Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 May 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 27[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 27, 2018.

Deku[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 disambiguate. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:54, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Deku" is also the nickname/hero name of Izuku Midoriya, the main character of the popular anime and manga series My Hero Academia. Propose either retargeting to List of My Hero Academia characters#Main characters or deleting per WP:XY. Raymond1922 (talk) 00:22, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate for the two usages mentioned by the nominator and the two people with this surname. Drafted under the redirect. No WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT here by long-term significance. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 03:07, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I forgot to say that searching for "Deku" on Google brings up Midoriya, so I believe that is the primary topic. Interestingly, there is no redirect for Izuku Midoriya or most of the other main characters of the show. Raymond1922 (talk) 03:23, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per Angus. I've made some redirects for major MHA characters. Raymond1922 (talk) 21:19, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

22D6F312-B0F6-11D0-94AB-0080C74C7E95[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:55, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTDIR not a catalog of registry entries - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:13, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Windows media player classic[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 4#Windows media player classic

Dennis "Copper" Barth[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. TIL: Inverted comma is Britishism for quotation mark! At any rate, keep arguments are stronger, and while this might not be the most useful or popular redirect out there, it certainly is accurate and plausibly so. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:15, 8 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is an unlikely name for a search query. The article name is Dennis Barth. It seems people would search on Dennis Bath or Cooper Barth. –CaroleHenson (talk) 22:15, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as plausible, and the page refers to him as that. Raymond1922 (talk) 00:28, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Highly implausible, particularly with the inverted commas included. Who's going to type all that? Deb (talk) 08:10, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - agree that the title configuration is highly problematic. Onel5969 TT me 14:47, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is exactly how people with nicknames and the like are referred to on Wikipedia (and many other sources), including at the very start of this article. A quick google suggests that this exact phrasing is widely used in Jamaican sources, using either single or double inverted commas, so claims of implausibility just don't hold any water. Thryduulf (talk) 17:01, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • But not normally in redirects, for the reasons stated above. Deb (talk) 09:53, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep so implausible that that is how our article starts in giving his name..yeah Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:38, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • The point is, Galobtter: Is someone going to type "Dennis "Copper" Barth". I could see someone typing Dennis Cooper Barth, but someone putting Cooper in quotes... and even if they did (and there were no redirect), they should get the article in the search results. Based upon what I consider silly "keep" votes, though, I am about to withdraw this due to "redirects are cheap", because it would probably result in "no consensus"... and why waste anyone elses time on this.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:50, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • yeah CHEAP is actually part of it, also it is plausible to link, even if it isn't currently. You can't really withdraw since there are two other delete !votes, but it is nearly to the 7 day mark anyhow Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:53, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete it is a pointless redirect because when you search Dennis Copper Barth the first page that comes up is the target and not the redirect itsi only when you put in the speech marks that the redirect pops up. Highly unlikely that anyone will put in the speech marks and even if they did the search engine comes up with the right page. Dom from Paris (talk) 18:38, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Wiki-speak isn't what the rest of the world uses to discuss people. Nobody in the real world calls him Dennis "Copper" Barth. Copper Barth, yes. Dennis Barth, yes. Dennis "Copper" Barth (with the quotes) - come on now, let's not be ridiculous here. It's in the article to denote his nickname because that's how Wikipedia articles denote it. Nobody is going to come to Wikipedia for the first time and enter that term into a search box, so let's get real. Exemplo347 (talk) 19:33, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, this is an acceptable format for someone named Dennis Barth who has the nickname "Copper". -- Tavix (talk) 01:39, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Next welsh devolution referendum[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:38, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as no future Welsh devolution referendum is currently scheduled to take place at any time. Helper201 (talk) 19:49, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I fixed the proposal to follow the proper format, but delete as the event already happened. I also added Next Welsh devolution referendum to the discussion for the same reason. Raymond1922 (talk) 00:09, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree - a historical leftover. Deb (talk) 09:32, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No longer required. Number 57 11:03, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete but without prejudice to recreation should there be another referendum in future. Thryduulf (talk) 17:03, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The Telegraph (disambiguation)[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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:50, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete these orphan redirects: the targets are WP:SIAs and not disambiguation pages. