Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 April 7

April 7
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 7, 2009

Disambig templates → Wikipedia:Template messages/General
The result of the discussion was Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 03:07, 15 April 2009 (UTC) Delete, or Move to Wikipedia namespace (without redirect) and respecify target as Template messages/General. Very old cross-namespace redirect, and there's a better target. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 13:42, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

(I missed one, earlier.) See Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 March 31. 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

Hank Green → John Green
The result of the discussion was Speedy close, since turning a redirect into an article doesn't require RFD. Non-admin closure. Olaf Davis (talk) 13:42, 8 April 2009 (UTC) I request that Hank Green have his own article as he has gained noteworhty fame through Brotherhood 2.0, including having released an album, and competing in the Masters of Song Fu contest. He is obviously a different person from his brother (John Green), who is an author. 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Comment. Creating an article doesn't require discussion here.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 02:02, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

West Indies → Caribbean
The result of the discussion was Kept. Feel free to make a request for unprotection with the protecting admin or at WP:RPP. -- JLaTondre (talk) 03:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC) Requesting redirect to West Indies (disambiguation) since the page already exists, other spellings and misspellings of West Indies go there, Caribbean is the first link on the disambig page and West Indies clearly can have a significant dual meaning, certainly to the cricket playing regions of the world. I am unable to edit redirect as page is protected Gamma2delta (talk) 01:02, 7 April 2009 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Weak oppose. My feeling is that 'Caribbean' is the sufficiently dominant useage to justify the redirect, with the  at the top of Caribbean. I'm not willing to argue very strongly, though. Olaf Davis (talk) 17:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * After looking at Talk:West Indies and seeing no dissenting voices over a span of 5 years for having this point to, or be, a disambiguation, I was quite tempted to treat this as a simple editprotected request. It's not apparent why it's even protected.  9 edits in nigh on 7 years is not exactly a raging edit war.  The permanent full protection seems to have been a slight overreaction to some page move vandalism. Uncle G (talk) 23:41, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Fine with me to unprotect. NawlinWiki (talk) 00:19, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Oppose I think few people would have ever looked at the talk page of a redirect. I think that Carribbean islands are the dominant usage. 70.29.213.241 (talk) 03:56, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

Rage quit → Multiplayer video game
The result of the discussion was delete. Unsourced neologism. --Aervanath (talk) 17:02, 15 April 2009 (UTC) Delete: irrational redirect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rankiri (talk • contribs) 02:53, 7 April 2009
 * The editors in the discussion at Articles for deletion/Rage quit didn't think that it was irrational. On what specific grounds do you disagree with them? Uncle G (talk) 23:25, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
 * My arguments are as follows:
 * Three of the five editors in the discussion (myself excluded) nominated the neologism for deletion. One of the proponents of the redirect mentioned that the term was used by the press, but no actual links were provided and I couldn't locate such uses myself.
 * An unsourced, poorly defined neologism is unambiguously incompatible with the WP:NEO guidelines.
 * Multiplayer video game doesn't have a single mention of the expression, which makes the redirect rather incomprehensible.
 * Additionally, it's not a valid subtopic. It seems doubtful that such an ambiguous term can only be used in reference to videogaming, but if it does, I still fail to see why it should be linked to Multiplayer video game in particular. Can one "rage quit" because of an unfair enemy opponent, overwhelming game difficulty, or irritating game bugs? If the answer is no, then the redirect is inaccurate: multiplayer videogaming is routinely used to describe cooperative game sessions played against computer-controlled opponents - it is not necessarily competitive by nature. If the answer to the question is yes, then why shouldn't it redirect to singleplayer instead? Regardless of the answer, why not link it to videogaming, Competitive gaming, or even rage (emotion) or frustration? I think the WP:NEO guidelines are there for a reason. If one cannot define a neologism in a clear and consistent manner, perhaps it's better not to use it at all. Rankiri (talk) 03:11, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a much better rationale. It gives the discussion closer something to hang xyr hat on, which "irrational" really does not.  Thank you. Uncle G (talk) 12:36, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * When I looked for sourced before for "rage quit" I thought I had 2-3 from RS from news.google, but those aren't showing up even. So there is the sourcing aspect which may make the rest of this moot.  Speaking strictly from an OR standpoint but as a reasonable expert in the field, rage quit is basically a term described to players quitting a competitive multiplayer game over any one or combination of factors, including cheaters, outmatched opponents, stupid opponents or teammates, or problems with the game engine itself. It is only a factor of multiplayer gaming ("rage quitting" a single player game is not a term used around VG discussion), and it's not a factor in the competitive gaming leagues (as rage quitting generally has a degree of anonymousity to it, and doing that in those leageus would cost you your ranking/position/whatever).  Thus, while it's likely comparable to road rage, the best place on the term is Multiplayer video game.  The fact that that article doesn't have a section on it yet is not an issue; likely there needs to be a section in that article on criticism of online gaming, which would include rage quitting mentioned alongside cheating, spawn camping, etc. But again, the argument circles around to the point that while I thought there were sources when the discussion took place, I can't find them now.  Will there likely be sources in the future?  Yes, the term is relatively new (last year or so?) but is being used more causally across gaming boards, and just as 4X took some time to penetrate to be a usable term, it may be the case here.  Whether that means now to delete the redirection, well, that's the point of the discussion.  Without the section in the target article, the redirect is pretty useless, so unless someone adds it, deleting the redirect is fine. --M ASEM  (t) 13:01, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. It's not in the article.  Perhaps it was then.  Lean toward delete unless it's mentioned in the target somewhere.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 02:03, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - the "Rage quit" is a neologism that directly contravenes WP:NEO. A redirect is to server the reader by directing them to an appropriate article with related information.  this article dumpts the reader into an article where these is no infomatation about "Rage quit". -- Whpq (talk) 13:05, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Multiplayer video game#Jargon - My vote on the AfD was Merge & Redirect, the merging hadn't happened, so I just boldly tried to merge it in a way that appears to make sense (fully expecting to be reversed within the day, but hey, that's the best I can do). MLauba (talk) 13:41, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Some additional observations.
 * Even Urban Dictionary has no consensus on the exact meaning of the term, or even on its correct spelling:"ragequit", "rage quit"
 * "Rage quitting" a single player game is apparently not that uncommon: Google search results
 * "I hope it's permanent, the Russian tank mission made me rage quit single player."
 * "I am also guilty of ragequitting once in a while, but that's generally only in single player."
 * "I lose two capital regions before I rage quit my [single player] campaign and start a new one."
 * "...[single player mod] just gets frustrating and I rage-quit and pick it up again later."
 * Masem's reference to "road rage" led me to Computer rage. Although I still lean toward deletion (WP:NEO), redirecting Rage quit to seemingly more relevant Computer rage is an option you may want to consider.

'The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete. I think I'll reiterate my point that I made in the AfD discussion -- under WP:NEO, neologisms shouldn't have their own articles, and shouldn't be used in articles.  Matt (talk) 17:37, 8 April 2009 (UTC)