Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 December 17

December 17
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 17, 2012

NAAFS



 * 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 defer to AfD. If the article is kept and anyone still wants this deleted it can be nominated and evaluated on its own merits without prejudice. If the article is deleted the redirect will be speedily deleted (WP:CSD). Thryduulf (talk) 21:10, 17 December 2012 (UTC)


 * → North American Allied Fight Series (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

deletion: Per Afd on the article it redirects to. "Doesnt seem to be a notable enough organization to have a wikipedia article. It's a local fight promotion, of which there are tons of." JonnyBonesJones (talk) 08:17, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - presumably, this should just be closed. If the article is kept, the nominating rationale is invalud.  If it's deleted, the redirect will go as CSD#G8. Wily D  11:24, 17 December 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.

Frown and smile



 * 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 Retraget both to Miscellaneous Technical (Unicode block). Ruslik_ Zero 19:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

These two redirects are from the Unicode characters and. They are not pictures of frowns and smiles; rather, they are technical symbols which look similar and were named accordingly. They correspond to the ISOAMSR entities /frown and /smile; gives them the unilluminating descriptions "down curve" and "up curve". Does anyone know what these are for? If not, I propose deletion because the current targets are not relevant. Gorobay (talk) 00:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 *  → Frown (links to redirect • [ history] • )    [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]
 *  → Smile (links to redirect • [ history] • )    [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]
 * Keep matches the names provided in Unicode, so seems like acceptable redirects WP:CHEAP -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 06:04, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The current targets are not about and do not mention these characters. It is like redirecting "∇" to Harp, "⁐" to Close-up, or "•" to Bullet. Redirects are cheap, but that should not be an excuse to keep incorrect redirects. Gorobay (talk) 16:52, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The symbol is a symbol for the topic of the target, therefore it is covering what it represents. There is nothing incorrect about it. If you want to look at it that way, a "bullet" is just a string of ASCII characters and isn't actually a ballistic projectile thrown by a firearm. Same with everything else. And these are computer characters, 1 doesn't redirect to Unicode either, but it is a Unicode symbol encoding the glyph for 1. -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 05:12, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No. "Bullet" is six characters which we interpret as referring to a projectile. "•" is one character which does not symbolize a projectile; instead, it marks a list item. If the characters in question were named "up/down curve", we would not be having this discussion. Their only connection with facial expressions is their names. Gorobay (talk) 15:10, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * No, "Bullet" is 6 unicode characters encoding six alphabetic characters that is strung into a word that is used to to label the projectile. It's not a bullet. The symbol • is the at bullet (typography). My example was not using "•" at all, it was using the string of ASCII derived codepoints "bullet". "1" is also a unicode character, used to encode a glyph that is used to represent an Arabic numeral, that is in turn used to represent a number. ; that the two redirects under discussion are unicode characters with names, shows where they can point to, because, why else would they be named that way? They are not called "upward curve" or "downward curve", they are called "smile" and "frown". -- 70.24.247.127 (talk) 22:56, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete The articles are not about the characters, they are about the facial expressions. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:21, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Redirecting a symbol that represents a frown to the frown article is not incorrect, indeed in the absence of an article about the symbol it is the correct course of action. It is no different to frown being about the facial expression not the word - we are an encyclopaedia not a dictionary. As for your examples, •, a typographical bullet, correctly redirects to Bullet (typography); ∇ redirects to the article about the symbol itself, but if we didn't have that then targetting it hard would not have been incorrect; ⁐ is a difficult one as although redirecting to close up would be fine, no search engine I tried seems to include it in their database (there are dozens of mentions on unicode symbol pages so I know it does exist in the wild) so I can't how it is actually used to determine if there is a better target. Thryduulf (talk) 21:37, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirecting a symbol that represents a frown to the frown article is not incorrect, but it is not symbol that represents a frown. Gorobay (talk) 23:43, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
 * What is it then? Unicode defines it as meaning "frown", "down curve" is merely a description of the glyph. Thryduulf (talk) 07:49, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps analogies will help. ⟨•⟩ is not a picture of a bullet, but it looks like a bullet, so it is called "bullet". ⟨⊥⟩ does not symbolize tacks, and yet it is called "up tack". ⟨@⟩ is an ⟨a⟩ with a long curvy tail, but some languages call it "monkey". ⟨⌑⟩ was called "pillow" in German. Similarly, ⟨⌢⟩ is not a picture of a frown; "frown" is merely a description of the glyph.
 * As for what it is, it is one of many geometric shapes used for technical purposes. Gorobay (talk) 14:54, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * "⟨•⟩ is not a picture of a bullet, but it looks like a bullet, so it is called "bullet"" indeed, and our article about it is at bullet (typography) accordingly. "⊥" looks like an upward-facing tack, so it is called "up tack" and so ⊥ redirects to up tack, a disambiguation page listing the things the symbol is used to represent. ⌑ redirects to our article about the shape. The point is that the best target for any given unicode symbol isn't always the same, if you think there is a better target then propose one and we can discuss it, but the current target is entirely appropriate. Thryduulf (talk)
 * The best target for any given Unicode symbol is always an article about the symbol, what it symbolizes, or how it is used. The only sensible target for the two redirects is Miscellaneous Technical (Unicode block). Does this meet with your approval? Gorobay (talk) 18:42, 18 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Retarget to Miscellaneous Technical (Unicode block) which explains what they are and what they are called. Siuenti (talk) 12:32, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Retarget, per Gorobay and Siuenti. If I saw a ⌢ and wanted to know more about it so cut it and pasted it after "http://en.wiki.org/wiki/" I'd be more enlightened to know about its Unicode-ness rather than rather peripheral stuff about actual frowning. Tonywalton Talk 01:31, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Gorobay, Siuenti, and Tonywalton. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 09:19, 28 December 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.