Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 October 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 25[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 25, 2013.

Walter Williamson[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 Wally Williamson. (NAC) Armbrust The Homunculus 21:06, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. A Google search reveals he also may pass WP:NACTOR, so we should delete it to make way for an article about him. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 14:41, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom.--Lenticel (talk) 02:40, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Wally Williamson as a perfectly normal redirect for the full name of a notable person. If the actor is notable an article can simply be written over the redirect. The Whispering Wind (talk) 17:49, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to TWW. Plausible search term which can be overwritten with an article on the actor. There was a case at RfD not so long ago very much like this, but I can't recall it offhand. --BDD (talk) 16:10, 1 November 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.

2014 Indian Grand Prix[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 2014 Formula One season#Calendar changes. (NAC) Armbrust The Homunculus 12:36, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - it has been confirmed that there will be no Indian Grand Prix in 2014 - see http://www1.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/8848700/bernie-ecclestone-has-confirmed-that-there-will-be-no-indian-gp-next-year DH85868993 (talk) 11:26, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I think that it should not be deleted but should be now redirected to the section Calendar changes of the 2014 Formula One season article where it is clearly written why it was not held in 2014 season (Point 5 as of 14:55, 26 October 2013 (UTC)). I say this because there might still be some people who come here searching about it. Who knows? Please be kind enough to leave a message at my talk page in case of a reply. I am not watching this page. Regards. - Jayadevp13 14:55, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and refine target to 2014 Formula One season#Calendar changes. No policy-compliant reason in the nomination for deletion. It seems a perfectly useful redirect. The Whispering Wind (talk) 17:05, 26 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment (from nominator): "Keep and refine target" is fine with me (but may as well let the discussion run its course). DH85868993 (talk) 01:49, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete We're seeing a bunch of these spring up, already we have a redirect for 2015 Indian Grand Prix. How many redirects will we create because a race might have been held. Typing 2014 Indian Grand Prix will bring Indian Grand Prix up in the top of the searches, isn't that enough? --Falcadore (talk) 14:33, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirects are simply search aids, tools to help the reader find information that they are seeking. Why would we wish to delete a redirect that takes the reader straight to relevant information and make it harder for them to track down what happened to the GP? The Whispering Wind (talk) 15:32, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I fully support what The Whispering Wind said. - Jayadevp13 12:19, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - plausible search term, best place to send someone searching for the term. No argument has been presented for deletion. WilyD 10:40, 4 November 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.

Wikipedia talk:Partial revert[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 procedural close. Firstly, this is the wrong forum, it should be at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. Secondly, no relevant ground for deletion has been adduced; WP:RFD#DELETE. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 17:30, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I do not want to delete the redirect itself, just the talpage. Reasons: it is the talkpage of a redirect that was never really used and has been inactive since 2006. One admin left a message at that time (2006) to delete it, and I agree that is a good idea. Debresser (talk) 08:55, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. It's not clear from your nomination why you want this page deleted but as it's a talkpage, I think it should be nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion not here (even thought it's the talkpage of a redirect). WJBscribe (talk) 01:47, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
User:EurekaLott said in his editsummary "This is the talk page of a redirect, not a deleted page. Please take the redirect to WP:RFD if you wish to pursue deletion.". I understand that I am here not to propose the deletion of the redirect itself, but of the associated talkpage. I am not sure if that makes a big difference. I'll wait this out and if necessary will take it to WP:MFD. Debresser (talk) 01:50, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think EurekaLott was mistaken. But regardless of whether this is discussed here or at MfD, why do you think this page should be deleted? It contains a comment about the page being redirected, which would usually be kept. At the moment, I don't know what the reason for the deletion would be (nevermind whether or not it's a good one). WJBscribe (talk) 11:07, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I suggested bringing the redirect here, not its talk page, because I misunderstood Debresser's intent. I don't see what we'd gain by deleting the talk page. - Eureka Lott 15:43, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Action Unless my information is out-of-date (or I'm just misremembering), RFD is for redirects, not talk pages. The correct venue for talk pages is MFD. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 04:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
WP:MFD#Information on the process says that "the various Talk: namespaces" fall under it's scope. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 04:57, 27 October 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.

Why wikipedia is great[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 November 5#Why wikipedia is great

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2013_October_25&oldid=1090409349"