January 14

WP:Dick

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasKeep. The consensus is that the time to delete it has not come yet.Ruslik_Zero13:20, 23 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Dick →meta:Don't be a dick(links to redirect •history •stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

The need to link toWP:Dick is not a requirement for effective communication on Wikipedia. These redirects should be redlinksTom Pippens (talk)19:08, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This is the wrong place to discuss this IMHO it is more suited in MFD. If a "delete" decision is reached please allow me to replace every instance of "WP:DICK" and "Wikipedia:Dick" with "Meta:Don't be a dick" so that the archived discussions have the relevant link. People will still be usingm:Dick mind you so I do not really see the point of this nomination. --A Certain White Cat^chi? 20:51, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

It should also be noted that the similarWikipedia:Don't be a dick was kept by consensus 5 days ago and that redirected to the same place. Is there any reason that you think it will be any difference in this case?--70.24.206.51 (talk)22:18, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• It's goin' ta snow This is a generally accepted "behavioral guideline" on WP.Hurricanefan25 (talk · contribs)23:20, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as a valid shortcut. It's funny to see this nomination less then a month afterWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 December 31#Wikipedia:Don't be a dick. —Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk)23:57, 15 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would sayDelete as cross namespace redirect, but it is more than that, essentially it as a cross webspace redirect, i.e. it goes to a different site (Wikimedia.) Obvious delete.

I presume, what nobody else has said, is that some silly schoolboy think it is funny to have an article titled "Dick" (in UK English that is slang for penis). Let him have his fun doing so, but as far as I see it, it has no benefit for Wikipedia UK or Wikimedia.

Strong delete.Si Trew (talk)13:16, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

m:Dick is a core policy though. And project namespace has no articles. --A Certain White Cat^chi? 18:28, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

• Keep for now, as a natural shortcut to an established essay. When (not if) Wikipedia outgrows its puerile adolescent stage the essay will be deleted or rewritten and re-titled, but Wikipedia is only eleven years old so it will be a while. ~Ningauble (talk)15:36, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Per Hurricanefan25.Niteshift36 (talk)21:37, 22 January 2012 (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.

articles prefixed by "c:"

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasClose. If this bug is fixed the pages can be dealt with by non-controversial admin actions. So, this discussion is not necessary. In addition, not all those page are redirects.Ruslik_Zero16:56, 22 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bugzilla:4676 has been reopened to introduce "c:" as a shortcut for commons. There are two files and several redirects that need to be deleted, seeSpecial:Prefix Index/C:!a×p_de^Hello!22:41, 14 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Is the request the deletion of these pages so thatc: would link directly to commons? --A Certain White Cat^chi? 20:37, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

I fail to get the point of this nomination. If the feature gets introduced, the redirects should be deleted perWP:SPEEDY criteria G6 or G9. What are we supposed to discuss here? —Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk)00:02, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment why would you need to delete any files? They are used byFile:C:xyz there's no confusion or intersection withc:File:xyz orc:File:C:xyz. Why would you delete files in any case, instead of renaming them?76.65.128.132 (talk)05:34, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

.

• Comment simply a technical argument agreeing with Dmitrij (and I respect him very much). As it stands with Wikipedia, we have to assess each article in isolation, not refer to other articles or other site. I agree with Dmitiri giving a bug reference is rather sad, really, and there is a fairly simple answer to that:The bug has been reported, the cause has been diagnosed, you are free to edit the software, now either bitch or make it better. The argument about Caps c versus lower C is moot here, since the Wikimedia software will take an inital cap in either case (seeWP:TITLE,WP:NAME andWP:PF (parser functions) so that argument falls at the first hurdle.Si Trew (talk)13:23, 16 January 2012 (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.