Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 November 16

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 16[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 16, 2010

中南海[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. Jafeluv (talk) 02:35, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Contested prod. This is a page with a title in Chinese characters that redirects to a page with a title in Latin characters at Zhongnanhai. That's in breach of policy at WP:UE: "Names not originally in a Latin alphabet, such as Greek, Chinese, or Russian names, must be transliterated. Established systematic transliterations, such as Hanyu Pinyin, are preferred". Also the guideline at WP:EN: "The title of an article should generally use the version of the name of the subject which is most common in the English language... Names not originally in a Latin alphabet... must be transliterated into characters generally intelligible to literate speakers of English". In other words Zhongnanhai is an acceptable title because it's Latinised but 中南海 is not because its non-Latin. The policy doesn't make any exceptions for redirects nor does WP:REDIRECT. andy (talk) 23:24, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

you bring with you reasoning that is most vulnerable to attack. Under the section "Reasons for deleting", the "non-Latin script" reason is not covered. I dare you to edit that to suit your wishes.
did you check the page on speedy deletion? "redirects from common misspellings or misnomers are generally useful, as are redirects in other languages." I suggest you read up past discussions such as this one, and believe, as I explained on your talk page, that you are baiting me to violate civility or launch a personal attack.
Zhongnanhai IS the article title. 中南海 is NOT; it is a re-direct.
And unless you wish to be discriminatory, then you need to indicate that this utterly superfluous debate be extended to ALL re-directs in non-Latin, in which case you risk inflaming those participants of the mid-April 2010 discussion. Is that your wish?
and funny why you chose this re-direct in particular. is it because it could potentially serve the leaders of the great Chinese Communist Party well? It doesn't. It's a place in Beijing and has existed long before Marx. --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 23:34, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - it is established practice in this project that redirects from words that are the titles of articles in their native languages are acceptable, and that position has been supported in a number of RFDs. This is one such instance of acceptable usage. Bridgeplayer (talk) 00:25, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There's no reason not to have a redirect from the original language. Policy doesn't provide an exception for redirects because that policy is about titles of articles. It is not about redirects. And it's already stated elsewhere that redirects in other languages are useful. This whole nomination smacks of following the letter of policy exactly without considering the spirit. The purpose of our policy against non-Latin characters is obvious: to stop articles from actually existing at titles like 李白 that English readers will not recognize. The purpose of a redirect is also obvious: to make an article easy to find, even if people try a different script, so a redirect from 李白 to "Li Bai" is completely in the spirit of the policy. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 03:17, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep-As others have said, redirects to a non-English topic from the native term are wholly acceptable and actually quite common. WP:EN does not apply; it is essentially a subset of the article titles policy which, as the name suggests, is specifically about titles of articles. A redirect is not an article.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 22:48, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Fair enough, except you have to ask why any native English speaker would search for 中南海 in the English wikipedia, and if they did why they would expect to be redirected to an English article. Surely it should redirect to the Chinese article? And conversely, if a native Chinese speaker searched for 中南海 wouldn't they be surprised to find an article in English? IMHO this is a (rather strange) courtesy for users who are not comfortable in either English or Chinese. andy (talk) 23:03, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, but that glosses over one category: learners. learners, Andy, learners. look for my other comments for an elaboration. --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 23:06, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • If wikipedia is a language teaching tool you might have a point. But it isn't. And look in the bottom left of every page - there's a language box where any article can be linked to an equivalent foreign language version. So, in this particular case we are assuming an English speaking user who knows enough Chinese to want to track down the meaning of 中南海 rather than Zhongnanhai but cannot understand the answer if it's written in Chinese. How's that happen? They're reading a Chinese text that they don't understand but they think "中南海, gosh I must track that one down"? No, the policy is there for a very simple reason - English wikipedia readers speak English, Chinese readers speak Chinese and so on. And if an English speaker wants to read something in Chinese, or conversely, there are cross-language links. andy (talk) 23:25, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suggest you read the (much more massive) mid-April discussions. That's where I got this reasoning from. I am getting impatient and don't really wish to continue lecturing you lot on this, ok...? and you don't wish to see me or anyone else flare out. so take up the reading instead of making baiting nominations such as this one. It was my very first Chinese re-direct under this username, so I have my reasons for suspicions. --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 23:48, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep if German, Serbian or Icelandic is allowed to become article titles (titles, not redirects), I see no reason to delete this one. German, Serbian and Icelandic use Non-English lettering, so there is no difference, since a great portion of monoglot anglophones will never recognize those characters either. 76.66.203.138 (talk) 05:16, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this has exploded into an WP:RFC at WT:Article titles. -- 76.66.194.212 (talk) 21:11, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    and unfortunately, too. this should have been resolved much farther back and carved into stone as official policy. Would have saved me from participating in two massive debates (last one was in mid-April)... --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 21:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

MediaWiki Users Guide[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 both. Ruslik_Zero 20:18, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These are cross-namespace redirects with little value in page view statistics or incoming links. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 23:37, 16 November 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_November_16&oldid=1066419115"