Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 October 1

October 1

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 1, 2009

Zenwalk/redirects

The result of the discussion was delete all. Closedmouth (talk) 08:49, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Somehow this one fell through the cracks when we were deleting other redirects that advertised to be redirects. Created in 2005, this seems too old to be speedied. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 00:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appending three more:

All four of these are the result of recent moves by Anthony Appleyard -- ToET 01:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • OK, OK, delete them: each [[X/redirects]] is junk that I shifted aside when obeying a request to move another page to name [[X]]. Leaving deleted parallel-history edits under a visible page with an edit history, is too liable to accidents if the new page [[X]] must for some reason be later temporarily deleted. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:26, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appending eight more of the parenthetical style:

More of the same (these tend to be older.) -- ToET 01:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Appending one more; this one without an explicit "redirect":

used in one of the moves relate to Sewanee: The University of the South (redirects) above ToE($a,$b)=($b,$a);06:40, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note that none of the 13 nominees above have content history in need of merger. All are redirects all the way down, except for Hector Og Maclean, 15th Clan Chief/redirects, which for two revisions was a sentence fragment of a stub (with nothing that wasn't in its target article of the time) and Sewanee: The University of the South (redirects) which for one revision was a cut-and-paste copy of its target article. -- ToET 07:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. There is no reason whatsoever for "/temp" or "/redirect" redirects. B.Wind (talk) 17:09, 9 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Ranunculus nivalis

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 retargeted to Snow buttercup; speedy close upon withdrawal of nomination by nom (non-admin close). B.Wind (talk) 05:12, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This plant does not grow just in Canada, but also Greenland, Svalbard, and mainland Norway – this should be redlinked (or an article), not redirected to an arbitrary list. — the Sidhekin (talk) 23:06, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I just created an article about this species here and redirected Ranunculus nivalis there. A redirect to the appropriate article is better than a red link. Neelix (talk) 23:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – or do I say withdrawn? – yes, a Ranunculus nivalis article, by any other name, would be as good. Thanks! :) — the Sidhekin (talk) 23:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

The Replacements (disambiguation)

The result of the discussion was keep. Killiondude (talk) 07:47, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is redirecting to a disambiguation page. It makes no sense to maintain the name (disambiguation) page anymore. warrior4321 03:06, 1 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Redirecting "Foo (disambiguation)" to the disambiguation page for "Foo" is generally quite useful. — Gavia immer (talk) 01:47, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Gavia immer sums it up nicely - and there is plenty of precedent for keeping such redirects. B.Wind (talk) 02:15, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2009_October_1&oldid=616128428"