Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 April 13

< April 12

April 14 >

April 13[edit]

I can still make cheyenne → I Can Still Make Cheyenne[edit]

The result of the debate was Keep — anthony^[review] 21:32, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

unneccesary redirect. makes searching harder (nomination by Swingline 2005 (talk · contribs))

Comment: this redirect is a redirect from another capitalization. Deleting the page means that typing in the uncapitalized title will result in a non-existent page, rather than the article itself (the latter would happen if this redirect never existed). How is searching made harder? Gracenotes ^T § 19:07, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Redirects are cheap, and the nominator hasn't really explained how this redirect would make searching harder. We have plenty of redirects for incorrect capitalisations, which, in fact, makes searching easier. Walton ^{Vivat Regina!} 19:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep how does it make searching harder? --Melanochromis 19:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. It's a common mistake to search for an article without the proper letter case. If anything, it makes searching easier. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 19:58, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that the target article meets our inclusion criteria but as long as it's still around, keep the redirect. Redirects to aid in capitalization errors are part of our standard practice. Rossami (talk) 12:12, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep We might as well delete rest of the things that are usually searched with wrong cap. as well. TheBlazikenMaster 21:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Occasionally people type in their target in the address bar, not the search tool. When someone writes it in all small letters, this redirect will help them. The rationale for deletion is untrue since it has no impact on searching. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

WP:OMFGSTOPBURNINGMYASS → Wikipedia:Staying cool when the editing gets hot[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 04:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessarily long, no one would ever type that out when WP:COOL also redirects there, uses profanity, and OMFG may be offending to some Christian and Jewish users. Cool Blue^{Light my Fire!} 00:11, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Because of course Christianity and Judaism are the only monotheistic religions in existence, and of course Wikipedia needs more censorship). --84.68.162.114 00:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stick to the discussion at hand. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 00:41, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Shortcut has only one link besides this deletion discussion and other similar pages. And I agree with Cool Blue in that its insulting, and will probably aggravate a discussion instead of toning it down, negating the entire philosophy of WP:COOL. It is humorous, but I think it crosses the lines of WP:CIVILITY. - Mtmelendez ^{(Talk|UB|Home)} 00:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If anything makes me laugh that hard, it should probably be deleted. It's total rubbish. YechielMan 01:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete too long. Wooyi^{Talk, Editor review} 03:35, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Why the hell would I search for "oh my fucking gosh, stop burning my ass", and how does that have anything to do with "stay cool"? TheBlazikenMaster 11:03, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, way too long. Herostratus 16:25, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nonsense. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 16:29, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Implausible, incivil, ridiculous "shortcut". Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:58, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

WP:WPMOVIE → User:Raul654/Wikipedia the Movie[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. From the comments below it seems to be a clear view that while pseudo cross-namespace redirects are not a problem in of themselves, they should be kept to a minimum. In this case the fact that the target was primary for entertainment rather than for building the project seemed to be the crucial element that has tipped the balance in favour of deletion. WjBscribe 05:01, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect was recently speedy deleted due to an overly strict interpretation of the WP:CSD guidelines, which was overturned at DRV with the possibility of listing at RFD, therefore I am proceeding to nominate it.

The issue at hand is that it is a cross-namespace redirect from the Wikipedia: namespace to the User: namespace. Now, this is by no means the only such redirect from WP: to User:; another well-known example is WP:VPRF. However, I think the key here is that such cross-namespace redirects should if the content of the redirect target is appropriate for the source namespace. In this case, WP:VPRF is certainly appropriate; the Wikipedia: namespace is home to many other user-created Wikipedia tools in the same vein as VandalProof, such as AWB.

On the other hand, the content at User:Raul654/Wikipedia the Movie isn't really appropriate for the Wikipedia: namespace. It has a very cliquey and in-jokey air to it that I feel could be discouraging to contributors, especially the "Cast" list which has undertones of a "who's who" of Wikipedians. Cultivating an oligarchical atmosphere such as this is antithetical to Wikipedia's community effort IMO, and while one could argue that it's OK in userspace, given the wide latitude offered to users there (the MfD ended in no consensus), I don't think having a WP: redirect is appropriate. Krimpet (talk/review) 03:01, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:DRAMA RFD precedent and there is no need to delete this. Wooyi^{Talk, Editor review} 03:33, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't understand how WP:DRAMA is a precedent; it's not a cross-namespace redirect. How does it relate to this discussion? Krimpet (talk/review) 03:50, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has been said that this redirect is "cliquey and in-jokey", but a previous "cliquey and in-jokey" WP:DRAMA has been kept by RFD. Crossing namespace shouldn't be the issue here. Wooyi^{Talk, Editor review} 04:15, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The material on the target page doesn't really have anything to do with the project. I'm against the notion of using WP: shortcuts for user pages at all, but if we are to use them, we certainly shouldn't use them on pages that don't help the project. Nothing against Raul or anything, but if this shortcut was not pointing to a page in his userspace, I don't think we'd be having this discussion at all. --- RockMFR 05:02, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment do you think that all of the redirects listed at WT:CSD are inappropriate? Some of them? Gracenotes^T § 17:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Good question. Let's see... I'd probably support the deletion of these: WP:AU/G (useless target), WP:BEARDMUSTGO (what the heck), WP:BOAR (empty), Wp:boar (empty), ~~WP:COLLAB~~ (poor essay that apparently should not be edited), WP:COLLABORATE (same), WP:COLTRUMP (same), WP:TRUMP (same), WP:NOA (pretty useless essay), and WP:PBOT (bot wasn't used). WP:BEEFSTEW, WP:BOBA, WP:AYB, WP:HELL, and WP:LTBDTW are kind of questionable. Basically, anything that could reasonably be moved to the Wikipedia space can have a WP: redirect (either being helpful software or helpful essays). I didn't finish looking at all of them, but I think you get the idea. --- RockMFR 20:04, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    - Some of those deletion requests are reasonable. Although, if the only reason for deletion is that it's a cross namespace redirect (when there's nothing wrong with crossing these particular namespaces, in theory), then that seems pointless to me. The redirect here up for deletion is not merely a redirect; it's a shortcut. I could type "User:Raul654/Wikipedia the Movie" into Firefox's search box, or I could type "WP:WPMOVIE" into said box and get there quicker, in case I need to (and why not?). "Redirects are cheap" is a quote worthy of, well, quotation, from an above deletion debate, if not taken somewhat out of context. There's no harm in having this: it won't confuse newbies (who notice {{humor}}), etc. But if consensus is to delete them, then so be it. Gracenotes ^T § 20:46, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is not Uncyclopedia. TheBlazikenMaster 11:04, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, I guess. Cross-namespace redirects should be as limited as possible. Herostratus 16:27, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment according to a recent policy change at WP:CSD (to which no one objected), there is nothing generally wrong with redirects from the "WP:" psuedo-namespace to the user namespace. Whether an individual redirect is appropriate or not is a different issue, and the subject of this RFD. Gracenotes ^T § 17:09, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Cross-namespace redirects into userspace should be avoided wherever possible, and this one might well seem confusing and/or odd to newer users. Walton ^{Vivat Regina!} 19:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Eh, I doubt newcomers would use the WP shortcuts. Those are primarily for "insiders" who often go to Wikipedia project namespace. Wooyi^{Talk, Editor review} 19:44, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per revelation by User:Gracenotes. I do not support the user subpage, but it is well-known (from all these discussions about it) and if you ever need to get to it, typing a shortcut is that much more convenient. –Pomte 18:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]