Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 July 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 18[edit]

Gloedhel → Glóredhel[edit]

The result of the debate was keep. -- John Reaves 01:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant typo, completely moved first to Glóredhel, later merged into a list Súrendil 23:43, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep, not highly likely typo but in this situation I see no chance of mistaking the misspelling for relating to anything else. Someone either found it useful for this to be a redirect, or thought it was the correct title and put an article there. BigNate37(T) 13:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as harmless. Phil Sandifer 17:33, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is a good example of exactly what redirects are for - an obvious misspelling. Redirects do no harm. they may help some readers. --Bduke 00:46, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Arosslach → Arossiach[edit]

The result of the debate was kept and retargeted with relevant templates added. -- John Reaves 01:25, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant typo, first moved to Arossiach later merged into a list Súrendil 23:43, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sador (Labadal) → Sador[edit]

The result of the debate was keep. -- John Reaves 01:22, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A leftover of an older page with redundant disambiguation, moved to Sador. Sador Labadal redirect also exists Súrendil 23:43, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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

Arconian → Elvish languages[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. -- John Reaves 01:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Leftover of an old vandalism Súrendil 23:43, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - does not seem to actually be a term used by or in Tolkien. Phil Sandifer 17:36, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Bogus redirect. A series of fantasy novels has appeared that uses 'Arconian' in their titles, with no apparent connection to anything in Tolkien. There is also a small amount of strange unsourced material in the history under the redirect. EdJohnston 02:43, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Tolkein isn't the only one who wrote fantasy about elves or their language(s). This subject isn't restricted to Tolkeinesque lore or canon. Having said that, Arconian does not appear at the target, so delete it as confusing/misleading. It is better left as a redlink. BigNate37(T) 02:55, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Your point about the redlink must be that if anyone wants to write about the Arconian novels in the future, the name would be open for a future article. If it is left as a redirect, the name is not available. I notice that there is a section in Elvish languages for non-Tolkienian works, but there is nothing there now about Arconian. EdJohnston 03:23, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    No, it is because someone clicking a blue link for Arconian expects to find an article discussing it. This is not possible as far as we know, so the link should be red to reflect that nothing exists for Arconian wherever it may be linked. A redirect can be turned into a full article without being a redlink, although the redlink increases awareness that the article does not exist (a side effect of what I just described). None the less, creation of an article for Arconian isn't the main reason for deleting this redirect. BigNate37(T) 03:38, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Complete rewrite → Henry Ward Beecher[edit]

The result of the debate was Deleted (G6). -- JLaTondre 13:59, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A mistake made by Polbot. I've already switched the old tag for the more appropriate one (Template:Cleanup-rewrite) in Henry Ward Beecher. ~Iceshark7 13:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's hilarious! Yes it's a Polbot bug, but it's a rare one, and difficult to avoid. The bot used to look for bolded text in the first paragraph (assuming those are alternate names) and created redirects based on those. The article at the time had "complete rewrite" in bold in the first paragraph as an instruction. Anyway, yes, please delete this redirect (or else redirect to Template:cleanup-rewrite if appropriate). – Quadell (talk) (random) 13:52, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Palestinian Holocaust → Israeli-Palestinian conflict[edit]

The result of the debate was no consensus. -- John Reaves 01:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading, erroneous, arrogant, no references what so ever. Psychomelodic 13:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete and protect or redirect to Zionism and racism allegations Psychomelodic 13:39, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've added {{rfd}} [1] to the redirect in question. I also mentioned to Phil Sandifer [2] that this redirect he created is on RfD—if he comes to comment, great. BigNate37(T) 19:40, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I honestly don't remember three years ago when this was done. My guess is that I nuked an old article that existed there and made a redirect as a compromise. In any case, the term gets 500 unique Google hits, and it may be preferable to have a redirect here than an opening for what would be an obscenely POV article. But I don't honestly care. Phil Sandifer 21:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Aha! It was a legacy of Holocaust (Disambiguation). At one point, it contained the term, and I created the redirect so that would point to a NPOV article instead of a POV fork. The term has been removed from the disambiguation page, so it's probably redundant at this point. Phil Sandifer 21:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Actually, screw it. Keep. It gets someone typing "Palestinian Holocaust" into their browser to the closest thing to an article on that topic we have or ever will have. Phil Sandifer 22:07, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This redirect by its very nature is POV, unless the target article documents that such terminology is justified. The word 'holocaust' doesn't occur in the target. As to whether this might be a vestige of an old compromise, as suggested by Phil, the deletion log doesn't reveal the former existence of any article by this exact name. EdJohnston 21:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am fairly sure the deletion log has been purged some time since mid-2004. I also am fairly sure the term existed at one point in the article - or, at least, there's an old draft of the article in SlimVirgin's userspace that uses the term. Phil Sandifer 21:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The term is certainly in use outside Wikipedia, and I think it's actually a positive thing to have POV titles redirect to NPOV ones. --bainer (talk) 11:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Ken Masters (Street Fighter) → Ken (Street Fighter)[edit]

