Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2013 February 10

February 10
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 10, 2013

List of less common dragons in Dungeons & Dragons



 * 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 Dragon (Dungeons & Dragons). Steel1943 (talk) 08:26, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

This is an outdated search term that now leads to the article Dragon (Dungeons & Dragons). Nowhere on this article is there a "less common dragons" section or wording listed anywhere. In addition, none of the links to these redirects are in the article or template namespace. Steel1943 (talk) 22:25, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * → Dragon (Dungeons & (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]
 *  → Dragon (Dungeons & Dragons) (links to redirect • [ history] • )    [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]
 * Comment - I think this one was merged after an AFD, so there would be attribution concerns if it were deleted. BOZ (talk) 22:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * True; I wasn't sure about this one, considering the decent number of cross-namespace links to List of less common dragons in Dungeons & Dragons. Steel1943 (talk) 22:31, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. These redirects are actively used (see stats) and the target is both logical and the closest we have to what is being searched for. Deletion would bring no benefits. Thryduulf (talk) 10:30, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Somewhat disagree. Per the stats here and here, in the last 30 days, these redirects have only been looked up 1-5 times a day, and that's not happening every day. The only reason for the most recent spike in views is most likely the cause of the fact that they are currently listed here as a RfD. Steel1943 (talk) 00:48, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Avoiding the blip caused by RfD listing is why the stats link above points to the previous month's figures. It's not the most used redirect of course, but given that bots and similar account for only 2-3 hits a month it's clear that these are seeing human use. Even if it's only a handfull of people a month, what benefits does inconveniencing them bring? Thryduulf (talk) 11:15, 12 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep per Thryduulf. These redirects may not be used very much (especially List of less common dragons in Dungeons & Dragons), but they are used and thus help some people at least; also, the problems pointed out by WP:RFD both apply in this case. Redirects are cheap and like Thryduulf said, deletion would bring no benefits here. Sideways713 (talk) 11:19, 12 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment I retargeted this to the Types of dragons section. Emmette Hernandez Coleman (talk) 03:23, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I see you only did that for List of less common dragons in D&D, so I did the same for List of less common dragons in Dungeons & Dragons. Made enough sense to me. Steel1943 (talk) 08:26, 23 February 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.

Golden Dragon-1



 * 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 Speedy Delete, G6 by User:INeverCry Lenticel  ( talk ) 00:10, 11 February 2013 (UTC)


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

Delete. The "-1" in the title makes no sense and will most likely never be typed as a search. Also, this redirect is an orphan. Steel1943 (talk) 21:01, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment this looks to be a left over from a complicated series of page moves in 2007. If so, and if there is no other purpose (it doesn't seem to have any editing history other than as a redirect, but I'm not 100% sure on this), then it could be speedy deleted under criterion WP:CSD. Thryduulf (talk) 21:54, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete? I'll tag it, and see if another administrator shares that thought. I didn't think of that myself since this is a redirect, and thus, I looked in the Redirects section for reasons only. Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 10 February 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.