Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 May 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 24[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 24, 2008

Template:BIRTH-DEATH-SORT → Template:Lifetime[edit]

The result of the debate was keep. VegaDark (talk) 16:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BIRTH-DEATH-SORT was used in the past. It's long and confusing. People decided to rename it to Lifetime. I think it's time to delete it. There is one redirect to Lifetime called BD as a shortcut. BIRTH-DEATH-SORT doesn't serve any purpose anymore Magioladitis (talk) 15:22, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Redirects are cheap, and past discussions are using the link. -- Ned Scott 06:57, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment From the links, I can see only one past discussion using it. Many redirects just make programs like AWB, dealing with these things,more complicated. -- Magioladitis (talk) 09:42, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Redirects are cheap" can't be a reason to keep for a template redirect. This is something editors are about to use not just search. A newbie has to get used to more things. Having less redirects for a template make it easier to be identified in page's source. -- Magioladitis (talk) 08:27, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It's helpful since the target template sorts via birth and death. It may help someone who is looking for the template and can't remember the name of it. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 11:50, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: records a page move; is a relatively useful redirect, as it explains what the template actually does; and having read the comments at the TFD, it's not impossible that the template could actually be moved back to this name at some point. As long as the template exists, this redirect is worth keeping. Terraxos (talk) 18:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There was a consensus for Lifetime against BIRTH-DEATH-SORT. More likely, is that defaultsort will go off this template. -- Magioladitis (talk) 21:31, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Why The Reds Won The Civil War → Russian Civil War[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. VegaDark (talk) 16:22, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is not a proper title, but simply a biased and moderately derogatory statement. Neelix (talk) 14:18, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - unlikely search term, page redirected after an original research page was made [which should really have been deleted]. RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 18:31, May 24, 2008 (UTC)
  • delete per nom and Richard.--Lenticel (talk) 01:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first draft of the page was the "term paper stub" kind of contribution - inappropriate to the encyclopedia but probably not speedy-deletable. The decision at the time to redirect had the advantage of clearly pointing the anon user to the page where his/her contributions might be appreciated without going through the confusing mess of "losing" the page and incorrectly assuming that the server hiccupped. That said, the content was added in 2005 so the potential for confusion is now extremely low. I'm going to argue keep only because the costs of correcting the issue (small as they are) are greater than the costs of keeping the redirect. The best answer for the project is just to ignore these deprecated pagenames. Rossami (talk) 02:30, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: not a proper article title. Saimdusan Talk|Contribs 22:01, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Rossami has a point, but I still think this title is too biased. --Eivind (t) 23:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - there are no incoming links in need of replacement (perhaps they were replaced?), so the costs of correcting the issue are no longer greater than of keeping the redirect. –Black Falcon (Talk) 00:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Rossami. We don't know what external links may exist; there's no harm in keeping. -Pete (talk) 08:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Best physics schools → Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute[edit]

The result of the debate was speedy delete all. --- RockMFR 06:08, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also Best IT programs, Nerdiest School and Nerdiest School of all time, all of which were created at the same time, by the same editor and point to the same destination.

Vandalism and not factual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RCX (talk • contribs)

  • Delete per nom.--Lenticel (talk) 01:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have bundled three other very similar nominations into this one discussion for administrative simplicity. The issues appear identical to me. If I overlooked something and the facts support separate discussions, please break them back out. Rossami (talk)
  • Speedy-delete as vandalism. The creator's contribution history does not support an assumption of good faith in this instance. Rossami (talk) 02:23, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2008_May_24&oldid=1138575724"