October 12

Assorted Wikipedia Maxims

1. Wiki is not paper →Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
2. Wiki isn't paper →Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
3. Wikipedia is not made of paper →Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
4. Wikipedia is not a crystall ball →Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
5. Wikipedia is not a mud wrestling pit →Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
6. Wikipedia is not a soap box →Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not
7. Wikipedia contains spoilers →Wikipedia:Spoiler warning
8. Wikipedia does not give medical advice →Wikipedia:Medical disclaimer

All eight of the above are unnecessary CNRs that are not encyclopedic topics.Gavia immer (u|t|c)19:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all per nom.Khatru220:01, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete all per nom. (Note that some of the source pages are misspelled, as well.) —Arthur Rubin |(talk)18:09, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep ofWiki is not paper andWikipedia contains spoilers. These have history which predates the creation of the independent namespaces.KeepWikipedia is not a soap box andWikipedia does not give medical advice because they have at times been in significant use on Talk and project pages - clear evidence that lots of people find them useful. No opinion on the newly created and little used redirects. Being a CNR is not inherently evil and there is no possibility that these links will ever be confused for anything but the policy pages that they point to.Rossami(talk)22:36, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The two 'Wiki ...' redirects imply that the policy page describesWikis in general, which is too broad.John Vandenberg22:50, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong delete for all, as cross-namespace redirects. --Rbraunwa15:59, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• MoveWiki is not paper toWikipedia is not paper orWikipedia:Is not paper andDeleteWiki isn't paper andWikipedia is not made of paper.
  MoveWikipedia is not a crystall ball toWikipedia is not a crystal ball. The redirect is used to construct prose so the spelling mistake doesnt need to be left to help people find the right page;WP:NOT is very easy to find.
  No opinion on theWikipedia is... redirects as they are harmless CNR used for prose purposes.
  John Vandenberg22:50, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Access denied →File system permissions

There is more to "Access denied" than just file permissions!--QuentinSmith13:07, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Any alternatives you can suggest?CP/M^comm |Wikipedia Neutrality Project|16:10, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This is a stereotypical computer error message that is indeed related tofile system permissions. There is no reason to delete it for pointing it at that target, and if the nominator feels that some other target is warranted, no action is required here - it can simply be changed.Gavia immer (u|t|c)17:50, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Also used on login screens, and (although I don't have a cite) possibly in general usage for any denial of access. If changed to a disambig page, it goes out of scope for RFD. —Arthur Rubin |(talk)18:11, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm inclined to agree with Gavia, although itmight be prudent to change to a small disambiguation page pointing tofile system permissions anduser authentication. However, that might be considered excessive and unnecessary.WhiteLightning08:41, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not everyone is a computer freak, not everyone logs as a non-privileged user.Pavel Vozenilek14:28, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The redirect is not without merit; if it can be improved,be bold.John Vandenberg22:55, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

William Davidson Institute at the University of Michigan →William Davidson Institute

Totally unnecessary redirect page, no non-trivial edit history, no links to redirect, all contents from both original articles now live atWilliam Davidson Institute in a much nicer form ... my mistake, I could have avoided the whole situation had I looked closer for duplicate articles.JubalHarshaw18:45, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy keep to prevent a third duplicate article. —CharlotteWebb20:46, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The edit history is important to retain as content was migrated into theWilliam Davidson Institute article.John Vandenberg23:00, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Risk Management Information Systems - RIMS →Risk Management Information Systems

Misspelled redirect page with no real edit history, just cleaning things up after a page move, thanks.JubalHarshaw19:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom.John Vandenberg06:40, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editcountitis →Wikipedia:Editcountitis

Cross-namespace, no history.Khatru221:37, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Helfferich →Helf

Helfferich is in several articles, such asHelfferich Glacier, various references, articles including information on German minister Karl Helfferich. There are variant spellings on the name, such as Helfrich, Helfrick, etc. But Helf? seems like a whole different group of names and people.Deirdre00:05, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]