Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 18[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 18, 2014.

File:Outoftheblue.jpg[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 March 25#File:Outoftheblue.jpg

Shiggy[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 dabify Shiggy, delete the others. --BDD (talk) 16:19, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence that this person is commonly called "Shiggy", so we should not spread these invented names. Note that there is some evidence of fans calling him "Shigsy", so that existing redirect is not nominated here. 172.9.22.150 (talk) 02:50, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have no problem with this being a disambiguation page if the items listed really are referred to as "Shiggy". 172.9.22.150 (talk) 03:33, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 16:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I don't think 'Shiggy' is a Japanese nickname Ned1230|Whine|Stalk 16:05, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

XHDEB-TDT[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. As noted below, it may be appropriate to recreate this if the name is verifiable. At the moment, it appears it may have been a Wikipedia invention. --BDD (talk) 16:22, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen no evidence of the "XHDEB" call sign ever being used, and certainly not on this station. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:10, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Google Search gives me a link to "Wikipedia Project Mexico/Assessment" that starts "XHDEB-TDT have renamed themselves to XHDTV-TDT" and " XHDTV-TV renamed to XHDEB-TDT" but I have difficulty bringing up the link (sorry). Are these callsigns starting XH- generally used for Mexican television stations? (European television or radio stations don't generally use callsigns like that so I am just guessing). If it was renamed, then it should stay, but I'm sorry but Google won't let me go through the link. The link goes via uc.hao87.eu.org which I presume is dead. There's also a link [here at movies.vmeso.com] but that essentially links back to Wikipedia so is not much use. Si Trew (talk) 05:19, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 16:28, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: User:Wcquidditch shared some info in XHDTV-TDT history —PC-XT+ 00:43, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Seems like either one of our TV editors was misdirected or there was some kind of call change that was called back before it went into effect. If the calls do change I have no prejudice against re-creation for XHDEB. Simon, the links you had were all Wiki mirrors; there are no sources for the XHDEB calls at all to be found (XH and XE are indeed the prefixes for Mexican television calls). Nate • (chatter) 09:40, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Next Swiss federal election[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. --BDD (talk) 16:23, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect as a result of renaming page: too abiguous to be a useful redirect. TheLongTone (talk) 12:32, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm now Neutral due to the established naming conventions referenced in comments below (but I still am holding on a bit to my WP:CRYSTALBALL point, but it seems like the naming conventions overturn that point.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:33, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There is actually an article called Next United Kingdom general election which will likely become a redirect when the election gets a finalized date. I may be wrong but I believe it was also previously the title for the previous election article as well. The title was also a result of a page move.--70.49.72.34 (talk) 03:10, 8 March 2014 (UTC)--70.49.72.34 (talk) 03:10, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Thanks for finding that. But the Next United Kingdom General Election is well established since now there are fixed terms for elections to the UK Parliament rather than the Government of the day timing it to their own advantage (this is one of the policies agreed by the UK Coalition Goverment in 2010 right at the start and is in the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011), so that is not CRYSTAL when that will be held and the article gives details of UK MPs who have declared they will stand down, and so on. In any case, that is an article not a redirect, so I don't see how that is relevant to the discussion about a redirect. Si Trew (talk) 10:20, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
There's also a Next United States Presidental Election; it was created in November 2008 and retargeted accordingly in December 2012. --BDD (talk) 16:27, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Really don't see the problem with this redirect - the 2015 election is the next federal election. And the comments above about the use of "next general election" and CRYSTAL are completely wrong. There are numerous examples of "next election" articles for elections with no set date (Next German federal election, Next Irish general election, Next Italian general election, Next Dutch general election, Next Greek legislative election to name but a few). It's even part of the naming criteria WP:NC-GAL#Elections and referendums. Number 57 22:26, 9 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This looks like a roaming redirect, where the target changes every so often. It is of a similar nature as current pages. The only problem I see with this, other than extra work, is that some people may use it without realizing that it will not point to the same page in the future. There is really no obvious documentation for redirects, so it could be a problem. If not for that, I would actually like the idea. If parser functions or variables can be used in redirects, the incremental work could be minimized. —PC-XT+ 05:24, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, that's adding salt to the fire. The point of redirects is to make it easier for readers to find what they are looking for, not to make it easier for editors to point things wherever they fancy. If you did that, RfD would not exist since no topic could be discussed for a keep, redirect, or delete and so on, since it would be a moving target. Si Trew (talk) 22:31, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say it was ideal. It can be confusing. If it is used to help readers find what they are looking for, however, rather than a second name for the particular article it is pointing to at the time, it could be ok from my viewpoint. I'm not sure I understand your point of no RfD. The redirect would not change very often, and could still be deleted if there is consensus to do so. The article could still be discussed at AfD. If you were referring to parser functions or variables in redirects, they would define the moving target, which I believe could be discussed in much the same manner as any other defined target. TfD and MfD work. I understand a roaming redirect may be too dynamic for the standard encyclopedia, but this is Wikipedia. —PC-XT+ 05:24, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Not hurting anything, and #57 points out established naming conventions that use this style. Unless you're trying to get them to change the date, you're not going to dispute the idea that the 2015 election will be the next federal election in Switzerland. There's nothing wrong with having a redirect whose target is designed to change once every several years; something that would change daily or weekly would be a problem, but going several years between necessary target-changes is not a problem. Nyttend (talk) 22:18, 11 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree. An encyclopaedia should be a permanent store of knowledge not something that changes on the whim of a government, federal or otherwise. Of course, we all try to improve the knowledge bank every day (at least I hope we do) but by deliberately having redirects that are repointed whenever a new election comes up is not helping anyone trying to research. The next local council and European elections in the UK for example I think are on May 8, but there is not a redirect or article for Next European Union Election in the UK. Si Trew (talk) 22:25, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 16:26, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it. With Next Greek General Election, Next Maltese General Election, Next United Kingdom General Election etc there seems to be a general a pattern here. I don't like it, but if that is the pattern and it helps others to search, stet let it stand; I can't always be right :) Si Trew (talk) 23:17, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - a common search term, and if you don't send people somewhere, they're just going to create it or get frustrated. I agree a bit that having to update it periodically seems unideal, and would prefer to direct it to List of Swiss federal elections or something like that, but no such page seems to exist. WilyD 09:54, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Again, no one is looking for this. 'Next swiss election.' Rly? Ned1230|Whine|Stalk 16:06, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Despotate of Sinope[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 procedural close. --BDD (talk) 16:40, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No such state ever existed, and the term is a neologism resulting from the original 2005 article in the Catalan Wikipedia. Constantine ✍ 07:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete what does that mean? Ned☸☯1230 13:59, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[[1]] here it says that the despotate of Sinope was part of the Empire of Trebizond. I can speak Catalan vaguely so I could probably translate that back if that were useful. Si Trew (talk) 23:22, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In fact I can translate that back. It is only a stub at the Catalan WP do you want me to translate that back? It is easy for me to translate it back but I don't like to do it while things are under discussion. Si Trew (talk) 23:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PROCEDURALE CLOSE please. I have made lots of slips but that is translated now from the Catalan and is no longer a reidrect but an article. Not a very goood one I admit but it is not a redirect any more. Si Trew (talk)

