Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 April 9

April 9
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 9, 2011

Laboratory School (Philippines)



 * 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 no consensus.  Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 02:44, 5 May 2011 (UTC)


 * → Tarlac State University – Laboratory School (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Delete. The school is not the only laboratory school in the Philippines and neither is the school referred to simply as the "Laboratory School". The redirect is therefore unnecessary. Moray An Par (talk) 14:11, 9 April 2011 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep as the only remaining evidence of a botched series of pagemoves that started in 2008 and inexplicably included moves to the titles Delete 2222 and Delete 223. The history here documents that the page existed prior to the content that is currently recorded in the target page's history and provides at least a few clues that future editors may need when attempting to comply with the attribution requirements of GFDL.  Note:  If there are multiple "Laboratory Schools" in the Philippines, I have no objection to an overwrite with disambiguation content.  But that can be resolved on the appropriate Talk page and doesn't need to be decided here.  Rossami (talk) 19:37, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * If the page was to be converted into a disambiguation, wouldn't "Laboratory schools in the Philippines" be a more appropriate title? Moray An Par (talk) 03:27, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * That would certainly be a better title for an article about laboratory schools in the Philippines, but less obviously so for a dab page. In any case this title would be a very logical search term for a page of either sort at that location. Thryduulf (talk) 07:33, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Possibly that would be a better title and if that page is created, this could be retargetted there. I have no strong opinion on the ideal title of a disambiguation page as long as the history of this page remains available.  Rossami (talk) 13:43, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

File:I21713a8kv3.jpg



 * 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


 * → File:Hello Echo Tour album cover.jpg (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Older redirect with bizarre name. File was moved.  Ker αun oςc op ia◁ galaxies  04:44, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * This file was at the name since 2008, so I did not do a speedy delete. If any one cares to do an off wiki search to see if anyone would be using the bizarre name it may show that it is OK to delete. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:07, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I did a Google search and the last result (of only a few), called Hello Echo Stone, has the file name in the result description. But at the actual website, under the Images tab, the image seems to have been stored elsewhere. Would this site still sustain some problem from linkrot? –  Ker αun oςc op ia◁ galaxies  07:26, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Wait. WP:CSD is for Recently created redirects with implausible typos, not recently created files or articles. The redirect in question was recently created. I don't read anything about keeping old files around. And not to put too fine a point on it, but I don't see why Wikipedia (or I) should really care about whether or not some other website will be subjected to linkrot. In reverse, Wikipedia sources are (or should be) archived to prevent linkrot on our end. But who cares if some random website somewhere in the Internet's universe is going to lose an image because XXXXX.jpg is deleted? I believe that tagging this redirect db-r3 wasn't an error, if I understand the definition correctly. I am completely open to keeping the file name if there is some rule on Wikipedia about keeping older names around. I just don't know where that is stated. –  Ker αun oςc op ia◁ galaxies  15:59, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: The file was uploaded on 5 Mar 2008 which means the title has been in existence since then.  Moving a page does "create" a redirect in one sense but it does not reset the clock for the purposes of CSD#R3.  The "recently created" clause has always referred to the creation of content at the title.  The decision to decline CSD#R3 was absolutely correct. To your question about linkrot, this is from Redirect:
 * As Brion Vibber said, "Not breaking links helps everyone, especially us first and foremost". He also said that the removal of (file) redirects is "extremely user-hostile and makes the project less useful".
 * Brion Vibber is the Chief Technical Officer of the Wikimedia Foundation, our release manager and to my knowledge is our most active developer. So, yes, our policy does say to keep those redirects unless they are harmful.  Rossami (talk) 20:07, 13 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much Rossami, that's exactly what I wanted to read. I just wanted clarification and documentation on the whole thing. I think if it's possible, I would prefer to withdraw this RfD than let it sit around and waste other people's time. – Kerαu noςco pia ◁ gala xies 21:57, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

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

International Code of Area Nomenclature (ICAN)



 * 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. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:08, 25 April 2011 (UTC)


 * → International Code of Area Nomenclature (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Delete. Unlikely search string. -- Alan Liefting (talk) - 00:44, 9 April 2011 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep. It's where the page existed for over three years before the pagemove.  Redirects like this are explicitly encouraged to prevent linkrot.  The title is not harmful or confusing and is not in the way of any other content.  As we have said often before, redirects do far more than merely feed the search engine.  Rossami (talk) 02:06, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, this is actually not an unlikely search string. Perhaps not the most likely, but given the recency of the move it's both very likely that external sites are linking to the old title still and that it is impossible for us to know how many people will continue to look for it at this title. Thryduulf (talk) 11:01, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Canal+ HD



 * 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 Skier Dude  ( talk ) 01:48, 26 April 2011 (UTC)


 * → Canal+ Film HD (links to redirect • [ history] • )

There is a channel called Canal+ HD in France,so this redirect might be unuseful. LTSC1980 (talk) 23:59, 9 April 2011 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep because it helps to document the pagemove and preempts linkrot. No objection to overwriting with disambiguation content if there is an article on the French channel, though.  Rossami (talk) 03:10, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Do not delete. This is case where WP:REDLINK would suggest deletion, however given the the page move (which needs documenting), the recency of the move (nowhere and nobody has had time to catchup) and the large amount of traffic that visits the target article means that deletion would be counter productive. The options therefore are keeping it as is, replacing it with a stub about the French channel (with a hatnote to the Scandinavian one), creating a dab page, or redirecting to the section on the Canal + article that lists the channels (again with a hatnote). Any of these options is fine by me. Thryduulf (talk) 07:44, 10 April 2011 (UTC)