Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2007 November 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 7[edit]

WP:GT → Wikipedia:Search engine test[edit]

The result of the debate was no consensus. Result defaults to no change. - Mtmelendez (Talk) 13:17, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like this to redirect to Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia Tech, per the discussion at RFD: WP:TECH → Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia Tech —Disavian (talk/contribs) 16:03, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • This really should be discussed on the respective Talk pages but since you asked here, I'll offer my opinion. I would oppose that retargetting. This redirect is currently in use on approximately 100 pages. It is widely understood to stand for Wikipedia:Google test (which properly redirects to the more general page on search engines but which everyone still refers to by the most popular example). The references to the Google Test are relevant in a wide variety of discussions and settings where our users are seeking to use the results of a search engine as evidence. Any references to the Wikiproject on Georgia Tech will naturally be limited to the participants of the wikiproject. Retraining all of our users of the Google Test link seems unreasonable just to make linking slightly more convenient for a few people interested in Georgia Tech. Leave WP:GT pointed where it is. Rossami (talk) 19:12, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I still don't see what GT has to do with search engine test. GT is more likely to stand for Georgia Tech--Phoenix-wiki (talk · contribs) 20:09, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • So at a quick estimate, what proportion of these links can you find that are being used in the context of Georgia Tech? Rossami (talk)
      • WP:TECH was more likely to refer to WikiProject Georgia Tech than WP:TECHNOLOGY at the time of that RFD debate, because we'd been using it. That argument wasn't accepted there. Why is it valid here? —Disavian (talk/contribs) 01:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nominator. --Jerm (Talk/ Contrib) 21:07, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment if this is supposed to be for Google test retargetting might not be so good. 132.205.99.122 22:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose retargeting. This has been the redirect to Wikipedia:Google test (and then Wikipedia:Search engine test) since October 2005. In addition to the links on pages that use it, there are likely to also be uses of the shortcut in edit summaries - which we can't change. Seems to me retargeting will likely cause some confusion and I'm not convinced that the letters GT have an overwhelmingly close connection to the Georgia Institute of Technology (they certainly are not for me as an non-American). WjBscribe 22:55, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Georgia Tech / University System of Georgia has a trademark registered in the United States for the letters GT (When made interlocking). To me this shows a connection with the letter and the university.[1] --Jerm (Talk/ Contrib) 17:29, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Using Google Test (http://www.google.com/search?q=GT), Georgia Tech's website is one of the top hits and the search engine bold-faces the phrase "Georgia Tech"; "Google Test" never appears in search results. • WarpFlyght (talk • contribs) 00:25, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose It has an existing important use for something else. The University people can find an alternate--existing useful abbreviations should not be interfered with -- I suggest GTECH for the university.DGG (talk) 17:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • But using WP:EA the more active page should have it over the historical one. --Jerm (Talk/ Contrib) 17:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • You've raised an invalid argument here. As several users said during that discussion, Wikipedia:Esperanza was at that time, effectively "dead". The redirect was no longer in active use. WP:GT and it's target remain in active use all over the project. It is not merely "historical". (I'll also add my opinion that the EA discussion gave too little weight to the importance of history. I do not consider it to be good precedent.) Rossami (talk)
  • Support. While WP:GT is currently widely used as a shortcut for Wikipedia:Google test, I accept that the Georgia Tech WikiProject is a far more sensible destination for this redirect. The letters 'GT' don't even have anything obviously to do with the title 'Search Engine Test', while they are widely used in the real world as an abbreviation for Georgia Tech. There are already plenty of redirects to Wikipedia:Search engine test; we don't need this one as well. As for the problem of links from historical pages, that can be solved by adding a simple disambig note to the top of Wikipedia:WikiProject Georgia Tech. Terraxos 03:43, 10 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

5 pillars of wikipedia → Wikipedia:Five pillars[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 01:39, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace re-direct just created today.--12 Noon 00:54, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, unneeded cross namespace redirect. meshach 04:05, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Crown their ass → Dennis Green[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. WjBscribe 01:40, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This quote is attributed to the coach, however negatively. It's author also created many other senseless redirects, which I deleted based on clear CSD criteria. However, since this quote is somewhat notable on the web, I'm nominating here to make sure. I suggest deletion as an implausible and unnecessary redirect. Mtmelendez (Talk) 00:31, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Quotes go to WikiQuote. We do not create redirects for every non-notable quote (and only for the rarest of notable quotes) to the subject. In fact, the only examples of quote-redirects that I can think of are redirects kept to document a merger of the quote's page back into the subject's article. Rossami (talk) 00:37, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Help:Interwiki redirect demo → w:a[edit]

The result of the debate was retarget to wikt:a per Rossami. WjBscribe 01:41, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect was created by a Bot based on its equivalent meta page. As the page in question was an example interwiki redirect to the English Wikipedia, I don't think it of much use in its present form. I'm not sure however whether the best option is to retarget it towards a page on another Wiki (making it an example of an interwiki redirect) or just to delete it all together so am listing it here for further input. WjBscribe 07:41, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The redirect works correctly as a demonstration (in Help:Redirect#Interwiki redirects and redirects to special pages) that "interwiki redirects ... have been disabled" and an easy way to show what will happen if you attempt it. You could certainly repoint it to a different project if you think that would make the example clearer (wikt:a might be good) but even if you don't, the formatting of the redirect triggers the disablement of the redirect. The example works the way it's supposed to. Rossami (talk) 19:22, 7 November 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_November_7&oldid=616134176"