Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006 September 22

The nominated redirect was kept. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 15:37, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Completing incomplete nomination by User:BANG!. Keep, plausible typo. TimBentley (talk) 20:29, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per nom proper listing of nom. Irongargoyle 23:44, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 15:38, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Violates wikipedia policy (cross neamspace). 72.139.119.165 20:23, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Cross-namespace redirect with no useful history, has only one legit incoming link. Khatru2 21:40, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. per nom. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 14:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was kept. Redirects don't need incoming links, and their purpose is to save time. If the author wants to delete it, he can put {{db-author}} on the page. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 15:41, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Both Kurt vonnegutt and Kurt Vonnegutt redirects exist. Suggest retaining only one, since they have identical function. Both are very recent--I created them both. My bad. Paul D. Anderson 17:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you created them and they haven't been modified since, you can use {{db-author}}. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 03:19, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I suppose you could speedy this as author, but I think a common mispelling for a well-known author certainly wouldn't hurt things and might help. Redirects are cheap. Irongargoyle 23:39, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, won't be used for linking due to miscapitalization and the existence of Kurt Vonnegutt is sufficient to navigate to this author by type-in. Kusma (討論) 05:50, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was made into an article of some sort. —Centrx→talk • 23:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need to rename existing, but misspelled, Baby Guiness to Baby Guinness Picapica 00:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. The page has history. The page that you want to move into this title was essentially identical to the version that was previously merged-and-redirected to Cocktail. Instead, that page with the misspelled title should also redirect to Cocktail. (And now it does.) Rossami (talk) 05:01, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Eh? Now both histories have been buried. And Cocktail does not include the material from either Baby Guiness or Baby Guinness (so much for "merging"!). Perhaps I'm failing to notice something very subtle here, but once we had two articles supplying information about this particular cocktail ...and now we have none. Shouldn't the correct procedure have been to merge Baby Guiness into Baby Guinness, with, of course, an internal link in that latter article to Cocktail. As things now stand, anyone looking up Baby Gui(n)ness in the Wikipedia will find out absolutley nothing about it. I call that not so much a cocktail as a cock-up. --Picapica 11:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• My comment was unclear. The prior version was merged to Wikibooks and redirected through the Cocktail page to the Wikibooks page. With the exception of a few drinks with significant well-documented social significance, the community consensus has been that articles on specific drinks belong over in the Cookbooks section of Wikibooks, not in Wikipedia. Those articles are always moved. The contents of the Baby Guinness article was moved over in March. Cocktail has a link to the correct Wikibooks page.
  If you think that this drink (at either title) has sufficient social significance to support its own encyclopedia article, you should open a discussion on the article's Talk page. You don't need to delete the redirect to do that. Rossami (talk) 16:40, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Further comment. Rossami, I will take up your suggestion to have the Baby Guinness entry restored to its pre-March status (and then have Baby Guiness and Baby guiness redirect to that entry, rather than to the present, unhelpful target). I therefore withdraw my request to delete.
    To comment on your comment: I've no special interest in cocktails – indeed I've never consumed one in my life – but it does seem über-deletionist to have singled out the article on this particular one for disappearance.
    – Quote: the community consensus has been that articles on specific drinks belong over in the Cookbooks section of Wikibooks, not in Wikipedia .
    Can you point me to the discussion from which that "consensus" emerged?
    – Those articles are always moved.
    At the risk of encouraging more slash-and-burn, oh no they're not: there are dozens of such articles extant.
    – Quote: The contents of the Baby Guinness article was moved over in March. Cocktail has a link to the correct Wikibooks page.
    Well, darned if I can find it, or those contents. Three other Wikipedia articles have links to Baby Guinness: those links now lead nowhere except to an unhelpful redirect to Cocktail. --Picapica 20:51, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was Converted to disambig. -- JLaTondre 03:25, 27 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SR 613 is a general term for State Route 613 or State Road 613. This should not redirect to a single highway with that name. --NE2 01:37, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete SR 613 makes no sense as a redirect, way too generic 70.51.11.116 03:13, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete There is most likely more than one SR 613. Redirecting here makes no sense. If there are other SR 613s, make it into a disambiguation page. Irongargoyle 23:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. —Centrx→talk • 23:23, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This has been a recent Afd, but has recently reappeared as a redirect. All articles that link to Dartmouth (ship) are expecting an article about the ship rather than its involvement in the Boston Tea Party. Jayvdb 04:52, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 15:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

