Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 December 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 10[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 10, 2012

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The result of the discussion was nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:39, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Department of Physical Education[edit]

deletion: unused redirect, appears to be a typo Buffs (talk) 17:17, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This is surprisingly well used for a redirect with mismatching parenthses, suggesting it's linked from somewhere. I've marked it as a {{R from typo}} which marks it as unprintworthy, so keeping it wont harm anything. Thryduulf (talk) 19:56, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, I see your point there. Hadn't thought of that. I suppose there's no harm in keeping it. Buffs (talk) 21:54, 10 December 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.

Metro Manila's Central Business District[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 (non-admin closure). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:18, 17 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Obscure. Very long. Looks more like a search term rather than an actual article title. Unlikely to be used. Xeltran (talk) 16:20, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. None of those are reasons to delete a redirect and the stats show that it is used at least 8 times every month, sometimes many more (53 hits in July for example). Redirects exist to enable people to find the articles they are looking for, and this does exactly that. Thryduulf (talk) 16:46, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - plausible search term / link term, no rationale for deletion. WilyD 16:50, 11 December 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.

User:Nelly57m[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) 19:56, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest deleting a redirect on the grounds it is cross namespace Susfele (talk) 15:59, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Being a cross-namespace redirect is not a reason in and of itself to delete a redirect, however redirects from user pages to article namespace redirects are extremely rarely useful, other than for a few days following a userspace draft being moved into the main namespace when complete. This draft was complete back in April so any usfulness is now outweighed by the likely confusion. Thryduulf (talk) 16:52, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as promotional, though that doesn't mean that was the user's intent. I don't want to be shown this article whenever I come across Nelly57m and want to know more about him or her. --BDD (talk) 00:24, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Close this already I think this can be closed as delete now. I'd do it myself but I'm not an administrator. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 07:42, 18 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've left a request at WP:AN/RFC for an admin to clear the backlog. I've done all I can but I obviously can't close the discussions I've taken part in. Thryduulf (talk) 21:57, 24 December 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:Derivative works[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 Retarget to Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright#Derivative works. Once again Thryduulf works his retargeting magic. — This, that, and the other (talk) 00:10, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The target page contains no information about derivative works on Wikipedia. If there is no better target at which to point this redirect, I think this should be redlinked until there is something to say about our policies, etc. on derivative works. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:13, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright#Derivative works. That took some finding, but it is the only place I've located where derivative works are actually explained. The phrase is used a lot in file deletion discussions so we really need this title to exist. Thryduulf (talk) 13:12, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well done on finding that! I had a look but couldn't find anything useful. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:04, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Thryduulf. Weihang7 (talk) 02:30, 11 December 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.

NCOP[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. Independent of whether YellowPegasus (talk · contribs) is a sock of any other user or not, consensus is cleat that this redirect should be deleed. Thryduulf (talk) 02:20, 20 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete recently created redirects for a template that was moved from WP:AFC into live action on 8 December (any history prior to 8 December was in new page sandbox at AFC, so was not live). "NCOP" is incredibly opaque, and on the internet it seems to mean "no credit roll opening TV sequence". As for "No content on page", it's a novel redirect to a speedy deletion template, which should not be used. --

70.24.247.127 (talk) 02:22, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete a bit misleading by its name and seems to be an answer to a question no one asked. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 02:39, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the redirect was only created after I listed the template at TFD. As Dennis says it's an answer to a question that doesn't exist (like several other templates created by the same person). NtheP (talk) 11:46, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • YellowPegasus has been blocked for evading a block -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 23:54, 15 December 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.

Skycity (disambiguation)[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. Thryduulf (talk) 14:11, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the article redirect.Following the recent move, it has become quite a redundant page. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 16:15, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as an extremely likely search term, given that the disambiguation page it targets covers multiple articles named "Skycity" and "SkyCity" and that it was the disambiguation for over 2½ years. Thryduulf (talk) 16:59, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • The fact that its disambiguation page for 2.5 years is irrelevant to the discussion. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:12, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • No it's entirely relevant - because it was the location of the disambiguation page for so long it is very likely that people will continue to look for it there due to old incoming links, bookmarks, memories, etc. This is in addition to it also being a likely search term independent of its history, due to multiple things known as "Skycity" and people looking here for things called "Sky City". Thryduulf (talk) 18:15, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per Thryduulf; note that the first sentence of the target page begins with "Skycity or Sky City may refer to:", so it seems pretty obvious that it is the correct target. The proposer may possibly be confused by the difference between an article and a redirect. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 18:52, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: reduces the chance of someone creating a part-duplicate dab page in the future. PamD 13:48, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure if there is a communication gap or something, but I intend to delete only Skycity (disambiguation) and not Skycity, Sky City or Sky city or Sky City (disambiguation). The search terms likely to come up are already covered in the above 4 examples. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 14:12, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • No communication gap, we just believe that all five titles are likely search terms and likely targets for incomming links for the reasons given. Thryduulf (talk) 18:11, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Alright. I just came to know that redirects are usually not deleted unless absolutely required. [I was previously under the impression that they are used only when necessary]. Seeing that, and the community consensus, I Withdraw my nomination. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:47, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - plausible search term / link term, likely to be externally linked, no rationale for deletion. WilyD 16:49, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination withdrawn. TheOriginalSoni (talk) 12:47, 12 December 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_December_10&oldid=1083556163"