Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 October 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 10[edit]

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

Operation Niagara Falls[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The result of the discussion was Keep as withdrawn. Tikiwont (talk) 13:46, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find a mention within the article or online to back up the existence of this redirect, so I am creating this discussion to see if anyone else agrees with me. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 13:16, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The official Army History mentions it as a cover operation for Operation Ceder Falls, see (http://www.history.army.mil/books/Vietnam/90-7/ch2.htm ), Sadads (talk) 15:08, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Relisting comment: I nearly closed this as keep, but would feel happier with more input. Thryduulf (talk) 23:09, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 23:09, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw the nomination, due to Sadads' discovery. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:31, 14 October 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.

Template:Wpbio[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. Neither side presented any particularly compelling arguments for or against deletion, and I don't see and other valid reason to delete some or all of these, so there's really nowhere to go with this one. Swarm X 20:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion: No pages use 5 of the redirects. A few pages pages use three of the redirects. There are currently 15 redirects for Template:WikiProject Biography. This would remove 8 of them. Bgwhite (talk) 21:42, 10 October 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.

Zimdara[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. Swarm X 20:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Target article contains no information about the redirect's subject. (RFD#DELETE#10) SMS Talk 16:03, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Revert to article. It seems that this was redirected due to "markets are generally not notable", but the article claims that it is also a settlement. Settlements are inherently notable, so should not be deleted. There isn't much information out there, but redirecting a small village to one of the four provinces of Pakistan is never going to be useful. I've added Kumbar to this nomination as it's in exactly the same state, and I'll notify tarc (talk · contribs) of the discussion as they did the redirecting. Thryduulf (talk) 18:23, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Revert to what? There's nothing of substance to revert to, other than sub-standard, remedial English written by an obviously non-native speaker. The content of Zimdara was "Zimdara or Zemdara is a market and village located at Pukhtunhwa, Pakistan. The population is down but it is the main market of many villages" and the content of Kumbar was "Kumbar is a market located at Maidan in Lower Dir,Pukhtunhwa,Pakistan.Kumbar is the main market of many places.Many peoples came and vist Kumbar for shopping.The people of Kumbar speak Pashtu Language and follow Islam.". Utterly worthless. If there's a village by the same name, fine, just go remake it, but not by utilizing what's there now. Blow it up. Tarc (talk) 19:48, 10 October 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.

Israeli terrorism[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. Swarm X 20:08, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What should we do with this? Zionist political violence doesn't seem like a good target, that's primarily about Zionist terrorism in Mandatory Palestine, not "terrorism" by Israel or Israelis. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 09:17, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli terrorism can mean terrorism by Israel as well as terrorism in Israel.Greyshark09 (talk) 19:03, 17 November 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.

Redirects from proper names to lists of minor planets[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 without prejudice against better disambiguation and selective retargetting. If there are some that seem harmful but cannot be resolved with normal editing drop me a specific note with reference to this discussion. Some general hat note on the target lists, seems a good idea in any case. Tikiwont (talk) 15:29, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are thousands of redirects from proper names. I propose to delete them en masse (they are searchable anyway) and recreate a few necessary ones afterwards. Some planets, especially with lower numbers, have original names, but most are named after famous people, places, etc.

Criteria
  • Criterion 5 (Redirecting names of people, places, etc. to lists of asteroids is like redirecting apples to oranges. If the purpose of these redirects is to catch incoming links, then they surely don't catch many links to minor planets while catching quite a few to who or what the asteroids were named after.)
  • Criterion 10 (A big part of the redirects can be expanded into articles or disambiguation pages. To start with, it is true for all the last names. The target articles contain no information on the primary subject.)
  • Criterion 1 (If you enter one of these names in the search box, you are redirected to lists of asteroids.)

The lists are linked from here: List of minor planets#Index to lists of minor planets.

Example

Redirects to List of minor planets: 11001–12000

There are Mirstation, people's full names (Anatolefrance, Jerrylewis, Kimclijsters, Donjohnson), last names (Fukunaga, Uchikawa), geographic names (Ostravia, Velikij Ustyug), names and nicknames of universities (Baumanka, Migaic).

Most, if not all, of these redirects were created by a bot as redirects to articles about individual minor planets. I know that some of the names are probably original, but I can't determine which ones.

