unusable. — Scott • talk 10:26, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Direct title matches

The article formerly at this title (and the only article on the English Wikipedia to actually include "C:" in its title) has been moved to C：Real, using the fullwidth form of the colon. Our search backend treats the two forms of the colon as one character - try testwiki:Special:Search/C:Real - so fullwidth colon entries will still appear in a search typed using the halfwidth form. Recommend deleting (and fixing incoming links).

Other redirects

Recommend renaming all to use the fullwidth colon.

Question: In re “Our search backend treats the two forms of the colon as one character”: I take it that future versions of Special:Search will do some normalization of input. Is there any documentation of what characters will be considered equivalent? Gorobay (talk) 14:46, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Almost certainly, but pinging PiRSquared17, who knows more than I do about this. — Scott • talk 15:50, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
According to mw:Unicode normalization consideration, MediaWiki uses [6]. Select Punctuation-Other and ctrl-F for "FF1A". I'm also not sure if NearMatchPicker.php comes into play here. I can probably get more info later. Maybe verdy_p knows more. πr2 (t • c) 17:21, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move these redirects (some are of very dubious value to begin with) to use fullwidth colons and delete all redirect titles beginning with 'C:'. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:18, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move these redirects to use fullwidth colons. By “fullwidth colon” I mean U+FF1A ： FULLWIDTH COLON, and not U+FE30 ︰ PRESENTATION FORM FOR VERTICAL TWO DOT LEADER (which is used in C︰Real). In Special:Search, a simple U+003A : COLON will match the former but not the latter (assuming it uses NFKC). Gorobay (talk) 13:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh dear. Thanks for discovering that. I think it derives from a comment I left at the talk page of that article containing the erroneous character - apparently a copy and paste error on my part. I've moved the article to C：Real and fixed all the incoming links. — Scott • talk 14:03, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Alas that very WP:INVOLVED closure of the Meta RfC has placed the convenience of editors above the needs of the readers of the encyclopaedia by forcing the use of incorrect titles where this is not necessary. A retrograde step for usability. Thryduulf (talk) 17:33, 29 March 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.

@Nyttend: Fair enough, but would you please mind finishing the job and removing the RfD tags from the redirects. Thanks. — Scott • talk 14:07, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

C: category shortcuts[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 14#C: category shortcuts

Template:Wem[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) 16:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect, as it originally pointed to template:wpem that points to WikiProject Electronic Music. Redirects are cheap, but should not be used as grass seed to make as many redirects with as few letters as possible. The Banner talk 02:17, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete wikiproject shortcuts should use "WP" not "W", it is not about anything at WEM (disambiguation), so is occupying a location potentially useful for an encyclopedic topic, and the shortcut already exists as {{WPEM}} -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:36, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per 70.50's reasoning. Redundant, and could be useful for something more directly related to its title. — Scott • talk 09:19, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete as confusing. Frietjes (talk) 16:13, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per 70.50. John Vandenberg (chat) 04:12, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - Taking away another user's tools. See parts of my first response at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 27#Template:Wpcy that apply to this section. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:29, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Deletion would bring no benefits, other potential uses are not relevant (WP:OTHERSTUFF) until there is a specific proposal for a specific retargetting or repurposing (neither of which would require deletion). Thryduulf (talk) 17:35, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. WikiProjcet shortcuts should astart with "WP". Shortcuts shold be allcaps. Confusing capitalisation. See also my redirects can harm clarification above. -DePiep (talk) 09:11, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - If there is a better target for {{wem}}, I am all for it. Each redirect should be judged based on its own merits. On a side note, TFD and RFD are backlogged with items from February, and should be attended to promptly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:51, 3 April 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.

Come However You Are[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 City Harbor (album). (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 07:07, 5 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to a redirect, just to claim a title The Banner talk 02:07, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment wouldn't the bot have fixed that anyways? -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 04:38, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - indeed, you can certainly retarget a double-redirect to the end result without asking, bots do it all the time. Unless you're looking for something else? WilyD 10:15, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Part of the problem is that author is massively claiming article titles my creating redirects, while it is very doubtful if they will ever appear as articles what the summary ("temp") suggests. The Banner talk 13:51, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't think I follow your thinking. If articles are very unlikely to ever be made, then a redirect makes a lot of sense. It's only where an article is likely to be made that deletion makes sense, because the red link calls attention to the fact that the article needs to be written. WilyD 18:01, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy retarget to City Harbor (album) as a typical {{R from song}}. I have no idea why this was created as a double redirect; the album article already existed when it was created. --BDD (talk) 18:17, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy retarget to City Harbor (album) per BDD. John Vandenberg (chat) 04:13, 28 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to "City Harbor (album)" - According to WP:NSONG, "Songs that do not rise to notability for an independent article should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song". With that being said, why is this being nominated for deletion at all if the album and artist are not also being nominated for deletion (which I do not think they should be anyway)? --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:37, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to City Harbor (album) as a {{R from song}} per BDD. Sideways713 (talk) 08:52, 4 April 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_March_27&oldid=1136083268"