Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 November 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 27[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 27, 2010

Wikipedia fundraising[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 retargeted to History of Wikipedia#Fundraising. Nomination withdrawn. I have merged the history into the retarget but further editorial work needed. NAC. Bridgeplayer (talk) 16:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deceptive redirect. This was turned from a microstub about Wikipedia's fundraising to a redirect to Wikipedia, but there's nothing on the main page about fundraising. If anyone feels the redirect should be reverted and the article should instead discussed at AfD, please do so. Nom withdrawn, needs redirecting and that section expanding. Fences&Windows 23:01, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

黑龙江[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 Kept as there is no consensus. If the desire is to re-target, that should first be handled at the redirect's (or target's) talk page. Re-targets only needs to be brought to RFD if wider community involvement is required to resolve a dispute. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:29, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am considering a re-target to Amur River instead, because the province is named after the river. --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 19:15, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Neutral. However, if the retargetting is done, there should be a {{dablink}} that explains it. --Nlu (talk) 19:22, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment since neither is in English, we could just build a disambiguation page somewhere and redirect both to that. 76.66.194.212 (talk) 06:15, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    "neither is in English" is not grounds enough. I suggest you read the discussion at WT:Re-directs about use of non-Roman script in re-directs and DABs. Plus you are not being specific enough about what the DAB would be.
    According to pinyin spacing rules, there is a difference between "Heilongjiang" and "Heilong Jiang". If we create a DAB this is all the more the reason for it to be in Chinese. --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 14:43, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - No reliable source justification has been provided to bypass the Foreign names and anglicization policy or the Treatment of alternative names policy. WT:Re-directs is not Wikipedia consensus. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 15:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    your claims mean absolutely nothing because creating and keeping most of such re-directs is already community practise. most of those re-directs are not going away any time soon. And I came here looking for people to comment constructively on primary topic and etymology, not for people to go around deriding re-directs that they alone consider to have no use. and since you have the link to that discussion, why not participate instead of potentially beginning an anti-non-Roman-redirect rampage? lastly, I suggest you read WP:FORRED
    Technically a foreign non-Latin name can be considered an alternative name. Why don't you read a map to see if things match up? --HXL's Roundtable, and Record 17:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Dominion Video[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 by BD2412 (talk · contribs). →GƒoleyFour (GSV) 20:45, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget or delete. This does not seem to relate to any meaning on the disambig page. bd2412 T 16:45, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

  • Retarget to Sky Angel, the original target before the bot meddled. Dominion Video formally owned Sky Angel. See here, for example. The previous involvement of Dominion Vidoe should, of course, be added back to the retarget. Bridgeplayer (talk) 03:44, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done. bd2412 T 14:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Eddie Van Halen brown sound[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 by BD2412 (talk · contribs) →GƒoleyFour (GSV) 20:46, 5 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget, if possible. None of the topics on the disambig page clearly mirrors this very specific redirect. bd2412 T 16:41, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

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

Article of death[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 Deleted. Article of death does not appear to be the same thing as last words[1]. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:35, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget or delete. This does not seem to be an all-purpose synonym for any potential meaning of "Last words". bd2412 T 16:30, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

  • Comment Where could the retarget go if the result was that? Death? Some other article related to that? I would probably say Delete, but I'm just going to leave a comment here for now. Andromedabluesphere440 (talk) 09:12, 30 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Possibly to the article, Last words, rather than to the disambig page. bd2412 T 14:45, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Retarget, to Last words, per above. Rehman 14:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Wikipedia:WIFC[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 Kept as no consensus for deletion. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect with little in transclusions or page view statistics and without apparent good justification. Recent speedy delete was declined because stands for W is fancruft. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 11:28, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • It stands for "Wikipedia Is FanCruft", in essence that the trivial things are our greatest asset. WP:RFD#KEEP says that if something is found useful by someone, it probably is. This is designed to shorten links to a page that has more than a few, so your argument on "good justification" is not really correct, nor are the pageview statistics (which is often rendered incorrect by Squid caching). Also FYI, I think you mean "links", not "transclusions" in this case.--Ipatrol (talk) 19:06, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, IMHO these type of cross-namespace redirects are not right. User: and WP: are different. Maybe User→WP, but not WP→User. Rehman 14:35, 2 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Wikipedia:Userboxes/Politics by country[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 Kept as no consensus for deletion. -- JLaTondre (talk) 16:55, 12 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect created by user after the user's project page was MfD userfied. There is little in transclusions or page view statistics and is without apparent good justification. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 11:54, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • See all the arguments above for WIFC, the redirect is there to avoid breaking any references to it, as the MFD stated. Really, are you just scanning over XNRs and lighting fires wherever you see kindling?--Ipatrol (talk) 19:08, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, IMHO these type of cross-namespace redirects are not right. User: and WP: are different. Maybe User→WP, but not WP→User. Rehman 14:38, 2 December 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_27&oldid=1138577455"