Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 March 30

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 30[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 30, 2010

$1,000[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 no consensus. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The United States is not the only country whose currency is called the dollar. Furthermore, I don't think these would be likely search terms for dollar or dollar bill (the latter of which seems to be specifically about one-dollar bills). Jafeluv (talk) 11:24, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. These are very plausible search terms. Traffic stats indicate that at least some of them are accessed hundreds of times per month - many thousands of times per year. Surely we want to help those multitudes of people to find the article they are looking for. I think these were once disambiguation pages for various "dollar" currencies, but those were deleted. If these pages are not going to be disambig pages, they should at least be redirects to the most-sought and most-relevant article. Peacock (talk) 11:39, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Perhaps a hatnote along the lines of:
    "$1000", "$5000", "$100,000" and similar terms redirect here. For details of other currencies see List of people on banknotes and List of motifs on banknotes.
    Those articles link to other articles about individual banknotes where they exist (although the lists are possibly not complete). The other possible target is Dollar#Countries which use the dollar (I've created a redirect to that section at List of dollar-denominated currencies) but as that links to pages about the currency as a whole, rather than specifically banknotes, I don't think it would be as helpful a destination. Thryduulf (talk) 11:56, 30 March 2010 (UTC) see below. Thryduulf (talk) 16:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Delete Basically for the reason that the US dollar isn't the only currency in the world with these denomation dollar notes. I think that there is a bit of WP:BIAS here -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\
  • If they can refer to more than one thing, that's more of a reason to keep (and convert to dab pages) than to delete. Peacock (talk) 03:21, 1 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of circulating currencies - the current redirects would be appropriate if Wikipedia were designed to be US-centric, but for the global reach this would be the best option. A two-pronged disambiguation (one for US large denomination currency, one for the rest of the world) is shortsighted, to say the least (what about Canadian or Australian currency, for example?), and to do a dab page for every country whose currency uses the $ sign (and it wasn't that long ago we had a similar discussion about that redirect!) is currently impractical. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 14:54, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but turn into DAB pages, similar to the lower denominations such as $1, $20, etc. There are some countries that actually have currently circulating $1000 notes and higher. They should be included. For an example, see what I have done with $1000. Rawr (talk) 16:47, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • $1000 doesn't meet WP:MOSDAB which is my point for all of these nominations.Chuckiesdad/Talk/Contribs 00:34, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't follow... Can you be more specific about why it doesn't meet WP:MOSDAB? Rawr (talk) 00:46, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Because in the narrow construct of the title, the only thing that each entry has is the dollar sign. Some editors tend to take the narrowest of interpretations of MOSDAB while many others take a broader interpretation. Of course one way to get around the narrow interpretation is to convert the "semi-MOSDAB" page into a list article. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 02:12, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convert some to dabs, retarget others. Specifically:
  • Delete or at most Redirect, not DABs. These were initially DAB's that didn't survive a cleanup - there was nothing left once they met WP:MOSDAB.Chuckiesdad/Talk/Contribs 00:34, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of circulating currencies would be the best option here, and it being a featured list certainly is a bonus. Deleting these very common and plausible search terms does not help the project at all. -- œ™ 02:52, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete shows extreme US Bias. 76.66.192.73 (talk) 04:54, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    "Extreme"?? Hardly. -- Ϫ 07:29, 31 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to list of circulating currencies as above. Avoids the U.S. "bias" (notwithstanding that U.S. dollars are by far going to be the most plausible search term...claims of bias in this case are ridiculous) and also has actual content. Shadowjams (talk) 07:22, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I don't think List of circulating currencies is a particularly good redirect target. For one, most of them are not circulating currency, and the $100,000 dollar bill never circulated. For another, they aren't mentioned in any way, shape, or form on the proposed target. Instead, a person who wanted to learn about, say, the US $1000 bill must scroll down to nearly the bottom of the page, click on United States dollar (here he might easily give up, thinking that page is just about the $1 bill), then go halfway down the page to United States dollar#banknotes, determine that the $1000 bill doesn't have its own page but will be covered in Large denomination bills in U.S. currency, then read down to the third paragraph of the section and click on it. Whew! That's about as inconvenient as it gets. Thryduulf's proposed disambiguation pages are an improvement, but I'm not sure what they will contain except the following, for example:
$100000 is a sum of money. Alternately, it can refer to:
Like I said, it's better than a flat-out redirect to List of circulating currencies (and infinitely better than deleting these redirects, which is a truly awful idea), but not any more helpful to anyone than simple hatnotes on the current targets would be.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 15:55, 2 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

How Does The Immune System Work?[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) 12:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary redirect-from-question created in 2006 to get rid of an article under this title.  Glenfarclas  (talk) 06:39, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

Ricky Martin – One Night Only (1999)[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 keep (non admin close). B.Wind (talk) 16:37, 9 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Too improbable a redirect. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 00:21, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per my reasoning on several nominations by Justin yesterday. About 51 weeks at the title that is now a redirect, with the redirect nominated for deletion 62 seconds after the page move. No reason to break incomming links, bookmarks, etc. Additionally, in this case I see it as not improbable search term, even if you ignore that having the article at this title for so long automatically makes it probable someone will look for it here. Thryduulf (talk) 02:08, 30 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, considering the only difference between this and Ricky Martin - One Night Only (1999) (31 incoming links) is an endash. I've already retargeted Ricky Martin - One Night Only (1999) to Ricky Martin – One Night Only, it was a double redirect as a leftover result of Koavf's move. -- œ™ 03:09, 31 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_30&oldid=1148047047"