Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 April 24

April 24
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 24, 2013

Nordic art



 * 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 Scandinavian art then reverse the redirect ~ Amory ( u  •  t  •  c ) 14:57, 5 May 2013 (UTC)


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

Delete. Plain daft/horrifically ill-informed redirect. Akin to redirecting "North American art" to "Mexican art" -> a minor feature of a much larger topic. Mais oui! (talk) 19:09, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Redirects are not about content, verifiable or otherwise, but about enabling people to find the content they are looking for, which includes thinking about the way people who don't have "a proven minimum level of elementary knowledge" use language. In all these discussions, it is far better to comment on the arguments not on the people who make them. Thryduulf (talk) 08:54, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Scandinavian art. The current target is indeed too narrow, but this seems suitable. --Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 20:16, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Retarget per Fyre2387. Thryduulf (talk) 20:53, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - please note that the Nordic countries (Greenland, Iceland, Faroes, Svalbard, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Åland, Finland) is not the same thing as Scandinavia (Sweden, Norway, Denmark). The omission of Finnish art especially, a key component of Nordic art, makes the retarget a poor one. But OK, I suppose, if properly explained.--Mais oui! (talk) 02:20, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Is Finland a Nordic country? They don't speak a Nordic language. Ego White Tray (talk) 04:04, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * It is comments like that which sometimes make me wonder if Wikipedia will ever get on the right track. I am seriously beginning to think that the best route for the project is only to allow contributors to write, and comment on, content for which they have a proven minimum level of elementary knowledge. --Mais oui! (talk) 07:50, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I believe you're looking for Citizendium. --Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 22:10, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * If you are going to make uncivil and insulting comments about someone's question, you best be sure you know what you're talking about. The comments below suggest that you don't. Ego White Tray (talk) 01:18, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * According to the dab page at Nordic, sometimes. Generally it seems Finland is included in geographical contexts but not in cultural ones, however the article at Scandinavia contradicts this saying that Scandinavia always includes Denmark, Norway and Sweden, and only sometimes Iceland, Finland and the Faro Islands while "Nordic countries" always includes the whole group. Scandinavian art itself is just a "stub" that looks more like a set index/dab which lists the articles about Norse art and the art of Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Iceland and Finland. Given this I can see no reason not to point this potentially ambiguous term to the list as proposed. Thryduulf (talk) 07:30, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * There is a reason why WP:VERIFY is official Wikipedia policy. One of those reasons is so that Users unfamiliar with topics do not rely on daft, unreferenced dab pages as their main source of information. --Mais oui! (talk) 07:50, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry that was poor wording, only the first sentence relates to the dab page. Both "Nordic" and "Scandinavian" are ambiguous as to whether they include countries other than Norway, Sweden and Denmark in non-specialist use. However, as the proposed target, Scandinavian art, lists all the topics that people could be looking for it is the ideal target.


 * disambiguate to the various Nordic art articles -- 70.24.250.103 (talk) 04:05, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete and subsequently move Scandinavian art→ — I think Scandinavian art's content would be appropriate to redirect to, but as far as I know (/can tell) "Nordic" is generally considered a more inclusive group than "Scandinavian", as Mais oui! outlines above, which makes me think would be a better title for that content. – 296.x (talk) 12:23, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * disambiguate Nordic art is more inclusive than Scandinavian art so it makes more sense to have that are the dag page and Scandinavian art as a redirect. There are several ways it could be done technically, just add the dab terms per the IP or delete and move per 296.x. --Salix (talk): 22:34, 3 May 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:DPL/D2D



 * 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. No contrary opinions were expressed so this seems uncontroversial. In the absence of any expressed preferences for either target I've arbitrarily chosen the first, but this is a normal editorial action. Thryduulf (talk) 18:41, 3 May 2013 (UTC)


 * → Disambiguation pages with links/Disambiguation pages that link to disambiguation pages (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Retarget to Disambiguation pages with links. This shortcut seems to redirect to a retired project whose previous purpose is now listed on Disambiguation pages with links. However, if retargeted, due to the previous purpose of the redirect's current target, I'm thinking that it should also redirect to a section in the possible new target, but I'm not sure if it should be Disambiguation pages with links or Disambiguation pages with links. Steel1943 (talk) 04:45, 24 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.

Thomas Dalton and Lucy Lew



 * 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. --BDD (talk) 21:46, 1 May 2013 (UTC)


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

Request deletion of the redirect. The page used to be labeled for two people, but the bulk of the content was for Thomas Dalton. The article has been restructured, any links to the previous article name have been removed, and the redirect is no longer needed. In addition "Thomas Dalton and Lucy Lew" are unlikely search criteria since Lucy's name at this point was Lucy Lew Francis Dalton.  CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 02:58, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Nominating Thomas Dalton and Lucy Lew-- CaroleHenson  ( talk ) 02:59, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Page history is sufficient here. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 17:52, 28 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.