Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 December 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 26[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 26, 2012

MTVish[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) 18:00, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Recently created by a vandal, no evident purpose, relevance or encyclopedic value. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:32, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination... it is a meaningless term. Senator2029 “let's talk” 11:00, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, it's blatant vandalism, just another prank from a vandalism-only account. kashmiri 00:35, 30 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.

ß-1,3-glucan and others using es-zett for beta[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 all. Ruslik_Zero 18:29, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects should be deleted. They all use the German es-zett character for a Greek beta. They aren't plausible typos, they are just wrong  Randall Bart   Talk  21:15, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - plausible search terms, no rationale for deletion. WilyD 09:24, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. ß is a lot easier to type on most non-Greek keyboards than β so these redirects are highly useful. Thryduulf (talk) 10:20, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all This is English wikipedia, we are not the German one. Β/β should be the character used, and "ß" is not typable on any English keyboard, nor would the HTML coding for it be known, unlike the one for the Greek letter. These redirects are just plain wrong, and unlike Beta redirects to German articles, are not expected from English-language audiences, since unlike Beta, Eszett is not taught in schools for English, whereas Beta is taught in math and science classes. -- 65.92.180.225 (talk) 23:46, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, but almost all your assumptions are incorrect: ß is typeable on my English keyboard by AltGr+s or by compose followed by ss, on Windows systems it's also available by the use of Alt+0223. HTML coding is known and used by many people who may or may not also know the coding for β. Category:Redirects from misspellings is plenty of evidence that "just plain wrong" is not a reason to delete a redirect. Further, I did learn about ß in school (I did German to GCSE level) whereas I didn't learn about β in GCSE maths and I don't think I did in GCSE physics (but I'm not completely sure about the latter) - in any case I wasn't taught that the two are different characters (English and German use different sounds for the character "w" for example, so German and Greek using different sounds for the same character is equally plausible). Thryduulf (talk) 13:12, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can type Greek characters by Alt-numpad just as easily as I can type German characters that way. If Germans (with a direct ß key) might be in the lazy habit of using it as a β stand-in, then that's possible, but I don't believe anyone, German or not, is going to go to the trouble of Alt-numpadding the wrong character, especially not when it's only one character out of an alphabet. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:19, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete unless someone can put forward a credible (not WP:N/WP:V nonsense, but just at least not crazytalk) that there is some habit in Germany of using ß as a stand-in for β. I find this as dubious for Germany as I do for England – would German typists really do this for a single letter, when it offers no help for gaining an α or a ɣ? Andy Dingley (talk) 13:14, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Verifiable usage figures for these redirects in November 2012 (ie not distorted by the RfD listing) are, respectively 60 44 7 4 672 10 10 427 6 7 6 15 5 4 8 11 7 5 8 and 4 hits. Background noise (bots, search engines, etc) is taken to be 2-3 hits/month so every single one of these is actually used by real people who would be inconvenienced. Whether they are from Germany or not is not possible to know. Thryduulf (talk) 13:30, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • OK then, keep, if we're seeing credible indications of human traffic. Andy Dingley (talk) 10:49, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, plausible misspelling. There are a lot of google hits for e.g. "ß-glucan" which shows it's used and means people may copy-paste into Wikipedia. Siuenti (talk) 13:25, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Purpose of redirects is not to correct typos - else we would have to create redirects for every misspelled word. As to the hit numbers, I'd bet this is because of incorrect backlinks in most cases. kashmiri 00:48, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • One of the purposes of redirects is to correct common typos - see Category:Redirects from misspellings. Incorrect backlinks is a good reason to keep as it shows that the ß spelling, although incorrect, is used - the redirect then educates readers to the correct form while taking them to the information they're looking for, rather than implying we don't have an article. Thryduulf (talk) 10:12, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Backlinks corrected. Stats should no longer show additional traffic apart from those who click on the links above (esp. in case of "ß-Methylphenethylamine" and "ß-Phenylmethamphetamine" where hits most likely resulted from ess-zett being wrongly placed in the "Phenethylamines" template). As to searching for ß/β-terms, already Google employs correction. kashmiri 19:40, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Wait for the new usage statistics, then. Since I fixed the few backlinks 10 days ago, the usage should decrease significantly. If it does not, I will support keeping. Else, delete. kashmiri 12:32, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all. These appear to be plausible search terms that have a clear target. The issue at hand is not whether the redirect is wrong, but whether it is plausible. The hits show that it is plausible (and used). In addition, the german letter may be easier to produce on some keyboards than the greek one. Tazerdadog (talk) 03:02, 14 January 2013 (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:NS14[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. Ruslik_Zero 18:15, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, if I had to guess this redirect is based on the idea that the category namespace is officially designated as the fourteenth namespace. However, this redirect goes to a page describing that namespace, which is actually in Wikipedia space, or I suppose we could call it "NS4". The point is that this redirect appears to be pretty much unused and unhelpful. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:34, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

After writing that I thought to see if WP:NS4 existed. I have to leave for work in a few moments but I anticpate this becoming a bundled nom for all "WP:NS#" redirects. It's not a identifying system that is actually being used in any meaningful way that Io can see. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:38, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both (and probably others as well) - the redirects go to the pages that explain the relevant namespace, so they are at the very least harmless and appear to get a little bit of usage. Thryduulf (talk) 10:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm. In five years of editing I had never seen namespaces identified this way until I ran across this redirect. Checking links it seems some are used more than others. WP:NS0 has piles of links which are mostly to uset talk pages. I am wondering if there is maybe a template that uses it. On the other hand WP:NS12 is basically unused. I dunno. Beeblebrox (talk) 04:29, 28 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    The namespaces are identified by number internally by MediaWiki software. NS0 is always the main namespace on a wiki and NS1 is always the Talk namespace (NSn+1 is always the talk for NSn), I think Project and Category namespaces might be the same on all MediaWiki installs too but I'm not certain. Template:Namespaces shows the namespaces in use on en.wp, wikt:Wiktionary:Namespaces#List of namespaces shows those on the English Wiktionary. There used to be (maybe still is) at least one interface page used by administrators that exposed the namespace numbers, but I can't remember what it is/was. I believe the namespace number is used in bot and/or template coding when knowing the namespace is required. Thryduulf (talk) 13:00, 28 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.

Kijong-dong[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 wrong venue, see Wikipedia:Requested moves. Thryduulf (talk) 10:24, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The letter ŏ is not used in article titles per WP:NC-KO#Place names. For example Pyongyang is correct, not P'yŏngyang. The page to be moved to this name Kijong-dong is Kijŏng-dong. See also: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kijong-dong. Sawol (talk) 09:53, 26 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry to pass you from pillar to post, but the folks at AfD were wrong to send you here. Per the instructions above, this is an issue for Wikipedia:Requested moves. Thryduulf (talk) 10:24, 26 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_26&oldid=1138578152"