Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 September 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 18[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 18, 2009

Robert e. lee the man who fought for his country[edit]

The result of the discussion was Speedy. Rich Farmbrough, 14:35, 18 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Delete. Pointless redirect: it is highly implausible anyone would search for this. Robert e. lee the man who fought for his country was an article created by a new user, which was redundant as Robert E. Lee already existed, so it was changed to a redirect, which is an improvement, but still unnecessary. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:56, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete WP:CSD#R3 - I made this redirect as a friendlier alternative to speedying a childish essay, and intended to come back after a couple of days and {{db-r3}} it. JohnCD (talk) 11:19, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For exactly the same reason I nominate the following for deletion:

  • Robert e lee outline → Robert E. Lee (links to redirect) (stats).
  • Speedy delete this one too. Same initial author as the one above, who has ignored my message after the first redirect. I haven't actually tagged them R3, now they're here perhaps better let this run its course, but I wouldn't object if someone tagged them for speedy. JohnCD (talk) 12:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Christian applied philosophical view of marriage[edit]

The result of the discussion was Speedy. Rich Farmbrough, 14:35, 18 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

This 2004 article was an essay that would never survive AfD today, and was made into this ridiculously long redirect (without any merging). Abductive (reasoning) 10:01, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. It is implausible that anyone would search for it in this wording.
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Historicity of Jesus/temp[edit]

The result of the discussion was move history to talk namespace to preserve edit history, and delete redirect. Jafeluv (talk) 09:04, 29 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too clear on why this temporary article was created/forked from the target, but I assume the text was put back into the target after the editor was finished. It may have been a fork. I would prefer it be deleted, either with or without a history merge (if such a thing is possible at this late date). Author's account was banned long ago. Abductive (reasoning) 07:52, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - It seems to have been a temporary page for a draft copy which has since been remerged into the article(Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Historicity_of_Jesus/). No reason to keep this around anymore. ShakingSpirittalk 09:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep [or merge if used] for history / GFDL purposes [if unused revert and afd]. Rich Farmbrough, 14:31, 18 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]
  • User is not banned, ban expired. And we have been GFDL for a looong time. At least 18 June 2002. Rich Farmbrough, 23:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]
  • The key question is whether or not the history was merged after the close of the VfD. If it hasn't, a direct history merge is going to be problematic (I'd feel for the admin who would have to organize such a mess). The redirect is orphaned in articlespace; so, the history is the only consideration for saving this (in my view). Could this be saved on a talk subpage? The history needs to be kept, but the temporary redirect needs to go. B.Wind (talk) 01:43, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • B.Wind read my mind. We should unredirectify and then move this into the talk page namespace. A good target would be something better than the current naming like Talk:Historicity of Jesus/Sandbox 2005 and link to it from the talk page. Theres way too much history in there to delete it. —mako๛ 02:20, 20 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    And leave a redirect to the talk page? Rich Farmbrough, 17:29, 20 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]
Not a redirect, but a link on the talk page, either on top or on the bottom, pointing to the new location of the history. Creating another redirect to take care of this would be inviting more trouble. We use templates to link talk pages of merge targets and the original source articles with some regularity. No redirects are created this way. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 19:41, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Isn't a simpler solution to the whole issue of retaining the history to simply keep the redirect? It's not actually doing any harm, as far as I can see. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Generally, it's not a good idea to keep "permanently" an article, redirect, subpage that is clearly marked as "temporary." In fact, there is a harm in that future editors would not realize that it is preferred that we clean up after ourselves after a merge. There is no reason to keep anything that advertises in its name that it is a temporary page or subpage (or, for that matter, redirects that state that they're redirects in their names). B.Wind (talk) 17:11, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

World Peace (computer virus)[edit]

The result of the discussion was replace with article Rich Farmbrough, 23:30, 18 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

This is not the same thing as "W32.Myzor". The only thing I could find about "World Peace" was that it was a boot sector virus, and therefore could not be anything even related to "W32.Myzor". That's all I found though, so I can't even make this into a stub article. HamburgerRadio (talk) 07:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect has been replaced by article on World Peace. HamburgerRadio is perfectly right: the World Peace virus is nothing to do with W32.Myzo, and there is no earthly reason for the redirect. However, I have now made it in a short article about the World Peace virus, so the matter is dealt with. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:52, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Halting redirect[edit]

The result of the discussion was Speedy. Rich Farmbrough, 14:39, 18 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Delete the redirect that advertises that it is a redirect. With the same justification I also nominate

147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:47, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedily delete both of them (CSD R3). It is inconceivable that anyone would type in "Colonization/redirects" in order to find an article on Colonization, or "Halting redirect" in order to find an article on Denvilles halt. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:57, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reminder As well as being speediable the cost of listing rfd's is greater than the cost of keeping the redirects. Harmless redirects should be ignored. Rich Farmbrough, 14:13, 18 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]
  • Speedy Rich Farmbrough, 14:13, 18 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

1704 House&redirect=no[edit]

The result of the discussion was Speedy. Rich Farmbrough, 14:40, 18 September 2009 (UTC).[reply]

Unusual name for a Wikipedia page that no one would ever use as a search item, it seems to be a byproduct of a hasty cut and paste of part of a URL. Created in 2007, it seems a bit old to apply CSD R3 speedy deletion here, but it should be gone nonetheless. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:16, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Nobody will ever type in "1704 House&redirect=no" looking for the William Brinton 1704 House. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedied Rich Farmbrough, 14:30, 18 September 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_September_18&oldid=1138577097"