Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 January 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 20[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 20, 2012

Oops, sorry, page unavailable[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 16:13, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect NYKevin @878, i.e. 20:04, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as an impractical synonym.--Lenticel (talk) 13:11, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep When I saw this on WP:DAFT it seemed like the best target would be the article on the 404 error because the 404 error is also known as "page not found." User:Davidfreesefan23 (talk) 17:24, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • But wouldn't a 5xx error be more appropriate? In any case, who would search for this? Look at the statistics. --NYKevin @059, i.e. 00:25, 26 January 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.

Free tv[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 all. Ruslik_Zero 16:03, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all (or redirect someplace else if relevant). Completely implausible. — Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 14:34, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all of them. They are merely promotional. Peacock (talk) 18:41, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete as unambiguous advertising or promotion. Lmatt (talk) 20:12, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as advert.--Lenticel (talk) 06:24, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete: CSD#G11. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:45, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete "Free TV" is broadcast TV, OTA TV, as opposed to "pay TV" and cable/satellite. 70.24.251.194 (talk) 09:08, 25 January 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.

chem table information[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 both. Ruslik_Zero 16:05, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete XNR, the target is not an article-type page, instead it is an instruction page about Wikipedia formatting. 76.65.128.132 (talk) 05:36, 20 January 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.

Duchy of Moravia[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 Margraviate of Moravia. Ruslik_Zero 16:10, 1 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I did not change redirect to proper article Margraviate of Moravia because it is useless. This redirect should be deleted. Moravia never was a duchy. Iaroslavvs (talk) 01:53, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- While not correct, it does get used, and is therefore a valid search term. Online include Regents of Moravia, Austrian Landwehr Infantry of the Napoleonic Wars, 1809–1814, A Differerent Kingdom of Italy, & Family Names and German Towns of Origin. Likely to be instances offline, and who knows where the user is coming from? These are by no means reliable sources, but aren't these sufficient to keep a harmless redirect? Dru of Id (talk) 02:17, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Well, is this debate about harmlessness or about correctness of information? I see no reason why here, in encyclopaedia, somehow to "give legitimacy" to incorrect term (and mentioned resources are simply false in this case) through redirect. The purpose of redirection is to enable to a reader find an article with proper and most common name also via less common and/or related (but correct!) names which he/she to entry into search engine.
Just for comparison, when we are talking about Czech area: Moravian twin, Bohemia, has about 5,800 hits for the term "Empire of Bohemia" – but it is certainly no reason to create redirect article Empire of Bohemia here. Bohemia was the Duchy and later Kingdom, but never Empire in the full sense of the word (like, for example, Holy Roman Empire or Russian Empire). --Iaroslavvs (talk) 03:36, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You have cited none of the clear reasons given above for deletion. I have cited none of the clear reasons given above for keeping, which is why I did not !vote keep. While I have never heard of 'Empire of Bohemia', I have shown where 'Duchy of Moravia' is, admittedly mistakenly, used online. I presume it may also be misused offline. Dru of Id (talk) 08:11, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget as suggested Redirects do not need to be correct. They need only be useful. --NYKevin @881, i.e. 20:08, 20 January 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_January_20&oldid=1145774668"