Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 April 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 10[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 10, 2009

Passengers of Atlantic Southeast Airlines Flight 529[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted except for those mentioned in the target article (which have been marked with strickouts). If the names are in the article, than they're valid search terms. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:36, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Chuck Pfisterer
Matt Warmerdam
Robin Fech
Ed Gannaway
Dave McCorkell
Tod Thompson
Alan Barrington
Mary Jean Adair
Chuck LeMay
Lucille Burton
Alfred Arenas
Jason Aleshire
Renee Chapman
Jennifer Grunbeck
Jean Brucato
Barney Gaskill
Sonya Fetterman

Delete as non-notable passengers "known" exclusively for flying on Atlantic Southeast Airlines Flight 529. They are implausible search termsTavix |  Talk  22:54, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete except for crew members Robin Fech, Matt Warmerdam and Ed Gannaway. Both of them were not actual passengers, they were crew members at the time of crash. There are few Google search terms. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 13:22, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment some of these names are actually mentioned in the article. Perhaps those may be kept. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:47, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Wikipedia is not a dictionary. → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_dictionary[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cross namespace redirect and unlikely search term. ANDROS1337 22:28, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Danger: Diabolik (film) → Danger: Diabolik[edit]

The result of the discussion was Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 19:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Malformed redirect. I fixed it but I'm not sure its really necessary, there's no disambiguation links or pages associated with this Danger: Diabolik - just the film. - 2 ... says you, says me 19:14, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom - there's really no need for this redirect, and I can't think why anyone would search for it. Robofish (talk) 22:21, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep as while not strictly necessary, due to there being no need for disambiguation, it is doing no harm and enables a user to find the correct article. The film is based on a similarly titled comic and so a user who is unaware of the slight difference in the titles may add the (film) when lookiing for the film article. PaulJones (talk) 09:08, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep — someone slightly familiar with our naming conventions might well type this. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Anneke Frank → Anne Frank[edit]

The result of the discussion was Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:37, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Seems not to be her name. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:41, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Changed to Weak delete. Anneke Frank is still not her name nor what she's called, although I'd now support a line in the Anneke article, although I couldn't find the source before. On the other hand, translations of names are questionable at best. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:09, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep - redirects are cheap and since one person made this connection, another person may in the future. –xeno (talk) 17:51, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Upgrading to regular keep per Hopiakuta's comments below; seems to have been a "pet" name her father called her by as per her diary. –xeno (talk) 23:59, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, nickname used in reliable sources. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 20:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I do completely disagree; does anyone research anything ever, other than a list of vulnerable targets?

I did want assistance to create a Green Police article, as each had been in The_Diary_of_Anne_Frank_(1980_film):

< http://nexuslearning.net/books/Holt-EOL2/Collection%205/Diary%20Act%201%20Scene%205p1.htm >:

Mrs. Frank. Never! This is the most precious gift I’ve ever had!

[She sits, showing her present to the others. ANNE hurries back to the satchel and pulls out a scarf, the scarf that MR. FRANK found in the first scene.]

Anne (offering it to her father). For Pim.

Mr. Frank.

        • Anneke . . . I wasn’t supposed to have a present! (He takes it, unfolding it and showing it to the others.)

Anne. It’s a muffler . . . to put round your neck . . . like an ascot, you know. I made it myself out of odds and ends. . . . I knitted it in the dark each night, after I’d gone to bed. I’m afraid it looks better in the dark!

Mr. Frank (putting it on). It’s fine. It fits me perfectly. Thank you,

She had had many aliases; via the internet, some of you have hundreds of aliases,.................... screennames!!

&, I do wish that I could figure how to end this screenreader attack.

Okay, no one owns a telephone; does anyone reside w/in twenty miles of Coachella Valley, Riverside County?? How about some sort of affidavit??

[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 21:20, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]



I did translate that quote from another website; & I did translate the original pages from the movie that I've linked.

However, I did not translate any of it from any language; whereas, Mr. Frank had done much of his work in North America, he had certainly intended his edits of his daughter's work, including any aliases that they would mutually employ. I do not think that he had intended any of his books, documentaries, movies, speeches, et al, to mumble. His work screams intent & purpose, including their names.

Her work, however, was not intentionally planned for anyone but herself; but, his work is an obvious statement that as badly as things had gone in the intervening time, she might not mind so much his violating her privacy. Therefore, I would infer that every characteristic of their combined work has fully earned any documentation & promotion that it could have. That terrorist government would have opposed those of us who advocate maximizing electronic democracy.

Further, it is obvious from the above script that her father had called her two different nicknames in some ninety seconds.

Furthermore, all words are, to some extent, a translation of the language of the previous era, of half a century ago, or a century ago. As an example, I had heard that the compound word kidnap had come to use regarding Charles Augustus Lindbergh; as I cannot locate such confirmation on this website, & it would be enormous to verify it elsewhere, I concede that my example is not verified.

