Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 December 8

December 8
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 8, 2013.

Historic tax credits



 * 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. Thryduulf (talk) 14:08, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Historic tax credits → Mill conversion (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Delete, unless someone can suggest a better target. Historic tax credits are slightly related to mill conversion, but they're a vastly larger topic; historic tax credits are less relevant to mill conversion than building restoration is, and we'd never redirect that to mill conversion even if we didn't have an article on it already. WP:REDDEAL demonstrates ways in which we'd benefit by making this a redlink, including demonstrating the fact that we ought to have an article on historic tax credits; it's much more specific than the general tax incentive article, so it shouldn't redirect there either. Nyttend (talk) 21:59, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - yes, it is confusing and should be addressed in a broader context, e.g. not just mill to residential conversion historical tax credits, but also residential to residential historical tax credits. Smallbones( smalltalk ) 22:19, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I actually found it while preparing to expand Beasley Building, which got the credits for grocerystore to residential conversion. We really need to have a complete article on this topic, or at least a stub discussing the basics.  Nyttend (talk) 22:32, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Retarget to Tax credit would make sense, but an article on the subject wouldn't be amiss, either. --Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 23:38, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete this is not about tax credits that no longer exist. Nor is "Federal Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credit" the only tax credit for historical sites. If we really need this, it should be a disambiguation page, and should also point to expired tax credits, and tax credits that are themselves historic in nature (such as the first ever tax credit, or a tax credit that is famous for some reason) -- 65.94.78.9 (talk) 07:20, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * You know, I think I agree with your comment even more than with my own original statement. You've made solid and sensible explanations of why the proposed target change wouldn't be a good idea.  Nyttend (talk) 04:35, 15 December 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.

Signal processsing



 * 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. Thryduulf (talk) 14:04, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


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

Improbable spelling error. The target article can easily be found without the "help" of this redirect. &#8239;Senator2029 ➔ “Talk”&#8239; 16:59, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - plausible typo, if implausible spelling error. No rationale for deletion. Wily D  14:35, 12 December 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.

PIL



 * 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 move PIL (disambiguation) over this redirect. For future reference, requests to delete redirects to make way for a page move belong at Requested moves. As consensus here is clear it seems the page move will be uncontroversial so I'll make the move rather than list the request again. Thryduulf (talk) 14:01, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * PIL → Public Image Ltd (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

I want PIL (disambiguation) back in this place. Having PIL redirect to Public Image Ltd is a nuisance for those looking for the Python Imaging Library, which is the common meaning of PIL in programming, and other expansions of the acronym. Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 15:14, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Support: Having the disambiguation page back totally makes sense. &mdash; Dsimic (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Support – There is no primary topic, therefore redirecting to the disambiguation page is appropriate. &#8239;Senator2029 ➔ “Talk”&#8239; 17:07, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Support: It seems like the disambiguation page would give more readers a good experience than this single redirect. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 21:59, 12 December 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.

Shawn Breaker



 * 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. Thryduulf (talk) 13:57, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Shawn Breaker → Danbury Mad Hatters (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Insignificant, non-notable hockey player, never played out of the low minors, extremely implausible search term.   Ravenswing   10:06, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Implausible search term. Also, redirecting a non-notable player to one team's article is no more appropriate than linking them to the article of any other team they played for.  This was pretty much done only to get the first edit in in case the player ever did become notable. He didn't. Resolute 15:40, 8 December 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.

Ice Cream Sandwich (operating system)



 * 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. Thryduulf (talk) 13:52, 15 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Ice Cream Sandwich (operating system) → Android version history (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Implausible search term and disambiguation. Also applies to the related articles, Gingerbread (operating system), Honeycomb (operating system) Jelly Bean (operating system), KitKat (operating system) ViperSnake151   Talk  06:16, 8 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep: Having these redirect pages in place is in fact preferable, per WP:NOTBROKEN, as each of them might be expanded into a full-size article at some point in time. Also, having these redirect pages is good for disambiguation pages, making them more clear.  Third, these redirect pages are utilizing explicit anchors, making it easier to link various Android versions from other articles, without the need to type in awkward and much longer links to sections in Android version history article, and/or remember (or look for) their exact explicit anchors. &mdash; Dsimic (talk) 13:22, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Why you can't use Android 4.2 as the wikilink instead I will never know. ViperSnake151   Talk  21:11, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Please pardon me, but when and where did I say anything against such "versioned" redirect pages? In that case we'd have a lot of   links around, what's probably more prone to errors.  In general I'm Ok with those Android x.y redirects, but "version nicknames" seem to be much more used in actual articles. &mdash; Dsimic (talk) 21:24, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep, topics discussed at target with a correct disambiguation. Siuenti (talk) 11:17, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete: The Redirect names are misleading since they don't mention the actual operating system, just the detached version codename. --ConCelFan (talk) 19:17, 14 December 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.