The result of the debate was keep. -- John Reaves 01:18, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are two redirects in "Ken (Street Fighter)": Ken Masters, and Ken Masters (Street Fighter). David Pro 15:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete and protect David Pro 15:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. What in the world is the reason for deletion? --- RockMFR 16:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. "Ken Masters (Street Fighter)" isn't very useful. David Pro 18:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete. There aren't other characters named Ken Masters. David Pro 22:46, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • If you wish to revise your own opinion or comment on others, you are welcome to. However, only one recommendation per person, please. -- JLaTondre 23:05, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There's nothing wrong with this redirect that I can see, and the nominator's sole supplied reason for deletion (that there are no other characters named Ken Masters) doesn't seem to be reason enough to delete a good redirect.— Gavia immer (talk) 13:17, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete redirect. Since that this character is more known commonly as Ken (with Ken Masters being his full name), in this case Ken Masters must be kept and Ken Masters (Street Fighter) deleted. David Pro 14:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete redirect. Seems to be an unused redirect. The characters included in Category:Street Fighter characters generally have the form Firstname (Street Fighter), or just plain Firstname Lastname. Keeping around this additional redirect in the form Firstname Lastname (Street Fighter) seems unnecessary. At least, deleting this one would forestall mass creation of new redirects in the same form for all the other characters. EdJohnston 21:30, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Harmless. Someone might conceivably type it in, and should be taken to the article they're looking for. Phil Sandifer 22:06, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Delete redirect. The only one redirect to Ken (Street Fighter) to being kept must be Ken Masters, and Ken Masters (Street Fighter) must be deleted as being a copyvio. David Pro 22:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • As JLaTondre said above and I just said in another redirect's discussion below, only one recommendation per person. BigNate37(T) 22:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, entirely plausible that someone would enter this. And so what if more redirects are created of a similar form; redirects are cheap. --bainer (talk) 11:46, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. bainer has it spot on. What is this mention of a copyvio? How can a redirect be a copyvio? --Bduke 00:51, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Best User Page Contest → Wikipedia:Best User Page Contest[edit]

The result of the debate was speedy delete. Marlith, creator and only contributor to the redirect, agrees with its deletion (WP:CSD#G7). Non-admin closure. --Boricuaeddie hábleme 22:24, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary cross-namespace redirect, hardly used. Hut 8.5 16:14, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete WP space is seperate from mainspace. Marlith 18:54, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete- per Marlith. --Boricuaeddie hábleme 00:05, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. We usually require that long-standing XNRs have a good reason to be kept. This neither needs to be found by rookie editors who don't know about namespaces nor has it been around forever which would have suggested large amounts of incoming links from off-wiki. BigNate37(T) 21:28, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete due to need to segregate namespaces. Phil Sandifer 17:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

La Copa de la Vida → The Cup of Life[edit]

The result of the debate was keep. -- John Reaves 01:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is the Spanish version of Ricky Martin's song The Cup of Life, and this isn't very useful. David Pro 18:35, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Yes, it isn't very useful. Redirects should never be in other language than English, unless the official title isn't in English, but this one is. TheBlazikenMaster 22:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The title of this article should be "La Copa de la Vida", since that "The Cup of Life" is the English version of this song. David Pro 22:50, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, the Spanish title is mentioned at the target article. Prevents duplicate article creation. BigNate37(T) 17:15, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, since the Spanish name of the song is mentioned in the target article. We do after all have an article called Bolero, and no-one complains that it's in the wrong language. We even have Que sera, sera which is not grammatically correct in any language whatsoever according to the article, though it is a generally-known name of a song. EdJohnston 21:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Since that Martin first included the Spanish version ("La Copa de la Vida") of this song in his album Vuelve (as well in La Historia, the English version ("The Cup of Life"), was featured in The Best of Ricky Martin. The best thing to do would be that someone move this page to "La Copa de la Vida", since that Martin first recorded the Spanish version of the song. David Pro 22:42, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Since the redirect has nontrivial page history, that would need to go to requested moves, not RfD. The important thing to consider is whether an English audience (since this is the English wiki) is more familiar with The Cup of Life or La Copa de la Vida. BigNate37(T) 13:11, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Harmless. Bilingual singers are a clear exception to the language policy. Phil Sandifer 17:45, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. No good reason to delete. Redirects are cheap and are to help readers. --Bduke 00:54, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per BigNate and EdJohnston. Having the article here rather than at the Spanish title is reasonable given that the English-language version appears to have been more successful as well as being more familiar to users of the English Wikipedia. --Metropolitan90 16:59, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is a useful redirect for the case in which someone ran across “La Copa de la Vida” first and searched for it. Also note that there is a similar redirect at La copa de la vida (note capitalization). ●DanMS • Talk 22:40, 21 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The Twilight Zone (pinball) → Twilight Zone (pinball)[edit]

The result of the debate was keep. -- John Reaves 01:16, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Twilight Zone" is the actual name of this pinball game. David Pro 23:08, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Several articles link to the redirect, so obviously there is a pretty good chance that people will use the incorrect name. We should have a redirect to help them when they do. —David Eppstein 00:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and protect. David Pro 21:19, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment: protection would be totally inappropriate in this situation. BigNate37(T) 21:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Something people might well type into their browsers. Phil Sandifer 22:08, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    Delete. This isn't very useful. David Pro 22:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • You're the nominator and you've now voted twice as well. I've indented your second vote and removed the boldface. BigNate37(T) 22:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. What on earth is the problem with it? It may be useful to some readers. What is the real name is how we name the article. Redirects are for mistakes readers might make. Redirects are not a burden. They do not harm the project. --Bduke 00:30, 21 July 2007 (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/2007_July_18&oldid=1138574666"