Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 April 14

April 14
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 14, 2010

NYC Records



 * The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


 * The result of the discussion was speedy keep because this RfD was created by a single-purpose account for the purposes of promotion. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk  19:16, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


 * → List of records in the National Youth Competition (rugby league) (links to redirect • [ history] • )

deletion because of odd acronym. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NYC Records (talk • contribs)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep because I feel the nominator would like "NYC Records" freed up to promote their record label, and this is not the way to go about doing that.    ArcAngel    (talk) ) 18:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Winter (Australian novel)



 * The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.


 * The result of the discussion was Delete ~ Amory ( u •  t  •  c ) 03:06, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

The action I would like to occur is deletion, and the rationale for that action is the following: The deletion of this REDIRECT is not harmful in any way - it has a minimal risk of breaking any links (if you check its history I already nominated it for "speedy deletion" and gave an explanation as to why I think the risk of breaking any links is minimal, also it does not contribute to improving Wikipedia. The REDIRECT is the result of a "move page" as it didn't keep in line with the WP:NC-BK policy. If you look at number 7 under "Reasons for deleting" it says: which applies to this and is self explanatory as this REDIRECT is for a novel. --Fresh Start 06:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * → Winter (Marsden novel) (links to redirect • [ history] • )


 * Below is the "speedy deletion" request (from Winter (Australian novel) history):
 * found here --Fresh Start 06:52, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * found here --Fresh Start 06:52, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete, vague title and inappropriate disambiguator. I've also nominated Winter (novel) John Marsden for deletion in its own RfD.  Frankly, shouldn't the article itself should be moved to Winter (John Marsden novel)?   Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 11:44, 16 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with everything that you have stated, with the exception for the renaming/moving of the article as it currently follows WP:NC-BK. --Fresh Start 18:21, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:NC-BK introductory paragraph
 * --Fresh Start 18:37, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Reply: Good to know -- thanks for the explanation.   Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 09:40, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - since the author of the book is known, it is improper to disambiguate by nationality. People who are unfamiliar with John Marsden wouldn't know if he is British, American, Canadian, Australian, or Nigerian (to say a few). Regarding the question by Glenfarclas: if a disambiguator is needed, the appropriate one would be Winter (novel), unless this is already the name of an article or disambiguation page, whereupon then appropriate name would be Winter (Marsden novel). Winter (John Marsden novel) is consistent with WP:NAME and WP:DISAMBIGUATION but not necessary unless/until another Winter by a different author with the last name Marsden has an article. B.Wind (talk) 00:54, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * LEAVE THE NAME OF THE ARTICLE ALONE!
 * WP:NC-BK (as I added above) is a "shortcut" to Naming conventions (books) which defines how to name the article, and going by the guidelines set in the very first paragraph of text on the page (of which I also added above - literally just above the comment above this...in the "quotation" template) the current name of the article (NOT THE REDIRECTS/LINKS TO THE ARTICLE) should remain as it is --Fresh Start 07:56, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The target is properly disambiguated, as I indicated above, so I feel that the yelling above was not necessary - in addition, the article's title is not the subject of this RfD: it's the format and fitness of the redirect, which does not fit WP:NC-BK and should be deleted per the reason I stated above. Repeating: the redirect should be deleted; the article is not officially considered here. B.Wind (talk) 03:16, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

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