Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 May 3

May 3
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 3, 2011

Ramat Tyumakin



 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 22:09, 16 May 2011 (UTC)


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

Delete—the redirect is an implausible misnomer. The creator probably meant Ramat Tyomkin, a village that became part of Netanya. However, no one is likely to search for Ramat Tyumakin, which is incorrect and implausible. Ynhockey (Talk) 19:05, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete per nom; also, there's no "Ramat" anything mentioned at the target, making the redirect at best confusing and unhelpful. Glenfarclas  ( talk ) 20:54, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Israeli apartheid



 * 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) 03:44, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * → Israel and the apartheid analogy (links to redirect • [ history] • )

(deletion,) the redirect is both abusive and insulting attempt to bypass fair discussion on the main page. by implying that a disputed liable notion is an agreed fact. |Jonathango| 17:37, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Palestine-related deletion discussions.  — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 17:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Israel-related deletion discussions.  — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 17:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)


 * NOTE to closing admin: There is both Israeli Apartheid and Israeli apartheid. IZAK (talk) 04:13, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep reasonable search phrase — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 17:47, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Readers new to Wikipedia are surely far more likely to search for "Israeli apartheid" than for "Israel and the apartheid analogy". Deleting this redirect will leave them unable to find the material they are looking for. RolandR (talk) 18:26, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete—the reason that the article was moved to Israel and the Apartheid Analogy in the first place was that calling the article "Israeli Apartheid" would violate a number of core Wikipedia policies, especially WP:NPOV. Having a redirect to the page implies that the phrase "Israeli Apartheid" is applicable, which defeats the whole point of the original renaming. —Ynhockey (Talk) 19:03, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:RNEUTRAL - redirects do not have to be from neutral titles if there are good reasons for a non-neutral title to exist (such as being widely used), and the presence of a redirect does not imply acceptance of the term. The term "Israeli apartheid" is very widely used, getting over a million web hits, 97 current news hits, and over 600 books - all these figures are for the exact phrase, and include both reliable and unreliable sources. Given this it's a very obvious keep. Thryduulf (talk) 19:55, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - an obvious search phrase, deletion of which will only make it more difficult for people looking for information on the topic to find it. Gatoclass (talk) 20:44, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep as redirect to Israel and the apartheid analogy. This has always been a redirect. Not sure what the nominator's problem is because this is a common search phrase and does not denote any "judgment" about the subject. IZAK (talk) 04:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Plausible search term. Redirects have a much much, lower threshold than other aspects of the Wikipedia, i.e. they are not subject to NPOV concerns.  Fortunately there's only one "I don't like it" vote so far, hopefully we aren't flooded with more by the usual suspects. Tarc (talk) 15:58, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Re-direct is not well thought out. The "Israeli Apartheid" is quite different in meaning to "The Israeli Apartheid Analogy". The use of the word analogy implies that apartheid can exist only by analogy to the former South African regime. John Dugard, the world's pre-emminent scholar on apartheid law has written, regarding the Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, "That the Apartheid Convention is intended to apply to situations other than South Africa is confirmed by its endorsement in a wider context in instruments adopted before and after the fall of apartheid... It may be concluded that the Apartheid Convention is dead as far as the original cause for its creation – apartheid in South Africa – is concerned, but that it lives on as a species of the crime against humanity, under both customary international law and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court." (http://untreaty.un.org/cod/avl/ha/cspca/cspca.html) Therefore Israeli Apartheid can be described by way of analogy to the former South Africa or as an independent political phenomenen. A page titled "Israeli Apartheid" could reasonably include a section on "The Israeli Apartheid Analogy" but not vice versa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Floccinauci (talk • contribs)  14:28, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Please read the several discussions at Talk:Israel and the apartheid analogy to see why the article previously named "Israeli apartheid" is now under this name, and why the redirect is appropriate and necessary. RolandR (talk) 15:29, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * KEEP: For me, it seems like it's OK to have a redirect. it's not any problems of the neutrality of a redirect about "Israeli apartheid". If it had been an article that was called "Palestine and the apartheid analogy", I would also accept that it had been an redirect from "Palestinian apartheid" to the article about that (even that I'm a peace activist and hate Israel). A young communist (talk) 15:09, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Verifiedvoting.org



 * 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. JohnCD (talk) 22:07, 16 May 2011 (UTC)


 * → 2004 United States election voting controversies (links to redirect • [ history] • )

I searched the target article's history and couldn't find a single mention of the names "Verified Voting" or "TrueMajority". I can't imagine what purpose this redirect serves. Closedmouth (talk) 16:50, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete. Apparently VerifiedVoting.org is a lobbying organization promoting reliable elections processes.  If it is notable, it should be a redlink so that an article can be created; either way, the target provides no information about this subject, making the redirect unless and potentially confusing.  Glenfarclas  ( talk ) 22:24, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

Li Chengwan



 * 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 19:11, 30 May 2011 (UTC)


 * → Syngman Rhee (links to redirect • [ history] • )

This is oddly a Mandarin re-direct to a Korean name, and per WP:FORRED, we are advised not to create such re-directs. A potential historical, or even BLP, article (either is certainly possible) is a question for another time. Focus on the deletion discussion now – HXL's Roundtable  and  Record  12:56, 3 May 2011 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'