< February 25
February 27 >

February 26

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 26, 2012

Citation style

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 Citation#Citation Styles.--Salix (talk): 08:33, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This redirection doesn't seem to fulfill any purpose whatsoever. 212.201.73.229 (talk) 20:46, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum: redirect to Citation or Citation#Citation Style. That's what I was looking for (and I had found it sooner if this stupid redirect hadn't block me. --212.201.73.229 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:52, 26 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]
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.

Template:Common cats

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 and orphan --Salix (talk): 08:40, 11 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup in redirects for different commons related templates. Per Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2012_February_10#Template:Wikicommons. More will follow. MGA73 (talk) 12:29, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Joined similar nominations. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 13:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Thank you. I joined the new ones also --MGA73 (talk) 16:09, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You are right that some of the names may excist on other wikis. The only reason for that is that an article or a category was once copied from en-wiki and translated. As mentioned in the original nomination the problem is that the names we use here tend to spread to other wikis. So if we have 50 redirects many of them will end up on other projects making it all more complex. If we were to have the same names they use on other wikis we sould end up with redirects like "위키공용과 분류". I do not think that it would be helpfull.
This DR will not remove any of the formats used (box or inline etc.) it will just remove some of the redirects. --MGA73 (talk) 16:16, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think you should say obscure rather than obtuse. Rich Farmbrough, 19:01, 26 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]
I don't see any usability improvements for humans with these redirects, only usability problems. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk) 20:27, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I am reluctant to see these redirects deleted. Some are obvious typos that will recur, others have been in extensive use on the past, and we are breaking historical versions by deleting them (remember, good referencing practice is to perma-link to historical versions)> Of course there is a cost to some bots, but not necessarily a significant one, depending on the algorithm and purpose of the bots. It is good practice to deal with necessary template redirects. However I do think they confuse matters by being left in active use so I would support:
If you can implement it it would be super cool :-) Feel free to comment on http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=603138&aid=3494734&group_id=93107 or take ownership of it. --MGA73 (talk) 17:36, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've commented with a slightly more detailed version of what I posted here. The API is not complex. There's an example on the API page. I'll look into implementing it, but I'm not familiar with the Python Wikipedia Robot Framework, so someone else may be faster. Superm401 - Talk 02:59, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Gumby's pizza

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. Ruslik_Zero 18:38, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is vaguely spammy, as there are a few pizzerias so named, and there's no meaningful reason to redirect to pizza. (No disrespect to the Great Green Being.) Clarityfiend (talk) 02:59, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.
More