Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 December 29

December 29[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 29, 2011

Ardalambion[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. Ruslik_Zero 12:32, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ardalambion → Languages constructed by J. R. R. Tolkien (links to redirect • history • stats) [ Closure: keep/delete ]

Delete as simply confusing: I can't see any reference to this at the target or the perhaps more relevant Elvish languages (Middle-earth). JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 14:51, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, as it seems to be harmless, is here for a long time and has a hit count above the noise level. It would be confusing if there was something about this site elsewhere, but there is nothing. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 18:04, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or otherwise fix per nom. A redirect should lead to content relevant to the title of the redirect. Otherwise the redirect is pointless and confusing. This one should not be maintained in its current form. Its target used to be the article at Languages of Arda before that article was moved to what is now this redirect's target (Languages constructed by J. R. R. Tolkien); it may be that Languages of Arda had relevant content, but Languages constructed by J. R. R. Tolkien does not. --Tkynerd (talk) 19:15, 7 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is confusing so it cant serve any purpose. Tom Pippens (talk) 19:45, 17 January 2012 (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.

Indian neoconservatism[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. Ruslik_Zero 12:35, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Indian neoconservatism → Hindutva (links to redirect • history • stats) [ Closure: keep/delete ]

Misleading redirect. I'm not aware of any reliable sources which describe Hindutva as 'neoconservatism'; they seem to be entirely separate ideologies. Hindutva is considerably different from what neoconservatism means in the West, so this redirect is more likely to be confusing than helpful. Robofish (talk) 13:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as redirect from POV. I didn't find the source of traffic, but it is pretty high for a that recent redirect. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 18:16, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete information that disagrees with Robofish not easy to come by. Tom Pippens (talk) 20:02, 17 January 2012 (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.

Night flower[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. Ruslik_Zero 14:58, 8 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Night flower → Chad Mirkin (links to redirect • history • stats) [ Closure: keep/delete ]

deletion - reasons : no known connection with the target, probably a bot-mishap (user:Xqbot), maybe the redirect could even be seen as offensive?. The previous (original) target Merkin had the relevant part for the redirect removed from the target article (for being unsourced) on December 12 2007, so just reverting the redirect seems not a good solution to me. In case I did all this here totally wrong, then please tell me so. Thanks. Pardon my German (Fiiiisch!) (talk) 17:42, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as the term is to general to have a good target (there are also some flowers with the night time activities) and too unimportant for a DAB. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 18:22, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now, there is a Night-flowering Jasmine and a Night-flowering catchfly but I don't think they're good targets--Lenticel ^(talk) 01:36, 2 January 2012 (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.

Dabnube Swabian[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. Ruslik_Zero 14:51, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dabnube Swabian → Danube Swabians (links to redirect • history • stats) [ Closure: keep/delete ]

Please delete. This seems to be an unnecessary redirect to accommodate an unlikely typo ("Dabnube" does not redirect to "Danube"). It was used only once, on Yugoslav Front, and it isn't anymore. – Miranche^T C 23:25, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: we don't delete redirects from typos. I would propose to reopen this request in February, when the clean usage stats could show whether this typo is plausible. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 10:22, 1 January 2012 (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.