Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 December 29

December 29

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 29, 2009

Hum. Mutat.

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Entirely unhelpful redirect for Human Mutation (an academic journal, not yet created). It makes sense to redirect to publisher when they are small publishers strongly associated with the journal, but JW&S is a publishing giant with hundreds if not thousands of journals. Headbomb {ταλκκοντριβς – WP Physics} 21:08, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

久下季哉

The result of the discussion was Speedy Deleted G1 by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). Tavix |  Talk  21:59, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign language redirect that has no use in the English Wikipedia. Tavix |  Talk  18:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete as nonsense. There is no "93" in that redirect, and GoogleTranslate can't make something other than gibberish out of it. 76.66.197.17 (talk) 05:10, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Deleting this as "patent nonsense" was wrong. The redirect is on-topic: As a short Google search tells you, this is the name of a Japanese passenger of the flight (Kuge Toshiya). See also United 93 (film). Now I am not certain that we should have redirects for every passenger of that flight, but I think the Japanese ones are just as appropriate as the American ones. —Кузьма討論 08:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Delta operated by Northwest Flight 253

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an implausible search term. Both Delta Flight 253 and Northwest Flight 253 work as redirects so I don't see why we need to specify this information, especially when it should be the other way around. (Northwest is a wholly owned subsidiary of Delta). Tavix |  Talk  18:48, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy Delete for an overly long, incorrect, and oddly specific term. - Chromatikoma (talk) 01:58, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, at least for now. This was how CNN was referring to the flight the day of the incident. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 07:16, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Implausible, unhelpful. We have an internal search engine to perform this work. YouWillBeAssimilated (talk) 06:45, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Category:Songs from The Wall

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:15, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Empty, unnecessary category. Friginator (talk) 18:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Category:Songs associated with The Wall

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Empty, unnecessary category. Friginator (talk) 18:16, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, per nominator. YouWillBeAssimilated (talk) 06:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

"Alexander R. Bolling"

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:22, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

People's names put in quotation marks. What a bizarre and implausible concept. Furthermore, surrounding a name in quotation marks in Wikipedia search will turn up the same result anyway (for example, "United States" will turn up United States). (NOTE: Every article on this list is the name of a person, and the quotation marks are not around their nickname, but simply around their name in general, and around their entire name.) — The Man in Question (in question) 10:34, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep all, harmless, plausible type-in URLs. —Кузьма討論 10:37, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as implausible. Why would someone want or need to type in a person's full name in quotation marks? Tavix |  Talk  18:52, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all What proposer says is true. WP will find the topic whether or not you enclose the term in quotation marks, so these redirects are of no value. Yappy2bhere (talk) 07:31, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all Implausible and useless. Reywas92Talk 21:38, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. They have no utility whatsoever. If someone inputs names in quotes it will take them to the pages anyway even without the redirects. YouWillBeAssimilated (talk) 06:42, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

"Willie" William Lidstone McKnight

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriately worded redirect. Nicknames never go in front, in or out of Wikipedia. — The Man in Question (in question) 09:29, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Agree, the article title in question should be framed as William "Willie" Lidstone McKnight. FWiW Bzuk (talk) 12:11, 29 December 2009 (UTC).[reply]
  • Keep though Wikipedia does not place nicknames first, it does not mean that no one does. 76.66.197.17 (talk) 05:46, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    It is not proper English, nor is it similar to any proper form in English. — The Man in Question (in question) 05:57, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's true, nicknames never come first. Yappy2bhere (talk) 07:28, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Implausible, unhelpful. Nicknames don't come first, and people don't input searches like this, either. YouWillBeAssimilated (talk) 06:52, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

"reality" television show

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a critical commentary on the genre? Either way, a useless redirect because it is 1) implausible and 2) immaterial since Reality television will be the first result even if quotation marks are included in search. — The Man in Question (in question) 09:06, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

"illegal" rezident

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Poor use of quotation marks + misspelled word = implausible redirect. — The Man in Question (in question) 09:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Illegal rezident (Google Books) is not misspelt - I believe it is Russian in origin though it may now have been (improperly?) anglicised. Likewise the quotation marks are commonly applied in references (and on Wiki - see What links here page) They are applied to contrast with legal rezident CyrilThePig4 (talk) 10:51, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    If it is Russian, then it's worth noting that Russian can be transcribed a variety of different ways. — The Man in Question (in question) 22:41, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - article (unreferenced) does not use quotations. But quotatiosn superfluous in any event. GraemeLeggett (talk) 12:04, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per GraemeLeggett Yappy2bhere (talk) 05:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per GraemeLeggett. YouWillBeAssimilated (talk) 06:54, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Hairy hardon

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:10, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE please. Sorry, I don't get the joke here. No mention is made within the parent article. JBsupreme (talk) 07:36, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. While I do get the joke, this is potentially misleading. Erection would be a better target. —Кузьма討論 10:39, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I don't think such a joke should be used to exclusively redirect to that article. Erection would be a better target then that, and even then it would still be bad.--Stinging Swarm talk 09:14, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

"chanistskali".

