Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006 August 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 26[edit]

10^12 → names of large numbers[edit]

The nominated redirect was Reverted to 17 July version (target of Trillion). -- JLaTondre 13:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a name of a large number, it's the numeral form of a large number. Voortle 23:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Someone looking up this particular large number may type it in like that. It seems to be a logical redirect. Change vote to Retagert to Trillion per Roy. --Edgelord 00:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but the article that it's pointing to is about 'names' of large numbers, and 10^12 isn't a name, but a numeral. Voortle 00:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Slightly OT but I noticed that there was not an RFD notice on the page for the redirect. I have done so for you but in the future please try to do that before nominating here. --Edgelord 03:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Dubya dubya two → World War II[edit]

The nominated redirect was Deleted. If they don't know "Dubya" is "W", then they aren't likey to use this exact spelling & capitilization either. -- JLaTondre 21:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely 'typo' redirect. I doubt people are going to put (bad) phonetics in the go box Computerjoe's talk 21:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Why not? I'm sure some veterans spell it this way.PenguinX 21:33, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete per nom - nobody is ever going to type that into the search box expecting to find WW2. BigDT 21:59, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, harmless. Some people say it that way, so it's possible that they'll type it in, and it doesn't hurt anything just sitting there. To the above user who used 5 tildes, there is absolutely no reason to speedy delete this. Please review WP:CSD. --Rory096 23:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Umm ... well ... please see CSD R3. An implausible typo can be speedy deleted. BigDT 00:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's not a typo, nor is it implausible. Clearly it was intentionally spelled like this, and many people do spell W out as "dubya" (rather than "double-you") --Rory096 00:35, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Its a harmless redirect. --Edgelord 00:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Harmless isn't a reason. A redirect from dfsgsdfhgjksdfgjsdfgjskhdfgskljdfghlsdfh to Virginia Tech Hokies is harmless, but unhelphful. Wikipedia:Redirect gives a list of reasons to have a redirect and I don't see that any of them fit here. In fact, I don't really even agree that the redirect is harmless. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. Joke redirects have no place in article space. BigDT 00:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • How is it a joke redirect? It's possible that somebody would type it in- the creator of the redirect certainly thought of it. There's no reason to delete it. --Rory096 00:35, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • If you are wanting to do research on World War II, you might type in WW2, WWII, "World War 2", or "World War II". Heck, you may even use "The Second World War". But I am pretty sure that no serious person is ever going to type "Dubya dubya two" into any search engine anywhere looking for serious information. BigDT 00:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • Wikipedia isn't just for research. If you're just sitting around and typing random things into the search engine because you're bored, you might type that in and then read the article about WWII. Or maybe not. It doesn't really matter, and there's no point in deleting it. --Rory096 00:42, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
            • Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day. Somehow, I don't think it's for things made up while bored one day, either. BigDT 00:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
              • It's not made up while bored one day, it's the way many people would spell out "WWII." If anybody might type that in, we should have it to bring them to where they want to go, whether they're doing it when they're bored and just browsing WP or not. --Rory096 00:47, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • By the way, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion#When should we delete a redirect? dfsgsdfhgjksdfgjsdfgjskhdfgskljdfghlsdfh would fall under the 4th reason to delete, but this is clearly relevant. --Rory096 01:19, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, insipid, and not helpful to anyone. Seems like a form of vandalism. --Cyde Weys 02:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. A possible Bushism. ⇒ JarlaxleArtemis 04:26, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's actually a deletion reason, not a keep reason, as it seems to exist solely to disparage a subject. If you want to go make dubya jokes go try Uncyclopedia. --Cyde Weys 04:29, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's not a Bushism, but Bush is a good reason for keeping it. The nickname "Dubya" didn't come from nowhere- it's the way many people spell out "W," so "dubya dubya two" would be how they'd spell out "WWII," so it should be kept as a plausible search term. --Rory096 06:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a joke/nonsense redirect. I am mystified as to why anyone would claim this is a legitimate search term. --Hetar 06:45, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep - leads to a proper target. The only reason for deletion would be that 99% people would just type WW2, but for some link it might be used. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 09:40, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Abstrakt 17:00, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Surely this is someone's idea of a joke, right? I fail to see why this is a plausible search term. Even people who would pronounce WWII this way wouldn't spell it like this. JChap2007 00:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The edit history convinces me that this was a prank entry made by a user with an checkered contribution history. Rossami (talk) 03:19, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. POV redirect with spurious linkings between George W. Bush and World War II. No conseivable usefulness, and concur with Rossami. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:59, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, the term "Dubya" in this sense has nothing to do with Bush. It is simply a way of pronouncing "W" with a drawl. There are several instances of characters in movies or on TV saying it this way. A person who may not realize that they are actually spelling out "WWII" may search for this instead.PenguinX 10:14, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Current events → Portal:Current events[edit]

