User talk:Daniel C. Boyer/redirect

_Wikipedia is the new high Tech KKK. Who's purpose is to attempt to slander people they don't like.... There is no freedom of the press here. They write what they want to hear. Cowards who hide behind code names.

_____________________________________________________________________________ There was some discussion on votes for deletion, which is only in the history of that page (as far as I can make out). I might salvage it sometime. Martin 14:46, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Deleting the Charles C. Boyer redirect
[Charles C. Boyer is] a name by which Daniel C. Boyer has mistakenly (and rarely) been called. --Daniel C. Boyer


 * Given that Charles Boyer was a rather famous actor, and that your name isn't Charles, despite what a small minority of people might think, I've listed this on Votes for deletion. --Camembert


 * I can understand this; the reason for it is this page: http://forum.psrabel.com/biografien/boyer.html (by which by no means am I saying that the redirect shouldn't be gotten rid of; I am just reporting the reason for my making this unusual redirect). --Daniel C. Boyer 18:00 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Said page has had its title changed. Redirect can be deleted. Martin 11:12 24 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Yes, I found that page eventually. I doubt, however, that there's much chance of somebody mistakenly linking to "Charles C. Boyer" within the wikipedia. I suppose this page could become a disambiguation page rather than being deleted (I might do that later tonight, when I'm more in the mood, if nobody gets there before me). --Camembert


 * O.k.; better idea. --Daniel C. Boyer 18:09 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * No disambiguation page please -- completely unnecessary here. --Eloquence 16:03 26 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Delete Charles C. Boyer - currently redirects to Daniel C. Boyer for some mysterious reason. This is misleading, as there is a rather famous Charles Boyer (redirecting it to him instead, however, probably isn't much good, since he doesn't seem to have a middle name at all). (I don't mind the other Boyer redirects, btw, just this one.) --Camembert 13:11 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * see title of http://forum.psrabel.com/biografien/boyer.html. --Daniel C. Boyer 17:58 20 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Email them and tell them to change it. Here you go, here's a contact form. I vote for deletion. -- Tim Starling 00:01 21 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * It's been changed; the redirect should be deleted. --Jiang 05:59 22 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * I agree that it should be deleted. --Daniel Quinlan 05:33 21 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Could someone delete the Charles C. Boyer one too? Someone can make a real Charles Boyer page later, but his middle initial may not have been C.


 * This ("Charles C. Boyer") has been extensively discussed elsewhere. I may have been wrong about this, but people have mischaracterised my intent.  I was never trying to get myself confused with Charles Boyer.  --Daniel C. Boyer 15:52 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Deleting the mis-spelling redirects
There was some discussion on VfD prior to this (now lost in history), which then moved over (as a general issue) to deletion policy - @ Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy/redirects/Archive1.


 * 16 of the 17 name redirects to Daniel C. Boyer which were added by Daniel C. Boyer: Daniel Boyer, D. C. Boyer, Daniel Christopher Boyer, Danielcboyer, D.C. Boyer, Dan Boyer, DC Boyer, Daniel C. Boeyr, Daniel C. Bohyer, Daniel C. Bopyer, Daniel C. Boye, M. Daniel C. Boyer, Daniel C. Boytr, Mr. Daniel C. Boyer, Dboyer, Daniel C. Boyet
 * These completely overwhelm any search for "Boyer" as a last name and don't help users searching for a "Daniel" or "Dan".  If they were really needed, someone else could have added them.  By way of comparision to the 17 name redirects for Daniel C. Boyer, George W. Bush, one of the well-known people with the most redirects I could find, only has 11 redirects for his name (some of them are a bit pejorative and some are due to people mistakenly looking for George Bush, Jr. and such) and he's the current US President. Even John F. Kennedy only has 4, C. S. Lewis has 3, Lyndon B. Johnson has 3, Iain M. Banks has 3, Harry S. Truman has 3, James Danforth Quayle has 2, F. Scott Fitzgerald has 1, etc. --Daniel Quinlan 05:03 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * The 17th should go too. There's no good reason why a user page should redirect to an article: User:Daniel C. Boyuer. --Daniel Quinlan 05:24 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * I vote for deleting all of them except Daniel Boyer. -- Tim Starling 05:48 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * I agree with Tim. It is highly unlikely that anyone would try any of the above, with the possible exception of Daniel Boyer. --bdesham 15:01 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * Daniel Boyer and Daniel C. Boyer are legit. The other redirects are unnecessary. The article should stay. --Jiang 08:02 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * I can live with the single redirect of Daniel Boyer proposed by yourself and Tim Starling. --Daniel Quinlan 10:05 18 Jul 2003 (UTC)

On VfD, Martin argued that "These are valid redirects, and should stay, in accordance with deletion policy" - the resulting discussion can be found at Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy/redirects/Archive1.