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:15, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep all. Targets are functionally DAB pages and not developed SIAs. No reason to impede navigation. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 23:40, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget The Telegraph (disambiguation) to Telegraph (disambiguation); delete the other two. bd2412 T 20:34, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very strong keep all. The targets are exactly what anyone using these search terms is looking form. The SIA/disambiguation distinction is entirely artificial from a functional perspective and the former exist only as a workaround for inflexible interpretation of disambiguation page style guidelines. From the point of view of a reader, it is completely and utterly irrelevant whether a page is technically one or the other and requiring them to know in advance which has been chosen in any given case is ridiculous in the extreme. Thryduulf (talk) 17:10, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Thryduulf: Comment from nom: I agree—up to a point Lord Thryduulf—but they're orphans. They're not needed as WP:INTDAB links. No one is going to land on these pages unless they type The Telegraph (d... into the search box, and why would you do that? The only reason I can think of is if you somehow knew what you wanted wasn't at the base name: in which case you'd be wrong. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:15, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
First, not everybody uses the search box. Secondly, many people (myself included) navigate directly to disambiguation pages when they know or suspect that the article they want to read is not primary topic but don't know what disambiguator has been used. In the case of those listed at The Telegraph we have (city) (e.g. The Telegraph (Adelaide)), (town, state) (e.g. The Telegraph (Alton, Illinois)), (country newspaper) (e.g. Telegraph (Bulgarian newspaper)) and (city, country) (e.g. The Daily Telegraph (Napier, New Zealand)) in addition to more specific titles (e.g. Derby Telegraph). By navigating to The Telegraph (disambiguation) I get a page listing the article I want to read whether there is a primary topic or not (I'd probably have guessed The Telegraph would be a redirect to The Daily Telegraph). Especially when people are using devices with slow connections (I sometimes browse on a kindle, loading The Daily Telegraph article took just 15 seconds, loading The Telegraph took just under 4; I've got a better wifi connection at my desk than where I usually use it for internte browsing) or where they pay for data (the SIA is 3.6kb, the article 49.3kb) avoiding unnecessary page loads is significantly worthwhile. Thryduulf (talk) 15:17, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Thryduulf:I understand your rationale, but I do not support keeping technically-incorrect redirects in order to avoid disrupting the navigation of experienced users trying to incorrectly second-guess page titles using slow internet devices! Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:01, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but deliberately inconveniencing readers (and there are many people who navigate to dab pages, for many reasons, not just me) just to maintain a technical destinction that is entirely irrelevant in practical terms and conders no benefits to anybody is something I can only describe as arrogance. Everything we do on Wikipedia should be done for the benefit of readers, and that includes making sure that they can find the article they are looking for, even if that inconveniences editors (although this will inconveniece them as well). Thryduulf (talk) 10:37, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Paul Kitchen (headmaster)[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:39, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Okay, this is an odd one; I discovered it while browsing Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion/Redirect Archives/June 2006 for a now-forgotten reason. This started at Paul Kitchen as an article about the headmaster, and someone reasonably A7-tagged it, but the reviewing admin instead decided to redirect it to the school. It was taken to RFD as implausible, but it was kept on what to me seems a flimsy reason, Keep and just don't link to it. Anyone who searches for Paul Kitchen might benefit from the school's article, so it's good. It also helps prevent recreation of that article. Some time later, someone wrote an article about a different Paul Kitchen who's a notable guitarist, and eventually this was moved to its current title so the guitarist could occupy the un-disambiguated title. Backstory over, my rationale: what benefit does this provide to the reader? For one thing, who's going to search Wikipedia for the headmaster of an average prep school unless the headmaster's important for some other reason, or if his headmastership has made him prominent far beyond the school? Kitchen's not even mentioned in the article (the current headmaster, a different Paul, was appointed in 2016), so if his departure from office is sufficient reason to remove him entirely, he clearly didn't make a big enough impact to warrant placement in the History section (at least in the mind of whoever removed him), and his absence means that nobody visiting this redirect learns anything about Kitchen from the article; if you didn't check the history, you'd think the redirect was pointing to the wrong place. Nyttend (talk) 02:40, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Raymond1922 (talk) 00:30, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Whatever value this redirect did or did not have in the past, it doesn't have any now. Thryduulf (talk) 17:12, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Deb (talk) 09:55, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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/2018_May_27&oldid=1036307958"