Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 October 14

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 14[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 14, 2008

Bilderbeck's → Mercury poisoning[edit]

The result of the debate was Delete. Lenticel (talk) 01:39, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect appears to be an error. I cannot find the name "Bilderbeck's" as a synonym for mercury poisoning in reliable sources. The Google Scholar query "Bilderbeck mercury" comes up empty. The only citations on the web are those derived from Wikipedia. Having this redirect is causing more confusion than it cures. Eubulides (talk) 17:59, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I did some research and I noticed that I originally had Bilderbeck's redirecting to Acrodynia but due to acrodynia being merged into mercury poisoning, the redirect of bilderbecks must have automatically been redirected to mercury poisoning. I am unsure where I found the source to say that acrodynia = bilderbeck (as it was over a year ago that I did the redirect) but I did a quick search now and managed to find these two sources:

And from a quick scim of those two sources I am unable to see acrodynia to = bilderbeck apart from the individual who perhaps discovered acrodynia to have that surname (but your right it doesn'y actually say bilderbeck as another name for it - it those list a list of other names though).

Good job on picking this up! Feel free to look at my many other redirects if you want (I have made quite a lot) in case I made any other mistakes such as the above. Cheers! Calaka (talk) 06:00, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as confusing. Both link sources mentioned above don't have a mention of a "Bilderbeck," but a "Bilderback" instead. This is the crux of the confusion and the zero entries in the Google search. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 17:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

L.M. Barack M.O. → Barack Obama[edit]

The result of the debate was delete

Despite the indication by the creator of "believe it or not, i've heard him called this before" I am more inclined to find it a really really limited neologism. I can not even find any mention of it anywhere, nor what it could possible stand for. If nothing else it is so convoluted to be useless. –– Lid(Talk) 06:53, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete as patent nonsense. Term (in quotes, both with and without spaces between initials) earns the Golden Donut award in a Google search. Tagged as CSD G1. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 15:05, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article speedily deleted under CSD R3 - implausible redirect Thingg⊕⊗ 16:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Toma (Dragon Ball) → Category:Dragon Ball characters[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. Wizardman 17:08, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Name appears nowhere in any article in the target category (there is a List of Dragon Ball Characters in the category, but there's no "Toma" inside). I could find no alternative as a target, so putting this wayward redirect out of it misery seems the most appropriate action. B.Wind (talk) 02:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Trade union/Summary → Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized Labour/Summaries/Trade union/Summary[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. Wizardman 17:10, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect created in 2007 as a result of a pagemove. Trivial history. Title does not comply with Wikipedia naming conventiion. Linked only to three User pages and a Wikiproject transclusion. In the context of the target, unlikely to be a search item (one can also make a similar argument on this last point for the target, but this would be outside RfD purview. B.Wind (talk) 02:08, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wikimoney → Wikipedia:WikiMoney[edit]

The result of the debate was delete. Wizardman 17:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely crossnamespace redirect, historical page targeted. MBisanz talk 01:08, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep, in that this title is unlikely to be used for an article; whereas the wikipedia term is just about a plausible search term. Terraxos (talk) 22:50, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a CNR to a historical non-policy page. mattbr 10:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Wikipedia utilities/Pages to be rewritten or deleted → Wikipedia:Pages needing attention[edit]

The result of the debate was keep. Wizardman 21:15, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Malformed, unlikely cross-namespace redirect MBisanz talk 01:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep to maintain significant history, which is the only reason to save this page whose name has become obsolete. B.Wind (talk) 01:48, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Couldn't this page be moved to Wikipedia:utilities/Pages to be rewritten or deleted and the resulting redirect deleted? This would preserve page history and get it in the right namespace. MBisanz talk 08:56, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • That seems implausible for two reasons (besides the noncapitalized U). Wikipedia:Utilities is an inactive page and (according to the top of the page) itself undergoing a merge. In addition, it would be creating an active redirect with the name of a subpage of an inactive page. A histmerge to another redirect (similar to one recently done for a redirect to George W. Bush) might be a better way to go, but it also has its problems. B.Wind (talk) 04:14, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep to preserve the history of this very old page. It long predates the creation of the separate namespaces. There is a chance that links to the page still exist and no value to breaking them. Rossami (talk) 23:25, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Might be worth a history merge, as it seems that [1] turned into [2] --Rumping (talk) 22:15, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • History-merge can ensure compliance with GFDL but does nothing to address the problem of link rot. Rossami (talk) 04:34, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

How does one edit a page/Redirect traffic from one page to another page → Wikipedia:Redirect[edit]

The result of the debate was No consensus. Opinions divided over how useful this is, but all contributions are well-reasoned.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 05:12, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely improper cross-namespace redirect MBisanz talk 01:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per discussion in 2007 RfD. Rossami's argument for preserving the history is most persuasive. B.Wind (talk) 01:38, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, per WP:RFD#HARMFUL. It documents the history of a page move, and is pretty old. Midorihana みどりはな 03:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • It could always be hist-merged with the current page, or page moved to a Wikipedia: title with the new redirect deleted for GFDL purposes. MBisanz talk 08:55, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep again. This old page still has links scattered all over the project's history and likely has external links. Hist-merging solves the problem of GFDL attribution history but not the problem of link rot. Rossami (talk) 23:27, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Cross-namespace. Try to hist-merge to save the history. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:29, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. --MZMcBride (talk) 07:33, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not really useful for anything. Wizardman 21:16, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I looked through the discussion from 2007, but still don't see why to keep this. It's completely implausible both as a link and as a type location. There's no reason I can see to keep links working that only exist in page histories. — Carl (CBM · talk) 00:52, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Luka Jacov → Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Luka Jačov[edit]

The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 03:01, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely, improper cross-namespace redirect, possible BLP implications MBisanz talk 01:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - there's a difference between Luka Jacov and User:Luka Jacov (the latter redirecting to User:Luka Jačov) for Wikipedia purposes. This redirect blurs the line between articles and user pages, and this should not be permitted to continue. B.Wind (talk) 01:44, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Pavilion Hotel → The Pavilion (Vermont)[edit]

The result of the debate was converted to dab. Anon's concern was addressed by the dab page. Lenticel (talk) 01:42, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Encountered this one while I was renaming the original target, The Pavilion (government building). The problem is that The Pavilion Hotel is a hotel in Nebraska (and this has a link from National Register of Historic Places listings in Nebraska). There seems no apparent alternative for redirection here. B.Wind (talk) 00:48, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - confusing redirect: is the hotel in Vermont or Nebraska? 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 15:07, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I created a disambiguation page with the above information as it would have taken as long as a vote. JASpencer (talk) 21:23, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as disambiguation page. Rossami (talk) 23:28, 15 October 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_October_14&oldid=1054984531"