Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dmmaus (talk | contribs) at 08:12, 9 May 2004 (=May 8= I should spell the requested deletion properly...). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Sometimes, we want to delete redirects. Hence this page.

Other Votes for deletion (VfD) pages: copyright violations -- images -- votes for deletion

Deletion guidelines for administrators -- deletion log -- archived delete debates -- undeletion -- blankpages -- shortpages -- move to Wiktionary -- Bad jokes -- pages needing attention -- m:deletionism -- m:deletion management redesign -- Wikipedia:Cleanup

List articles to be deleted in this format:

When should we delete a redirect?

To delete a redirect without replacing it with a new article, list it here. This isn't necessary if you just want to replace a redirect with an article: see meta:redirect for instructions on how to do this.

You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met:

  1. The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. (see meta:searches and redirects for proposals to lessen this impact)
  2. The redirect might cause confusion. For example, if "Adam B. Smith" was redirected to "Andrew B. Smith", because Andrew was accidentally called Adam in one source, this could cause confusion with the article on Adam Smith, so it should be deleted.
  3. The redirect is offensive and/or POV, such as "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs", unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is discussed in the article.
  4. The redirect makes no sense, such as [[Pink elephants painting daisies]] to love
  5. It is a cross-space redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace.
  6. If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to an article that does not exist, it can be deleted immediately, though you should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first.

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

  1. They have a potentially useful page history. If the redirect was created by renaming a page with that name, and the page history just mentions the renaming, and for one of the reasons above you want to delete the page, copy the page history to the Talk page of the article it redirects to. The act of renaming is useful page history, and even more so if there has been discussion on the page name.
  2. They would aid accidental linking and make the creation of duplicate articles less likely
  3. They aid searches on certain terms.
  4. Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful - this is not because the other person is a liar, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways.

For example, redirecting Dubya to George W. Bush might be considered offensive, but the redirect aids accidental linking, makes the creation of duplicate articles less likely, and is useful to some people, so it should not be deleted.

Older than 5 days

People voting here may also be interested in the discussion on the policy regarding the deletion of offensive redirects.

April 21

  • Wizards_(Movie) -> Wizards_(movie) (note lowercase m) I created the first page erroneously, then moved it to the other when I found that the convention was to use "movie" rather than "Movie." This was done immediately (in the same web-editing session) so there should be no links through the re-direct (nothing to get broken). I'm just trying to clean up after my own mess.JimD 02:23, 2004 Apr 23 (UTC)
    • Keep, valid redirect. RickK 23:01, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
    • Delete as it is the author who requested it, and it was requested soon enough that it doesn't break any links. Angela. 22:14, Apr 28, 2004 (UTC)
    • Keep. anthony (see warning)
    • Keep. Harmless/typo protection/keeps someone from inadvertantly starting a second version of the article. Niteowlneils 05:17, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

April 26

April 27

  • Carrier (StarCraft). Currently blank. Last edit summary was Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason (There should not have been a redirect here). (moved here by Angela - this is not a vote)
    • Has since been restored by Wmahan, but no reason has been given for it.
    • Keep. The former article was moved to the Protoss#Air section

April 30


May 2

  • Ohosaka redirects to Osaka.
    • Keep unless no one else uses this transliteration, otherwise delete. --Jiang 00:57, 3 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
    • No one else uses it and I can't see it being a common misspelling
    • Keep. anthony (see warning)
      • This is a deliberate misspelling. You'd really have to try to type Ohosaka. In kana (Japanese phonetic script) it's written O-o-sa-ka; there's no ho in it at all. Exploding Boy 23:17, May 3, 2004 (UTC)

volunteer fire dept

There are excessive links to this throughout the article and Wikipedia namespaces. I'm trying to clean them up without losing any relevant history, because I believe that excessive prominence of the page may confuse new contributors.


New requests

(on May 10: since May 5)

May 5

Template:VfD-US Highway 110

  • In the U.S., interstate highway numbers are in a different "number space" than U.S. highway numbers. So I-394 is the same road as a section of US-12 and there is (AFAIK) no US-394. Sound confusing? It is, though on the roads the signs are different colors which helps. The link should be deleted because the two topics are unrelated. UninvitedCompany 16:06, 6 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. If anything, it should be on the historical U.S. 110. --Minesweeper 01:21, May 9, 2004 (UTC)
  • To Ben Brockert: Jiang moved the discussion from VfD because I erroneously started the discussion there. He noted the move on my User page. Sorry for the inconvenience! --Robertb-dc 14:42, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]


May 6

  • AmericA -> America Old CamelCase redirect. Nothing links here. Nobody's ever going to try to link here again. There's no point to it. Grendelkhan 16:32, 2004 May 6 (UTC)
    • Delete. Niteowlneils 05:17, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
    • Aren't CamelCase items kept because of old search engine links? RickK 00:53, 9 May 2004 (UTC) [reply]
      • I've never heard of that. Is there any example where that's actually been done? And what sort of search engine still has links to CamelCase articles---when did Wikipedia ever use CamelCase? Grendelkhan 01:03, 2004 May 9 (UTC)
    • I wouldn't miss this if it were deleted, but since it's causing no harm, I suppose it should be kept. Additionally, it has part of the editing history in its page history, so to be compliant with the GFDL, it should remain. There are plenty of other CamelCase redirs still lurking around (e.g. EcheloN). --Minesweeper 01:21, May 9, 2004 (UTC)

May 7

Got another idea. Would it be useful as a disambig page to universities with schools with that name? Niteowlneils 04:46, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]
PS The article was just created, so nothing links there. Niteowlneils 05:17, 7 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

May 8

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion&oldid=3510154"