Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 August 8

August 8
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 8, 2012

File:Sq logo.gif



 * 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.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 08:53, 18 August 2012 (UTC)


 * → File:Space Quest logo.gif (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

I deleted this under G6, but this was (quite rightly) reverted as an incorrect use of the G6 criteria. This redirect is not used (no articles link to the "Sq logo" name, see ) and it is unlikely that anyone wanting to use the logo would expect to find it under "Sq logo" - when they would find the proper file if they look up "Space Quest". That was what I meant as "housekeeping"... clearing up an unused and highly-unlikely-to-ever-be-used redirect. As such, I think this redirect should be deleted.  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 22:27, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. The image was at this title for 7 years so its very likely that people will expect to find it there. It's also quite likely that it has been linked/hotlinked/attributed to this title externally in that time. It's not doing any harm, so what benefit will be gained from deleting it? Thryduulf (talk) 22:40, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per Thryduulf. benzband  ( talk ) 19:22, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

User:Mitchazenia/WTM3



 * 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 retargeted, so the nomination rationale no longer applies. If anyone still wants this deleted then feel free to nominate it again with a different rationale. Thryduulf (talk) 22:42, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * → Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Goals (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Useless redirect. Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page 2011wp (talk) 15:32, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I've changed the redirect to the new page name for that event.--Pharos (talk) 15:43, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

User:Piemanmoo/monobook.js



 * 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 Speedy Delete, G8 by User:Explicit. Lenticel  ( talk ) 02:49, 9 August 2012 (UTC)


 * → User:Mintpieman/monobook.js (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Useless redirect. Pages dependent on a non-existent or deleted page 2011wp (talk) 15:31, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * This is a leftover from a user name change, who later had the CSS page deleted as CSD U1. I know technically this may be speedily deleted, but in this case, why bother? It simply documents the rename, and there is zero possibility of confusion or title conflict going forward. BigNate37(T) 15:48, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy G8. The target was deleted by user request, so there is no reason to keep the redirect - indeed had the user and/or deleting admin noticed the redirect they'd have probably deleted it there and then. There is no harm to keeping the page as is, but equally there is no benefit - it's not required for attribution or documentation of the page move (other userspace pages do that). Further, skin .js pages are not part of the encyclopaedia but simply personal tools that control how that user interacts with the project, so there is no reason not to delete it if the user wishes, and in this case they did. Thryduulf (talk) 22:51, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Belief without religion



 * 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 Retarget. Whith Ietsism seen as the somewhat more logical target, readers may not necessarily follow that reasoning so should be able to find SBNR via Hatnote.Tikiwont (talk) 17:59, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


 * → SBNR (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

After a short discussion on the help desk, this redirect was pointed to SBNR (Help desk). However, per definition, SBNR includes organized religion (it only lowers its importance; thus effectively not being belief without religion; maybe belief beyond religion or belief belittleing religion, but mostly not belief without religion (since it 'preaches' 'spirituality over all')), while Ietsism never includes religion (its always belief without religion), since Ietsers don't know what exacly thay believe in. Typical Ietser's sentence could be "I'm not Catholic, but there must be something", while SBNR person's would be "I am Catholic, but I'm definitely more praying (or whatever) than going to church (or whatever)". So, Ietsism is the only compatible term, since SBNR does include organized religion, so I think it being the primary redirect tag contradicts its concept by itself. My proposal is either to incluse Ietsism as sole redirect (the best), include both on disambiguation page (media, but contradicting SBNR definition) or make Ietsism leading redirect (also median, and still contradicting SBNR definition). 93.87.210.14 (talk) 05:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * N.b. relevant discussion from the help desk is now located at Help desk/Archives/2012 August 7. BigNate37(T) 21:09, 13 August 2012 (UTC)


 * There are two sides to this issue. As I explained at the HD thread linked above it is my opinion, based on our Ietsism and Spiritual but not religious (SBNR) articles and the literal meanings of the terms involved, that the meaning of the phrase belief without religion is more closely related to SBNR than to ietsism. However, it is claimed that believer without religion is a demonym of sorts for those identifying as adherents to ietsism. I originally opposed the nominator's opinion that these terms should point at ietsism, and I targeted them at SBNR. However given both sides of the issue, I'm now unsure which target would be best for these two redirects. The BWR terms are certainly worth having in some shape or another, so I'm opposed to deletion. BigNate37(T) 21:17, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi, I think that this really should be redirected to Ietsism (I come from the Balkans region so I second the claim about censuses). It's even in Religion in Russia (if they were SBNT they would (according to its article) identify as particular religion practitioners (about 25% Americans being SBNT really wouldn't make sense the other way, since most of them addhere to some religion (Religion in USA))). Lakisan97 (talk) 21:50, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Believer without religion



 * 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 Retarget as above. Tikiwont (talk) 18:00, 9 September 2012 (UTC)


 * → SBNR (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

This redirect seems to me as too much. It should be deleted. 93.87.210.14 (talk) 05:35, 8 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Treat similarly to above. They are simply verb/demonym variants of the same term. BigNate37(T) 21:07, 13 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't delete, but add similars as Believers without religion (but, claim on the prevailing article (if it stays/becomes the solution) should contain only Belief without religion so things don't become "overcrowded"). Lakisan97 (talk) 21:59, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.