Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 March 2

March 2
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion on March 2, 2008

"Gypsy music" → Romani music
The result of the debate was Deleted by ZimZalaBim as db-empty. However, it should really have been db-author. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC) I don't know if there are any precedents on this, but the quotes seem to make it an implausable search term. Gypsy music itself already redirects to Romani music. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:01, 2 March 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

Shoop → Cell (Dragon Ball)
The result of the debate was Re-targeted to John Shoop. If there are other valid alternatives, feel free to convert to disambig. -- JLaTondre (talk) 02:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC) Seems like a nonsensical redirect to me, unless anyone can explain otherwise. h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 20:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

Redirects to Miranda Warning
The result of the debate was Deleted. Redirects are for convenience, but they are not meant to replace the search engine in its entirety. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:32, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
 * If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. → Miranda warning


 * Do you understand the rights I have just read to you? With these rights in mind, do you wish to speak to me? → Miranda warning


 * If you are not a United States citizen, you may contact your country's consulate prior to any questioning. → Miranda warning


 * We have no way of giving you a lawyer, but one will be appointed for you, if you wish, if and when you go to court. → Miranda warning


 * You have the right to have an attorney present during questioning → Miranda warning


 * Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. → Miranda warning


 * You have the right to have an attorney present during questioning. If you cannot afford an attorney, one will be appointed for you. → Miranda warning


 * You have the right to remain silent, anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. → Miranda warning

It is quite unlikely that this is going to be useful per WP:R number 7 Chris!  c t 20:11, 2 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: I combined the above Miranda warning redirects into a single nomination. They seem to be best considered together. — Gavia immer (talk) 14:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - This is what the search facility is for! Having a redirect for every sentence is ridiculous. MSGJ (talk) 14:47, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete What's next, a redirect for every line in Hamlet? Dloh  cierekim  03:53, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I support deletion of all of them except the sixth and eighth. Those two are rather prevalent, in my mind. The others aren't as much. seresin | wasn't he just...? 04:03, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep 5, 6, and 8. Having these redirects they serve as tabs - title and URI pages - as well. That is they are individual pages that are search engine indexed. So by having relevent tabs to the main article we are doing Search Engine Optimization that is SEO. Now irrelevent SEO is Spam but when it helps searchers to find the proper article with a right keyword phrase it is helpfull to users and it is called white hat SEO. So when you Google and you want to get Wikipedia to serve Miranda but the user may not be aware of the terminology and just type in one of the top relevent phrases above because they remember it from some police show on television they will get the tab in their Google search results. Clicking on the tab will redirect them to the appropriate article. Redirecting Sushi to Miranda is Black Hat SEO and it is Spam. Igor Berger (talk) 04:21, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all - I might have supported keeping a couple of these (namely 6 and 8) except for the fact that there is a period at the end of these (except #5), making these extremely unlikely search terms. I'm not sure if the above contributors noticed this. I still support deletion for #5, however, as I feel that is also a fairly unlikely search term.  However, I wouldn't mind if that particular one was kept, so only weak delete on that one. VegaDark (talk) 02:58, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * You need to understand how the sear engine indexes. It is not that a searcher needs to type in the exat phrase, they may just type a few keyword in that phrase and hit the article via the redirect. So you are given WP:DUE to the article. Igor Berger (talk) 03:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please refer to Search engine optimization to understand about SEO and acceptable white hat practices. Igor Berger (talk) 03:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete not needed. Individual lines is overkill  Gtstricky Talk or C 18:09, 7 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete all but the last. The final phrase may be useful, albeit probably only to those who know the Miranda warning verbatim. So, weak keep on redirect #8. Mizu onna sango15 / 水 女 珊瑚15  05:37, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete all, implausible. Wikipedia's pageranks are doing just fine without amateur SEO, thanks. &lt;eleland/talkedits&gt; 07:56, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete all but keep You have the right to remain silent, which was not on this list. Those listed above are unlikely search terms and do nothing to help the project. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 03:02, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Glasgow Metropolitan College → Central College of Commerce
The result of the debate was RFD no longer applicable as it's been turned into an article. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:34, 14 March 2008 (UTC) Central College of Commerce is a completely different entity to Glasgow Metropolitan College - they are in the same area of Glasgow, but are seperate institutions - PR 86.4.218.246 (talk) 00:09, 2 March 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Comment - this has already been turned into an article of its own. MSGJ (talk) 14:50, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Éric_Chevillard → Eric_Chevillard
The result of the debate was RFD not applicable as the page was not a redirect (nominator added redirect along with RFD tag). However, I went ahead and merged the two at Éric Chevillard. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:40, 14 March 2008 (UTC) The accent makes access to the page difficult, and the information on the redirecting page is not as comprehensive as that on the target page 128.36.68.57 (talk) 00:45, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * In my oppinion it would make more sense to invert the redirect, redirecting Eric_Chevillard -> Éric_Chevillard, and keeping the main article there, as the latter seems to be the correct spelling of his name, and the redirect could be there for comprehensive searching. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Martijn Hoekstra (talk • contribs) 23:04, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Merge to Éric Chevillard and keep the resulting redirect from Eric_Chevillard. I know that "merge" isn't a typical RfD result, but both pages have useful history. With regard to the name, a rough survey of web search results (I know, that's not definitive) shows English language results roughly split between using the accented and unaccented versions of his name - in such a case, it makes sense to keep the article at his actual name rather than at a version used only sometimes in English. — Gavia immer (talk) 14:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Ankle breaker → Allen Iverson
The result of the debate was speedy deleted by DragonflySixtyseven. — Gavia immer (talk) 14:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC) unuseful POV.  brew crewer  (yada, yada) 02:24, 2 March 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

This (Egypt) → Girga
The result of the debate was Kept (nomination withdrawn). -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:41, 14 March 2008 (UTC) Makes no sense and should be deleted Igor Berger (talk) 12:51, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
 * It is for some reason not mentioned at Girga, but in fact the more commonly cited Greek name for the city was not Thinis but This. This of course causes huge amounts of confusion for English speakers, who have a hard time seeing it as anything by the demonstrative pronoun this, so in English many scholars prefer the name Thinis just to avoid the problem. Nevertheless, This (Egypt) seems like a very logical guess for where our article would be located, and in fact that is what I originally found. Of course the existing article is not listed under This or Thinis at all, but Girga, the modern, Arabic name of the site. --Iustinus (talk) 18:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Keep - I recommend that you add something to that effect to the Girga article's page so users coming there via "this" will not question as to why the redirect exists. Not everyone knows the meaning, so a little explanation for clarity is desirable. Igor Berger (talk) 23:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Will do. If you don't see an update within a few days, please remind me. And for the record: Keep --Iustinus (talk) 06:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

Ballistario of Cremona → Flavio Biondo
The result of the debate was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:42, 14 March 2008 (UTC) Ballistario was Flavio's teacher; at least so the article on Flavio claims Lynxmb (talk) 14:33, 2 March 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete A one-sentence stub, explaining Ballistario's relationship to Flavio, would be better than a redirect. Nothing at all would also be better than a redirect. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 02:56, 11 March 2008 (UTC)