The nominated redirect was Kept. This xns redirect actually benefits readers. -- JLaTondre 21:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cross namespace redirect. Polonium 14:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Why is that bad? I use this redirect every day. It does not seem like Wikipedia needs an article on the concept of events that are current. 74.134.236.69 18:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move, Keep, or Merge edit history - there is a boatload of edit history there ... it cannot be lost under the GFDL because of all of the copy/paste moves to dated articles. BigDT 18:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • By the way, I agree with the nominator that this cross-namespace redirect is not needed - but it cannot be deleted outright because of the edit history. Either it needs to be preserved as a redirect or its history needs to be merged with the current edition of Portal:Current events. BigDT 22:02, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, edit history is there and portalspace is part of the encyclopaedia (or so I'm told). Not really sure why current events had to move to a portal, but whatever. --Rory096 23:37, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The redirect is needed for backward compatibility. Some people, such as me, have this link in their favorites. Why let them run against a wall? Common Man 08:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep! (If there is such a thing) - I have the habit of typing "wp current events" in firefox when I want to know what's going on in the world. Ditto for people with bookmarks. Removign the redirect is useless and annoying. In fact, I'm going to revert it to a redirect now. From Wikipedia:Redirect on when not to delete redirects:
  1. "You risk breaking external or internal links by deleting the redirect. Old CamelCase links and old subpage links should be left alone if there are any existing external links pointing to them.
  2. Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful — this is not because the other person is a liar, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways."

In fact, I'll go mention this on that page. flammifertalk 07:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This is a useful cross-namespace redirect, and a very likely search term which benefits the readers, not just the editors. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:01, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep. The Current Events portal, like most portals, is designed for the reader. It is formally a XNR, but there is no formal policy against them, and the reason to avoid XNRs is to prevent readers unintentionally stumbling into our internal instructions and discussions, and this is not the case. Is there ever going to be article "current events"? No, as long as we have the portal. Are readers going to search for it? Yes. Are they supposed to know about portals and namespaces? No. Therefore, redirect is the only possible, and perfectly proper solution. Works as intended. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 02:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Pluto (planet) → Pluto[edit]

The nominated redirect was Kept. —Centrx→talk • 14:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pluto is no longer a planet, it is a dwarf planet since the 2006 redefinition of planet.Polonium 14:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The article on Pluto explains the current status of the celestial body. If we have redirects from misspellings, I don't see a problem with redirects from misdescriptions too. --Metropolitan90 15:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. We have redirects from misspellings and other common "incorrect" titles to the correct article, this fits in to that. Not to mention that there's probably a bajillion links out there on the Internet that point here and it'd be rather rude to break them all. Bryan 16:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, otherwise we should also delete Xena (planet) and Sedna (planet). Wii gok 16:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quickie Keep I can't even start to fathom why someone would try and delete such a major redirect. There are at least 300 articles using this redirect. If we can add redirects for common mis-spellings, we can certainly have them for Pluto (planet). Unless there are any dwarf planets with the same names as planets, I don't see the issue. Nfitz 18:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious keep. The purpose of redirects is to take the user from a common appelation, even if it's erroneous or out of date, and take them to the actual article that covers the topic they were looking for.--Sonjaaa 18:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per others above. --Cyde Weys 02:29, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Other articles may use this link. Also, it's not incorrect, as a dwarf planet is a type of planet, hence the "planet" of "dwarf planet." ⇒ JarlaxleArtemis 04:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually a dwarf planet is not a type of planet, it is a separate classification. The IAU made a huge mistake in calling them dwarf planets because it easily gives the wrong impression about the actual categorizations of things. --Cyde Weys 04:30, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Wholeheartedly agree with Nfitz. Common Man 08:31, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It's remotely possible that someone may have a reference source a week or more out of date. --Aranae 17:59, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. As per above. - BalthCat 04:35, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep so that people under the mistaken impression that Pluto is still a planet can be better informed. JChap2007 00:06, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. People will still refer to Pluto as a planet, no matter what the astronomers say. Perfectly valid redirect Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:02, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Sumbuddy has marked Pluto (planet) (yet not Planet Pluto) for deletion. This is silly. The term is used, it was perfectly correct for several decades, it isn't hurting anything. (I hope I am doing this right. Previous times I went to a discussion page, I found the discussion. This timethere was nothing so I made my own header.) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.109.185.132 (talk • contribs) .
    • Each debate has it's own section. I've moved this to the correct section. Please sign your comments. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 20:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Japnese → Japanese[edit]

