This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 24, 2020.
Wikipedia:LTA/Olha
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.
Not sure this person is a LTA on the English Wikipedia and should likely be moved to either Meta if its not active in the English Wikipedia or moved he if the person is active as its English page on the Dutch Wikipedia
I do not know dutch at all so i would be unable to ask the Dutch Wikipedia for permission to move to here or to meta even through its in English
🌸 1.Ayana 🌸 (
talk)
23:25, 24 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete. It's not useful to the English Wikipedia to have a redirect to an LTA page on the Dutch Wikipedia. If the user is a long term abuser here, they should have an LTA page here, if they aren't they shouldn't. This is without prejudice to any moves.
Thryduulf (
talk)
23:51, 24 July 2020 (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.
Assocation Press
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.
Keep. I created this redirect. It was 13 years ago and I no longer recall the circumstances, but I presume I saw a need for it and I don't see the harm in keeping it.
Wasted Time R (
talk)
21:57, 24 July 2020 (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.
Island Huxley novel
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.
Delete per { {db-G7}} or equivalent - as OA of the RD page, deleting page is ok with me - no problem whatsoever - thanks -
Drbogdan (
talk)
20:14, 24 July 2020 (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.
Death of Amir Tehkal
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.
This page was written as biography of a non-notable person which was moved by some editor to Death of Amir Tehkal, however it was just a torture case and he is alive. The page was moved, so this redirect makes no sense.
USaamo(
t@lk)19:38, 24 July 2020 (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.
Unbelievable (24kGoldn son
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.
@
AshMusique: for future reference, if you want a page that only you have contributed to speedily deleted (e.g. because you made a typo) then you can just place the {{G7}} template on the page and an admin will delete it for you.
Thryduulf (
talk)
17:11, 24 July 2020 (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.
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.
Unlikely that someone would look for the series under this title, because there is no evidence that it is ever referred to simply as "Bharosa"
M Imtiaz (
talk ·
contribs)
16:10, 24 July 2020 (UTC)reply
That shows only links from current revisions of pages on en.wp, so it is not a complete indicator of utility. The reasons for keeping this redirect are both the standard reasons for {{R from move}} redirects and the 60-70 hits a month it is getting. The latter suggests that it is linked from somewhere other than Wikipedia, so if the redirect is deleted the people using the redirect will be presented with a message saying we don't have an article and (depending on various factors) would they like to search for other articles and/or create a new article. This may lead to the creation of a duplicate article (which we don't want) and is definitely unhelpful.
Thryduulf (
talk)
19:18, 24 July 2020 (UTC)reply
M Imtiaz, it may pay to take a look at the guidelines surrounding RfD. These include sentences like Redirects should not be deleted just because they have no incoming links. Please do not use this as the only reason to delete a redirect. However, redirects that do have incoming links are sometimes deleted, so that is not a sufficient condition for keeping and Therefore consider the deletion only of either harmful redirects or of recent ones. —
J947 ‡ message ⁓
edits21:12, 24 July 2020 (UTC)reply
@
M Imtiaz: 60-70 hits every month is a very well used redirect. What J947 and I are trying to explain is that whatlinkshere is not, on its own, a reliable indicator of use.
Thryduulf (
talk)
23:55, 24 July 2020 (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.
Smasung galaxy s2
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.
Keep -
[1] Reasonable pageviews last year. This isn't hurting anything, and is historical enough that it's likely that old links (including external) may be in play. It's a simple transposition. I wouldn't recommend creating this if it didn't exist, but I don't see a good reason to delete it.
