Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 November 25

November 25
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 25, 2008

45th President of the United States → United States presidential election, 2008
The result of the debate was Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystall ball. Ruslik (talk) 14:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Unclear if this should refer to 2012, 2016, or even another date given exceptional possibilities. Certainly shouldn't be 2008 or Barack Obama, which is the 44th. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Nominator is correct that, baring some unfortunate event, Barack Obama will become the 44th U.S. President. It is thus a matter of pure speculation as to when the 45th holder of that office will be chosen or the date of the selection. --Allen3 talk 20:40, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, it has to redirect somewhere. After all, Barack Obama has to have a successor. I think since he could very well lose reelection in 2012, or could carry out 8 years, that 45th should redirect to the 2012 election. 2016 is way to far off.Saberwolf116 (talk) 22:28, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * comment No, it doesn't have to redirect somewhere - we could delete it. As for 2012, the 2012 election will not necessarily be for the 45th president, (because if Obama runs and wins a second term he would still be the 44th). Redirecting it there would be a serious WP:crystal violation and could be seen as pushing a specific political agenda. --Bachrach44 (talk) 02:57, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. Barack Obama may win again in 2012, or he may not. Right now there is no way of knowing. It's inaccurate as it is right now. An alternative could be just retargeting to United States presidential election or List of Presidents of the United States. Cunard (talk) 22:48, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Retarget to List of Presidents of the United States.  --UsaSatsui (talk) 23:00, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete any attempt to retarget would be a violation of WP:crystal and could be seen as pushing a political agenda. --Bachrach44 (talk) 02:57, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * ...Are you implying that it's unlikely there will be a 45th President of the United States? Is there something you're not telling us? --UsaSatsui (talk) 04:48, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol. In all seriousness, what I'm implying is that we have no idea when the 45th president will be elected. Even assuming nothing unusual happens, it could be in 2012, or it could be in 2016. --Bachrach44 (talk) 14:58, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * So what's wrong with a retarget to the list of Presidents? Within 8 years, #45 will be on the list.  --UsaSatsui (talk) 19:02, 28 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete without retargeting. There's no information currently in the List of Presidents of the United States about a potential 45th. This should be created later, in 2012 or 2016 as necessary. Glass  Cobra  09:43, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Retarget Ok fine, maybe I was a bit presumptous. I say we redirect it to President of the United States.Saberwolf116 (talk) 01:39, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Template:2008 Libertarian presidential voting total → United States presidential election, 2008
The result of the debate was Delete. Ruslik (talk) 14:12, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Improper XNR. Magog the Ogre (talk) 20:03, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

2008 prez election → United States presidential election, 2008
The result of the debate was Delete. Ruslik (talk) 14:23, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Unlikely redirect Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:47, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Del. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 00:05, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. I am unfamiliar with policy in this area, other than having read Redirects for discussion.  Could somebody please explain to me what harm would result from leaving this redirect intact? I don't understand this at all. Unschool (talk) 06:15, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It could be harmful because the US isn't the only country that held a Presidential election in 2008. But the argument is that it's an unlikely search term (I'm inclined to agree).  --UsaSatsui (talk) 04:49, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, so let's say it's an unlikely search term. What is the harm in leaving it in place? Unschool (talk) 02:50, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, for example, if I were looking for this... --UsaSatsui (talk) 13:10, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete high US bias. 76.66.195.63 (talk) 06:32, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

08 US Election → United States presidential election, 2008
The result of the debate was Keep 08 US Election and US 08 Election. Delete 08 election and Vote 08. Ruslik (talk) 14:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC) Also:
 * US 08 Election
 * 08 election
 * Vote 08

Ambiguous redirect: could refer to 1808, 1908, or 2008. Should a disambiguation page be created? Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:35, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete. Agree with the nominator; and a triplely unlikely redirect. Most probable would be '08 US presidential election. (Addition of apostrophe, addition of "presidential", capitalization of "election".) — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:41, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * note from nominator: above comment was added for only main redirect: others were not added at time of opinion. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:44, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete the other ones, also. — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 22:17, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 *  Keep They are an easy way to get to the most recent elections. I don't think many people are typing in 08 Election and planning to go to the 1908 of 1808 elections. Keep till at least a couple weeks after Inauguration Day.Spitfire 19 (Talk) 00:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete the last two as contrary to WP:CSB; there were other countries with elections this year. Neutral on the first two. Stifle (talk) 12:20, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Variations of the word suicide → suicide
The result of the debate was Delete. I also found nothing useful in its history. Ruslik (talk) 14:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Very unlikely search term. Had previously been an article proposed for deletion, but article creator changed to a redirect with the edit summary "merge to suicide for now. have plans to improve and make encyclopedic later." Fabrictramp |  talk to me  18:45, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete. Not a useful or likely term for the target, no actual merge, and no useful article contents to keep around. No need for this. — Gavia immer (talk) 19:06, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Maurie Kaufmann → BOY
The result of the debate was Keep. Useful and plausible redirect. Ruslik (talk) 10:49, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Associated with both BOY and Lights, so a single redirect is misleading. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 17:53, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Comment - Kaufmann was a member of BOY. Lights is a solo act that Kaufmann currently plays drums with. - SummerPhD (talk) 18:33, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Medvedev(surname) → Medvedev (surname)
The result of the debate was Delete. A casual read is unlikely to be familiar with Wikipedia naming conventions, and there is no such a redirect as Putin(surname). Ruslik (talk) 10:56, 4 December 2008 (UTC) 

