Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 April 27

ZH-TW



 * 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 What User:Angr did - everybody's happy. ~ Amory ( u •  t  •  c ) 00:43, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * → Traditional Chinese characters (links to redirect • [ history] • )

are these codes only for spoken or for written languages? the Taiwanese variant of traditional is different from that of Hong Kong and Macau (e.g. with 着/著; the latter is used only in the former). 华钢琴49 (TALK) 23:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Dabify to trad Zh chars and to mandarin. BTW, zh-tw: is a traditional chinese Wikipedia. 70.29.208.247 (talk) 05:38, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. doesn't redirect to Traditional Chinese characters, it redirects to Taiwanese Mandarin. Are you proposing that it should redirect to Traditional Chinese characters instead? +Angr 06:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Update. I've gone ahead and created a dab page at zh-TW (since it's customary for the letters referring to a country to be capitalized), and zh-tw now redirects there. If there are no objections to that course of action, this discussion can be closed. +Angr 09:58, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * sorry for the confusion; here, the pointing was only suggestive of what I wished to occur. 华钢琴49 (TALK) 12:41, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you content to have the dab page zh-TW and to have zh-tw redirect there? +Angr 16:09, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * yes, because the code could mean either the written or spoken variant of Chinese on the island. 华钢琴49 (TALK) 17:25, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

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

List of famous concerts



 * 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 Deletenull ~ Amory ( u •  t  •  c ) 00:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * → Concert (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Delete. The subsection this redirects to was removed in 2005. Tobias Bergemann (talk) 18:48, 27 April 2010 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Retarget (slightly) - Seeing as the section is no longer there, the redirect is no good as it stands. Perhaps it could simply be changed to point to Concert, seems a logical choice. If not, then it can go. - Mobius Clock 20:09, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - B.Wind makes a compelling argument, no need for this to stay around. - Mobius Clock 14:40, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as this implies that there would be a list of "famous concerts" at the destination... but even if there were such a list, its so-called "rules of inclusion" can be at best arbitrary and subjective. So there is no valid destination for this redirect, and no possible way under Wikipedia guidelines and policies to have a valid article under this name. B.Wind (talk) 17:52, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per B.Wind. Tavix | Talk  23:10, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Xena and neo



 * 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 Deletenull ~ Amory ( u •  t  •  c ) 00:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)


 * → Love (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Delete - Wikipedia: not a shipping port. - Mobius Clock 16:50, 27 April 2010 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete per the perfectly concise nom.  Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 00:43, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Pokémon/Archive 2



 * 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 --Taelus (talk) 16:45, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * → Pokémon (links to redirect • [ history] • )
 *  → Pokémon (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Delete, no reason for them to exist. I imagine they were created accidentally as part of a (borked?) talk-page archiving, but there's no reason to keep the mainspace redirects around. Mobius Clock 16:15, 27 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: no relevant page history, no need for existence.  Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 00:44, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, though nothing was "borked". Talk:Pokémon/Archive 1 and Talk:Pokémon/Archive 2 exist as perfectly correct talk page archives. There's just no need for their mainspace equivalents to exist. +Angr 10:04, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I realised that the talk pages as they stand are fine, I suppose I thought something had gone wrong in the process of getting them there. I was obviously wrong. - Mobius Clock 15:38, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I do the same thing when I archive my user talk pages: I make a redirect from the corresponding user space page to my user page (e.g. when I created User talk:Angr/Archive 7, I also redirected User:Angr/Archive 7 to User:Angr) out of a suspicion (whether well founded or not, I don't know) that a redirect to an existing page is less likely to get vandalized than a red link. But in main space, where anons and new users can't fill in red links anyway, such redirects are unnecessary and indeed more likely to get vandalized than a red link. +Angr 16:07, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

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

Annihilatrix



 * 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 --Taelus (talk) 16:46, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * → Large Hadron Collider (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Delete seeing as no link between the term and the LHC can be found. Mobius Clock 15:39, 27 April 2010 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete: based on comments at these two pages, I think it has something to do with an obscure joke from the cartoon Frisky Dingo.  Far too obscure to support this misleading and POVish redirect.   Glenfarclas   ( talk ) 00:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Fudzilla



 * 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 --Taelus (talk) 16:50, 4 May 2010 (UTC)


 * → Fear, uncertainty and doubt (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Please delete this redirect. Fudzilla is a computer parts weblog named after Fuad "Fudo" Abazovic and has nothing to do with fear, uncertainty, and doubt except for sometimes exposing it. Jesse Viviano (talk) 00:44, 27 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Note Pasting the following comments relevant to the discussion onto this page, as the talk page is about to go along with the redirect, and the comments helped form consensus here. --Taelus (talk) 16:50, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

sckirklan (talk) 18:06, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * There's no reason this page should redirect. The redirect should be removed and the page deleted or this Fudzilla entity, as it were, that it represents should be in it's place.

Aliquidparadigm (talk) 15:07, 13 June 2009 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Seconded. One quick look on the Googer clearly shows that Fudzilla does not resonate as an archived Libervis project so much as it does the techbloid, thus the redirect seems to be prejudiced.