Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 November 6

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 6[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 6, 2009

F.I.R.-Fairyland in Reality (F.I.R. album)[edit]

The result of the discussion was delete. Noms that don't get any other outside input are deleted per the guidelines on WP:RFD. Killiondude (talk) 05:09, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Redirect is left over from a page move made because the article name was unnecessarily disambiguated. The old name is not a likely search argument, and I have cleaned up all links that used the redirect. TJRC (talk) 20:23, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Gorka José Unda Velasco[edit]

The result of the discussion was delete. Killiondude (talk) 05:11, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A non-notable player who plays for the Real Madrid's third team (Real Madrid C). This article should have been deleted in the first place instead of made into a redirect. Geregen2 (talk) 19:30, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. What was there to redirect? Hasn't play in any professional league nor has been name to a national team. Raul17 (talk) 00:10, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

81 points[edit]

The result of the discussion was delete. Killiondude (talk) 05:12, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Redirect has nothing to do with the linked article except the number of points that Kobe Bryant scored in one game. I don't believe it belongs. Manway (talk) 02:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Useless redirect. --Vejvančický (talk) 08:33, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Otherwise we'll need a redirect for 0 to 9999 for every possible point score. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 18:42, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Battle of Dore[edit]

The result of the discussion was delete. Killiondude (talk) 05:17, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The recent AfD found a strong consensus that there was no evidence of a Battle of Dore, and the outcome was that the article was deleted. However, the admin deleting it recreated the page as a redirect to Dore, explaining here that "An entry that makes the creation of duplicate articles less likely by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term. Evidently somebody thought there was a Battle of Dore because there is a memorial stone in the village. By creating the redirect, we prevent others from making the same mistake, and we help people who also think there was a battle to find the relevant information." But this is not a misnomer, and there is no evidence of any kind of such a battle. The "memorial stone in the village" makes no claim of one. As stated at the 2nd para of this page, "Turning redirects into fleshed-out encyclopedic articles is wholly encouraged at Wikipedia". I see no difference between Battle of Dore and Synod of Dore, Palace of Dore, Bishop of Dore... they are all fictional and by existing can only mislead and (in the first case) encourage the recreation of an article we have decided to delete. Moonraker2 (talk) 00:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Agree. Seems an eccentric action on the part of the admin. This was all sorted at AfD. There is no Battle of Dore, either in history or in conjecture; it was simply fancy or misunderstanding on the part of the original article's creator. Giving the notion any sort of credence on wikipedia flies in the face of this. Declan Clam (talk) 03:56, 7 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_6&oldid=1047171771"