Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 May 9

May 9
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 9, 2008

Yasuhiro Wada → Harvest Moon (series)
The result of the debate was Withdrawn. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:45, 11 May 2008 (UTC) This redirects a person's name to a work that he is associated with. However, there is another person by this name who has an actual article, which is currently disambiguated by Yasuhiro Wada (Honda). Given the tenuous nature of the redirect, I would prefer that the existing article simply be moved over it. Alternatively, since neither person appears to be a primary topic, the redirect should be converted to a disambig page. Ham Pastrami (talk) 00:08, 10 May 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Withdrawn. I guess this belongs at requested moves instead. I'll nominate it there. Ham Pastrami (talk) 01:54, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

YUFDMP → Why was my page deleted?
The result of the debate was Consensus is to Delete.  MBisanz  talk 01:23, 17 May 2008 (UTC) According to an IRC chat, this stands for "Y U (bad word) delete ma page". Funny, but a very unlikely redirect. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 23:06, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * It's okay. You can swear on the Internet. Having said that, Delete as unlikely search term. -  Jéské   ( v^_^v  E pluribus unum ) 23:16, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete per above; not a useful search term. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 05:45, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Useless redirect, unlikely shortcut. Shortcuts are meant to make things easier, not create cryptic redirs.  RichardΩ612  Ɣ |ɸ 11:41, May 10, 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nonsensical if you don't know what it means, a tad insulting when it's explained.  --UsaSatsui (talk) 09:00, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I rather doubt this is a WP:BITE problem, but find me any newcomer who even knows this shortcut exists and I'll happily be corrected. Beyond that, no objection if this is deleted. Don't believe it was ever intended to be more than a harmless easter egg. – Luna Santin  (talk) 21:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikipaedia → Wikipedia
The result of the debate was keep. VegaDark (talk) 00:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

The redirect page is unnecessary now. It is also very redundant. 74.249.55.160 (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep it is entirely possible that someone will misspell "Wikipedia" as "Wikipaedia". —Remember the dot (talk) 20:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep I must confess that I don't read the nomination as making any real grand case for deletion, but I cannot imagine that any case would surmount the (almost certainly accurate) claim that the redirect is useful to readers; because, in British English, encyclopedia is often given as encyclopaedia (a simplification of encyclopædia), it is quite likely, as Rtd observes, that one might input the redirected term in search of its target (even as [and I wonder if it is to this issue that the nominator means, at least in part, to refer] the correct spelling of Wikipedia appears in the logo situated on the sidebar and necessarily appears in the address bar; there are, after all, editors who use Wikipedia without the benefit of the sight of the interface, and perhaps those who reach the site without knowning how properly to spell the name).
 * Speedy-close this discussion because no reason has yet been given for deletion. All redirects are unnecessary and redundant by definition.  If they weren't, they'd be articles, not redirects.  This redirect meets none of the delete-if criteria.  Rossami (talk) 05:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Useful search term, since it's an alternate spelling of "encyclopedia". JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 05:46, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Since "encyclopaedia" is an alternate spelling of "encyclopedia", "Wikipaedia" is by no means unreasonable. In fact, the redirect has proved itself very useful, and in April 2008, it was apparently used 568 times. . Sjakkalle (Check!)  08:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep very likely typo, this redirect is useful --Enric Naval (talk) 06:10, 11 May 2008 (UTC)
 * keep likely typo as demonstrated by google. Incidentally, this is apparently also the correct spelling of Wikipedia in Scots. JoshuaZ (talk) 00:16, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

डोंिबवली → Dombivli
The result of the debate was Consensus = Delete.  MBisanz  talk 01:22, 17 May 2008 (UTC) Letters are written in the wrong order because the creator of this redirect is missing complex language support, see WP:INDIC. -- Prince Kassad (talk) 16:23, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete unlikely search term. —Remember the dot (talk) 20:52, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Stuff like this needs a CSD criterion like George Bush needs a brain! But seriously, very unlikely search term on enwiki.  RichardΩ612  Ɣ |ɸ 11:35, May 10, 2008 (UTC)

Chronology (album by Bryn Haworth) → Chronology (Bryn Haworth album)
The result of the debate was Consensus was Delete.  MBisanz  talk 01:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC) Redirects from a single user page, serves little likelihood of being used; I only found it by searching for articles for the Chronology (disambiguation) page Yamara ✉  13:28, 9 May 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete the redirect was created due to the misnaming of the disambiguation (album by DH) instead of (BH album) per naming conventions. Changes were made to all "what links here" files, and no one would probably come across this page even accidentally. Wolfer68 (talk) 16:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - too bad we can't call it "housecleaning" here (for a justification for a speedy deletion) as Wolfer seems to have paved the way for the deletion here. B.Wind (talk) 00:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep because it documents a very recent pagemove. The redirect serves to point the prior editors to the correct page where they can continue to improve the page.  If you delete the redirect, unfortunately, many new editors mistakenly assume that the database hiccupped and ate their page, leading them to recreate it and we end up with forked content or, worse, the duplicate gets deleted and we bite the new editor.  Those redirects are automatically created during the pagemove process for a reason.  Rossami (talk) 05:10, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete I can see Rossami's concern, hence weak delete, but the "whatlinkshere" doesn't show anything to worry about, so users will probably hit the search and find the moved page anyway. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 05:48, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, our own tests have confirmed that the search engine is not a guaranteed way to find the article. Rossami (talk) 16:05, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Rail transport in Argentina → Transportation in Argentina
The result of the debate was Kept, no prejudice to article creation over redirect.  MBisanz  talk 01:16, 17 May 2008 (UTC) I need to delete a redirect without replacing it with a new article,  when I look up "Rail transport in Argentina" it redirects to Transportation in Argentina, can an administrator release the name (Rail transport in Argentina) so we can organize the following and new articles coming up – Línea Urquiza (Buenos Aires) / Trenes de Buenos Aires / Tren de la Costa, Puerto Madero Tramway / PreMetro E2 (Buenos Aires) / Línea Belgrano Sur (Buenos Aires) / Buenos Aires-Rosario-Córdoba high-speed railway / La Trochita and Railway Privatisation in Argentina amongst others  – we urgently need a home for mentioned articles ~ Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 15:38, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Note: originally nominated in the wrong order; heading corrected to show correct redirect page and correct target article. B.Wind (talk) 19:41, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Second note: boldly writing a complete article with the title of a redirect page is encouraged (see top of WP:RfD), but I should point out that already exists. B.Wind (talk) 19:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Third note: Sorry, still baffled!! ~ Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 02:12, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep You don't need to delete it- if you want to replace the redirect with an article, just click the "edit" tab and type away. As long as you delete what's there first (#REDIRECT), it will act normally. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 05:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Be bold and create the actual article. The redirect should be kept until someone actually starts to write the separate article Rail transport in Argentina. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 10:43, 12 May 2008 (UTC)