Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 November 4

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 147.70.242.41 (talk) at 16:05, 14 November 2008 (Fimian → Keith Fimian: comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

November 4

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 4, 2008

This template must be substituted.

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 </noinclude><includeonly>

</includeonly><noinclude> Retargeted NAC. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshellsOtter chirpsHELP) 04:53, 7 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This shortcut is to a failed biographical proposal. I would like to co-opt it for a more scary purpose, especially since the failed proposal has two shortcuts.--otherlleft (talk) 15:49, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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). This template must be substituted.

This redirect used to be an article, which was deleted (full disclosure: by me) earlier this year after an extremely contentious AFD. There's now a bit of an edit war brewing over whether it should redirect to Crime of apartheid or Israel and the apartheid analogy. Neither seems to be to be an especially good target, and right now it's causing needless controversy. No articles link here, which further shows the lack of need for this. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 12:56, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have boldly retargeted it to Apartheid (disambiguation) to avoid a double redirect. In looking at the background, I am amazed at the number of "Allegations of **** apartheid" or "Allegations of apartheid in **** " mentions in articles and redirects. I'm not sure if this nebulous phrase has been given too much undue weight in Wikipedia, but I'd rather either see it all weeded out (check the search for "allegation apartheid" without the quotes) or perhaps convert the redirect into a dab page. I just don't know - either way, some sort of protection may be in order. 147.70.242.40, temporarily at 147.70.242.41 (talk) 19:08, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as redirect to Apartheid (disambiguation) (although that page seems to be under threat itself; it was just turned into a redirect, which I reverted...). This page is probably worth keeping for its historical value (it was the subject of a great deal of argument, and to an extent still is), but I agree that there isn't a hugely relevant target for it at the moment. Terraxos (talk) 02:09, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
On second thoughts, delete. User:Jayjg has explained why he got rid of Apartheid (disambiguation), and he was justified in doing so; but if that page is a redirect, there's nowhere useful for this one to point to. Given the controversial history behind it, I'm coming round to Sarcasticidealist's point of view that it's probably best deleted altogether. Terraxos (talk) 02:21, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I'd like to see all of the "Allegations of X apartheid" pages disappear. Apartheid has one specific meaning - and only one - in the same sense that The Holocaust is unique. But this needs to be discussed, not just on one editor's talk page but either on the talk page of the appropriate article, or - better yet - at the appropriate WikiProject. In the meantime, until there is consensus regarding Apartheid (disambiguation) it should be left as a dab page with Allegations of apartheid as a redirect pointing to it. Temporary keep. B.Wind (talk) 03:52, 6 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I created the redirect originally, but changed my mind. Bwrs (talk) 05:15, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Self-referential redirect to a category, improper CNR. MBisanz talk 03:43, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Internal "shortcut" to a wikiproject, does not link to content nor is it a likely search term. MBisanz talk 03:42, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely CNR to a Wikipedia process, does not link to content. MBisanz talk 03:41, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Improper redirect to a Wikipedia page, does not link to content, WP policies are not the only official policies MBisanz talk 03:41, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]