Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 April 15

April 15[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 15, 2012

Committee for the Defense of the Republic[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. Thryduulf (talk) 11:50, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Committee for the Defense of the Republic → Coalition for the Defence of the Republic (links to redirect • history • stats) [ Closure: keep/delete ]

Delete. Nothing in the target article suggests that this short-live political party was ever known by this name. There was an entirely distinct Committee for the Defence of the Republic however that the redirect may lead to confusion with. TB (talk) 17:45, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weakish keep. The first three google hits for Committee for the Defence of the Republic relate to Rwanda and, if I'm not mistaken, refer to the Coalition for the Defence of the Republic. There've been other organisations with the same name, but unless one or more can be shown to be notable then this redirect seems appropriate (and if this is kept, Committee for the Defence of the Republic should be created with the same target). – hysteria18 (talk) 19:46, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep unless better target found as "committee" and "Coalition" are words easily confused in names of political parties. If there is another group with the name, then retarget. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 19:11, 16 April 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.

Wikipedia:TANGENT[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 that either the general case of redirects from the Wikipedia namespace to the User namespace, or this particular example are harmful or otherwise problematical. Thryduulf (talk) 11:53, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:TANGENT → User:Yukichigai/Avoid irrelevant information (links to redirect • history • stats) [ Closure: keep/delete ]

A redirect created in the Wikipedia namespace to lead to one user's personal page. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:47, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I thought only problem was redirects from mainspace to other areas of the project. I'm certain there are other redirects from the WP namespace to essays hosted in userspace. I don't know if it matters, but I created the redirect. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 16:06, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Info: We have 884 redirects from namespace 4 (Wikipedia) to namespace 2 (User). Probably to be avoided; in general moving content from userspace into Wikipedia:, if nothing else to keep clear what's communal vs personal. I've listed them at User:Largoplazo/WP Redirects in case you want to investigate. - TB (talk) 19:18, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I would like to see them all deleted per my comment below. They are not as bad as redirects from article namespace into user namespace but lets get rid of them. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:47, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. User namespace is a free for all (sort of) so it should not be linked from the more regimented Wikipedia namespace. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:47, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Alan, you should maybe consider your own user space essay (redirected from Wikipedia:COSTLYREDIR) before you tell us to delete other people's. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 19:14, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I did not create it. I have put it up for deletion. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 22:52, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is no problem with the general concept of a redirect from the Wikipedia space to the User space (or vice versa). Essays get moved in and out of the userspace all the time. Leaving redirects in place makes it easier to for people to follow conversations from before the move. Redirects can also, like this one, be used for shortcuts to popular essays. Individual redirects may be deletable if they are deceptive or harmful. I don't see a particular problem with this one. Rossami (talk) 04:00, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and seeing User in huge text at the top of the page will make it clear that this is a user, not Wikipedia essay. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 19:14, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Would a clause in Template:Essay to highlight the fact that a page is in user-space be apropos ? - TB (talk) 20:49, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - no problem with the redirect, and per above, it is good to leave it in place as a shortcut. "Pepper" @ 03:06, 18 April 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.

Wikipedia:HandGCOTM[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. Thryduulf (talk) 11:55, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:HandGCOTM → Wikipedia:WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening/COTM (links to redirect • history • stats) [ Closure: keep/delete ]

Proposing deletion of the shortcut Wikipedia:HandGCOTM, which links to Wikipedia:WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening/COTM, the WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening collaboration of the month. The abbreviation's lettering is rather vague regarding what the shortcut links to, and there are less ambiguous shortcuts already existent for the page: WP:HORTCOTM and WP:HGCOTM. Northamerica1000^(talk) 13:15, 15 April 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.

Pope John Paul III[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. JohnCD (talk) 12:44, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Pope John Paul III → Antipope (links to redirect • history • stats) [ Closure: keep/delete ]

No such antipope, as far as I can tell. Soooooo tempted to IAR speedy delete but thought best to play it straight. Bencherlite ^Talk 11:39, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. I found the following possible sources:
1. This Uncyclopedia hoax
2. This NationStates fiction
3. This garage band
4. This rant against the legitimacy of John Paul II
None properly substantiate this redirect, though. Delete unless the redirect's creator can clear up the confusion. Rossami (talk) 13:22, 15 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as confusing redirect.--Lenticel ^(talk) 00:48, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as the article it directs to seems to have no content that refers to a Pope John Paul III. [1] is hardly a rant though: it is a long list of sourced quotations. Meowy 14:27, 16 April 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.