Added missing space in title between words "Medvedev" and "(surname)". First title was incorrect. — Al3xil ✉  16:32, 25 November 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. This is incorrect but plausible, and it harms nothing by existing, since the article is at the correctly formatted title. — Gavia immer (talk) 18:01, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, and apologies to Al3xil for what could have been seen as a rather brusque message on my part when reverting the blanking of the redirect. In any case, I agree with Gavia that this is an entirely plausible typo. Redirects are cheap. Glass  Cobra  14:31, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It wasn't brusque, GlassCobra, all correct. As to a redirect, it will be a precedent to redirect naming such as Smith(surname), Wilson(surname), etc. Besides, there isn't links to that redirect: . — Al3xil ✉  15:39, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I see nothing really wrong with those either, personally. The function of redirects is to point our readers to the correct place in the case of obvious typos, ie. common name misspellings, or article names without spaces. It's clear in these cases where the readers are intending to go, and we should be pointing them there. Glass  Cobra  09:39, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * However, I not sure, that it will be useful for readers (if i was a casual reader, then i typed simply "Medvedev" for search, because only advanced readers know about pop-up titles in the search line and rules for article naming when after a basic title goes an accurate definition in brackets "(surname)", "(company)", etc. Therefore, there is no point for keeping this redirect, but for some wikipedian who can made a wikification mistake. — Al3xil ✉  21:22, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

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

Wikified → Glossary
The result of the debate was Delete. Ruslik (talk) 10:00, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Wikijargon CNR that does not link to content.  MBisanz  talk 04:29, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Don't care if it it deleted so long as all the links are fixed. --mav (talk) 00:34, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - the main space is meant for articles, absolutely not anything to do with Wikipedia content. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:13, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

List of Feature Pictures → Featured pictures
The result of the debate was Delete. Ruslik (talk) 08:21, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Inappropriate CNR to a wiki-list, does not link to content.  MBisanz  talk 04:29, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - see above. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:13, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Wiki War → Edit war
The result of the debate was Delete. Ruslik (talk) 08:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Nonsensical, combative, CNR, does not link to content.  MBisanz  talk 04:24, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - see above; and made up nonsense jargon to boot. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:13, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Set index article → Disambiguation
The result of the debate was Deleted by Stifle as CSD R3. It would also have qualified under CSD G4 per the last debate. -- JLaTondre (talk) 12:59, 2 December 2008 (UTC) Inappropriate, recent CNR, does not link to content.  MBisanz  talk 04:23, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - see above. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:14, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm going to speedy this as an implausible typo. Stifle (talk) 12:19, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Siberian Tatar language → Baraba language
The result of the debate was Keep and retarget to Tatar_language. Ruslik (talk) 08:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

An IP has been repeatedly blanking this redirect, believing that this redirect should not exist. Here is the IP's rationale [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Siberian_Tatar_language&diff=253318447&oldid=101792842 This redirect should not exist. Tom Tatars and Tobolo-Irtysh Tatars also speak Siberian Tatar.], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Siberian_Tatar_language&diff=next&oldid=253338001 This redirect is wrong. No information is always better than wrong information.], and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Siberian_Tatar_language&diff=next&oldid=253531713 Tom Tatars and Tobolo-Irtysh Tatars are also dialects of Siberian Tatar. Baraba Tatar is just one of three dialects of Siberian Tatar.] I have no opinion on the fate of this redirect. Cunard (talk) 02:52, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

Wilshire Associates → Dennis Tito
The result of the debate was Keep. The company is mentioned in the article. Ruslik (talk) 14:02, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Redirects from a company to a person. Person's article does not mention company. Smack (talk) 21:15, 25 November 2008 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep. Tito's article does, in fact, mention the company, and explains that he founded it in 1972, which I think is sufficient justification for the existence of the redirect. 129.206.102.208 (talk) 16:13, 27 November 2008 (UTC)