Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 June 2

June 2
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 2, 2010

Bert Rivendale



 * 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. Ruslik_ Zero 19:01, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * → List of My Gym Partner& (links to redirect • [ history] • )

This appears to be a joke redirect as there is no such My Gym Partner's a Monkey character as Bert Rivendale. As such, this redirect should be deleted. Neelix (talk) 17:46, 2 June 2010 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - this was redirect made from a hoax article. Bridgeplayer (talk) 18:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Park Ji-Young



 * 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 Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:21, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * → Kahi (entertainer) (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Has little history and a page of similar title. Do we need some many redirects with similar titles? EunSoo (talk) 17:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep - foreseeable search term - here. Alternative name mentioned in the article. Bridgeplayer (talk) 20:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Created by me just this morning after EunSoo's other nominations alerted me to the fact that this version of the target's name was missing. Variant romanizations of foreign-language names are a benefit to the encyclopedia, not a detriment; in fact they harm nothing, since nobody will see them unless they go looking for them. There's no reason to delete this. — Gavia immer (talk) 21:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - We already have Park Ji Young as a redirect. EunSoo (talk) 06:45, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Park Ji-young



 * 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 Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:23, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * → Kahi (entertainer) (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Has little history and a page of similar title EunSoo (talk) 17:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - recently created redirect and I don't see the purpose in this name formulation. Bridgeplayer (talk) 20:51, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep. Created by me just this morning after EunSoo's other nominations alerted me to the fact that this version of the target's name was missing. Variant romanizations of foreign-language names are a benefit to the encyclopedia, not a detriment; in fact they harm nothing, since nobody will see them unless they go looking for them. There's no reason to delete this. — Gavia immer (talk) 21:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - We already have Park Ji Young as a redirect. EunSoo (talk) 06:44, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Park Ga-Hee



 * 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 Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * → Kahi (entertainer) (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Little history and has a RfD of similar title EunSoo (talk) 17:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - mentioned in the article as an alternative name and plenty of gHits. Foreseeable search term. Bridgeplayer (talk) 20:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep. Created by me just this morning after EunSoo's other nominations alerted me to the fact that this version of the target's name was missing. Variant romanizations of foreign-language names are a benefit to the encyclopedia, not a detriment; in fact they harm nothing, since nobody will see them unless they go looking for them. There's no reason to delete this. — Gavia immer (talk) 21:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - We already have Park Ga Hee as a redirect. EunSoo (talk) 06:44, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Jessica Jung



 * 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 moot - this nomination was to facilitate a page move and discussion has now moved to WP:RM. Bridgeplayer (talk) 19:41, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Has 1 edit history EunSoo (talk) 16:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * → Jessica (entertainer) (links to redirect • [ history] • )
 * Keep. As noted below, we should redirect from such alternate names, and RfD shouldn't be used as a backdoor alternative to WP:RM — Gavia immer (talk) 17:02, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Currently in discussion on Requested Moves, so this is based on the history of the page. EunSoo (talk) 17:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

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

Yuri (Korean entertainer)



 * 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 Keep. Useful redirect. Ruslik_ Zero 19:05, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * → Kwon Yuri (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Has 1 edit history EunSoo (talk) 16:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. As noted below, we should redirect from such alternate names, and RfD shouldn't be used as a backdoor alternative to WP:RM — Gavia immer (talk) 17:02, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * This is based on the history of the page. EunSoo (talk) 17:15, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep - this redirect was created by a page move by the nominator and is therefore considered to have a useful page history. Bridgeplayer (talk) 19:44, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Walking Through White Darkness



 * 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 Kept. A quick Internet search shows several sites claiming this as an alternate title for the movie. Whether that is correct or not is immaterial as either way, it establishes it as a possible search term. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:29, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * → White Night (film) (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Has very little and insignificant history EunSoo (talk) 16:35, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - this redirect was created by a page move by the nominator and is therefore considered to have a useful page history. Though newly created, it is already proving a popular search term. Bridgeplayer (talk) 19:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. Bridgeplayer is mistaken about Wikipedia policies and guidelines.  That the redirect was created through a page move of the nominator is neither a reason to keep or a reason to delete.  If the redirect is misleading, it should be deleted.  The fact that the article was created at the first name by Yoshiroseto is evidence that it's a plausible usage, if Yoshiroseto speaks English well.  No comment on the nomination, per se, except that the "Keep" is not within policy.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 20:09, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - no, I am not mistaken. Please take time out to read WP:RFD - "The act of renaming is useful page history,...". Had it been misleading, or if there was another good deletion reason, then that guideline provides a mechanism for dealing with the situation. That is not the case here. Bridgeplayer (talk) 16:33, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, you are mistaken. It was appropriate before edit logs followed a move, but was deleted shortly thereafter around 2007.  I don't know when it was readded; as DumbBot isn't recorded as a bot, it's difficult to read the edit history of WP:RFD itself.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 17:04, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