Daniel C. Boyet is just a redirect. My name was so listed in an exhibition catalogue, so there is some possibility someone would look for me under that name. --Daniel C. Boyer

[Delete the following] REDIRECT pages to his name. With the exception of Daniel Boyer, I would like to propose the deletion of the following unreasonable redirect pages that all point at Daniel C. Boyer now that the deletion policy discussion (where the thread had been moved) seems to have concluded:


 * D. C. Boyer, Daniel Christopher Boyer, Danielcboyer, D.C. Boyer, Charles C. Boyer, Dan Boyer, DC Boyer, Daniel C. Boeyr, Daniel C. Bohyer, Daniel C. Bopyer, Daniel C. Boye, M. Daniel C. Boyer, Daniel C. Boytr, Mr. Daniel C. Boyer, Dboyer, and Daniel C. Boyet

(Daniel Quinlan 00:34 25 Jul 2003 (UTC))

I vote for deleting all [redirects?] related to Daniel C. Boyer. Case is similar to that of Charles W. Swan, an apparent attempt to use the Internet to create the identity of a "famous person" out of nothing. Web is full of evidently self-submitted references to Boyer, but absent of any evidence of artistic recognition by others which should be there for any artist worth to be included in an encyclopaedia (otherwise everyone could make an article about himself). As a rule of thumb, to justify an article for any living person there should be at least one mention of that person in the editorial part of a serious news source. 217.85.213.254 02:54 23 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Would you accept Brill's Content as a "serious news source"? It is defunct now but I was mentioned in it.  --Daniel C. Boyer 17:22 24 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * 217.85.213.254 is grossly exaggerating, to say the least. For instance, I have no part in the running of New York Arts Magazine, an internationally-distrubuted arts magazine, and it was not because of some submission of mine that I was asked to respond to an inquiry on "new surrealism."  I have no part in the running of Cultural Observator, a Romanian magazine; no part in the running of The Improper Bostonian, &c., &c.  Surrealist Subversions, in which two of my articles and a drawing appear, was edited, introduced and published by others, &c., &c.  --Daniel C. Boyer 20:18 23 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * keep Daniel Boyer and Daniel C. Boyer and delete the 15th other ones. This is utterly ridiculous. User:anthere (my ! did not I just said this just above ? Why is this discussion taking place two times ?)

(to user:Pizza Puzzle) Is this the tertiary bigtop? Sorry, I lost your VfD comment on the list of funny names in an edit conflict. I removed the Daniel C. Boyet redirect deliberately, though, because it's a perfectly valid redirect (a French misspelling of his name). So there. -- Oliver P. 14:57 8 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your guilt. I have taken your issue to the mailing list and propose that, as punishment, your user page be deleted and all contributions you have made should be rolled back, regardless of whether later editors have modified the text. Good day, and WikiLove to you! Pizza Puzzle

Am I being punished for my unilateral accidental removal of your comment from VfD, for my unilateral removal of the redirect you added there, or for one of my other recent unilateral actions that I've forgotten about? I do so many unilateral things these days that I lose track... ;) -- Oliver P. 21:31 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Deleting the redirects of merged articles
There were some seperate articles on different works by Boyer, which were merged and redirected by Martin (relevant talk might get moved to Talk:Daniel C. Boyer/merge at some point). A little while after the merge, the redirects were proposed for deletion by Mbecker.