However, language does continually evolve, so everything is a translation from a previous era.

In either event, I had verified it by viewing the movie, &, again, on that website, as above quoted. Regarding the website, I've copied that; I do not know how to copy the movie.

Of [ nearly ] three years experience, there are various persons on this website who are prohibited from earning credibility, regardless; one of them is DonFphrnqTaub Persina.

I do need to negotiate the status of my other comments on this page as well!!!! No one owns a telephone; no one is in California. I am required to concede that I use a screenreader, though I do not recall having seen one, nor do I recall having touched one, have no idea how it operates. If I ever have had one, then it would have been misplaced, particularly as I certainly did not recognize what it had been. In any case, I do not recall any such experience.

I, certainly would like to try it; it might assist w/ disability-access; but, I am only guessing that it might help.

The larger problem w/ the screenreader attack is that it leaves me as involuntarily misrepresenting my disability: I am neither legally blind nor illegally blind nor a blind ill eagle, nor a venetian blind.

I have used a driver license tonight; if there is blood on the fender, not enough to noticeably drip. No blind here, except, I am, obviously, blind as to how to communicate effectively.

Considering what these characters had thought of Green Police, I do have a dire fear that some other article would ever be created, diminishing their experience, @: GreenPolice, greenpolice, green police, or any similar spelling. I do advocate that those titles would be blocked, permanently, for forever.

[[ hopiakuta Please do sign your signature on your message. ~~ Thank You. -]] 05:59, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

List of "All your base are belong to us" computer and video game references → All your base are belong to us[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:09, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
List of "All your base are belong to us" print and electronic references

Unlikely search term, and the article doesn't really list any computer/video game references. Tavix |  Talk  16:17, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

List of systems engineering books → Wikipedia:WikiProject Systems/List of systems engineering books[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 23:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This has been a cross-namespace redirect for nearly two years. Either the article needs to be moved back to mainspace, or the redirect should be deleted. VegaDark (talk) 15:58, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have replaced all direct links to this redirect, so I guess it can be removed. I don't know about moving the article back to main space. These lists seem to be deleted in a flash, the moment one editor comes along and finds the list POV. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 10:05, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete When the article in project space is done, it can be moved to that title, until then, I don't think we should have the redirect in place. Raven1977Talk to meMy edits
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Country calling codes +37, +684, +671[edit]

The result of the discussion was disambiguate +37 as per User:PaulJones's suggestion; no consensus on +684 and +671--Aervanath (talk) 16:48, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These three country calling codes (East Germany, American Samoa and Guam) are historic. +37 was merged into +49 (German Reunification) while American Samoa and Guam joined the NANP. However, some users created redirects for these country codes that point to information on the new dialling codes of these areas. (Part of this was my mistake because I created some red links that I've removed by now.)
I think that these redirects should be removed again - These country codes were returned to ITU years ago. +37, for instance was returned in the early 1990s. -- Dynam1te3 (talk) 01:03, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

+37 → Telephone numbers in Germany[edit]
  • comment as the target article makes reference to integration of the former East German states into the numbering scheme of the West, wouldn't it be logical to also mention that they formerly used +37 as a country code and then this redirect should be kept unless the number is reallocated. PaulJones (talk) 08:18, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • +37 has been split up into 10 country codes: +370 Lithuania, +371 Latvia, +372 Estonia, +373 Moldova, +374 Armenia, +375 Belarus, +376 Andorra, +377 Monaco, +378 San Marino, +379 Vatican City. This means that the whole +37 numbering area has been reallocated. -- Dynam1te3 (talk) 10:50, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In which, my suggestion would be turn it into a disambiguation page, saying that it was formerly used in East Germany, but now incorporated into the unified German numbering scheme, and linking to all the country codes it has now been split into. In this way it will be clear what the number was, and how the number space is now being used. PaulJones (talk) 11:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete +37 was used in German Democratic Republic from 1940s until 1990. Therefore, the code was never used. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 13:04, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
+684 → area code 684[edit]
+671 → area code 671[edit]
  • I think that pages about diallig codes should primarily focus on current assignments. Information about historic dialling codes may exist in Wikipedia, but unused area codes shouldn't redirect to a page about the new dialling code of a particular area. -- Dynam1te3 (talk) 10:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree that only current assignements should be covered. As an encycolpedia both the historic and current use is relevent. Just giving current use would mislead a user if they had come across the code in a historic context. Articles do need to make a clear distinction between what was and what is though. PaulJones (talk) 11:50, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete it was used in Guam as country code before taking up to +1 671, per using North American numbering plan. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 13:25, 11 April 2009 (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/2009_April_10&oldid=1140259365"