Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 April 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 4[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 4, 2009

A1 Dhaba → A1[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:17, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another unlikely A1 redirect that isn't listed on the disambig. JaGatalk 22:14, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Pipeline A1 → A1[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:17, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another unlikely A1 redirect that isn't listed on the disambig. JaGatalk 22:11, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

A-1 Record Finders → A1[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:19, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another unlikely A1 redirect that isn't listed on the disambig. JaGatalk 22:09, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

A1 gate → A1[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another unlikely A1 redirect that isn't listed on the disambig. JaGatalk 22:08, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

A1 register → A1[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:20, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another unlikely A1 redirect that isn't listed on the disambig. JaGatalk 22:07, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

A-1 Artists Agency → A1[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:21, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another unlikely A1 redirect that isn't listed on the disambig. JaGatalk 22:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

A1 portion → A1[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:22, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another unlikely A1 redirect that isn't listed on the disambig. JaGatalk 22:05, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

A1 Records → A1[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:23, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Another unlikely A1 redirect that isn't listed on the disambig. JaGatalk 22:02, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Dumez Bridge in Kirkuk city- Iraq → Dumez Bridge[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted as CSD G8. -- JLaTondre (talk) 13:49, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term which leads to an article being considered for deletion. Greggers (t • c) 16:56, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Template:National football teams User:Fasach Nua think are still active → Template:UEFA teams[edit]

The result of the discussion was Speedy deletion requested by page creator. Deleted. Camw (talk) 13:00, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do we really need this redirection in the mainspace? It's clearly just someone trying to prove a point. It serves no purpose what so ever. Uksam88 (talk) 12:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Josef F. → Fritzl case[edit]

The result of the discussion was keep. English sources have been provided showing use of this term to refer to Josef Fritzl. This decision carries no prejudice against a decision to turn it into a disambiguation page if it is found that the name "Josef F." has been used to refer to other people with equal prominence.--Aervanath (talk) 16:57, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This was previously nominated for deletion, with the result no consensus (9 votes to delete and 7 to keep). I was encouraged to nominate it again, in the hope of reaching a solution even the majority could accept, as there is still no consensus on the content of the article. This time, I suggest, as a compromise, it it made into a disambiguation page for the various people whose name is Josef F..., for the following reasons:

  • Strongly support per all the rationale reasons given by the nominator. Let's put some sense in this redirect if we keep it.--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 22:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Multiple false claims in the nomination. 1) The redirect is used by through the interwiki link from the German article about the case. While I do not fully understand the reasoning for this practice, dewiki has had a long standing practice of not naming criminal defendants (A fact that has even been appealed to Jimbo). 2) Multiple independent news sources have used this name to refer to the defendant (e.g. [1], [2], [3], and[4]). It is thus a reasonable search term as people may wish to learn more about the named "Josef F". 3) No evidence has been presented that any of the other persons listed by the nominator has ever been referred to as "Josef F." in any published source. If such evidence is ever produced then disambiguation instead of deletion is the appropriate course of action. --Allen3 talk 09:46, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep enough references to him as such to warrant it. I still disagree with dewiki's moves. Computerjoe's talk 20:09, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral as it is somehow likely (but is it that much used in *native* English language news? I don't know...) yet it is unused other than at :de:, it looks. The use from :de: could (should?) be corrected using a redirect from Amstetten case or something like that, that would allow them to keep the name off the record while having a similarly named target? - Nabla (talk) 23:42, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Still a likely search term at least in German-speaking countries (just google it!), even if it's not in wide use elsewhere in the world. The abbreviated name refers only to Fritzl in German-speaking countries, and it's impossible to deny this point without acknowledging that the rest of the world uses the abbreviation as well (but feel free to start a new dab page via {{redirect|Josef F.}} if you have evidence that there is no primary meaning). The comparison to Adolf H. is lopsided as far as I know, as Hitler was never known as such, neither in German-speaking countries nor in the rest of the world. – sgeureka t•c 17:56, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or disamig. It's extremely unlikely this is the only "Josef F." with signficant media coverage, and it's not even clear it's the primary "Josef F.". This is the English Wikipedia, so comments about German-speaking countries are only relevant if they'd search the English Wikipedia. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 14:56, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

CINEMATIC IMMERSION → Cinematic immersion[edit]

The result of the discussion was Deleted by SchuminWeb as CSD G8. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:12, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects to non-existent page Greggers (t • c) 10:38, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Source needed → Wikipedia:Citing sources#Unsourced material[edit]

The result of the discussion was Re-targeted to citation. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:24, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect stanley bulgaria 04:34, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Labelled as such, along with 2,412 other pages. Not a reason for delete per se. Rich Farmbrough, 11:43 4 April 2009 (UTC).
    • It is if one looks at the specific namespaces involved. Many of those other pages are redirects from the article namespace to (say) the category namespace — i.e. from encyclopaedia material to other encyclopaedia material. The project namespace isn't part of the encyclopaedia, though. You must know the rest of the argument by now. Mirrors don't mirror the project namespace. Such redirects don't actually provide encyclopaedia content. This is behind-the-scenes plumbing to help editors, not actual content for readers. And so forth. This ground has been trodden often enough over the years. Uncle G (talk) 15:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Observe that citation needed redirects to citation. Uncle G (talk) 15:15, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to citation. The hatnote appropriately redirects the editor that wants to kow about citing sources. It would also be useful if the editor just wants to study why sources are needed.--Lenticel (talk) 15:03, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

User:Control-alt-delete/Favs → User:Control-alt-delete/Favourites[edit]

The result of the discussion was speedy delete. Deleted by CapitalR--Aervanath (talk) 09:57, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Testing redirect in my userspace, I no longer need this, please delete it.

Thanks Danny Control-alt-delete ★ user◾talk◾favs 04:20, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete per criterion U1 (user request). Control-alt-delete, in the future, there's no need to bring such uncontroversial requests here; you can easily have pages in your own userspace deleted simply by tagging them with {{db-user}} and some nice administrator will take care of it for you without the extra bother. — Gavia immer (talk) 04:50, 4 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_4&oldid=1140112222"