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:58, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Completely implausible. — The Man in Question (in question) 07:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

"True"-middle class

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:58, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With quotation marks and hyphen, implausible search term. — The Man in Question (in question) 07:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

"Three fookin' times!"

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:58, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No mention in target article + inappropriate use of quotations marks in mainspace. — The Man in Question (in question) 07:14, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Target has no relevant content. Yappy2bhere (talk) 05:52, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

"Penny Foolish"

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:58, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense. Not worth retargeting because of the quotation marks. — The Man in Question (in question) 04:40, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nominator. Yappy2bhere (talk) 05:50, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

"The Volunteer" Canal Boat at LaSalle Illinois

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:58, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Written as a description, not a title + needless quotation marks. — The Man in Question (in question) 04:35, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

"Pagal" (translated in English as "Crazy")

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Presumably one of his works, although it is not listed on the page. Regardless, a weirdly implausible search term + quotation marks. — The Man in Question (in question) 02:50, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nominator. Yappy2bhere (talk) 05:49, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

"Liberty, Order, Progress"

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No mention in target article. Use of quotation marks unhelpful and superfluous. — The Man in Question (in question) 02:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nominator. Yappy2bhere (talk) 05:48, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I think this was some sort of slogan of Gabino Barreda, a somewhat related figure. But there's no mention in that article or the target, so delete, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 11:44, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

"I Got My"

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 04:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No mention in target article, no reason for quotation marks. — The Man in Question (in question) 02:02, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete No relevant content, no redirect. Yappy2bhere (talk) 05:47, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this and all other quotation mark errors here on RFD. Reywas92Talk 21:39, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Suppertime - "I Got My" appears to be some sort of musical composition by this Static Major. However, searching for it without quotation marks will take you to Suppertime, Static Major's debut album in which "I Got My" presumably appeared in. Individual songs are often written with quotation marks around them, for on Wikipedia itself, so I think this search term is plausible enough to keep. Well, not keep, retarget. But you know what I mean, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 11:15, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that with the quotation marks, it doesn't matter if there's some place it can be retargered. It simply shouldn't be kept. — The Man in Question (in question) 20:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per nominator. YouWillBeAssimilated (talk) 06:57, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

"Paddy" Brendan Eugene Finucane (Irish)

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible search term. Subject's real name is Brendan Éamon "Paddy" FitzPatrick Finucane. Nicknames do not ever go in front, and the use of "(Irish)" at the end is just weird. — The Man in Question (in question) 01:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

"Occupied Japan" figurine

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No mention in target article. Anyone searching for this will find no information here. — The Man in Question (in question) 00:07, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete No relevant content, no redirect. Yappy2bhere (talk) 05:46, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I think this might (and this is only a might) be something to do with exported goods. According to this source, "Occupied Japan" was printed on pottery, porcelain, toys etc. which was made in Japan during it's occupation by America in the 40's and 50's. Still, I think the "figurine part" is too obscure and unlikely a search term, and Occupation of Japan (as far as I can see) gives no information on the subject, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 11:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, no utility. YouWillBeAssimilated (talk) 07:10, 4 January 2010 (UTC)The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.[reply]

"No Shhh! Zone"

The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory (u • t • c) 03:52, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No mention in target article. — The Man in Question (in question) 00:01, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • The redirect's history shows that it used to be an article, which was redirected instead of just being deleted under CSD A7. Probably not worth keeping, but I don't see it doing any harm. —Кузьма討論 10:42, 29 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It wasn't an article for more than a minute or two. The harm in redirecting to an article that doesn't mention the search term is the time wasted reading the article looking for the term, then the time wasted re-reading the article more carefully looking for the term that surely must be in there somewhere, then the time wasted cursing Wikipedia for wasting your time. Yappy2bhere (talk) 05:38, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I did a Google search with both redirect and target article, and I think the "Shhh Zone" is some sort of area within the library. There's a connection between the two, but it's not really a plausible search term, Lord Spongefrog, (I am Czar of all Russias!) 11:33, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unhelpful. YouWillBeAssimilated (talk) 07:03, 4 January 2010 (UTC)The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2009_December_29&oldid=1140112183"