Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 3[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 3, 2015.

Śrimati[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. --BDD (talk) 14:42, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Shrimati. Neelix (talk) 16:47, 26 September 2015 (UTC) (via Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 23:32, 3 October 2015 (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.

Κες[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. --BDD (talk) 14:41, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to KES College. Neelix (talk) 16:47, 26 September 2015 (UTC) (via Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2015 (UTC))[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 23:31, 3 October 2015 (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.

Kiries[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) 14:40, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Paulownia tomentosa. Neelix (talk) 01:00, 27 September 2015 (UTC) (via Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2015 (UTC))[reply]

  • Delete. I could not find any evidence that the tree in question is known by this name. -- Tavix (talk) 20:58, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
{{R from plural}} of "kiri"? Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:43, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Which would be "kiris" and that still doesn't explain the accented redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 21:50, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's no evidence that this is a plausible misspelling. Google "Kiries" and you won't find trees. -- Tavix (talk) 15:49, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 23:31, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as there appears to be no suitable target. --Rubbish computer 10:28, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both due to lack of potential targets. I can't find any info that says "kiries" is a valid plural form of "kiri"---Lenticel (talk) 00:11, 5 October 2015 (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.

Chevrolet Corvette (redirect)[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) 14:39, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RFD#D5 as this is a nonsense disambiguator. A Chevrolet Corvette is not a redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 17:01, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. This was set up as a special redirect for statistical tracking purposes, in order to find out how many people came to the Chevy article from the hatnote on the corvette article. Since this special redirect was removed from the corvette article at some point, it lost its value. We should either re-establish the hatnote or delete the redirect. It's not a nonsense disambiguator, though. Dohn joe (talk) 18:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation, I was really confused why someone would create a redirect with a disambiguator of "redirect" when the subject isn't a redirect. Looking over the stats, the redirect got ~125 hits a day until 15-Aug 2013, when it dropped to next to nothing. That corresponds with an edit made by JaGa at Corvette, with the summary: "fix underlying links." My question to you, Dohn joe, is do you still need this redirect? I'm not sure why this information is so important, except to use as a point in an WP:RM, but I'm not seeing one. It's fairly clear that somewhere between 100-150 people daily were getting to the Chevrolet Corvette article via the Corvette article. If we reinsert the redirect, I'm sure we'll get similar results. -- Tavix (talk) 02:19, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it was initially created in response to an RM. And you're right - we should have enough archived pageviews that any future RM could use those stats. Or we could recreate the redirect if desired at that point. For now, let's delete. Dohn joe (talk) 18:24, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as an implausible search term. --Rubbish computer 22:42, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tentative Delete per nom, pending an answer to Tavix's question above.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 03:30, 4 October 2015 (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:Deletedstubpage[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) 14:34, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In 2006, this redirect was previously a banner that seemed to be applied to categories and/or stub pages that were deleted. At this point, it seems like there is no need to do so with the way that the MediaWiki software has evolved over the years. In the page's current state as a redirect, it is possibly an WP:XNR that could confuse readers since all deleted stub pages are not automatically subject to creation protection. Steel1943 (talk) 15:58, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment as creator of the redirect. I've not been involved with the stub project for some time, but it would be difficult to judge how often this is used since it's a subst'd template. It was very useful at one point during the project given the repeated re-creation of deleted stub types. I don't know whether this is still a problem for the project, but I can't see any way that it would have changed over the years, so it may still be in fairly frequent use. I'd suggest notifying Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Stub sorting about this proposed deletion, if you have not already done so. If it's not in regular use, I've no objection to deletion, but if it's still used regularly, then deletion would be inappropriate. Grutness...wha? 23:26, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Around 2006, this was converted into a redirect to a non-template page. Also, it seems as though other portions of the template that was previously at this redirect was merged into Template:Deletedpage, which has not existed in its true form since it was deleted in 2011 (then re-deleted in 2014). Steel1943 (talk) 04:02, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • All true, but in no way answering my queries. Is it still used? Have you informed WP:WSS? Grutness...wha? 23:37, 4 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per the lack of a large amount of incoming links and the small amount of recent page views, I'd have to say that if it is being used at all for any reasons other than those incoming links, it may be searched for other reasons than being directed to the protection policy which it currently does. Either way, I have informed the Stub sorting WikiProject of this discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 00:47, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Subst'ed templates don't generate incoming links, so that's not really that relevant either. Thanks for leaving a note at WP:WSS though. Grutness...wha? 23:28, 5 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's certainly not useable as a substed template now; attempting to subst a redirect to a Wikipedia policy page will dump an entire Wikipedia policy page onto your stub, which is almost certainly not what you want. The only potential use, therefore, would be for people who encounter the name of the template that's been substituted onto a page, and I can't find the name of this template anywhere in the expansion of the template (I picked a few past revisions to check for it). Additionally, any substituted uses of this template have since been edited (the proof of this is that Category:Protected deleted pages, that the template applied to all pages using it, is empty in addition to being a redlink). Thus, in short: a) this template name is no longer used in either substituted or unsubstituted form (proof: attempts to use it would fail spectacularly); b) no substituted versions of the template that once existed at that name exist any more (proof: the category it populates is an empty redlink); c) if any substituted versions of the template did exist (perhaps in page history), they wouldn't contain any pointers to this name that people might follow out of curiosity. As such, the name's definitely not serving any purpose as a template, and as far as I can tell not serving any purpose as a search aid either. (There are also good reasons to delete, such as WP:XNR and the fact that the redirect doesn't really make any sense.) --ais523 01:09, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
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.

Le Dock Pullman[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) 14:33, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect should be deleted, as Dock Pullman and City of Fashion and Design are completely different places, see more info and addresses/maps in Dock Pullman's website (http://www.eurosites.fr/eurosites/les-docks-de-paris-2/) and Cité de la mode et du design's (http://www.citemodedesign.fr/english-version). Haha01haha01 (talk) 14:51, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, I created the page and thought Le Dock Pull man was in the City of Fashion after a search on the French wikipedia.--Prisencolin (talk) 23:06, 3 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per above points --Lenticel (talk) 00:08, 5 October 2015 (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.

Bunny[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 11#Bunny

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_October_3&oldid=1037881750"