Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 August 23

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 23[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 23, 2012

Ocean Bottom Seismic (OBS)[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 No consensus to delete. Tikiwont (talk) 19:32, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect was created after Ocean Bottom Seismic (OBS) was deleted as a copyright violation. However, the title of this page is simply a brand plus an acronym... which seems like on of the most unlikely things to be typed into the search box. This page seems to just be sitting here as cruft, left over after a CSD. Theopolisme :) 22:16, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - plausible search term, no value in deleting the redirect. WilyD 05:13, 24 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.

Castilleja arvensis[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) 20:28, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; we appear to ahve no article about this species, and the redirect target is a disambiguation page that lists a number of other species that have this name, but not this species, so it is a dead-end for readers. R'n'B (call me Russ) 17:36, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete red link to encourage article creation, Tideflat (talk) 01:44, 24 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.

ECDL Foundation 2[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) 20:30, 4 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The result of a page-move error. Doesn't seem a likely search term, and we also have ECDL Foundation. — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 09:48, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, implausible search term. Siuenti (talk) 10:35, 24 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.

Д. Ловато[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. Going over the discussion here as well as the others currently listed, there is still consensus to not have these redirects, also referred to as WP:RFD#DELETE criterion 8, unless there are compelling reasons related to the subject of the article itself, and not just where this subject it is of interest to speakers of other languages.Tikiwont (talk) 19:28, 22 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this recently created redirect. It is in a foreign language not directly related to the subject. All arguments at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 September 30 § ເຊລີນ້າ ໂກເມຊ apply here. Gorobay (talk) 07:11, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Unless she knows one or more languages written in Cyrillic, I don't think about that redirect. Unlike "Қара киімділер 3" and "Люди в чёрном 3", this is sometimes acceptable. --Daniyar Mukharbatanov (talk) 00:10, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Those should also be deleted, since MIB3 is an American film. -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 04:32, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete nothing to do with her Mexican, Irish, Italian, and English roots. WP:NOTDICT, Wikipedia is not a translation dictionary. -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 04:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep aids user navigation, and deletion presents no value. Why make Wikipedia less usable for no benefit? WilyD 05:15, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There is the outcome from a similar RFD last year which was to delete this kind of redirect, where the language in question was not closely related to the topic at hand. -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 09:06, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Non-English redirects are harmful, and these redirects are not a convincing exception. See WP:RFD#DELETE #8. BigNate37(T) 09:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • This user essay does not make the case that non-English redirects are harmful. It fundamentally boils down to "I'd rather not be bothered to consider the needs to readers from whom English is a second language". WilyD 09:38, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • He also linked to Redirects for deletion page which says "In particular, redirects from a foreign language title to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (should be deleted)" Ego White Tray (talk) 12:37, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment—The same people are having the same discussion in three different places, making the same points each time. Why not argue in one place and reach a single consensus? Gorobay (talk) 17:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

A good question. I can see three possible logical ways forward:
  • merging two of the three discussions into one of the existing ones - the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 August 24#Justin Bieber seems the most developed, so would seem to me to be the logical target if this option is chosen.
  • merging all three into one new RfD on today's (or realistically now tomorrow's) page
  • closing all three discussions as no consensus pending an advertised centralised discussion - WT:FORRED would seem a logical place to host this as we would be basically revisiting the 2008 discussion there to see whether the consensus arrived at then still holds.
I think that the last option is probably the most likely to arrive at a definitive consensus but I'm open to other opinions. Thryduulf (talk) 18:48, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer the latter, but any of the three is acceptable. I had assumed that choice #1 would be what we defaulted to (and I had considered adding a disclaimer to the other discussions mentioning that the closer ought to consider the merits discussed at the Justin Bieber discussion). BigNate37(T) 21:13, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, option 1 is what most often happens, particularly when all the discussions are on the same day but I've seen option 2 done too - it's useful if the discussions are parallel rather than identical. Option 3 occurs least frequently of course, but I think that in this case it's worth definitively confirming or overturning the now 4-year old consensus. Thryduulf (talk) 21:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are now three additional nominations with this reason - Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 August 25#دەمىي لوۆاتو, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 August 25#Lady Gaga and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 August 25#Call of Duty. I would recommend we decide quickly what to do about all these parallel discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 09:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I found those nominations somewhat pointy, frankly. What if we closed those discussions for now, and listed the foreign redirects on a subpage somewhere to be dealt with in due course? BigNate37(T) 15:43, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • If there are no objections within 24 hours of this timestamp I will start the discussion at WT:FORRED proposed above and advertise it as a centralised discussion. Once that discussion is open, I will close all the open discussions about foreign language as "procedurally closed pending the outcome of the <link>centralised discussion regarding redirects from foreign languages</link>" (unless someone suggests better wording).
      I suggest the following procedure be used. I will create a list of all the affected discussions at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Redirects from foreign languages/2012 holding cell, to which can also be added any other redirects that people become aware of during the course of the discussion that they would otherwise nominate. Every user who has commented in one of the affected discussions should be explicitly invited to contribute to the centralised discussion. If any foreign language redirects are nominated, any editor can procedurally close the specific discussion giving a link to the centralised discussion and adding the nominated redirect to the holding cell. All discussions procedurally closed will have the {{old rfd}} template added to their talk page to note the procedural close. When the centralised discussion is concluded the redirects in the holding cell may be nominated in appropriate single or logical group nominations (with the latter preferred), with redirects being removed from the holding cell when nominated. If there are a large number in the holding cell it may be better for nominations to be spread over more than one day; in addition to the redirect creator the initiator of the procedurally closed discussion should be notified if that redirect is renominated (although this need only be done for one redirect in the case of group nominations). If 7 days after the close of the centralised discussion any redirects remain in the holiding cell it will be presumed, without prejudice to future discussion, that nobody wishes them deleted at the present time and the holding cell will be emptied and closed without them being nominated.
      For all instances of "I will" in the above two paragraphs, these actions can also be completed by someone who is not me - I just can't think of a concise way of saying that! Thryduulf (talk) 17:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Beyond this, I suggest that people stop creating contentious redirects until we reach a consensus. Gorobay (talk) 18:12, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • Absolutely! Would it be wise to go as far as saying "Creating new redirects from foreign languages is strongly discouraged until this [the centralised] discussion reaches consensus. Editors who persist in doing so may be blocked for disruptive editing."? Thryduulf (talk) 20:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yes, let's establish an armistice for the deletion and creation of non-English redirects, for the duration of talks. There may be obvious cases which could be dealt with without a greater consensus, but there is WP:NORUSH. Putting everything else on pause while we systematically prioritize and address the situation will make things easier and keep tensions low. BigNate37(T) 22:17, 25 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment/Keep This is an unfortunate discussion. We want to keep them per Dru of Id at section "Justin Bieber". --Jadambyn Byamakov (talk) 21:16, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • — Jadambyn Byamakov (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Thryduulf (talk) 10:23, 1 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why don't we keep them on the Kazakh Wikipedia instead of the English Wikipedia? Why keep them on the English Wikipedia? If those articles don't exist at language X wikipedia, we could designate that the Kazakh Wikipedia host the redirects instead. (or some other language) Why do you choose the English Wikipedia? -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 03:57, 2 September 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_23&oldid=1138578090"