Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006 September 16

< September 15

September 17 >

September 16[edit]

Subpage → Wikipedia:Subpages[edit]

The nominated redirect was Orphaned & deleted. -- JLaTondre 01:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another cross-namespace redirect. User:TrackerTV 22:58, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The number of inbound links shows that this is a commonly used redirect. All the current uses are on user or project pages and clearly refer to the Wikipedia page. There is no reasonable possibility of confusion at present. If someone ever wants to write an encyclopedia article on the general topic of sub-pages, they can do so as a regular edit. Deletion of the redirect from history is unnecessary. Rossami (talk) 20:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Cross-namespace redirect with no useful history, has fewer incoming links than Wikipedia is not paper, for example, which was deleted. Khatru2 06:43, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Wikicalendar: 2005 → Calendars of 2005[edit]

The nominated redirect was Deleted --Cyde Weys 05:39, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is potentially confusing, since it resembles the syntax for project pages, but does not point to a project page. Gavia immer (u|t|c) 19:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

WIKISOT → Alternate history (fiction)#Online alternate histories[edit]

The nominated redirect was Deleted. -- JLaTondre 01:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not a useful search term for the target (it was originally an article on a nonnotable game). Subject is not discussed in the target article. Also, redirects to section fragments (#foo) do not work. Gavia immer (u|t|c) 18:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Gps receiver → GPS receiver[edit]

The nominated redirect was retargetted to Global Positioning System. —Centrx→talk • 20:31, 20 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redir leftover from tweak only to article's capitalization (from Gps to GPS). The preferred latter entry remains, with history, although currently that article morphed back into a redirect also. Removing nominated redir will stop, say, a lookup on "GPS Receiver" slipping over (Redirected from Gps receiver) as checking edits there are cloaked. Ricksy 07:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Global Positioning System (which is the target of GPS receiver) and then speedy keep as {{R from other capitalisation}}. There is nothing wrong with redirects from the wrong capitalisation—they help prevention of duplicate articles being created. BigNate37_(T) 15:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Admittedly, it did point there before I stumbled upon it. I've classified both redirs R-from in the meantime, but fail to understand people's determination of keeping it on the basis it can't be doing any harm. Had it gone quietly when I put RfD against it, I would not be here having to reason with people. Propose removal of nominated redir to draw attention to the fact that two authors attempted to make an article for GPS receiver as here evidenced from delve into the other redir's history. Ricksy
Retarget and speedy keep as per above Nfitz 15:57, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
~~Broken~~ Cite reason 1, links take other redirect, not losing historic article content -- on the contrary, drawing attention to dropped article. Until this is gone, every lookup w/o exact case match finds this at present, hence ~~Speedy delete~~ "it's how the cookie crumbles". Ricksy
- Could you please rephrase that? I have no idea what you are trying to get across. Which speedy deletion criterion do you think applies here? BigNate37_(T) 18:22, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - Oh dear, this is doing my head in, trying to fathom things out. I assume the attempted fork started as an entry for gps receiver. I thought that as that's now at GPS receiver it'd be straightfoward to be able to get there if that was the only matching article. Was the page move the right thing to do last week? (Don't answer that) I reckon that resulted in no use of the latter redirect unless that was taken explicitly (excl. hyperlinks). Plus no one, so far, has mentioned the x-ref in para 1 of the final target article. Ricksy
keep, some people don't capitalize things. — CharlotteWebb 19:10, 16 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Reading this again, 2nd case N/A because it's concerning a case insensitive match against the initial letters. Ricksy
Retarget and keep as per User:BigNate37. feydey 13:20, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Now I'm thinking to Keep it, but as is, leaving this a two-step redirect. People who casually look up gps receiver arrive at a page where they can move on or check the revisions, while others trying GPS receiver dive straight into the accomplished GPS entry. Perhaps someday, there'll be a real page about these gadgets themselves, from the end-user's perspective. Ricksy 07:15, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm. You've got a point, that targetting Gps receiver at Global Positioning System would mean that if GPS receiver were turned into an article, the redirect would be wrong. However, double redirects are generally bad as self-references to the 'pedia, and we don't want readers to peruse edit history—if it's worth reading, it should be in an article. I'd favour avoiding the double redirect and risking a mix-up if the other redirect is turned into an article. Oh, and the reason there's too many dots in the indenting is because of the extra newline between comments. BigNate37_(T) 09:51, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.