Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 November 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 15[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 15, 2009

Making money[edit]

The result of the discussion was delete. Killiondude (talk) 06:20, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a misnomer. In the usual sense, "making money" refers to "gaining a profit from an enterprise" or "earning a salary from a job," not "manufacturing currency." King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:31, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • If kept, it should definitely link to Making Money rather than either manufacturing currency, gaining a profit or earning a salary. Sideways713 (talk) 17:04, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination as misnomer. I do not think retargeting it would be beneficial as it would then be a redirect from capitalisation, thus the search box will handle it, and the fact the retarget would be a different topic from it's current use means any existing external inbound links would be redundant anyway. --Taelus (talk) 13:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and do not retarget to Making Money. The search function is case-insensitive for page titles which contain only capitalized words, so an alternative-capitalization redirect will not be useful for searching. Keeping the redirect has one downside: users who link to the incorrectly-capitalized title will see a blue-link instead of a red-link, and will not be prompted to correct the error. –BLACK FALCON (TALK) 00:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify as deletion would simply lead to recreation; in addition, the Making Money article already exists. Dabification is the only way to address all the objections mentioned above as the alternative, salting a deleted Making money article name, makes no sense whatsoever in light of the article on the Terry Pratchett novel. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 21:00, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • In general, disambiguation pages should point to existing articles with similar names, not function as dictionary or thesaurus entries: linking to the article Mint (coin) from a disambiguation page titled Making money would do just that. –BLACK FALCON (TALK) 19:54, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Laura Kirkpatrick[edit]

The result of the discussion was delete. I believe Plastikspork is correct, plus it was leaning towards delete. Killiondude (talk) 06:29, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

New user has been creating dozens of stub articles about non-notable people. Many of them are competitors in a TV contest, others are minor cast members in TV shows. In each case the article tells us nothing or virtually nothing beyond the person's name and the TV show in question. Some of these have been speedy deleted, others are tagged for speedy delete and waiting, while others have been converted to redirects. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 14:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I choose to delete the redirect as Plastikspork consider. Thus, I'm nominating the redirect. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 23:53, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I believe (but am not positive) this is usually the case with minor cast members of TV shows. Also, I don't see where the original author has created several of these articles, as this is their first edit since August. Finally, as a note, I'm the one who declined the speedy deletion nomination and redirected the article. TNXMan 15:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

:Comment I will withdraw if she will win this season of America's Next Top Model. ApprenticeFan talk contribs 04:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The convention is to not create such redirects for ANTM. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 16:17, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

الشيعه[edit]

The result of the discussion was keep. I felt this one was leaning more towards keeping. Killiondude (talk) 06:24, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply] Delete. Improperly applied PROD tag says the following: "Not Encyclopedia. Translated text =

Shia: "They are a group of people consider themselves Muslims, and Ncio by Abdullah bin Saba, a Jew from Yemen, have extremist ideas sanctification Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him, and this group was the most dangerous to Islam than the Jews and the Christians themselves, they seek every effort to destroy Islam, They are Aimiton represent Islam. The spread of this community, mainly in Iran and Iraq, and southern Lebanon and minorities in Bahrain, Kuwait and eastern Saudi Arabia and a minority in Syria, called `Alawis or Alnasirien. Not permissible for a Muslim marriage, especially of the Alawite sect, or who Nusayris Iolhon Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him."

Since prods are for articles only, I'm bringing this redirect here for deletion discussion. I do not see any utility whatsoever for this redirect. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:55, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
When I added the prod it was an article, not a redirect. It got edited into a redirect somwhere between me starting the prod and finishing it w/o me ever getting an edit conflict message. When i see something in another language, before i tag it for translation I try to run it through a basic translator myself, to see if it is anything... off-putting. This seemed off-putting.Vinithehat (talk) 01:40, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per WP:Use English. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 18:42, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as this is Arabic for "Shia" (according to GoogleTranslate) so is a perfectly correct redirect from the original language. 65.94.252.195 (talk) 05:25, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we keep with protection as there wont be further need to for editing and the original text that was attached to this article seemed a bit disparaging?Vinithehat (talk) 13:06, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 05:15, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete ~ WP:Use English. Bazj (talk) 10:04, 16 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:Use English... I quote from the guideline page: Redirects from non-English names are encouraged. --Taelus (talk) 13:45, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per 65.94.252.195 and Taelus. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:45, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I must point out that WP:UE, which is repeatedly mentioned above, states the following: Names not originally in a Latin alphabet, such as Greek, Chinese or Russian names, must be transliterated. This is not a transliteration; nor is this expected to be entered into the search of a Wikipedia using the Roman alphabet. I have no objection to a transliteration of this Arabic word and using it as a redirect, but anybody searching in Arabic would be using a Wikipedia with Arabic content instead. This is better deleted than kept. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 18:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • However I do not believe this applies to redirects, even though the article is not specific. The policy page actually uses this 北京 within it, which is a real redirect. It would be a bit odd for an article banning its use to link for it, and thus I can only reason it does not apply to redirects. Either way, WP:IAR, this seems harmless to be kept. --Taelus (talk) 20:10, 24 November 2009 (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/2009_November_15&oldid=1138576974"