Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 May 31

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 31[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 31, 2011

Windows Server 2012[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 18:36, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I can't think of a reason for which we should have this redirect. There is absolutely nothing about "Windows Server 2012" on Wikipedia, so why should we redirect people to nothing? Fleet Command (talk) 11:58, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There have been reports that the server version of Windows 8 will be named this.Jasper Deng (talk) 16:47, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Could you link to some of these reports.--76.66.185.169 (talk) 02:38, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Like [1].Jasper Deng (talk) 03:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Er... Reports? That, I am afraid, is completely besides the point. The section has no information whatsoever about "Windows Server 2012". So, there is no reason to have a redirect there. Besides, Wikipedia is not a tabloid that publishes rumors about "rumored editions" whose references are self-published sources. Fleet Command (talk) 09:46, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
It's likely that some one will come on here looking for it.Jasper Deng (talk) 14:58, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. That is why I nominated it for deletion: In presence of it, someone comes, thinks he has found a clue, wastes his time reading, finds nothing, leaves confused. In its absence, someone comes, finds nothing, leaves. Fleet Command (talk) 06:54, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to edit in WS2012 into Windows 8?Jasper Deng (talk) 02:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Jasper, in my opinion, the only factor that should be taken into consideration in keeping or deleting this redirect is the presence of information regarding Windows Server 2012 on Wikipedia. I say:
  • If there is no information on Windows Server 2012 on Wikipedia, delete this redirect.
  • If there are some information on Windows Server 2012 on Wikipedia that come from unreliable sources or are not referenced at all, then delete the redirect and the information.
  • If there are some information on Windows Server 2012 on Wikpedia that come from reliable sources, then keep.
That's all I have to say. Fleet Command (talk) 13:37, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Would editing it in solve the problem?Jasper Deng (talk) 22:43, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Only if the information is verified by reliable sources. Thryduulf (talk) 23:53, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Then we have to establish whether the source I provided is reliable or not.Jasper Deng (talk) 04:57, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you're talking about the one above, then no it isn't a reliable source. It's a blog that cites another blog - it is explicitly just an aggregator of "interesting links" be they rumour, speculation, press releases or commentary with no distinction between them. It cites one of the MSDN Blogs, a blogging site for Microsoft developers - see WP:Self-published sources for why blogs are not normally reliable sources. Indeed the cited blog explicitly states "The content of this site are my own personal opinions and are not intended to represent my employer’s view. These postings are provided “AS IS” with no warranties, and confer no rights.", which rules it out as a reliable source. Even if MSDN blogs are reliable (other ones might be), neither the explicitly cited blog nor any other contain the phrase "Windows Server 2012" so it's not verifiable. Thryduulf (talk) 10:40, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Guy McGough[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. Killiondude (talk) 17:32, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this page appears to have been created by mistake, since the author pasted the content on the target, changing the name. Google has 216 hits for the name "Guy McGough"; however, these appear to refer to a different person. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 09:33, 31 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Evan knappenberger[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. Killiondude (talk) 17:33, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

delete redirect until it is replaced with information pertinent to Evan knappenberger. Evan knappenberger is involved in several controversial activities in the Bellingham WA area. By redirecting "Evan knappenberger" to Iraq Veterans Against the War, readers are given incomplete and, therefore, misleading information. Dubyus (talk) 00:29, 31 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_31&oldid=616123127"