Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 March 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 15[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 15, 2010

Template:Otheruses3[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was speedy keep. This template was the subject of a TfD discussion, where there was consensus to redirect. The closer noted that "the long history of this template means that many editors may use it without realizing it is deprecated/deleted," referring to the concern that many editors have become accustomed to using it over the years and therefore will continue to do so (which is why the redirect must remain intact, thereby ensuring that it will perform as expected). Magioladitis misinterpreted this as a desire to retain the revision history (as expressed below and at Wikipedia:Bot requests) and deployed a bot to orphan the redirect (which does nothing to ensure that it won't be added to pages in the future). As the consensus to retain the redirect is clear and fresh, and this nomination is based upon a misunderstanding (and the patently incorrect belief that such redirects usually are deleted), I'm speedily closing. —David Levy 01:45, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No reason to keep this as a redirect. The number 3 doesn't add anything. there is some non-trivial history of this template. We can keep it as a subpage. PS Redirect is orphan in mainspace Magioladitis (talk) 19:48, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest deletion. This is what we usually do in these cases. As an alternative, if someone thinks we need the edit history for some reason, we can simply move to a subpage. -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:30, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Control-Alt-Delete (disambiguation)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. This was only supposed to last a couple of days so the bots could clean up the redirects. Closedmouth (talk) 13:57, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason to redirect a (disambiguation) page to the main article. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 17:36, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • It was recreated for the short-term whilst any links to it are cleaned up. I went through all the double redirects and fixed them, but perhaps it might be nice to let it stay there for a few days to allow any other links, or user bookmarks, to be cleaned up. That said, since an RfD lasts 7 days, thats plenty of time so Delete unless anyone has objections. --Taelus (talk) 17:38, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

World Contact Day[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was withdrawn. Information added to the target article that means the redirect makes sense. Thryduulf (talk) 15:33, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not in article, and when it was, it was a minor offshoot of the reason for the title of the song. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 04:58, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - the full title of the song is "Calling Occupants of Interplanetary Craft (the Recognized Anthem of World Contact Day)", as it is presented on both the Carpenters' and Klaatu's singles and albums. I have inserted it (and the mention of the shortened title "Calling Occupants") into the article. B.Wind (talk) 06:23, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    If that last addition is accurate (I can neither confirm nor deny, at the present time), I'd like to withdraw the nomination. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 07:15, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I can confirm it: I own a copy of the Carpenters' single ([1] - this is a shot of another owner's single sleeve). 147.70.242.54 (talk) 15:02, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Big Ship (album) 2[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was speedy delete per WP:CSD#G7. Thryduulf (talk) 10:36, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Improbable. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:59, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete as nomination was made by redirect's originator ({{db-author}} will do the job more efficiently). Tagged. B.Wind (talk) 05:05, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Jennifer Gibson[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. JohnCD (talk) 22:50, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Improbable redirect; doubtful that a name as common as "Jennifer Gibson" should redirect to a Canadian ballet company, especially as the dancer Gibson does not appear to be anyone special and the ballet company's page says nothing about her. Chubbles (talk) 01:44, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Should this instead be a disambiguation page; there is another Jennifer Gibson who is an actress, although there is no article about her. — Robert Greer (talk) 23:10, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as there are no valid targets for a dab page and no articles on anybody by this name. A redlink would encourage article creation. B.Wind (talk) 17:39, 17 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I think it may be referring the this person. I don't think she's quite important enough within the ballet company to redirect here, and there are other potential articles with this title. Per B.Wind, a redlink would be better in this case, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 10:49, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

B-Day[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Birthday. JohnCD (talk) 22:53, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lemma isn't mentioned in the redirect target and there doesn't seem to be a meaning of "B-Day" in a military sense. Also, "B-Day" could stand for "Birthday" (see wikt:bday) Church of emacs (Talk) 00:01, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Birthday. More logical target, plus B-Day isn't listed as a term in the Military designation article. –Grondemar 04:46, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per above. Thryduulf (talk) 15:35, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to birthday (and not to the sound-alike bidet) per above. B.Wind (talk) 00:03, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • At the time of the creation of the redirect, the lemma did appear in the target page. Specifically: "B-Day is used informally as short-hand for "birthday". It has no military designation." This was included to complete the list (which has otherwise very few gaps). Urhixidur (talk) 18:19, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

List of Rumored Evanescence songs[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. JohnCD (talk) 22:47, 22 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unlikely search term. Unlikely to be useful redirect in other articles – the topic is not welcome in the context of Wikipedia. Quibik (talk) 11:46, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Wikipedia does not deal in rumours, except where the rumours themselves are encyclopaedically notable. Thryduulf (talk) 15:35, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - There was once an article called "List of Rumored Evanescence songs" (last diff before redirecting), obviously inappropriate; I imagine redirecting was just a quicker alternative to deletion, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 10:45, 20 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - since the redirection occurred four years ago, there is no need to revert and take to AfD. There is no point in keeping even this redirect. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 17:49, 22 March 2010 (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/2010_March_15&oldid=1141906698"