Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 July 23

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 23[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 23, 2013.

George C. Prendergast (2)[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 speedy delete. Guess I was being too cautious about this one. Thanks for your input. --BDD (talk) 16:21, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect was recently created during the course of a page move. It's an implausible redirect, and in fact a bit misleading, suggesting it will lead you to another individual other than George C. Prendergast, which is not the case. BDD (talk) 22:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete wouldn't this be housekeeping deletion? -- 76.65.128.222 (talk) 05:52, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete - Not sure who's fault this is, may be mine. But whatever it is, it's redundant, so time for housekeeping. ✉→Arctic Kangaroo←✎ 14:00, 24 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.

Boyd Graves[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. --BDD (talk) 15:59, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not a single mention of Boyd Graves anywhere in the target. Beerest355 Talk 21:37, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Theoretically this should be kept for attribution reasons per WP:CWW and WP:R#KEEP #1, since the former article at Boyd Graves was merged into the article AIDS origins opposed to scientific consensus (as a result of this AfD), which was then moved a bunch of times and ended up at Discredited HIV/AIDS origins theories. On the other hand, looking through the history from the time of the AfD, I can't see any evidence that a merge ever happened. Still, the target isn't especially misleading or irrelevant, and Graves was determined at AfD to be non-notable (and this serves to discourage creation of an article at this location). Also, there seem to be enough Google Books hits to suggest he's worth a mention in the target, but then again WP:WEIGHT might be an argument against. I don't think the potential confusion resulting from the target not mentioning the name is enough to outweigh the benefits of keeping the redirect. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:49, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as harmless. Thanks User:Arms & Hearts for condensing that so nicely. The AfD and merge indicates Graves is not notable, bordering on nonexistent (in WP eyes). But WP may be mistaken, and other people may search for it: if they do, they either get, to their delight, the right article, or to their slight dismay but no harm, the wrong one. 01:05, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The Complete Hot Five and Hot Seven Recordings[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) 16:00, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect might cause confusion (as per WP:RFD#DELETE criterion #2). The Complete Hot Five and Hot Seven Recordings is a Sony/Columbia box set, for which no Wikipedia article currently exists. It redirects to Hot Fives & Sevens, which is a different box set (with a shorter title) from a different record company. It is better kept as a red link, and had been deliberately used as such at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/List of notable albums (and along these same lines, WP:RFD#DELETE criterion #10 somewhat applies, except that the target article doesn't currently link to the redirect.) Gyrofrog (talk) 21:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I made the redirect, and I do agree it's a little confusing. Perhaps I linked to the wrong one. If so, thank you for pointing out my error. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 22:56, 23 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.

Chaotic (EP)[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. --BDD (talk) 16:03, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion because it is uses incorrect title and is an unlikely search term. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PlatinumFire (talk • contribs) 20:44, 23 July 2013

  • Keep Very likely search term. I would expect a huge number of people forgot that "Britney & Kevin" was part the official album name. Ego White Tray (talk) 03:27, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Amazing as it may seem, there are people in the world who don't know who Britney and Kevin are. Well I think Britney is some kind of singer but no idea who Kevin is. Nevertheless, unless it is ambiguous, keep it. Though it seems unlikely someone will search specifically for (EP) in parentheses. Si Trew (talk) 01:09, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP search for "Chaotic EP" (no parens) gives the redirect and the target as first two hits. So, probably necessary to keep the redirect for that purpose, though the parens are just a big couple of unnecessary dangly earrings. Si Trew (talk) 01:12, 28 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.

User:AzaToth/sandbox/redir[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 Speedy deleted by Aza Toth (WP:CSD#G7). Whatever Aza was testing it appears to have worked. Thryduulf (talk) 23:04, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

test →AzaToth 20:34, 23 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.

Association of Inclusionist Wikipedians[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. --BDD (talk) 16:05, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Although this was kept in a 2008 RfD I don't believe that meta content about Wikipedians belongs in the article namespace. I was going to nominate this for deletion but then I found Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia which does mention this and the other organisations, so I am instead nominating this for retargetting to that article as a normal redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 09:28, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Deletionism and inclusionism in Wikipedia per nom.--Lenticel (talk) 11:03, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom, with a hatnote for the current target. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:41, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom et alia. I think I am a member of it, according to my user page. But it is not a society that exists outside of Wikipedia, at least, they haven't invited me to any of their parties. So I think yes, should be per nom and taken out of article space. Si Trew (talk) 01:15, 28 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_23&oldid=1039432966"