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

Bi Rain



 * 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 Kept as is not causing any harm and is potential search term. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:41, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * → Rain (entertainer) (links to redirect • [ history] • )
 * Has only 1 edit history EunSoo (talk) 16:31, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Someone may look for him under the name Bi Rain. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 16:33, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I know you have nothing personal against my moves but. Eh? I don't understand Wikiedpia editors first I offer the title for move, then it is declined but now you would rather have it as a redirect than the actual page title? This page has so little history and the move clearly states that this title is insignificant so why keep it?? EunSoo (talk) 16:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * As I said below, if you want a page moved, use Requested moves. Don't use RfD as a backdoor method. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:59, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * WRONG! Do NOT use Requested moves. You have people monitoring that page who will move any article without hesitation and discussion. EunSoo has already used that vehicle for this very article, and the move was reverted because just about everyone who chimed in were against the move. Requested moves should only be used for non-trival moves that won't cause debate. Instead, this particular user is basically trying to re-write the entire book on our article naming convention, and our use of redirects and disambiguous names of articles here at Wikipedia. Editors like this crop up every now and then, but eventually they all get tired of fighting and disappear. I'd handle this editor the same way. Man I hate summer vacations. Groink (talk) 18:29, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Huh? I am not trying to re-write anything. I am trying to help Wikipedia by putting some sense in. The rules don;'t say that disambig. titles have to have a job title. EunSoo (talk) 09:51, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Currently in discussion on Requested Moves, so this is based on the history of the page. EunSoo (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - this redirect was created after a page move so it is considered to have a significant history. Foreseeable search term - there is even a website using this name. It should be noted that the RM discussion started by the nominator is suggesting a move to Rain (Bi), not to Bi Rain. Bridgeplayer (talk) 19:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * What significant history it only has 4-5 edits? EunSoo (talk) 10:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * The record of renaming a page is considered to be a useful page history - see WP:RFD. Bridgeplayer (talk) 14:27, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * False. The record of renaming a page is not considered to be "a useful page history".  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 16:22, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Unless that section was recently changed, it only applies to page moves before the software change moving the edit history along with a page move; I believe that was in 2007. — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 16:24, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * True - no, I am not mistaken. Please take time out to read WP:RFD - "The act of renaming is useful page history,...". Had it been misleading, or if there was another good deletion reason, then that guideline provides a mechanism for dealing with the situation. That is not the case here. Bridgeplayer (talk) 16:33, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

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

Park Kahi



 * 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 moot - discussion now moved to WP:RM since the nominator was seeking deletion to facilitate a page move. Bridgeplayer (talk) 18:27, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * → Kahi (entertainer) (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Has 1 edit history EunSoo (talk) 16:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. As mentioned in the article, this is an actual name that she uses. Such names should always be redirected. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * If this is the name she actually uses then why is it that Kahi (entertainer) cannot be moved to Park Kahi?? EunSoo (talk) 16:51, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Good question. You shouldn't ask it here, though - instead, you want to follow the procedure at Requested moves, rather than trying to delete things. — Gavia immer (talk) 16:57, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Currently in discussion on Requested Moves, so this is based on the history of the page. EunSoo (talk) 17:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

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

Nuclear decline



 * 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. Ruslik_ Zero 19:03, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * → Nuclear power (links to redirect • [ history] • )

An improbable and highly POV redirect, created by banned User:Mac who was indef blocked for his creation of inappropriate redirects. He continues to edit uninterrupted under a series of sock accounts, the latest being User:Nudecline, expressly stated here as a way to further promote the phrase "Nuclear decline." Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:07, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - redirects are POV-neutral - see WP:RNEUTRAL. However, this is a low traffic redirect and I can't find a sensible target. Bridgeplayer (talk) 17:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip. I think this is my first RfD. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:34, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete Per nom. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 02:06, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Secure Continuous Remote Alcohol Monitor



 * 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 Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:44, 10 June 2010 (UTC)


 * → Continuous transdermal alcohol monitoring (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Delete. Doesn't appear in article. No assertion in target article that SCRAM or this brand is actually used (in violation of trademark) to refer to a generic alcohol monitor, although there such an assertion in an unrelated article.
 * Keep. While the target article is not one of our best, it does discuss the topic of transdermal alcohol monitoring. In the absence of a specific article on this one specific brand name for a monitor, which is probably not warranted, I think it's fine to redirect it to the generic topic. This was viewed 2112 times just in the last week of May, so it is a useful search term. — Gavia immer (talk) 15:56, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - at least some of the hits will have come from Tracy Morgan where this device is linked. I see no good reason to delete since the target provides the reader with useful, albeit generic, information. Bridgeplayer (talk) 18:08, 2 June 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. I created the redirect because I noticed continuous transdermal alcohol monitoring was an orphan while several articles mentioned alcohol monitors worn around the ankle. SCRAM technology is a major focus of a 2007 document titled Continuous Transdermal Alcohol Monitoring: A Primer for Criminal Justice Professionals, which states The SCRAM device became commercially available in 2003 and, to date, it is the only available continuous transdermal alcohol monitoring bracelet on the market. I'll agree that SCRAM should be described in the continuous transdermal alcohol monitoring article; I would have made the addition myself, but was deterred by its poor writing.- TDogg310 (talk) 18:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I'll withdraw the nomination when SCRAM is included in the target article to my satisfaction; I can see, from that source, that it's at least plausible.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 20:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep Per Gavia. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 02:07, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

How WPA could be broken last November



 * 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. Ruslik_ Zero 18:59, 9 June 2010 (UTC)


 * → Wi-Fi Protected Access (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Temporally ambiguous redirects are unlikely to be used, and "Q&A"-style redirects are generally deprecated. In any case, the relevant information is covered in much more detail in the article Temporal Key Integrity Protocol, so in case this is kept it should likely be retargeted there. — Gavia immer (talk) 01:39, 2 June 2010 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete - though there is a history, none of the content in the history has been merged so there are no GFDL implications. Not a foreseeable search term and virtually no traffic. Bridgeplayer (talk) 18:16, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - unlikely search term, and no content worth preserving. Robofish (talk) 21:27, 7 June 2010 (UTC)