Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 July 16

July 16

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 16, 2010

Ṩ

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 all. Retargetting can be done outside of the RfD process as pointed out. --Taelus (Talk) 07:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Useless, pointless, confusing, and unlikely search terms or typos. Delete :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 23:13, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep all - I am open to argument but I am not seeing a good reason to delete. They don't meet any of the deletion criteria, they are harmless and there is nothing confusing about them. A look at the stats shows that they are plausible and used search terms. Finally, they are not useless. Someone may well come across one of these characters and paste then into the search box to find out what type of character it is - not everyone knows their Macron from their Umlaut! Bridgeplayer (talk) 02:30, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all potentially useful for working out what a weird character is. Other wise no harm, so therefore keep all those unicode character redirects. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:21, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all but retarget Ḵ to Macron, like Ṯ and Ẕ. The redirect from Ḵ to Combining macron below appears to be misleading, as the macron under the K is not in fact combining - it is an integral part of that Unicode character. — This, that, and the other (talk) 10:23, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all. I feel that these redirects are useful and plausible. If there are any individual problems, as noted by This, that..., they may be dealt with outside of this process. Rje (talk) 19:31, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all. seems useful.  Chzz  ►  01:33, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all: per Graeme. Redirects of this type, if not these ones specifically, have certainly proven useful to me and I suspect many others. AJCham 16:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all: I've found many of these pages and similar ones extremely useful before when looking up letters with odd diacritics. Chances are other people are finding them useful too. 203.206.46.191 (talk) 12:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

This article does not cite any references or sources.

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 --Taelus (Talk) 07:12, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect seems rather lengthy and confusing; I only found after trying to search for the {{Unreferenced}} template. I doubt anyone would use such a long search term, and if they did they'd probably have a better time just looking up the text in the search results that follow from it. Therefore I would like to have this redirect deleted. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 21:57, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Add: User who created the redirect has been blocked for repeated vandalism. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 22:09, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - redirects from article to project space are generally a bad idea and I see no justification for this one. Few incoming links. Bridgeplayer (talk) 22:36, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and salt. Stonemason89 (talk) 23:21, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Cross-namespace redirects are almost never useful. Rje (talk) 19:28, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Tanjung Rhu Resort

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 --Taelus (Talk) 07:13, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriately PROD'd (by me) – hadn't realised PROD was unsuitable for redirects. However, this is a misleading redirect as Tanjung Rhu Resort and Tanjung Sanctuary are not the same entity, and they are operated by different companies. AJCham 21:01, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as confusing. These are separate places some distance apart. Bridgeplayer (talk) 22:42, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

John Boner

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 Retarget to John Henry Boner --Taelus (Talk) 07:16, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think we ought to delete and salt this, rather than having it redirect to Boehner's article. I'm not a Republican, but even I can see that having this redirect in the first place seems more than a little disrespectful toward Rep. Boehner, and generally we try to maintain high standards of decency at Wikipedia, especially when it comes to serious biographies like this one. Stonemason89 (talk) 19:40, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: This is tricky. Despite the potential (and in most cases, probable) pejorative nature, this is also a plausible misspelling – one which could be made entirely innocently. Some people may interpret the existence of redirect as endorsing the pejorative meaning, although I don't think such an inference is exactly fair. I'm leaning towards keep, but I'll wait until I've heard some more opinions. AJCham 21:10, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to John Henry Boner, as a perfectly useful redirect. Being disrespectful isn't an issue, see WP:RNEUTRAL. The important thing is that someone using the redirect is not confused or mislead. In this instance, though 'John Boner' is used in a pejorative sense by his political opponents, for example here, it is always in the context of Boehner. Therefore, I don't see people using Boner mistakenly as a search term. Also, the politician is pronounced Bay-ner so Boner is not likely to be entered by someone, phonetically, who has just heard the word. This is borne out by the stats; a pitiful 13 hits last month. Bridgeplayer (talk) 22:12, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Wow, I didn't even know that John Henry Boner existed. I think your idea is a good one. Stonemason89 (talk) 23:24, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to John Henry Boner, per the above reasoning. I hadn't realised that that article existed, nor was I aware of how Boehner was pronounced. AJCham 16:03, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to John Henry Boner, unless somebody seriously wants to add an item to the Boner disambiguation page for "surnames names that do not sound like and are not spelled like..." ~ Ningauble (talk) 16:21, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

South Korean House of Peers

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 all --Taelus (Talk) 07:18, 24 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The upper house of South Korea is not known as either the 'House of Lords' nor the 'House of Peers'. Further, that country does not appoint either Lords or Peers to serve in their legislature. Delete all as confusing and misleading. Bridgeplayer (talk) 14:34, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

School of Engineering

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. —fetch·comms 00:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • School of Engineering → Khazar School of Engineering and Applied Science (links to redirect • history • stats) 

There are so many schools of engineering that this it would be impractical to single this one school out. A disambiguation page might work, but I suspect that most of the schools are only briefly mentioned in their own university articles. —fetch·comms 00:04, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wait, I just deleted the target as spam. —fetch·comms 00:06, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2010_July_16&oldid=1148048123"