This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 9, 2016.
- 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 wasdelete.Deryck C.20:58, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This cross-namespace redirect, from the mainspace to a hoax article that is being preserved in the Wikipedia namespace, should be deleted. Cross-namespace redirects from the mainspace should be avoided in general, and we certainly should not have redirects to hoax articles coming from the mainspace. —Granger (talk·contribs)22:47, 9 January 2016 (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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasspeedy deletedWP:CSD#G10.JohnCD (talk)12:23, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Derogatory nickname for the store; not mentioned in target, unlikely search term.Ten Pound Hammer •(What did I screw up now?)21:54, 9 January 2016 (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.
Islamic Republic of Persia
[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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion waskeep.Deryck C.20:11, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Implausible search. The target article does not contain any such phrase. Invented by author - in real world, no entity by such name ever existed or was to exist. Google returns a single reliable hit, likely someone's mistake. Redirect is implausible and useless because any sane person would first go toPersia orIran. Unfortunately, the original creator has added several dozens of such implausible redirects (the majority of his/her edit history is creating redirects), many of which are now being speedied.kashmiri TALK12:18, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Please never accept the first Google number as authoritative! Just click "Next" on the results page and you will be given the real number of results: 32 (THIRTY-TWO). Out of which the vast majority are irrelevant (fantasy tales, forums, etc.). So, result can only be Delete.kashmiri TALK00:01, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I used a different search engine and found many fewer sources - and about half of them were false positives. But there were still enough to demonstrate that this was not merely an invention of the original creator. I don't see any probability of confusion with this redirect and the valid hits are enough to substantiate it.Keep.Rossami(talk)04:33, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Iran is also known as Persia (Persia redirects toIran) and the current republic is officially the Islamic Republic of Iran. There has never been adifferent Islamic republic in the area known as Persia. Perfectly plausible and perfectly harmless. Kashmiri, your CSD log for this month shows you're on a bit of a spree of speedying redirects, and your success rate is somewhere just below 50%. In particular, I can't imagine why you would think thatDoctor Pepper ArenaDoctor Pepper Arena (Dr Pepper Arena),Ben and JerrysBen and Jerrys (Ben & Jerry's),bromhydric acidbromhydric acid (hydrobromic acid) orchicken tikka marsalachicken tikka marsala (chicken tikka masala) wereimplausible typos to the point of obvious deletion. Consider taking a break from this.Ivanvector 🍁 (talk)16:46, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for advice on breaks,Ivanvector. I do not agree that "marsala" is aplausible typo formasala. Why not also "marsarla", "marsalah", "masallah", etc.? We should keep sane and avoid adding junk to Wikipedia as it severely degrades Search experience. I am also surprised that you must have missed the fact thatall the redirects I RxD'ed had been created by a single editor whosenearly all contributions to WP have been adding innumerable and mostly implausible redirects - likeMuttonhead Quail Movement redirecting toMuttahida Qaumi Movement. A 50% deletion rate already at RxD is not only fair but also gives a testimony to the quality of that editor's work. Consider working on your WP research skills.kashmiri TALK00:21, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, but my research skills are alright. I did see that you've been on a crusade of exclusively tagging one user's contributions for speedy deletion for the flimsiest of rationales. You've hit on some because you happened to be right, but having found a few questionable contributions by one user doesn't automatically mean thatall of that user's contributions are then speediable. Even Neelix did not get that treatment, and we made huge exceptions to deal with that mess; this is not even close. As I noted, many of their contributions are perfectly reasonable redirects. And not just me, many of the admins declining your R3 tags have said the same thing. Marsala is a plausible mishearing of masala, particularly for speakers of non-rhotic English dialects, and possibly confusing withchicken marsala, a similarly-named but distinct dish. I also see that a couple days ago the user offered to discuss their redirects with you when they noticed you were mass-speedying all of their contribs, and you responded with a quite incorrect interpretation of the purpose of redirects. Redirects arenot required to be notable topics. We very frequently have redirects from things associated with a notable topic, so that users searching for a non-notable thing can find some information about what they're looking for. The song titles of the Eurovision competition are perfect examples of this. And whynot "marsalah" or "masallah" if they help users find the information they're looking for? None of this degrades search, our search engine is smart enough to mostly disregard redirects, except for exact matches. Try it! Seesearch results for "chicken tikka masala" - the "marsala" redirect isn't in the list. It won't be in the list unless you type "chicken tikka marsala" exactly, and then it only shows up as a redirect to the proper topic. What part of that is degrading search experience? They didn't createchickpea titmouse macaroni,that would be R3 implausible.Ivanvector 🍁 (talk)02:14, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I can only repeat what I wrote above. But please go back to that user's contributions and doublecheck whether I tagged "all" of them – I recall leaving quite a lot of his/her contributions intact, considering them constructive and valuable. See, else I would reported him/her at ANI. Yes I tagged most (but not all!) of the song titles perWP:SONG – feel free to see the notability guidelines there. The reverts by HW had little to do with policy and more with the history of our interaction, which however is OT here. As to search engine, I had in mind that little box in right upper corner which shows all the redirects.kashmiri TALK03:20, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Rossami and per Ivanvector's comments on this redirect. Note also that "The Islamic Republic of IranThe Islamic Republic of Iran" exists as a redirect to the same target.Thryduulf (talk)02:09, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- comment (keep is OK, but I wouldn't create it). I sympathise with User:Kashmiri's concerns. A redirect from a extended sentence to part of that sentence is something the search engine (plus the reader's brain - they do have one) should handle without the need of a redirect. Also we should not bundle a bunch a synonyms to make a redirect, a silly example would be "Connected Lands of America" redirect to "United States of America". But this one seams acceptable, as explained by others above. -Nabla (talk)10:05, 16 January 2016 (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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete.Deryck C.20:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Topkek is (1) a brand of muffin and (2) internet slang for laughing. It should redirect to an article on one of those, but there is currently no appropriate target. It’s an unlikely typo for “Topeka”, especially as it already means something else.Gorobay (talk)19:32, 9 January 2016 (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.
Wikipedia:Narasingha Malla Deb
[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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasspeedy delete perWP:CSD#G6. See longer comment below.Thryduulf (talk)02:15, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
wrong Article namespaceBongan®→TalkToMe←16:29, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete The article was moved to this title by mistake when moving out of draft space to article space and was here for approximately only 1 minute in November 2014 (moving a page to Wikipedia: space when intending to move to the article namespace was (and maybe still is) a very common mistake for reasons I don't know have ever been established).WP:CSD#G6 allows for the deletion of pages obviously by mistake, including those created in the wrong namespace. Although not explicit, discussion at CSD talk confirms the spirit of the criterion allows the deletion of redirects left behind when fixing page moves to the wrong namespace.Thryduulf (talk)02:15, 10 January 2016 (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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion waskeep. There's little appetite to delete.Seamless is a disambiguation page with a link towikt:seamlessness so the soft redirect option is covered as well.Deryck C.21:00, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Propose deletion. No articles link to "seamlessness"; it redirects to a disambiguation page which does not include anything that corresponds. There is no article on the condition of being without seams.MB (talk)04:34, 9 January 2016 (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.
