Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 May 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 27[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 27, 2012

Stephen Preston (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 Keep. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 18:20, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

delete. Unneeded redir. It was deleted under WP:CSD R3 criteria but restored per WP:INTDAB. This appears to be a flawed rationale since WP:INTDAB does not require a dab page of this type to exist. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:12, 27 May 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.

Day Press News[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. A redlink is seen as preferable in this case. Thryduulf (talk) 20:18, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. We can't create redirects for media outlets (Day Pres News or DP News is a Syrian news website) that don't have their own article to the generic media of country articles. Just as we cannot redirect bands without articles to music in country articles. __meco (talk) 15:58, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • No interest. The redirect was created because it was included in a footnote/reference. 'Day Press News' gives no clue as to its location or ownership or reliability or anything else, so an article was clearly needed to establish some basic information about the source. The red links in Media of Syria were intended to show articles needed. That is the usual way to express that situation, or at least it was. With so much going on in Syria, it seemed highly likely that someone, Syrian or otherwise, would soon create an article for this news source and others. Obviously no one could be bothered, so it seems Syrians aren't interested in their own news sources. I would have thought they'd want the wider world to know which news sources are which, government vs. private, etc., but it seems they don't care. So be it. 184.78.81.245 (talk) 16:45, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Methinks that they Syrians are a little bit too busy dodging bullets to write an encyclopedia entry in a language that they don't speak. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 02:41, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • ++1. benzband (talk) 16:50, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • The media source is in ENGLISH and is purportedly written by SYRIANS. So you really believe no Syrians know English? Or want support for their revolution from those whose primary language is English? Try not to be so condescending, parochial and insulting next time. 184.78.81.245 (talk) 06:17, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, redirect is inappropriate and in this case a redlink is better. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 01:43, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, a redirect from a non-notable or semi-notable topic to a more notable parent topic is entirely appropriate. Many such redirects exist. I am inclined to agree with Dondegroovily, however, that a redlink may be better in this specific case. The notability of this company is unproven. A redlink will give interested editors a better shot at proving or disproving the point. Rossami (talk) 22:12, 31 May 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.

Beaver, Kansas[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 converted to a (stub) article. If the nominator or anyone else still wants this deleted it can be nominated at AfD in the usual manner. Thryduulf (talk) 20:20, 8 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete Beaver, Kansas, because the unincorporated community is not the township. It should either be an article about the unincorporated community or deleted, otherwise we don't see it as a red link for articles that need to be created. Thanks in advance. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 19:13, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing, I ask for a simple request to "knock down a road sign", and the response is "go back and build a road". • Sbmeirow • Talk • 12:54, 28 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Stub is made. That wasn't so hard, was it? Add to it at your leisure.D O N D E groovily Talk to me 01:46, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Stub articles are one step above worthless, thus is why I don't do them. My view is either do them right or they should be red-linked, thus is why I asked for it to be deleted. • Sbmeirow • Talk • 14:55, 29 May 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_May_27&oldid=1091632730"