Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 November 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 26[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 26, 2014.

Transferable skills[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. JohnCD (talk) 22:57, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a plural form which is redundant to the singular, which we prefer. Andrew D. (talk) 20:43, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy keep standard redirect {{R from plural}} ; this is why redirects exist. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 08:31, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Speedy) keep per 67.70. The nominator created the stub target on 26 November and the same day changed the target of this R. Before that (since 6 September 2010) it redirected to Transferable skills analysis. That change might have broken incoming links, and there was no mention of the previous target at the new target.
So with this edit I've added Transferable skills analysis as a "See also" at the recently-created stub target. Since the stub is so short it does not seem worth a hatnote. The only internal link in article space is at Reynol Junco, where the new target seems appropriate. Si Trew (talk) 08:51, 30 November 2014 (UTC) updated Si Trew (talk) 09:32, 30 November 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.

Daisy Christodoulou.[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. JohnCD (talk) 22:51, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This version of the title has a trailing full stop (period) which I didn't notice initially but which seems redundant. Andrew D. (talk) 20:42, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, apparently I created this, but seemingly with a rogue full stop. The original page redirected to University Challenge 2007, but as it's an error it could have gone straight to WP:SPEEDY. Not sure the subject is notable enough for a standalone article. This is Paul (talk) 20:54, 26 November 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.

Elise Sutton[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. JohnCD (talk) 17:38, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

6 years ago her article was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elise Sutton - the deleting Admin agreed it could be made a redirect if anyone wanted to add her to the Lulu_(company) article. That hasn't happened and an editor has asked at Talk:Lulu (company)#Why does "Elise Sutton" redirect here?. I don't see why she should be added to the article Dougweller (talk) 09:51, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I can't find any connection between her and Lulu. Thryduulf (talk) 10:27, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. --Lenticel (talk) 00:42, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - from the AfD, it seems one editor proposed this connection apparently based on Sutton having published some things through Lulu, which is a self publishing company, so in other words she purchased their service. I don't know why it was ever thought that such a link would be encyclopedic. That would be very much like creating a redirect for myself to The Beer Store. Ivanvector (talk) 19:27, 28 November 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.

U.S. Army in Iraq[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. JohnCD (talk) 22:58, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Request for deletion. The target page was created at 13:08, 26 May 2004 and the redirect page was later created at 16:39, 17 June 2008 as a redirect to a name space titled United States military in Iraq. This namespace acts as a redirect to Iraq War order of battle 2009. The subject page of this RfD, as far as I can tell, has been used to contribute to a sometimes rhetorical POV push to emphasise U.S. involvement in the war. My objections are that the result is a potential heightening of anti-US sentiment and that, as a national of one of the other nations involved in the conflict, I think that the designation does not credit other military personnel whose lives were put at risk within the conflict. Editors can still use piping if they have to but the redirect should not be available. I have edited articles to provide direct links to the target article. (for some reason I have not been able to Tag the redirect as, when I tried, the template displayed an error text). Thank-you Gregkaye ✍♪ 06:55, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I fail to understand why this is at all misleading - the US army were in Iraq as part of the multi-national force. Any redirect can be used inappropriately, if that happens then you fix the place that it's being wrongly used rather than deleting the redirect. See WP:RNEUTRAL. I've added the tag to the redirect for you, but I have no idea why it failed. Thryduulf (talk) 10:25, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I'm with Thryduulf, I don't get the possible misunderstanding either. Ivanvector (talk) 22:23, 1 December 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_November_26&oldid=1039434932"