Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 May 16

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 16[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 16, 2011

Frying the coke[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. Lenticel (talk) 23:55, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating for deletion, on the grounds that the article it now points to does not mention the phrase and does not represent the same concept either. While it is true that "jumping the shark" provided the inspiration for the phrase "frying the coke", frying the coke is a non-notable neologism limited to the Nostalgia Critic fan community that refers to a particularly awesome death scene, not significant enough even for a brief mention in the "jumping the shark" article. Dcoetzee 23:03, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sandor Ziherman[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 is no consensus to delete and the Ziherman appears to be a plausible misspelling. Ruslik_Zero 18:19, 20 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm doing this on behalf of User:Zzoli, who is a son of Sandor Zicherman. The original article had the name misspelled with a "c" missing in the last name. I moved the original article to the correct name and the user would like the redirect deleted. A search on the wrong name shows mostly Wikipedia links or Wikipedia derived links. The correct name has links all over the place Bgwhite (talk) 22:40, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. While we normally keep redirects created due to page moves, and redirects from misspellings often offer good targets for incomming searches, these need more than "does no harm" when there are objections from the subject. In this case the typo in the last name is not a mistake more likely than the missing of any other letter would be. Indeed, every use on the first three pages of a google uk search for "sandor ziherman" -wikipedia appears to be as a direct result of our error. In this situation then there is little benefit in our keeping the redirect, so I see no reason not to delete per the request. At the very least, this should be marked as a {{R from misspelling}} if kept. This is explicitly without prejudice one way or the other to any future similar requests, each one should be decided upon its individual merits. Thryduulf (talk) 23:55, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • What on earth. The person's name is Зихерман. "Ziherman" is not a misspelling. It is a valid transliteration, using -- there are various methods and I can't keep them all in my head, but a method that uses letter-for-letter rather than dipthong-for-letter replacement. Doing this has certain advantages, but we don't use that method, but it's not erroneous. We use the standard at WP:RUS, which actually gives "Zikherman" I think. At any rate, "Ziherman" is a quite reasonable result of transliterating Зихерман, so I would suggest that we keep the redirect. Herostratus (talk) 02:12, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    For what it's worth, "Zicherman" is not originally a Russian name. I strongly suspect that Зихерман is actually just a transliteration of a Latin spelling, not the other way around. Jafeluv (talk) 13:53, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Herostratus —Alison (Crazytales) (talk) 19:19, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • While it may be a reasonable transliteration, there is absolutely no evidence that anyone does or has transliterated it this way. Someone who sees the Cyrillic spelling can search on that, those that see a transliteration will search on that - but it wont be this one as they wont see it. Thryduulf (talk) 06:50, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not sure if I get a vote as I brought this on the behalf of another person. Thanks to Shakespeare, my first and middle name has been anglicized to Owen Glendower. Thankfully, my Welsh grandparent's name was the correct form of Owain Glyndŵr and thus is my name. But, look up the name in British books (example [1]) and you get the anglicized name. My wife's great-great-grandparents came from Ukraine and when they went thru Castle Garden, the immigration agents messed up their name. What I'm trying to say is that names do get messed up that aren't correct transliteration. As Wikipedia appears to be the only source for Sandor Zicherman's misspelled name, I hate for Wikipedia to become the Castle Garden or Ellis Island for his name. His name is Sandor Zicherman, only found outside of Wikipedia as Sandor Zicherman and Wikipedia shouldn't be the only source for any difference. Bgwhite (talk) 22:32, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • For what it's worth, as I noted above, "Zicherman" is simply wrong by Wikipedia rules, notwithstanding that some people named Зихерман may use other rules. Wikipedia's transliteration rules are at WP:RUS, and per those rules the person's name is Sandor Zikherman. I myself don't care enough one way or the other to change it, but technically the article title should be changed to Sandor Zikherman. Herostratus (talk) 02:52, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:RUS#People, if the person's preference of spelling of his/her name in English is known and can be documented, that spelling should be used. Therefore the name should probably be Sándor Zicherman, as given on his official website (and shown as predominant usage by Google). Sideways713 (talk) 09:33, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Glen Ford[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 Restore to Glenn Ford. Lenticel (talk) 23:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure exactly what should be done with this article, except that something should be done because the current redirect is absurd. The page was created in August 2007 as a redirect to Glenn Ford, the actor. It was changed in November 2007 to redirect to the Norfolk Four, a group of criminals, apparently on the basis that a detective in that case was named Robert Glenn Ford. The problem with this, however, is that there is another Glen Ford who people might be plausibly searching for - a left-wing journalist - and it seems rather prejudicial for his name to redirect to Norfolk Four. See his biography on his website and a Google search for glen ford journalist. A page could be made on him, except that there seem to be relatively scarce independent sources about him. If one could be made, I think that probably the best thing to do would be to put it at Glen Ford (journalist), and redirect Glen Ford to Glenn Ford, with a template at the top of the latter article. If he doesn't seem notable, though, redirecting this page to Glenn Ford might still be the best solution. Opus 113 (talk) 09:44, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Restore original target and tag as {{R from misspelling}}. The current target is not good unless the case is very strongly associated with the detective and the detective isn't significantly associated with any other case (notable or not), neither google nor the article make any case for either of these being true. If an article on the journalist is written at Glen Ford (journalist) then the Glenn Ford article should link to it in a hatnote; if the article is written at Glen Ford then hatnotes should be reciprocal. Thryduulf (talk) 10:14, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do what Thryduulf said above. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:35, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Run time (computing)[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 Withdrawn; I just hope editors don't add new links to it. Cybercobra (talk) 17:07, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Incomplete disambiguation (cf. Run time) which no longer has any extant mainspace/templatespace links. Cybercobra (talk) 05:04, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per {{R from incomplete disambiguation}} as these are typically very likely search targets in their own right, Additionally this was the location of the article until less than a week ago (we keep such redirects to maintain full attribution history and avoid link rot, including avoiding breaking links from external sites), when it was getting in excess of 7000 hits a month (and so will continue to be a very likely search result for some time to come). Thryduulf (talk) 10:06, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

2011 ice hockey world chamionship[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 --Taelus (talk) 10:57, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I understand rd 2011 ice hockey world championship, but why this typo redirect, chamionship? --Stryn(t) 12:26, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I hadn't actually spotted the missing p, but it is currently getting a massive amount of traffic - 407 views in April, 1392 in the first 15 days of May. If you've removed links to it from somewhere internal then wait a couple of weeks for people to catch up. Alternatively or additionally the traffic could be coming from an external link, so we should leave it in place to avoid link rot. I'd recommend tagging it as {{R from misspelling}} though, which will suppress it from the search dropdown as well as doing what it says on the tin. Thryduulf (talk) 21:59, 16 May 2011 (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/2011_May_16&oldid=1138577844"