Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 August 26

August 26[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 26, 2013.

Mukaila Jamiu[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. Bencherlite ^Talk 21:45, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mukaila Jamiu → Michael Jackson (links to redirect • history • stats) [ Closure: keep/delete ]

Unlikely search term that isn't mentioned at target. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 15:08, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per BDD's rationale below. ~~Keep. Wouldn't this possibly be a likely search term for Nigerians? It may even be linked at other Wikipedias in Nigerian languages.~~ – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 16:43, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"It's helpful for Nigerians" is not a reason to keep. Delete reason #8 states that if a redirect is an another language without that language being the subject of sourced commentary, it may be deleted. This is equivelant to deleted redirect Patinar. Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 12:22, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, okay, except that being useful and helpful to a segment of readers or potential readers is a reason to keep (K5, also K4 applies), and I'm not sure that I would equate a word like "patinar" (Spanish for "skating") with the Nigerian words for a deceased mega-celebrity's name. Are you certain no sourceable connection between Michael Jackson and the cultures of Nigeria/Africa can be found? [...] redirects from a foreign language title to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created. – D8 – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 02:04, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seeing a lot of words like "potential" and "possibly" here. Do you, in fact, know of any readers who find this redirect useful, or are you just speculating? If there are actual readers who find this redirect useful, then of course we have to take that into account, but it wouldn't be practical for us to keep every redirect that someone somewhere might at some time possibly find a use for. — Paul A (talk) 05:39, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we know that at least one user finds it useful - the creator of the redirect. The page views are not high over time, but page views for redirects vs. targets are still an enigma to me. From the FAQ:

Q: What is the logic for redirects and when a page gets moved do the stats move?
A: It counts the title the page was accessed under, so redirects and moves will unfortunately split the statistics across two different statistics pages.

That's from the FAQ, and I don't understand what is meant by "split". Does a redirect make the page views for its target lower because they were accessed via the redirect? Stuff like that. Nor do I know how page views from sister-language projects like Yoruba Wiki register in the data. To answer your question, a deep search into the number of contributors who use a redirect or how useful it is to them is seldom "practical" and sometimes impossible. It is "practical" to keep any redirect that is not really harmful or very recently created as long as it's useful to somebody. – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 22:06, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Any potential value of this redirect is based on complete speculation. Checking "Mukaila Jamiu" -wikipedia returns nothing related to Jackson. We wouldn't keep Miguel Jackson either. --BDD (talk) 16:25, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe we would keep "Miguel" if a person who finds it useful creates it. How does this argument fit all the many non-English redirects to the Main Page? – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 21:29, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good question. We could probably safely delete those, since the main page has no connection to any of those languages, unless we want to say Wikipedia is a world project so readers should be able to get to the main page (of the English Wikipedia) using any language. At any rate, the main page is de facto W-space, so I don't really see the relevance to this discussion. And no, it's not good enough that a redirect is useful to one person. In this case, R3 would likely apply if the redirect were more recent. --BDD (talk) 22:49, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For me, relevance lies in the non-English redirects, not in the target. Also, I never said "useful to one person", I said "useful to somebody", because we have no way of telling how many readers find this redirect useful. A redirect is always created by just one person; how many others find it useful after that is up for grabs. And one person's pablum is another's pearl. – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 23:48, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Until I see a shred of evidence that anyone refers to Michael Jackson as Mukaila Jamiu, I'm forced to assume only the creator would've found this useful. In the month before this nomination, it had a whopping 5 views; 6 in June, 4 in May. That's statistical noise. --BDD (talk) 19:10, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After further study, the only "shred" I can offer is that the Mukaila Jamiu Facebook page has been merged into the Michael Jackson Facebook page. A small shred to be sure. According to the article on Nigeria there are 521 languages there, so your rationale appears to be sound. – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 18:43, 5 September 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.