There are too many, I can't possibly list them all. --Moscow Connection (talk) 07:10, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep all without prejudice. If there are any individual ones that are harmful for any reason, should be retargetted, or deleted per WP:RED then nominate them individually. As a general class of redirects I don't see that there is a problem with them, e.g. Himuka is a minor planet. Thryduulf (talk) 10:11, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, "Himuka" is a good example. Cause "Himuka" is most certainly not an asteroid for most people. I searched the net and found it was another name for Hyuga Province. There are companies, a restaurant, a radio station, a mansion, at least 2 anime characters, Japanese people named "Himuka" or having the word in their name. In the Japanese Wikipedia, ひむか is a disambiguation page, which lists the province, the asteroid and a train. The redirect is harmful. --Moscow Connection (talk) 11:39, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the redirects are harmful. These are names of people and places that are not connected to the asteroids in any way. I personally get redirected to asteroids from the search box from time to time, and I find it annoying. There are thousands, I can't nominate them individually. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:31, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Last names can't be retargetted. Will someone sacrifice themselves to create disambiguation pages for all of them? I think they are better be deleted for now. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:42, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't expect people to vote "Delete All". But I pointed out a problem. --Moscow Connection (talk) 10:42, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Are the names like "Greenancy" a problem? It's not even "Nancy Gree"/"Nancy-gree"/"Nancygree" -- 70.24.247.66 (talk) 08:05, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I've found one original name in my example: Radiocommunicata. No articles link to it. This redirect is useful, but if it is deleted, the Wikipedia search will still find it. These redirects do much more harm than good. Maybe a bot can be programmed to delete the redirects that match any other Wikipedia article titles (with spaces in different positions, etc.). --Moscow Connection (talk) 14:47, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Mirstation looks original, since the station is called "Mir" not "Mir Station". -- 70.24.247.66 (talk) 08:02, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Not really. "Mir" is a common Russian word and won't work well as a search term. In English, I would probably search for "Mir space station". In Russian, for "Mir station". But I'm sure that there are more original names. Ksenborisova is an interesting case. It's short for "Ksenia Borisova". If she were famous, it would probably still be an original name, cause "Ksenia" is never shortened like that. (And it looks like she isn't.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 08:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Mir space station is a redirect to Mir. Mir station doesn't exist and has no incoming links, but has some hits: [2]. I think it's a useful redirect to Mir. --Moscow Connection (talk) 08:38, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep any that don't have articles on the subject the asteroid is named after. Retarget those whose namesakes have articles to those articles (ie. Jerrylewis would retarget to Jerry Lewis). Those articles should include a see also link or named for section that links back to the asteroid list. Retarget with hatnote those of variant spellings with articles which are not namesakes. Disambiguate those whose namesakes don't have articles for themselves but have sections in other articles. -- 70.24.247.66 (talk) 05:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was a bot action: Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/PotatoBot. I've informed the owner. Moscow Connection (talk) 06:06, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The bot made 5680 edits on April 19, 2010. (Link to Wikichecker, it will take a few minutes to process the request.) That's an estimate of how many redirects to asteroids there are. --Moscow Connection (talk) 09:44, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment from bot owner. The approval "discussion" is here. I don't see why criteria 5 (redir makes no sense) or 10 (redir could plausibly be expanded into an article) should apply. Of course, any last names about which we have articles should be turned into dabs (or retargetted with hatnote/see also link), but I don't see how this could be done by bot. --ἀνυπόδητος (talk) 13:17, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    I've just added comments in brackets, after the words "Criteria 5" and "Criteria 10". I think it was a mistake to create all these redirects. They don't serve any purpose, but they certainly catch quite a few search queries and incoming links to people. Those titles that aren't two words without a space between them can be expanded into articles or disambiguation pages. Those that are two words without a space should be redirected to who or what the asteroids were named after. --Moscow Connection (talk) 16:58, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    There wasn't much of a discussion. What happened is a mistake, in my opinion. I really think Wikipedia will be better without these 7650 redirects. And the target articles don't exist anymore, they have been redirected to lists. --Moscow Connection (talk) 18:10, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget all those that resemble a name or other topic, to the topics they resemble. Delete all that redirect to a mere list. Keep any that direct to a full article on a body and that don't resemble another topic name. Ego White Tray (talk) 03:09, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all and disambiguate where the names are ambiguous. There's certainly no reason to delete as most are either the only topics referred to by the names in search results, are not easy to find via search, or are suitable for conversion to disambiguation pages. The combinations of first name and last name refer to the minor planets; they probably don't correctly refer to the people they are named after. The lists could probably explain the names - if links are necessary that is probably better than having hatnotes on pages about unrelated people such as Alex Roberts. Peter James (talk) 23:30, 6 November 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_October_10&oldid=1138578495"