Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 February 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 2[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 2, 2014.

Main Hoon Shahid Afridi (film)[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. (NAC) Armbrust The Homunculus 08:40, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No need to keep this direct as no one will write the film name and "(film)" along with it. UBStalk 08:27, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: as per nomination. Faizan 11:53, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete per nom and Faizan. But the article itself is very good and well referenced. Si Trew (talk) 11:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC) I must have been nodding when I wrote this. Si Trew (talk) 23:53, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The article was at this title for approximately three months, so inbound links exist in plenty of old revisions and may exist in other websites. Deleting this title will break those links without benefit: please read link rot and remember that we shouldn't cause it without good reason. Nyttend (talk) 14:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a normal redirect from unnecessary disambiguation. People quite frequently create articles with this kind of title, so we know they are used. Siuenti (talk) 17:44, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this redirect is no more linked to any article, it's just linked to user's talk pages. So why should it be kept? UBStalk 18:19, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you know that it's not linked in any old revisions of articles? Do you know that it's not linked by any pages on other websites? Tha point is that deletion would cause linkrot without helping anything. Nyttend (talk) 19:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep WP:CHEAP clearly indicates a film article. -- 70.50.148.248 (talk) 00:20, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - plausible search term, clearly sends the reader/editor to what they're searching for. No argument has been presented to support deletion. WilyD 10:29, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. People (such as me) frequently search for articles about films using the format "Title (film)" if they know or think there are or may be other uses of the title. Also per Nyttend. Thryduulf (talk) 15:24, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per 70.50, Thryduulf and Nytennd. I don't watch films much but when I search for a book I often put (book) in the search term as a first guess. So I think it is absolutely approprate to keep. Si Trew (talk) 23:50, 6 February 2014 (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.

Main Hoon Shahid Afrdi[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. (NAC) Armbrust The Homunculus 08:40, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a title of the film, this redirect was mistakenly created. Word "Afrdi" do not exists as it is named "Afridi" and it's a person's name UBStalk 08:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Agreed. It should be deleted. Faizan 11:53, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete per Faizan. Si Trew (talk) 11:57, 2 February 2014 (UTC) [reply]

Nominated both for CSD as implausible typo, per Faizan. Unlikely search term. The article is very nice and I never heard of him and now I have, so it makes my life a little better to have heard of someone I never knew of before and I hope other readers will think likewise. Si Trew (talk) 12:06, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:R#KEEP. No doubt that the title misspells the last name of "Shahid Afridi" as "Afrdi" but this is a likely misspell. Redirect from common misspellings to correct one is one of the uses of redirects. And the fact that this redirect is a result of a mistake of misspelling endorses that this is a common misspell. -- SMS Talk 18:14, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this isn't the common misspell User:Smsarmad. Because Im the one who started this article with this misspelled title and the reason was that the original title was not edorsed/salted as it was deleted 3 times, so I created the article with this title, but after endorsing it was moved to Main Hoon Shahid Afridi (film) and later to Main Hoon Shahid Afridi. UBStalk 18:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - It's a redirect from a typo. A missing letter is evidently not an unlikely typo. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 05:43, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - plausible tpo, with no arguments presented to support deletion. WilyD 10:28, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Err, I wrote above "Unlikely search term." That is an argument presented to support deletion. As it happens I have changed my mind.
  • Unlikely search term is not an argument that supports deletion. Even implausible search term merely tells us that there's no reason to keep the redirect, not that there's a reason to delete it. WilyD 16:05, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I never said it was a good argument. I said it was an argument. I know it is a bad argument, which is why I changed my opinion and agree with you. but "with no arguments to support deletion" is very provocative language, in my opinion, and I and others have asked you to stop just knocking that in from your copy paste button. Si Trew (talk) 00:04, 7 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Redirects from implausible search terms are also sometimes kept for other reasons (e.g. attribution history). Thryduulf (talk) 16:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Err, yes, of course. I merely meant that being an implausible search term gives us no motivation to either keep or delete, so other considerations must break that "tie", while being an "unlikely search term" means you're also an "occasional search term", so directing the occasional reader/editor who uses it to what they're looking for means "unlikely search term" is a reason to keep a redirect (although as always, other considerations may apply). WilyD 09:11, 4 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per SMS, Salvadrim (Salvidrim, please!) and WilyD. Si Trew (talk) 11:39, 3 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment John Maynard Keynes once famously remarked when interviewed why things were not quite to plan, "when circimstances change, I change my opinion. What do you do?" Si Trew (talk) 00:34, 7 February 2014 (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/2014_February_2&oldid=1142587387"