Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 July 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 8[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 8, 2014.

Robotrain[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 August 13#Robotrain

籠球[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) 16:32, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not especially Japanese. TheChampionMan1234 06:17, 8 July 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.

Internet in South Ossetia[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) 16:30, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:REDLINK TheChampionMan1234 06:16, 8 July 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.

Google Japan[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) 16:29, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not covered in target. TheChampionMan1234 06:11, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Subsidiary companies should redirect to mother company *unless* the subsidiary can be set up as its own Wikipedia article. If these are deleted somebody may start a new article at those names. WhisperToMe (talk) 07:01, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And that's a bad thing? --BDD (talk) 16:39, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note recent discussion of similar redirect: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 28#Google Australia. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 07:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: information about these subsidiaries of Google is more likely to appear in main article. In such cases deletion would work against the rationale behind WP:RED. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 07:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • This may be true for a genuine subsidiary (meaning a different company with a different name producing different products), but these aren't really. This is just the same Google in different countries. Ego White Tray (talk) 05:51, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes and no. Legally these are affiliated but distinct entities, which carry out different sets of projects. Practically they are the same Google, so editors would cover activities of Google subsidiaries at Google, and only split it out if information on one of them would become overly detailed. This makes the creation of articles in these positions basically implausible. FWIW I believe that optimal solution would be to list Google subsidiaries somewhere and redirect all of these to that list. Until it's done, I believe that these redirects should point to Google per The Whispering Wind (talk · contribs)'s rationale in Robotrain discussion above. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 22:19, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, no information at target. This kind of redirect raises expectations that aren't met. Siuenti (talk) 15:59, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete These redirects should only exist if we have content specific to those countries on Wikipedia someplace. Without that, they are dishonest, and potentially blocking the creation of articles on these topics. Ego White Tray (talk) 05:50, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Ego White Tray and Siuenti. Viable search term that article fails to adequately cover. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 17:31, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unhelpful to readers as the captioned countries aren't even mentioned on the target. Some of these lemmas could turn into actual articles, like Google China already is. In particular, a cursory search finds a number of news reports about Google and India [1][2][3][4] (though perhaps an eventual article would better be titled "Google in India", since Google claims that Google India is just a marketing entity which does little useful work, and that controversy has also been the subject of news coverage [5]). But if someone turns these lemmas into bad articles, well that's what WP:PROD and WP:AFD are for; we'd end up there anyway whether they created those bad articles from scratch or by expanding a redirect. quant18 (talk) 01:45, 15 July 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.

List of major hotels in Busan[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. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 15:10, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not covered in the target. TheChampionMan1234 05:59, 8 July 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.

Shànghai[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) 16:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another one with incorrect Pinyin tone marks, (see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 July 7#Táibèi the second syllable is the fifth (neutral) tone rather than the correct third (dipping) tone (see Standard Chinese phonology#Tones TheChampionMan1234 05:56, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The correct Pinyin is Shànghǎi, however "Shànghai" could be a typo where someone forgot to put in the second tone mark. BTW I put in this redirect on 26 December 2003‎ ... over 10 years ago. Wow. I think it may have come from a time when some diacritical characters didn't work and some did WhisperToMe (talk) 05:58, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:FORRED: keeping typos in romanization of foreign language title is only feeding novice editors with WP:BADIDEAs. Although this redirect is old, its usage is below noise level, so its deletion won't be too harmful. Also note: the Pinyin title with tone marks stripped is identical to target's title, which makes this redirect even more useless. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 07:45, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Czarkoff; implausible typo. Someone who's unclear on the tones will simply type the name of the city without them. quant18 (talk) 01:33, 15 July 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.

宁[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 dabify. Hat tip to Quant18 for the draft. --BDD (talk) 16:27, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

According to http://baike.baidu.com/subview/38125/5094676.htm (if you understand Chinese), it could also refer to Ningxia, furthermore, according to http://baike.baidu.com/view/497250.htm?fromtitle=%E5%AE%81&fromid=3138946&type=syn 寧/宁 could also be a surname. TheChampionMan1234 05:51, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate WP:CJKV , as this is an original language redirect, and there are multiple topics with articles in English that are highly related to the original language, there should be a disambiguation page. Thus create a WP:CJKV disambiguation page. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 05:58, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:FORRED: ambiguous in foreign language. Native language DABs are inappropriate per WP:NOTDICT, and this one in particular is ruled out by WP:PTM. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 08:39, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate, if you would normally make a redirect to two or more different places it's natural to make a dab. It's used by itself to mean Nanjing and presumably also Ningxia so it's not a partial title match, besides obviously needing a link to the surname page. Don't forget to add the {{disambig-Chinese-char-title}} template . Siuenti (talk) 21:53, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Per previous comments by closing admins, it's helpful if RFD participants suggesting dabification actually provide a draft, so I've done so in a a comment on the redirect page. quant18 (talk) 01:31, 15 July 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.

Jack Cuozzo[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) 16:24, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect has no history, the target article currently has no section so named, and Cuozzo is not mentioned anywhere in the article. There is a link to the redirect, but I see no value in the target. Prosfilaes (talk) 02:31, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. FWIW, information about Cuozzo was added to the target by an IP in 2011 [6] to a section about creationist usage of the term "devolution"; the whole section was deleted about a year ago by Smk65536 with a suggestion that it might belong on a separate article [7]. But in general, I don't think that redirects from names of authors to single topics which they have discussed are necessarily helpful even when actually mentioned on the target article. quant18 (talk) 03:47, 8 July 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_July_8&oldid=1039435082"