Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 April 11

April 11
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 11, 2013

Heer



 * 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 to Heer (disambiguation) and reverse the redirect. JohnCD (talk) 11:32, 28 April 2013 (UTC)


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

There has been some back and forth over the correct target of this redirect, with some preferring German Army and others preferring Heer (disambiguation). The latter is technically incorrect, since an undisambiguated "Foo" title can not redirect to a "Foo (disambiguation)" title (see WP:MALPLACED), so what is really needed is a request to move the disambiguation page to the undisambiguated title. However, it should first be established that the current redirect target is incorrect. The large number of incoming links (over a thousand) indicates that there are settled expectations in one meaning; all such incoming links should be fixed before this title becomes a disambiguation page. Unless and until all incoming links are disposed of, keep the present redirect as the primary topic indicated by the incoming links. bd2412 T 12:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, I did some looking and I found your problem. There is absolutely zero question in my mind that German Army is primary topic for Heer. However, it is not merely the current German army, but the German Army as a concept, which includes the Empire, Weimar, Nazis and the current military, and probably the German Confederation and even older armies. The page German Army needs to be broadened to better cover the historical German armies, and needs subsections with main article links for each of these. In short, German Army should be more of a disambiguation concept page that explains all the various armies thruout Germany's history for the majority of us who don't know the difference between them. With that, I urge no action on this redirect. Ego White Tray (talk) 13:31, 25 February 2013 (UTC)


 * I had a look too. 90% of pages that link to Heer are articles about recipients of the World War 2 Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross. All this articles simply give as branch Heer and there are almost 1500 of these. If one takes these articles out, very few articles remain that link to Heer and most of them should link to the current German Army. All that is needed would be a bot going through the category "Recipients of the Knight's Cross" and replace  Heer  with  Heer  and then just a few dozen articles would remain. noclador (talk) 14:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I have to correct myself: I looked at the 1000 newest links to Heer and found a total of 6 articles and 4 talk pages, which are not articles about Knight's Cross recipients. Therefore I can say with confidence that 99% of articles should be linked directly to the Nazi era German Army. noclador (talk) 14:21, 25 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Retarget to German Army (1935–1945) with a hatnote to both German Army and Heer (disambiguation) based on Noclador's findings. Thryduulf (talk) 14:28, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Heer (disambiguation) (and then reverse the redirect). "Heer" just means "army", so it is too generic to point to just a specific army. Fixing of links is only important if the page ends up not being a disambiguation page (it is still nice if links are fixed). If the page ends up pointing to some primary topic, we are far more likely to send people to the wrong page. Fixing of links is also much easier (thanks to technical tools) if the page is a disambiguation page. —Kusma (t·c) 11:00, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
 * replace with disambig after cleanup I'm finding similar results to the above investigations. The vast majority I've found simply use it to mean "army", period, with the implication of whatever the German Army of the period was called. I think an appropriate first step is to go through its use with Template:Infobox military person and do the replacement above, though I have to say that since this is the English Wikipedia, we should translate Heer as we do for pretty much every other language out there. There's no need to hide German Army under a German word. After that I'm inclined to say that the current disambig page should replace the redirect. Mangoe (talk) 13:19, 5 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943  (talk) 02:01, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Relisting comment: I have an inkling how to close this, and volunteer to do so when the time comes, but given the number of pages potentially affected and that the template was removed a few weeks ago, I have relisted this a final time and requested input from WP:MILHIST.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory ( u  •  t  •  c ) 17:05, 11 April 2013 (UTC)


 * I will also note two discussions: this and this. ~ Amory ( u  •  t  •  c ) 17:09, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. Neither of these discussions point out the purpose behind the supposedly bold edit that Michael Zimmermann decided to do on 20 February 2009 to move Heer to Heer (disambiguation), and then turn Heer into a redirect to German Army. However, I do see some related discussions on Talk:German Army about such a move and/or merge once in 2005, and some more up until 2009 ... so I'm not sure. Steel1943  (talk) 01:19, 12 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Retarget to Heer (disambiguation) and then move over the redirect per similar ideas as Kusma and Mangoe. With the amount of articles listed on Heer (disambiguation), I do not see there being a clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Steel1943  (talk) 17:26, 11 April 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.

Wikipedia:Reporting admin abuse



 * 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 to Administrators. JohnCD (talk) 10:39, 19 April 2013 (UTC)


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

Never used, one link, doesn't make sense.  Rcsprinter  (shout)  @ 15:37, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Retarget to WP:ADMINABUSE (ADMIN), the entry shows what to do about admin issues.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:39, 12 April 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.

WP:BALEET



 * 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) 10:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)


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

Nonsense word redirects to a policy page. It's been around for 7 years but no pages link to it. Chutznik (talk) 01:29, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Formatting fixed. Thryduulf (talk) 02:39, 11 April 2013 (UTC)


 * delete Apparent nonsense, or if it was ever sense, the explanation is gone. Mangoe (talk) 12:18, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Baleet means delete. It's pretty harmless. - Eureka Lott 23:18, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * delete apparently only urban dictionary and encylopedia dramatica is using the word as such. It seems to be a Russian word for pain and an Hindi word (some sort of name, I don't know exactly what it means) as well so I guess we should call this as an unlikely redirect.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:44, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Quite definitely an unlikely redirect. Furthermore, I doubt many people use it to get to WP:DP Charon123able (talk) 15:28, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Word mainly started as a meme from Homestar Runner (here specifically). Doesn't really make sense for a redirect to the deletion policy though.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 05:43, 14 April 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.