The nominated redirect was Kept & has already been tagged with {{R from misspelling}}. -- JLaTondre 21:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Already of questionable usefulness because it redirects to a disambiguation page, this could also be seen as an unnecessarily offensive obeisance to Jap. Dekimasu 01:01, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep the offenisve word in question is also part of the word Japanese. I don't see how removing the a makes much of a difference. I also don't believe that linking to a dab page meets the deletion criteria either. --Edgelord 03:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as I believe this is more of a {{db-redirtypo}} candidate. Who uses "Japnese"? Ryūlóng 03:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's true; if this stays, there should also be redirects at Jpanese, Japaese, etc. Dekimasu 03:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, those are all speedy delete candidates, as I've listed Japnese. It links nowhere else, anyway. Ryūlóng 03:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I don't believe that it is a speedy deletion canidate. I don't believe that this reidrect missing one letter qualifies as R3. Also typos that can be plausable are usually kept. --Edgelord 03:44, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Ryū, I was trying to show that keeping pages on that basis is silly. Edgelord, "can be plausible" is a pretty big stretch. Dekimasu 03:57, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps my last argument was not very strong but I can show examples where redirects with similar mispellings have been kept. Thhe first example the first RFD on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006 August 5. Now I admit that switching two lerters around is not exactaly the samed but I do have a better example. The second example is the final RFD for Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006 August 10. This one I believe is a much stronger example because the redirect up for deletion was missing one letter like the current redirect. Also the main finding was that redirects are not deleted simply because they are unsued or mispelled and I believe that strengthens my case. --Edgelord 05:35, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First, this implies that there really should be redirects at every iteration of the word. Second, you ignored what makes it offensive. Would we keep a redirect from "Chinkese" to "Chinese"? I hope not. Dekimasu 06:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actualy, I did not ingnore that fact and have offered a counter argument earlier. In fact your current argument ingnores the fact and that is that the offenisve word in question is also part of the word Japanese but the same it not true of your China example. You need a better argument to delete than that. --My old username 06:20, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and tag as {{R from misspelling}}, plausible typo. --Rory096
  • Neutral - there are 236K g-hits [1] for "Japnese", so it isn't .that. implausible of a typo. Still, I am inclined to agree with Cyde on this one - it's a plausible typo, but it's also an obvious one that as soon as you key it in and get search results, you will realize you made a mistake and will fix it. BigDT 11:28, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually my comment was for Rory to put the template on the redirect rather than just saying it should be done. As for the redirect itself I would say keep, plausible mispelling. --Cyde Weys 23:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep redirects from plausible typos are useful. JChap2007 00:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Seems like a very possible typo/misspelling to make. The connection to Jap is pretty weak to me as a result. That connection may just be like people who think they've heard a profanity, but its just mind playing tricks. --Kevin_b_er 21:23, 1 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Account suicide → List of Internet slang phrases[edit]

The nominated redirect was Kept. -- JLaTondre 21:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've come across many redirect terms redirecting to List of Internet slang phrases, yet are not on the list. This is one of them. Gs68 02:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep just because it's not on the list doesn't qualify it for deletion. I frequent GameFAQs, where the phrase is pretty common, and leaving the redirect there would prevent a casual user from thinking that no such article existed and creating it. Hbdragon88 00:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2006_August_26&oldid=1138574075"