Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 August 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 2[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 2, 2012

Emperor of Wikipedia[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 BJAODN. Chaser (talk) 02:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This should be deleted because its not something anyone would ever search for. Would anyone possible ever search for "emperor of Wikipedia" when looking for Jimbo Wales? Dream Focus 13:16, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, Wikipedia is not a monarchy. —Kusma (t·c) 19:27, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not a useful redirect. Ambiguous Furry Rocking Thing (talk) 04:51, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - titles like the "boss" are reserved for the community's internal use only.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:55, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to WP:God Emperor of Dune
  • Delete – No basis in fact. Senator2029 • talk 10:02, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Per Jimbo Wales, "Although his formal designation is board member and chairman emeritus of the Wikimedia Foundation, Wales' social capital within the Wikipedia community has accorded him a status that has been characterized as benevolent dictator, constitutional monarch and spiritual leader."108.18.174.123 (talk) 11:54, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep...the spice flowing. Viriditas (talk) 12:11, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete In a blizzard. It is, at best, a joke, but not one which is likely to be appreciated by more than the creator and his friends. Collect (talk) 12:12, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Social capital or no, this isn't a common title for the subject and does not appear in the article. If/when it gets added to the article as a relevant, sourced piece of information, then this would be appropriate. BigNate37(T) 15:31, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Jokes shouldn't affect article space. IRWolfie- (talk) 15:37, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe that while Jimbo may still wear the robes and crown at home, it has become generally recognized that he's on vacation from Emperor-ing, and as such, it would reduce security costs if fewer in the general public knew about his status as Emperor. There are spies (henchmen of M.O.P.) and subversives everywhere who 'ignore all rules', and such vagabonds deserve no help from us who are still loyal to the His Editingness. Delete the page, or move it out of article space into the Wikipedia space. -- Avanu (talk) 15:46, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP CALM AND CARRY ON. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:57, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As Jimbo is known as Wikipedia's God-King, this is a very plausible redirect. --Allen3 talk 19:47, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as setting aside politics and dealing with the simple procedural reason, that we don't link across spaces this way. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 20:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not a cross namespace redirect, which would make it {{db-r2}}-bait :/ Br'er Rabbit (talk) 20:41, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and DAFTify, what the heck? StringTheory11 23:00, 4 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I'm sure Jimbo himself rejects the idea of himself as emperor, and if he doesn't, he's completely missing the point of his own creation and we'd be better off without him. Ego White Tray (talk) 07:26, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Delete This kind of humor doesn't belong to mainspace. 221.203.139.100 (talk) 14:46, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I prefer benevolent despot ;) --Lenticel (talk) 00:16, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Invalid. Proper noun without any reliable sources. John Vandenberg (chat) 08:08, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Mainspace is not the place for inside jokes.--Cube lurker (talk) 11:59, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Let BE be the finale of seem. The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream. benzband (talk) 13:57, 7 August 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:IWONTHEARYOU[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 deleted by JohnCD (talk · contribs). If anyone does want this to continue, discuss undeletion with JohnCD and renominate it (including a link to that and this discussion) if appropriate. Thryduulf (talk) 07:59, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Previously discussed here. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 05:59, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Deletion. I am baffled by this. I created this redirect, someone wrote that it was too confrontational/insulting, I agreed, I marked it with {{db-g7|rationale=Too confrontational}} (Author requests deletion[1]), and deletion was denied.[2] It seems to me that it should have been a WP:SNOW deletion. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:31, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Deletion. I disagree that this is too confrontational - it is mildly confrontational, on the order of "refusal to hear". In fact, it might be too mild. I've experienced a major project logjam IRL which was only broken when the sole progress-blocker was finally publicly, calmly, challenged with "You are merely refusing to understand. Please make an effort. We're not asking you to agree, just listen, all the way through. Once." I'm a believer in firm, but calm, and non-abusive, confrontation, when appropriate. IMHO "You choose not to hear" as expressed in IWONTHEARYOU is non-abusive, and helpful in some circmstances. We should not always choose the too-meek approach. However, if it's deleted, I won't go so far as to reinstate. --Lexein (talk) 08:05, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Lots of times a redirect sounds good at first, but upon reflection we decide it isn't neutral enough or sends the wrong message, so since the creator of the redirect wants it deleted, it should be pretty obvious. Too many redirects add less clarity anyway. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:56, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Aw, we should keep one of these, if only to stave off WP:NYAHNYAH --Lexein (talk) 14:55, 2 August 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:IWON'THEARYOU[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 deleted by JohnCD (talk · contribs). Thryduulf (talk) 21:41, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Previously discussed here. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 05:59, 2 August 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:IWON'TLISTEN[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 deleted by JohnCD (talk · contribs). Thryduulf (talk) 21:42, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Previously discussed here]. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 05:57, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Deletion. I am baffled by this. I created this redirect, someone wrote that it was too confrontational/insulting, I agreed, I marked it with {{db-g7|rationale=Too confrontational}} (Author requests deletion[3]), and deletion was denied.[4] It seems to me that it should have been a WP:SNOW deletion. --Guy Macon (talk) 07:31, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per above. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:57, 2 August 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.

(TV channel)[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. Tikiwont (talk) 13:33, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unless there is some connection between this title and Comedy Central that I am unaware of, this is an unlikely redirect. Jojalozzo 03:28, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete wholly inappropriate target. It would make more sense for TV channel to be the target. But this is an unlikely title. -- 76.65.131.160 (talk) 05:25, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to TV channel Television channel, this has existed uncontroversially since 2007 and was visited over 70 times last month so there is no reason for deletion but the target doesn't seem logical. Thryduulf (talk) 21:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think you mean Television channel. That seems fine, though I wonder how many of the 70 visits were people following links, to figure out why it exists. Jojalozzo 22:52, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • We should be so lucky as to have 70 people every month systematically investigating redirects! BigNate37(T) 04:46, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • The background noise of bots and those curious about redirects is on the order of 3-4 hits/month at most. Even many far more obviously useful redirects get less than 10 hits/month. The stats show this to be a well-used redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 08:05, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Inappropriate. Television channel would be better, but, just delete, because who will use parentheses in a search. TBrandley 15:58, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Redirect makes no sense whatsoever to either Comedy Central or the television channel article because of the parentheses. Nate • (chatter) 04:40, 30 August 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.

David Hallett[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. Considered sufficiently plausible as misspelling for now and can be expanded or disambiguated at any time. Tikiwont (talk) 13:46, 2 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion: An unnecessary redirect of a valid name (and potential article) to a relatively obscure misspelling of another name DavidH (talk) 00:12, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as implausible redirect and to encourage potential article.--Lenticel (talk) 00:33, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - All existing article space links to it are intended for other targets. Probably should be a dab page. Jojalozzo 03:32, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep A plausible misspelling, and this is the only person of this type of name who has an article. I fixed the links on the other pages to point to redlinks, so problem solved. Ego White Tray (talk) 04:06, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. A one-letter-off typo is always plausible. As far as incorrect linking goes, that is exactly why WP:REDNOT states "Red links to personal names should be avoided..." When you see names red linked or pointing at the wrong person please fix it, but that's not a reason to delete this redirect here. BigNate37(T) 04:56, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I started a discussion about that red link topic at Wikipedia talk:Red link#Red links to names Ego White Tray (talk) 12:51, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. A typo is very plausible, and per BigNate37. Don't see why the page should be deleted. TBrandley 16:00, 10 August 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2012_August_2&oldid=1138578081"