Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 August 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 5[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 5, 2011

Template:Location map Amsterdams metrostation[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. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:45, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unused and unnecessary clutter, can cause confusion –droll [chat] 20:35, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Template:Location map Amsterdam metro station[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. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:45, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unused and unnecessary clutter, can cause confusion –droll [chat] 20:30, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unnecessary. Delete. --Obersachse (talk) 20:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

ZHL-U1953[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. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 20:07, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Completely useless redirect. The ZHL-U1953 is the technical name of the Assault Riffle used in Deus Ex. Even the most hardcore of fans would not be searching for this. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:37, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - this is getting a small number of hits (typically 3-5/month), suggesting that it's not "completely useless". The redirect is not misleading, isn't offensive, etc, and based on google hits it isn't likely to be confusing. In short there is no reason to delete. Thryduulf (talk) 21:59, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The 3-5 hits per month is most likely due to people inspecting the "what redirects here" list. It serves no purpose, so let's delete it. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 22:38, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note that neither "unused" nor "serves no purpose" are reasons to delete redirects. Thryduulf (talk) 00:33, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • As it is impossible (if there is a way please tell me) tell where the clicks are coming from it is likely to be safer to leave to redirect just in case people are truly looking it up. Tideflat (talk) 01:38, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Special Psychologist[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, there are signs of some usage of this redirect, and there is no argument that the redirect is harmful. --Taelus (talk) 21:28, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, no need for this translation of the Danish-only term "specialpsykolog" when it is not used in English. Redirect page Specialpsykolog already exists for those who think it's useful to keep the Danish term. Hairhorn (talk) 15:08, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - the same editor has also added this term to Doctor of Psychology so the first stage is to decide which degree it actually refers to. Once we have sorted that, if the term remains in the article, then the redirect should be kept since it gets regular hits. Bridgeplayer (talk) 15:31, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There is frankly not that much traffic and no internal links to this page. A significant fraction of the traffic is me checking to see if the page is still there.... Hairhorn (talk) 18:51, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict)Keep, the term is used in English both natively and when writing in English about Denmark and Finland, see for example the following google books uses: [1] (a Finnish qualification), [2] (a job title in Oakland, California), [3] (job description, apparently United States), [4] (profession, Ecuador), [5] (expert witness, Washington state (presumably)), [6] (profession, United States). Thryduulf (talk) 15:39, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Except for the first one (which again shows non-English usage), all of these cites give a good reason to delete this entry, since there is no consistent usage, nor an indication of a particular meaning. A book from 1911 that calls someone a "special psychologist" is not evidence that this is a term that refers specifically to clinical PhDs. Ditto that someone hired a "special psychologist" for a trial; the intented meaning appears to be "a particular kind of psychologist" without saying which kind. You can put the qualifier "special" in front of anything, that doesn't mean that this is a recognized term that has a fixed meaning in English. Hairhorn (talk) 15:55, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually the first use is English, it's the English translation of a Danish and Finnish term in exactly the same way that "prime minister" is the English translation of the Norwegian statsminister. Thryduulf (talk) 20:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Again, this is pretty unconvincing stuff, since "Prime Minister" is a well established term in English, unlike "special psychologist" which is just a word-for-word translation of a non-English term. Hairhorn (talk) 01:02, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Candidates for Speedy Deletion[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 clear consensus for keep non-admin closure. Safiel (talk) 20:08, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Cross namespace redirect. ANDROS1337TALK 00:52, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This is a well used redirect (100-220 hits/month) and so is evidently very useful. There is a low risk of confusion with an actual article, as it's very unlikely that one would ever be written at this title. Speedy deletion can be the first interaction a new user has with the project side of Wikipedia and it's stressful and bitey enough as it is without making it harder for new users to find. Being a cross-namespace redirect is not, in itself, a reason for deletion, just one indication that it might be confusing or harmful. Redirects from article space to category space are not normally at all harmful, given that categories are reader-facing; and while this is a project category rather than a content category, it is one of a limited number of project categories where making it easy for people to find outweighs the chance of confusion. Note also a previous discussion of this redirect - Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 December 9#Candidates_for_Speedy_Deletion → Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 03:22, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep particularly per Thryduulf's thoughtful analysis. Bridgeplayer (talk) 22:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thrydoulf's reasoning. Safiel (talk) 18:25, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I find it helpful. James500 (talk) 10:04, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2011_August_5&oldid=1072731357"