Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006 October 31

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 31[edit]

Wikipedia-L → Wikipedia:Mailing lists[edit]

The nominated redirect was Kept. -- JLaTondre 01:45, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Related to my earlier nomination of mailing-list redirects (I missed one). An unnecessary cross-namespace redirect; previously similar ones were deleted. Gavia immer (u|t|c) 16:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This is where the mailing list content were prior to the pagemove. The system automatically creates these redirects for a reason. There are still significant inbound links indicating that this remains a useful redirect. There is currently no possibility of confusion with an encyclopedia article. Rossami (talk) 19:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. That the redirect is automatically generated is not necessarily a point in favor of keeping it. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 19:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep unless orphaned, no good reason to break all those links. Kusma (討論) 21:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Does that mean Orphan and delete? — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:34, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, it means "keep if not orphaned, don't care if orphaned". Kusma (討論) 08:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia → Wikipedia[edit]

The nominated redirect was Kept. -- JLaTondre 00:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:RFD, “If someone could plausibly type in the redirect's name when searching for the target article, it's a good redirect.” It does not seem plausible that someone is going to type in the entire phrase. Avi 03:41, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep How is it not plausible? It sounds perfectly logical to me that somone would type that in after seeing the slogan everywhere. What harm does it do anyway?--KojiDude (Contributions) 04:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Does no harm and is based on the logo --Henrygb 09:19, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. In addition to the above users' comments (which I agree with), note that a fair number of random-seeming pages redirect like the above as an alternative to being tagged with {{deletedpage}}, since the alternative is for a trivial search on "Wikipedia" to return lots of "No, you can't edit this" messages. Consequently, if the above redirect is likely to be recreated (as I think it is), the present behavior is correct. Gavia immer (u|t|c) 15:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Harmless and prevents moving to this target. Kusma (討論) 15:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - agree with the comments above. Rossami (talk) 19:37, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per all above - it is the WP slogon, and a plausible search term. Martinp23 19:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I say keep per all above. // hackmiester (contact) 00:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep per above. -- SilverStar★ 18:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Nothing wrong with it, at all. The phrase is quite likely; it's not hard to consider all the phrase to be our title. CP/M comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 09:46, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Roosevelt_Intermediate_Shcool → Roosevelt_Intermediate_School[edit]

The nominated redirect was Deleted. -- JLaTondre 00:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelling, typo. Not a plausible alternate to article name. Tvh2k 15:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, implausible typo. Picaroon9288 01:30, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Anyone who can spell Intermediate can sure as hell spell School.--KojiDude (Contributions) 02:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete implausible type - far more plausible is "Scohol" (from my tests :)) Martinp23 19:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Loubard → Racaille[edit]

The nominated redirect was Kept. -- JLaTondre 01:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

French words; the meaning of the redirect and the target are different, and I don't see any other article to redirect too; there is no point in having redirects for all foreign words anyway. I am not sure that the target itself is worth keeping here either, but this is a discussion for another page. Schutz 16:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - a google search yields this, which indicates that Loubard means "Hooligan" - which fits under the definition given of Racaille in the articles ("young residents (minor offenders in particular) "). So I'm saying keep, though I agree with the nom that the target article could be up for discussion elsewhere... Martinp23 19:44, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Smithson (comic) → Smithson (webcomic)[edit]

The nominated redirect was Deleted. -- JLaTondre 00:10, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing links to this redirect. Furthermore, it would be a dangerous precedent to set where every webcomic also has a (comic) redirect. --Brad Beattie (talk) 21:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - agree with nom, and it's quite implausible as a search input. The only link of this sort required is that which is already at the top of Smithson - a far more plausible input. Martinp23 19:37, 2 November 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_October_31&oldid=1138574291"