 * The Octopus Frets political poems -- First of all, this page redirects to the author, which is unnecessary, b/c if someone seached for it, and this page didn't exist, the page it currently redirects to would show up. Second, there are already 2 other similar redirects The Octopus Frets and Octopus Frets which also redirect to the same place.  MB 20:53, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
 * The title of the book is The Octopus Frets: political poems. --Daniel C. Boyer 00:28, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * I agree, total violation of redirect guidelines and meets deletion policy due to self-aggrandizing and advertizing nature. Delete all of these.  Daniel Quinlan 22:15, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
 * Explain how these violate redirect guidelines. --Daniel C. Boyer 00:28, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * They are self-aggrandizing, advertizing, and unnecessary, they also do not add to the user experience and only serve to clutter user search results. You added this redirect and it points to your own personal article.  Daniel Quinlan 00:57, Jul 30, 2003 (UTC)
 * What you are saying is not the whole story. I did create this redirect, which in my opinion is appropriate (given, which I by no means argue, that an article on The Octopus Frets was appropriate at all) as it is the full title: The Octopus Frets: political poems.  I did not do the subsequent merge which made it redirect to Daniel C. Boyer.  --Daniel C. Boyer 19:29, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * Zap it Tompagenet 17:59, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * Keep this redirect. Deletion would break links, and serve no purpose. Martin 19:44, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * Delete now that the content has been removed from the target article as unverifiable. Martin 22:14, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * The Octopus Frets -- No content, just a redirect to authors page, and therefore completely useless. MB 20:53, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
 * I agree, see above. Daniel Quinlan 22:15, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
 * Content in page history. Valid redirect. Deletion would break links, and serve no purpose. Keep. Martin 19:44, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * Delete now that the content has been removed from the target article as unverifiable. Martin 22:14, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Echo computer graphic, Echo drawing, The Tailgating Spinster, Tailgating Spinster -- same as above. MB 20:53, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
 * I agree. they aren't even stubs, just un-needed redirects. Quux 21:06, 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * I agree. There could be an entire page related to votes for deletion of Daniel_C._Boyer material. Angela 21:45, 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * I agree, see above. Daniel Quinlan 22:15, Jul 29, 2003 (UTC)
 * I disagree. By deleting these redirects, we lose page history. This page history has already proved useful to me. I feel that these are legitimate sub-topic redirects. Wikipedia search is disabled atm, but I doubt they would clutter search results. Therefore I would prefer to keep these redirects. Martin 22:46, 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * I don't believe there is a page history for these particular pages. They were created as redirects in the first place, rather than being pages which were moved. Angela
 * At least some of them were merged. I know, because I merged them. :) Martin 19:36, 30 Jul 2003 (UTC)
 * Well then, here is a compromise. We can use the move option to move the pages that have a history to User:Daniel C. Boyer/whatever, which will preserve the history, and then delete the others.  Once they are moved, we can either delete them, or keep them as redirects (although I think they would be completely useless to keep.  MB 20:29, Jul 30, 2003 (UTC)
 * MB's "compromise" would not reduce any of this alleged search result clutter, and would break links, thus making it the worst of all worlds. Broken links are evil. Don't create them - don't delete valid redirects. Martin 19:44, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Donnelly
 * Pulling out of the above silliness to say... now a disambig page. Keep. Martin 19:44, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * Octopus Frets, The Erotic Life of the Eskimo, Erotic Life of the Eskimo, The
 * pulling out of above to say - Delete now that the content has been removed from the target article as unverifiable. Martin 22:14, 2 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * I disagree with the "don't delete redirects" comments above. That may sometimes be applicable, but in this case, they were not created for an appropriate purpose. No useful links are being broken. They link only to this page and to Boyer's talk page. Angela 19:52, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

[There are]] pages created for advertizing reasons, now redirect to his page, but should be deleted nevertheless.


 * The Octopus Frets, Octopus Frets, The Octopus Frets political poems, The Erotic Life of the Eskimo, Erotic Life of the Eskimo, The, Donnelly, Echo computer graphic, The Tailgating Spinster, Tailgating Spinster, Echo drawing

(Daniel Quinlan 00:34 25 Jul 2003 (UTC))


 * It is a total lie to say that I created the Echo drawing page and if anyone would care to actually research things instead of just making up claims and then using them against me, they would see that the discussion actually relates to how information on echo drawing can be included in Daniel C. Boyer without creating such a page. --Daniel C. Boyer 15:52 25 Jul 2003 (UTC)


 * I think I created the echo drawing redirect? Hard to remember. Martin 15:20, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)

(to Martin) What would you like to do with the following pages that have histories, which should be deleted: Echo computer graphic, The Tailgating Spinster, Donnelly, The Erotic Life of the Eskimo? If you insist that they can't be deleted b/c they are valid redirects (which they aren't), then I will just delete them. However, you expressed an interest in preserving their history. (Please respond to me on my talk page) MB 17:45, Aug 6, 2003 (UTC)


 * Donnelly is now a valid disambiguation page (incidentally, one that doesn't mention Boyer) and should be kept.


 * I continue to believe that the others are valid redirects, and will not clutter up search results or cause confusion, and should therefore be kept. Two reasons have been given for deletion:
 * "self-aggrandizing and advertizing nature" (Daniel Quinlan).
 * the page is "unnecessary" as a search would find the author's page (Michael Becker)


 * Daniel Quinan's argument is based on a somewhat ad hominem approach to content that I consider misdirected. Michael Becker's approach ignores the benefits that redirects create outside of the narrow confines of the search engine. Therefore I consider neither argument convincing.
 * The loss of page history bothers me rather less now that this article has been almost completely rewritten, though if the redirects are deleted, then I would ideally like to see the list of authors copied to the top of this talk page for GFDL-compliance. Martin 23:45, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)


 * Alright, while you find these to be valid redirects, I don't. A valid redirect would be a misspelling or abreviation or such.  I'm not going to create redirects of everything I have done or links from Drexel University, or Computer Science to my user page.  I find these pages equivelent to such pages.  The pages should have been deleted in the first place, once merged, and never deleted.  The only reason I left them for now is b/c of the history thing.  I hate to say this martin, but you are way out voted on this issue (at least as of now on the VfD page).  I just don't think it is nessasry, or helpful to keep the pages as redirects.  It might be helpful if I made a page titled Monkey man and redirected it to George W. Bush, but it really isn't that important.  The same goes for these redirects, they just are very important.  MB 23:53, Aug 6, 2003 (UTC)