redirect to talk namespace as a result of a page move, talk page should not be deleted, as it is actually a subpage of Talk:Iran-Iraq War, no useful history Khatru2 06:01, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 15:45, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

redirect to talk namespace as a result of a page move, talk page should not be deleted, as it is actually a subpage of Talk:Jihad, no useful history Khatru2 06:03, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 15:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

redirect to talk namespace as a result of a page move, talk page should not be deleted, as it is actually a subpage of Talk:Left-wing politics, no useful history Khatru2 06:05, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 15:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cross namespace redirect, no useful history Khatru2 06:06, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 14:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 15:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cross namespace redirect, no useful history Khatru2 06:08, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:46, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The redirect has a significant number of inbound links. It serves to prevent the accidental creation of dead links during AFD and Talk page discussions. There is no reasonable possibility of confusion in this case. Rossami (talk) 16:43, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment But people will notice these red links and finally learn to link to Wikipedia: namespace. CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 17:52, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete per nom. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 14:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. —Centrx→talk • 23:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cross namespace redirect, no useful history Khatru2 06:09, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It's in use on a fair number of User pages. It serves to prevent the accidental creation of dead-links. In this regard, the accidental ommission of Wikipedia: is a reasonable typo. There is no possibility of confusion in this case. Rossami (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - no possible confusion. CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 19:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. (Confusion is quite possible, even if not a violation of the cross-namespace redirect policy.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 15:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cross namespace redirect, no useful history Khatru2 06:10, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. —Centrx→talk • 23:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cross namespace redirect, no useful history Khatru2 06:12, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:49, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This page is slightly less used than Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) (above) but the same arguments apply. Rossami (talk) 16:47, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - no possible confusion. CP/M ^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project| 19:15, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Consider deleting blocking the authors for disruption. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. —Centrx→talk • 23:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cross namespace redirect, no useful history Khatru2 06:14, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:49, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Cleanup (delete) per nom. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. —Centrx→talk • 23:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cross namespace redirect, no useful history Khatru2 06:15, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:49, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Again, slightly less used than Manual of Style (disambiguation pages) (above) but the same arguments apply. Rossami (talk) 16:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Request arbitration against Rossami? — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This is a clear case when WP:IAR applies. Inexperienced users don't know about cross namespace redirect; they just need to find things.--Holdenhurst 10:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. —Centrx→talk • 23:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cross namespace redirect, no useful history Khatru2 06:17, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete per nom. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The one further down is useful, so this may be.--Holdenhurst 10:20, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. —Centrx→talk • 23:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cross namespace redirect, no useful history Khatru2 06:19, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete per nom. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The one further down is useful, so this might be.--Holdenhurst 10:19, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. —Centrx→talk • 23:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cross namespace redirect, no useful history Khatru2 06:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:51, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete per nom. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The one below is useful, so I expect this might be.--Holdenhurst 10:17, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. —Centrx→talk • 23:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

cross namespace redirect, no useful history Khatru2 06:22, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. PJM 14:51, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete per nom. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I have benefited from this redirect myself.--Holdenhurst 10:16, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The nominated redirect was deleted. —Centrx→talk • 23:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk-space cross-namespace redirect. The corresponding article has nothing to do with the talkpage. There is useful history, which should probably be history-merged. --ais523 11:20, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. PJM 16:39, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. It's the Talk page of a page which was incorrectly speedy-deleted. The version which had been created in the meantime was probably a new-user test and has now been reverted. This talk page and the associated project page have significant history and were among some of our earliest policy pages. They are both likely to be linked from outside Wikipedia. In neither case is there any possibility of confusion by readers. Rossami (talk) 16:56, 22 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Update The article to Wikipedia-space redirect has now been restored. I'll place the RfD tag on it instead and have updated the header. --ais523 17:00, 22 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete per nom. (There are many possible opportunities for confusion of this redirect.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 13:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete No case for retention.--Holdenhurst 10:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.