Hog FarmBacon23:40, 24 July 2020 (UTC)reply
J947 i wouldn't have nominated this if it weren't for fact that the redirect
Smasung doesn't exist. This is also misleading to the reader as the correct spelling is
Samsung. We shouldn't push incorrect redirects just because they are "harmless". What is to be gained by keeping this misleading redirect? theultraUsurper06:32, 25 July 2020 (UTC)reply
(
edit conflict) What does it matter that the user misspelled Samsung? The user got where they wanted to go and if we do care about the spelling, right on the first screen there are 12 instances of the word Samsung – which should rub it in. I seriously doubt an elitist attitude to typing is a better way to go than simply directing the reader to their wanted article. —
J947 ‡ message ⁓
edits06:45, 25 July 2020 (UTC)reply
J947, you are asking every time, "What is to be gained by deleting this redirect?" whenever a user nominates a redirect to be deleted. I am now asking you, what is to be gained by keeping this redirect? Do you want to close the entire RfD programme because of your philosophy? --
Soumya-8974talkcontribssubpages08:02, 25 July 2020 (UTC)reply
These redirects are better than nothing. I certainly do believe that the RfD process is helpful. Plenty of redirects deserve to be retargeted, disambiguated, or deleted altogether. I just don't see why "unlikely" should be used as a rationale for deleting, especially when
RHARMFUL – a guideline – explicitly argues against such a practice. I have found that saying What is to be gained by deleting this redirect? is a good way to get the point across, effectively being a rephrase of this passage from
RGUIDE: In discussions, always ask yourself whether or not a redirect would be helpful to the reader. —
J947 ‡ message ⁓
edits02:50, 26 July 2020 (UTC)reply
That's exactly what i'm saying. It doesn't matter whether or not anything is gained from deleting incorrect redirects. Even if the user misspelled Samsung, WP will still suggest the correct spelling, so such redirects aren't needed. theultraUsurper09:54, 25 July 2020 (UTC)reply
It feels snarky to say it, but note that the editor above has been blocked for many reasons, including disruptive RfD nominations. —
J947 ‡ message ⁓
edits02:50, 26 July 2020 (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.
1C
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.
Round-robin swap with
1C (disambiguation) per above. To be fair, the company "appear[ed] to be the primary topic" back in 2010, but I'm not sure this is still the case ten years later, since this term could also refer to these other articles the nom alludes to. Regards,
SONIC67818:20, 24 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep since the other topics listed on the DAB that could compete with the company on pageviews, namely
Cup (unit) and
Cent (currency), are partial matches that are very unlikely to be searched for using "1C". Also, the tree of "per X" given above seems to be based on almost nothing. Several refer to Narky Blert, who in turn references
WP:MALPLACED, which just describes DAB pages that were perhaps named wrong to begin with but provides no argument for the company not being primary here, and this Teahouse thread which only questions whether the company is primary with no argument for why it wouldn't be. Could the others who voted here provide actual reasons per
WP:PRIMARYTOPIC that the company isn't primary, rather than "per above"? I'm not saying there's no argument for it, just that I think more explanation would be helpful.
-- Fyrael (
talk)
19:17, 24 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment. Please read what I wrote, and
WP:MALPLACED. This discussion is about whether or not the
WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT meaning of 1C is or is not 1C (company). If the consensus is that it is, nothing more need be done; if it is that it is not, a technical error will need to be corrected.
Pageviews mean less than nothing in a case like this. Of course the company gets more pageviews than any of the other topics - any reader who types 1C into the searchbox and hits Enter finds themself looking at IC (company), no matter what they were actually looking for!
Narky Blert (
talk)
21:51, 24 July 2020 (UTC)reply
We're agreed that it's simply a primary topic discussion, but yeah, for some reason I failed to take into account that the company has been the de facto primary up until now and would thus get all the page views.
-- Fyrael (
talk)
05:51, 25 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Further comment. These were the maintenance tags on
1C Company when this discussion was opened:
This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's
terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's
content policies, particularly
neutral point of view. (May 2020)
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.
IDevice
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. As the nominator is facing a CIR block for wasting editors' time over redirects and no one else has voiced support for their suggestions, I'm closing this as no consensus without prejudice toward further discussion if someone else wants to re-raise this issue. signed, Rosguilltalk21:31, 31 July 2020 (UTC)reply
@
UltraUsurper: the reference I pointed to says "An iDevice generally refers to any Apple mobile device that runs Apple's iOS operating system" and the current target is therefore the most logical.
Shhhnotsoloud (
talk)
07:40, 24 July 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Shhhnotsoloud: That's just one reference. From my research, iDevice refers to any Apple product, not just iPhones. Plus, Timeline of Apple Inc. products also covers iOS devices, so it seems like the most logical choice to me
theultraUsurper07:45, 24 July 2020 (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.
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 speedy keep. This was a talk page that simply ended up pointed to the wrong target, and now matches the article redirect. --
ferret (
talk)
11:39, 24 July 2020 (UTC)reply
Speedy close. Redirect blanked per
WP:RGUIDE: "Requests for deletion of redirects from one page's talk page to another's do not need to be listed here. Anyone can remove the redirect by blanking the page..."
Shhhnotsoloud (
talk)
07:37, 24 July 2020 (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.
Kalpit Veerwal
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 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.