Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 May 6

May 6
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 6, 2011

Infobox person



 * 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 Deleted. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:15, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * → Template:Infobox person (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Recently created redirect from main space. It certainly has to be avoided. We should not mix shortcuts with articles like that. It's not only the sites that copy wikipedia that will get confused that fi we follow this tactic at some point it will be difficult to distinguish navigation for readers and shortcuts for editors Magioladitis (talk) 21:11, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Theres a whole bunch of them already like cite web and cite news. These are commonly used templates that should be easily accessible. To claim that someone might get confused is absolute rubbish. --Metallurgist (talk) 22:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Delete. This is a recently created cross-namespace redirect to an editorial template that serves no real benefit. If you don't understand namespaces then you're not going to need to edit a template like this, and unlike a navigation template for example, there is no benefit for a reader in viewing it other than on an article. Every cross-namespace redirect creates the possibility of confusion (some more than others), and so we need to judge whether the benefits of the redirect outweigh the possible confusion - in this case the benefits are low at best and the risk of confusion higher than average, and there is no history to preserve so it's a clear delete. Thryduulf (talk) 08:24, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Like "Wikiproject," "infobox" is a self-evident editing-related term here, unlikely to be searching for a mainspace article.--Carwil (talk) 08:53, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * And redirects from the main namespace to Wikiprojects are discouraged and, unless there is significant history, they are almost always deleted. Thryduulf (talk) 09:53, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * This one is even worse than the pseudo-spaces like T: or CAT:. We should not encourage redirects like that. -- Magioladitis (talk) 18:49, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Cross namespace and serves no purpose. --Muhandes (talk) 23:31, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Can't see any reason to keep around a cross-namespace redirect. —Tom Morris (talk) 17:03, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Vase with Red Poppies



 * 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 longer applicable as converted to article. -- JLaTondre (talk) 01:16, 23 May 2011 (UTC)


 * → Poppy Flowers (links to redirect • [ history] • )
 * Currently redirects to Poppy Flowers, but this is incorrect as they are two separate paintings. Poppy Flowers(F324a) was famously stolen from a museum in Cairo in 2010, while Vase with Red Poppies(F279) is property of a museum in Hartford, Connecticut. Whoever created the redirect confused the two. Pictures and listings for each painting can be found on the List of works by Vincent van Gogh.--Chimino (talk) 13:03, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Are you asking for a deletion of the redirect or do you want to make a seperate article? If you want to make another article the redirect does not need to be deleted in order to do so.--76.66.182.228 (talk) 23:56, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect deleted, as a new article for the painting is likely far down the line of priority for VG paintings. My argument is the painting as listed on the List of Works by VGG should not be redirected to an incorrect painting.--Chimino (talk) 03:31, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Stubbify or delete per WP:REDLINK. Thryduulf (talk) 08:26, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Article created.--Chimino (talk) 19:19, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

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

2011 Somali protests



 * 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 per lack of objection after a month. Thryduulf (talk) 22:00, 5 June 2011 (UTC)


 * → 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests (links to redirect • [ history] • )
 * → 2010–2011 Middle East and North Africa protests (links to redirect • [ history] • )

Per http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2010%E2%80%932011_Middle_East_and_North_Africa_protests&oldid=427709457#Somalia. Closedmouth (talk) 07:14, 6 May 2011 (UTC) 'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'

Reboot Ralph



 * 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. Thryduulf (talk) 22:03, 5 June 2011 (UTC)


 * → List of Disney theatrical animated features (links to redirect • [ history] • )
 * Linked to inside the list it re-directs to. Georgia guy (talk) 00:09, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * It appears to be an upcoming Disney film, but not a lot to be found about it on the internet. Would suggest that as an article it fails notability, but as a redirect it could serve a purpose until more is known.  Anyone searching for it will be redirected to a list of Disney movies, so could be useful, but I would have no problem if it was deleted (except of course, someone will recreate it!)  However - there is also a redirect at Reboot Ralph (2012 film) that should be deleted.  --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:24, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

'The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.'
 * Keep the Reboot Ralph redirect, since it is sourced on the target page, however I would suggest deleting the Reboot Ralph (2012 film) since the date is more or less WP:Crystal. Tiggerjay (talk) 01:22, 26 May 2011 (UTC)