Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 July 11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 11[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 11, 2013

Template:Australian mobile phone companies/doc[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. --BDD (talk) 23:12, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The existence of this redirect is causing the documentation at the bottom of template:Australian mobile phone companies to say "The above documentation is transcluded from Template:Australian mobile phone companies/doc", which is false. The documentation being generated by {{documentation|content=...}} in the noinclude section of the main template page. I am going to try to see if we can fix Template:documentation, but until then, this redirect is problematic. I tried to have it speedily deleted, but my request was denied. Frietjes (talk) 23:08, 11 July 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.

Template:New-user[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. If the similarly-named {{new user}} is kept at TfD then a separate discussion about whether to retarget to that template may be appropriate, and this closure is without precedent to such a discussion. The consensus is to keep the current target at least until that TfD concludes however. Thryduulf (talk) 23:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing template-redirect created after a TfD that should have deleted Template:New-user, not redirected it The Banner talk 22:54, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I notice there's a {{unverified user}} ... could be used to synonymous that. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:14, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I agree that the TfD was closed oddly (both in terms of interpreting the consensus and implementing it) but I don't think this redirect does any harm, especially since a template similar to {{welcome}} was at this location for almost three years. (I wouldn't support retargeting to the same target as {{unverified user}}, which seems to be a more misleading redirect than this one.) – Arms & Hearts (talk) 18:18, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Arms & Hearts' reasoning. Preserving the project's history is important and the potential for confusion is minimal. Rossami (talk) 22:26, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I just noticed there's also a {{new user}} -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 04:11, 13 July 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 (such as the template's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

Ken Dobson[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 Kenneth Dobson. --BDD (talk) 15:20, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Illogical redirect - absolutely no mention of this person in the article whatsoever. Nor would it be a plausible redirect. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 20:38, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or retarget. From the history, it seems this originated as the biography of a councillor who (as of 2006) was representing the City Centre ward in Manchester. It doesn't appear that in the intervening years he has become any more notable. There is an article for Kenneth Dobson (an English cricketer) that would make a logical target but google suggests he was rarely known by "Ken" in reliable sources (and not often in unreliable ones). There is a darts player called "Ken Dobson" who may in future be notable but is not yet, and a driver in the American Le Mans Series but he doesn't seem to be particularly notable (although I've only done a cursory search). I'd be happy with either deletion or a retarget to Kenneth Dobson, with a slight preference for the latter Thryduulf (talk) 22:17, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • It was whilst going through some ALMS-related articles that I found this redirect - anyone competing in the ALMS is automatically notable, as it is a major series. I'm not bothered with either deletion or the retargeting, and it is possible that I'll end up creating the racing driver article at some point. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 11:13, 13 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Thryduulf with no prejudice against creation of an article at this location for any of the other individuals with this name. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 18:37, 12 July 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.

Mother Teresa Award[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 merge and retarget. Rossami (talk) 21:18, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Mother Teresa Award" is a name that is given to many awards, given by many companies and countries. It's wrong to redirect to a particular one given by an Indian business school. If WP had articles on those awards, this should be a DAb page, but they aren't particularly notable, so I guess I'm proposing to either delete this page or make it a DAb page with language explaining this and one entry pointing to the existing redirect target (which itself is just a section in another article). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 13:35, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Possibly that language might make sense at Commemorations of Mother Teresa noting that many awards have been established in her name. Thryduulf (talk) 22:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't remember why I created that redirect, so I don't care wether it's being deleted or not. -- XenonX3 - ((☎)) 12:45, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The Loyola award seems to be the only one we have significant coverage of, and the Commemorations of Mother Teresa article mentions awards in the lede but doesn't actually list any. If that article were to be expanded with examples of awards it'd be a more suitable target, but as it stands I don't see a problem with the redirect to the only topic by this name that we currently cover in any depth. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:04, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Here's the problem I'm trying to solve. Editors unknowingly link to Mother Teresa Award when an award by that name is given to someone, and it's almost always wrong. Looking at pages that link to it, I found that the awards were actually granted by:
Of the articles containing the phrase "Mother Teresa Award" but not linked to it, the grantors are:
It's clear that the award given by the Indian business school is far from primary, both in the world, and on WP. It's wrong that, when someone Wikilinks to it, or types it in the search, it is redirected to that particular award instead of a page that mentions how many different awards there are. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 16:02, 13 July 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.

Westchester, New York[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. There is no consensus on whether the article about the former town, when written, should be at this title or take a disambiguator. Until such time this redirect is considered worthwhile. Thryduulf (talk) 07:24, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There's a former town called Westchester in New York, this needs to be it's redlink. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 08:20, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep people frequenty call the county just "Westchester", so any town with that name will need a disambiguated title, since the primary topic is the county. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 11:23, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that normally we only redirect "X, [state name]" to "X County, [state name]" when there is no municipality or unincorporated community of "X, [state name]". Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 05:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per 76.65.128.222. If and when an article on the former town is created it should be at this location (with a hatnote); until then, deleting this plausible search term would make it unduly difficult to find the article on the county. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:00, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Good point, how about creating a disambig that uses {{Dabprimary}}. The problem with a redirect is link rot: after we created the town article at "Westchester, New York", it would break all links (internal and external) and bookmarks to the county article that used the redirect. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 05:21, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I would still say that the town should sit at a disambiguated title, and a hatnote at the county article can point to it, as the county is the primary topic of "Westchester", not the town. -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I can't see the need for a dab page: even if we had articles on the county and the town that'd only be two articles which would be connected via hatnotes. (Agreed that link rot would be a problem, but it'd be more of a problem if this were deleted. Couldn't the current article-space links to the redirect be bypassed using AWB or something?) – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:33, 14 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, because this is downright confusing; it says that the place is really named Westchester and that it has "County" added only pro forma, when that's nowhere near the real situation. This is a good example of WP:RFD#DELETE, point #2. Linkrot is a problem when there are multiple appropriate names and we get rid of one; by getting rid of this, we'll be saying "Westchester County is not named Westchester" and thereby educating readers (and editors) better. Nyttend (talk) 23:40, 18 July 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.

Equal temperament languages[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. --BDD (talk) 15:22, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

An original research. It also has some COI issues. (e.g. this) Mys 721tx (talk) 05:17, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete. I don't understand the nomination. How is the redirect original research? How does that diff show a conflict of interest? But the term isn't mentioned in the target, so it's hard to see any value in a redirect. Possibly retarget to equal temperament? In case it's not obvious I don't know the first thing about music theory. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:07, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Nonsense. — This, that and the other (talk) 02:25, 13 July 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2013_July_11&oldid=1136448295"