I can actally speak Catalan but apparently can't type. I can't speak it well and I will tidy it up tomorrow but there we are we have a stub instad of an R SO this should go. Just missing all the time on this KB. Si Trew (talk) 00:20, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural close/keep as stub for now —PC-XT+ 03:20, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • If it can't be reasonably sourced, it can go to AfD. —PC-XT+ 06:16, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have one reliable source which I put in the RfD. I need to tidy this up. But it is not a matter for RfD now since it isan article not a redirect. That is why I asked for a procedural close. Si Trew (talk) 08:42, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh... The article was redirected and then RfD'd for a reason, stated quite clearly in my edit summary. Having an unreferenced WP:OR article on a topic in the Catalan Wikipedia is not in itself evidence that the subject in question actually existed. Likewise, the site linked above is a) not a WP:RS, and b) says nothing about the "Despotate of Sinope", as opposed to the city of Sinope, which indeed was part of the Empire of Trebizond. Instead of recreating the article and obliterating the deletion notice, much trouble would have been spared for all users involved by simply asking me here or at my talk page. Anyhow, there is now a full AfD on this article. Constantine ✍ 12:21, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's not WP:OR. It is a bit sort of OR since it is a translation and a bad one from the Catalan, but a quick search shows that this despotate did actually exist and I actually found a reference to it before even starting the translation. Anyway how are others to judge without the rough translation? So I made a rough translation, that is a procedural close cos it is no longer a redirect, and then it can go to AFD if necessary. Si Trew (talk) 13:06, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion has moved to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Despotate of Sinope, so this can probably be closed. Thank you. —PC-XT+ 17:52, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Kinneil[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 Kinneil (disambiguation) moved. --BDD (talk) 16:45, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Additional articles with 'Kinneil' have made dab page Kinneil (disambiguation) necessary. If this deletion agreed, the dab page can be moved to 'Kinneil'. Davidships (talk) 04:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment why not just open a WP:RM request to move the disambiguation page? -- 70.50.151.11 (talk) 06:24, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguation I'd say just make 'Kinneil (disambig)' 'Kinneil.' Ned1230|Whine|Stalk 14:01, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Move over DAB. Just move it. Si Trew (talk) 23:31, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

United States House of Representatives elections in Illinois, 2004[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. --BDD (talk) 16:46, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Borderline WP:RFD#DELETE #10: the target does contain some information on the subject, but the redirect could unquestionably be expanded into an article (we have United States House of Representatives elections in Indiana, 2004, United States House of Representatives elections in Illinois, 2006, etc.). – Arms & Hearts (talk) 04:15, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No one is looking for this. Too specific. Ned1230|Whine|Stalk 14:02, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. People living in Illinois in 2004 may have been, but it hasn't had many hits lately. Si Trew (talk) 23:32, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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/2014_March_18&oldid=1065800721"