Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 December 30

December 30
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 30, 2012

Local Executives of Barugo (Past to Present)



 * 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. Ruslik_ Zero 18:36, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


 * → Mayor of Barugo, Leyte (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Not a plausible search item. – H T  D  19:19, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Three year old redirect, probably with external links pointing to it. We don't want people finding a dead link when they click a link pointing to Wikipedia. Ego White Tray (talk) 01:56, 7 January 2013 (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.

Elected Officials of the Local Government of Barugo for Years 2007-2010



 * 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 to preserve the history. Ruslik_ Zero 18:34, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


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

Not a plausible search item. – H T  D  12:01, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Not plausible. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 13:27, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * speedy delete decline reason I have left it there for attribution of the content writer, as content from it was merged to Barugo, Leyte. However if you can find a different method of attribution that would be OK too. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:42, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * There's this template you can use at the talk page to denote attribution after merges. – H T  D  03:46, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep as . The talk page template referred to above is, which states in part: "The former article's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter article, and it must not be deleted so long as the latter page exists." (my emphasis). Thryduulf (talk) 11:10, 31 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.

Wikipedia:Don't be a fucking idiot



 * 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. Probably crosses the line. Ruslik_ Zero 18:30, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


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

The current state of Wikipedia administration has reached an impasse on the ability to maintain a collegial editing environment and progressive elements who argue that civility is a detriment to building this free encyclopedia are bolstered when a redirect such as this is deemed necessary. It becomes impossible to encourage editors to avoid personal attacks like telling another editor "don't be a fucking idiot" when it would be institutionally appropriate to tell the same editor, "Don't be a fucking idiot". There is no correlation that necessitates this phrase with one's ability to find Don't delete the main page. It appears this redirect was moved to a more appropriate title only to be restored back to this title by a now banned account. I believe the redirect qualifies for wp:csd but prefer to document the discussion for clarity and precedent. -- My 76 Strat  (talk) 07:37, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Have you got any evidence of this redirect actually causing harm? Any redirect can be misused and therefore it isn't a reason in itself to delete. The history of the page seems to show this has been uncontroversially a redirect since 2009. Thryduulf (talk) 10:04, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The only evidence I have is the manner it harmed my comprise upon discovering its existence. I can affirm that I was taken aback by the insult I was forced to endure in trying to imagine the good faith motives that would spawn such a mockery of the redirect process. I'd be happy if that was the extent of harm caused, and fulfilled if I prevented any others from experiencing the same. -- My 76 Strat  (talk) 10:56, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Why isn't this redirected to Don't be a dick.--Amadscientist (talk) 10:16, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Interestingly enough, the project page you cited does connect to content of the same title, and the page itself proactively asserts the potential that title has to provoke negative feelings; stringently advising users to exercise "great caution" in their manner of use. -- My 76 Strat  (talk) 10:56, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete or retarget. The redirect would only be used to imply someone is a "fucking idiot", which is inappropriate. It really doesn't need to exist. If it is kept it should be retargeted to WP:DBAD, as the current target is just illogical – but I hope it is deleted. — This, that, and the other (talk) 11:19, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - little-used, and obviously insulting. Calling someone a 'dick' verges on incivility as it is, and that shortcut should be used with caution; this one is clearly way over the line of acceptability. Robofish (talk) 16:21, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Harmless amusement of a redirect, nothing more and nothing to worry about. This is just whiny backlash from the recent Malleus kerfuffle.  They failed to make a block stick, so now they channel the spirit of Mary Whitehouse and scour the Wikipedia for "nasties". Tarc (talk) 20:34, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Calling someone a "fucking idiot" hardly seems harmless and amusing to me. — This, that, and the other (talk) 04:39, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Needless to say, "amusement" is not the purpose of a redirect. It's machinations of policy like that which produces editors like Tarc, who use the wiki for self gratification; finding more and more ways to amuse. This redirect dilutes the authority of policy and emboldens the belligerent minority to flaunt their malcontent ways. Consider how fluently Tarc entered this discussion, posting a string of personal attacks against me; with impunity! Tarc calls this RfD a "whiny backlash", plays the "malleus card", and concludes his "trash talk" from there. I'm sure he thoroughly amused himself for all the things he could mock. I shouldn't feed the trolls on this site, but I often err, and publish a comment, way longer than the attention they deserve; like I have done here. I should have just made a humorous redirect called Go fuck yourself, linked to Dildo, and told him "here's a link for you. But this ain't a "whiny backlash" and I filed the discussion because I don't condone this kind of trash, or the ensuing amusement. If only I could touch Tarc with my hands; I would exercise the demons out of him; by intervention if necessary, and he would view amusement differently after that day. -- My 76 Strat  (talk) 07:17, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Question WP:IDIOT also redirects to the same target, should that be brought up for deletion as well?--70.49.81.44 (talk) 02:12, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Geez, what next? Is Don't-give-a-fuckism on the chopping block? Tarc (talk) 02:48, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * -- My 76 Strat  (talk) 03:49, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I was not suggesting that it should or should not be deleted only asking if this is deleted should the other one be as well since they are somewhat similar.--70.49.81.44 (talk) 20:49, 31 December 2012 (UTC)--70.49.81.44 (talk) 20:49, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think this is comparable to Don't-give-a-fuckism since I see I don't give a fuck as being far less likely to be seen as an attack against someone than telling a another person not to be an idiot. The first statement is a demonstration of a person view on a person while the section is a directive to another person calling them an idiot. I am not sure if this should be deleted but I am sure that the comparison made here is weak.--70.49.81.44 (talk) 21:00, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Your question is fair, the comparison is ad hominem (a predictable ploy), and the answer is probably best left for another discussion. There is a very slight difference between a shortcut, which wp:idiot is, and a redirect, which this page discusses. I am inclined to believe the shortcut is ok, used as a shortcut, and as such it would never be ok to use it to call someone an idiot. -- My 76 Strat  (talk) 21:48, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete Inappropriate personal attack not meant for Wikipedia. TBrandley (what's up) 07:15, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete I can't imagine a way in which this redirect could be used while maintaining civility. --BDD (talk) 23:02, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete (along with WP:IDIOT): For the rare cases (usually between two editors who e-know each other well enough to gauge skin thickness accurately) that something like this is needed, we already have WP:DICK, and don't need additional things of that sort. And, as noted, the target of the two redirs doesn't seem very appropriate anyway.  The difference between the longwinded nominated redir and WP:IDIOT on the one hand, and WP:DICK on the other, is that both of the former are crude criticisms of innate intelligence, and constitute personal attacks, while the latter is a sharp-tongued version of WP:TROUT, basically, addressing, actions and decisions, not an innate quality. — SMcCandlish  Talk⇒ ɖ⊝כ⊙þ Contrib.  12:21, 5 January 2013 (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.