Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 September 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 7[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 7, 2010

2 (playing card)[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 Kept. -- JLaTondre (talk) 00:38, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term.  ʄlame (report mistake) 01:08, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Actually a very likely search term. It is my goal that each of the 52 cards have its own article one day, though I am working on only 1-2 cards at a time. Many meet WP:GNG. You can tell this from a Google search. Dew Kane (talk) 01:20, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all - These are all entirely harmless so I see no problem in giving the creator time to do something with them. "Unlikely search term" is, in any case, not a deletion criterion. Bridgeplayer (talk) 15:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Uh, well, yes it is. Name one case where this would be useful. Would you seriously type this out just to get to an semi-related article?  ℳono  06:32, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Half your age plus seven[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 no consensus. Jafeluv (talk) 11:46, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing redirect not explained on target page. Appears to be based on an Internet meme. Uncle Dick (talk) 22:49, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Addendum - Adding two closely related redirects. Uncle Dick (talk) 22:58, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all, restore content to the target, and add sources from here. The reason why this is a "Confusing redirect not explained on target page" is because the nominator removed the content here. Half-Your-Age-Plus-Seven Rule is a former article that was merged per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Half-Your-Age-Plus-Seven Rule so since merged content is in the target's history, deletion would breach our GFDL obligations. These are well used redirects and entirely plausible search terms. Bridgeplayer (talk) 23:34, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • The content was removed earlier this year because it lacked any sourcing whatsoever, except a link to a web comic. The whole thing sounds like a non-notable meme/joke to me, but it apparently predates the Internet age. Of course, I have no objection to these redirects if the content is included in the target article with reliable sourcing, but as it stands now, I see no value in these redirects. Actually, the target article itself is a mess of original research and should probably be listed at AfD. Uncle Dick (talk) 23:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Uncle Dick. The Hero of This Nation (talk) 17:38, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and return content as per Bridgeplayer. It seems easy enough to show that the phrase/advice exists as a rule of thumb, not just the comic [1] but magazines [2] attributing it to the French, and even a 1964 book [3] attributing it to Muslims. I suspect it is even older. --Rumping (talk) 22:33, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Gardiner, New York[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 closed as wrong forum. Suggest use db-move as described at Wikipedia:Requested moves#Uncontroversial requests. NAC. Bridgeplayer (talk) 22:21, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation pages with links#Proposal for New York villages within towns, the more prominent of two connected municipal entities doesn't need further titular description. What I'm trying to do is delete the old Gardiner, New York redirect, and move Gardiner (town), New York to that page. Gyrobo (talk) 22:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

TV cable[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 Re-targeted to Audio and video interfaces and connectors. -- JLaTondre (talk) 22:56, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A TV cable is not the same as an extension cord, confusing redirect. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 18:28, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Television antenna which contains relevant information. Foreseeable search term. Bridgeplayer (talk) 18:54, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's a bit of a vague name, though. According to shopping catalogues (sic!) at any rate, a "TV cable" isn't necessarily a cable for connecting to the antenna. It could be a SCART cable, or an HDMI cable, too. Uncle G (talk) 01:23, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify? Not exactly my field but this term may refer to Cable television or other stuff that you stick to your tv set right?--Lenticel (talk) 06:12, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Audio and video interfaces and connectors. Not perfect, but seems like the best target. A DAB page with links to various types of TV connections might work, though.--Fyre2387 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Siblings (Transformers)[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. Jafeluv (talk) 00:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not a plausible search term due to parentheses. Created after deletion, not after discussion. Blest Withouten Match (talk) 17:56, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - not mentioned in the target and I can't find an alternative target that looks suitable. Confusing. Bridgeplayer (talk) 19:15, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Clothing store[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. Jafeluv (talk) 00:14, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clothing store isn't the same as boutique. Clothing store is more like Gap or American Eagle. Either delete or disambiguate. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 17:40, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I agree with the nominator that this is confusing. Two alternative titles are 'clothing retailer' and 'clothing shop'. However, no reasonable alternative targets present themselves. Though there are many clothing stores; looking through Category:Clothing retailers a disamb is not really practical. Bridgeplayer (talk) 18:28, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Falco femolaris[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 delete as G7. NAC. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 18:46, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelled by me (simple maintenance) Gongoozler123 (talk) 15:09, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Confluence : the journal of graduate liberal studies.[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 as R3. NAC. — Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 18:29, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely because of the dot at the end. On second thoughts I asked for speedy deletion, and as it will probably be was deleted, so there is no need for this discussion. Muhandes (talk) 07:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of an RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2010_September_7&oldid=1138577580"