Talk:Jaynagar Majilpur

This article contains content imported from the English Wikipedia article on Jaynagar Majilpur. View the page revision history for a list of the authors.

VFD discussion

Jaynagar, Joynagar, Majilpur, Mojilpur, Mazilpur, Mozilpur, Jaynagar Mazilpur, Jaynagar Mojilpur, Jaynagar Mozilpur, Joynagar Majilpur, Joynagar Mazilpur, Joynagar Mojilpur, Joynagar Mozilpur

I appreciate new users who come in with a sense of dedication, and I also appreciate that place names in languages that use non-Roman alphabets might be transliterated in any number of different ways. But do we really need all these redirects to Jaynagar Majilpur? It seems like serious overkill to me. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 16:39, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

I'd say to cut in half at least but I don't know which ones to delete and which to keep. Maybe the user(s) who created these redirects could explain. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 17:11, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Delete. In general, redirects for alternate spellings are not needed. If an alternate spelling is reasonably important, mention it on the destination page; that is enough that search will find it. e.g. Quanzhou mentions several. See User_talk:Pashley/Archive#Test_old_names for what I think are exceptions; well-known names like Bombay should get redirects. Pashley (talk) 18:10, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Sourav Bapuli, what is your view on the matter? --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 18:43, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

• Delete all the redirects which start with Jaynag - once someone has typed this much in the "right spelling" will be clear in the search box. On a similar basis keep Joynagar, but delete everything else starting with Joy. I would only keep Jaynagar, Joynagar and Majilpur. I just wish more effort had been spent on adding content to the article rather than redirects. AlasdairW (talk) 21:14, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

• Keep, assuming they're real alternate spellings. Why not? They don't do any harm, and they can plausibly help with searching and linking. (If there are any that aren't valid alternate spellings, though, then I think those can be deleted—for instance, if there are any that use one transliteration system for the first word and a different transliteration system for the second word.) —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:31, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

• Keep. I agree, providing they really are all alternate spellings. What's the harm? Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:42, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
• Keep. I don't see any harm either. Nurg (talk) 07:06, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
• This is overkill. I could see keeping one alternate spelling if it's not a typographic error (this is fairly common where a name has an accented character, as we'd redirect the same title sans accent for convenience) but let's not get carried away here. K7L (talk) 13:38, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
• Comment: Maybe we should wait a while and not type any of these in ourselves. Then, after a few weeks or months, we can see which ones were typed in the most, and stick with those and delete the others. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 17:12, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

• Delete — I doubt these are all useful. ϒpsilon (talk) 17:22, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

• It looks like we're about evenly divided for/against deletion of these redirects. What do you all think about AlasdairW's suggestion above? It seems like a good middle ground between keeping them all and deleting them all. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 17:42, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, sure. This isn't greatly important so let's cut down on the redirects and be done with it. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 19:20, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

I have to say I don't understand the rationale for deleting these. How would deleting them help any travellers? —Granger (talk · contribs) 00:56, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

• Keep all Redirects are cheap and ttcf--some traveler could plausibly type these, so why would we make it difficult to find the germane info? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:14, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

• Comment I'm undecided at the moment. But I do believe that these are all legitimate transliterations of the town's name. J and z tend to be interchangeable in Northern India depending on the person's accent while words that use a in a classical Sanskrit or Hindi pronunciation often use o in Bengali. Another pair of sounds which are interchangeable in Bengali are v and b (doesn't apply here). Gizza ^(roam) 02:09, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

• Comment. Redirects are very helpful to the traveler until fifty of them invade the search suggestions. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 03:33, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Agreed. I'm also dismayed at the lack of attention being paid to the specific merits of AlasdairW's argument. Simply typing "Jaynag" into the search bar will display a place name that's close enough to the one the user intended to type that it should be easily recognizable as a variant spelling. For the same reason, only one of the redirects beginning with "Joynag" is necessary. -- AndreCarrotflower (talk) 03:42, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

@AndreCarrotflower, AlasdairW: I don't think this would work on many mobile platforms. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:45, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

[Edit conflict] You mean until 13 of them, right? And besides, the ones beginning with "M" won't suggest the ones beginning with "J" that quickly. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:47, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @SelfieCity, Ikan Kekek: I don't understand what you mean. When I try to search for these redirects, the search suggestions only give me one of them, certainly not fifty and not 13 either. What are you typing into the search bar that makes more than one of the redirects appear at the same time? —Granger (talk · contribs) 03:48, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Ask SelfieCity. I haven't been searching for these terms, but I count only 13 on this page. Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:06, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Right, but they don't all show up in the search suggestions at the same time. The search suggestions only show one of the redirects at a time, as far as I can tell. —Granger (talk · contribs) 04:11, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Alasdair's theory is quite complicated, but I think I’ve got the idea. It’s about how many redirects we need for travelers to find the page, and having just a few redirects will accomplish that purpose. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 03:47, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Granger, I was more saying what could happen that wouldn’t be too ttcf rather than a realistic example of the situation. The point is that we don’t need large numbers of really similar redirects that all go to the same place. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 03:55, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay, so in other words it's something that doesn't actually happen, so not a reason to delete the redirects. To respond to AlasdairW's suggestion, I don't think that's a good solution. If, for instance, "Jaynagar Mojilpur" is a valid alternative spelling, then a user who types or copy+pastes the text "Jaynagar Mojilpur" into the search box and presses "enter" should reach the desired article.

Just keep the redirects. There's no reason to delete them. —Granger (talk · contribs) 04:11, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

The arguments put forward for deleting (including AlasdairW's) seem to be arguments for not creating the redirects. But we are not discussing whether or not to create the redirects - we are discussing whether to delete them. It may have been a waste of someone's time creating them, but now that they exist, what is the harm of doing nothing further and keeping them? When I type "Jaynag" into the search bar I get NONE of the redirects. WHAT IS THE HARM? Convince me there is some real harm and I will support deleting them. Nurg (talk) 04:20, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, maybe. I don't see much harm in deleting them or keeping them — it's not too important a city to debate over it and have edit conflicts like we had in the above comments. --Comment by Selfie City (talk about my contributions) 17:02, 8 September 2018 (UTC)

• Delete Jaynagar and some others per AndreCarrotflower. There is a city Jainagar in Bihar that is just as likely to be misspelled as "Jaynagar", so it should be deleted. I also think AndreCarrotflower's suggestion of limiting redirects to one per misspelling makes sense. The Search will take care of it. ChubbyWimbus (talk) 11:18, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

Result: kept; no consensus for deleting any of these. —Granger (talk · contribs) 01:51, 30 September 2018 (UTC)