Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 3[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 3, 2014.

Air Control[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 Air traffic control. --BDD (talk) 18:43, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Article was merged to the current target at AfD for lack of notability. The material was subsequently removed from the target article for lack of notability and relevance. Now a useless redirect on a subject for which Wikipedia has no material at all. Safiel (talk) 19:03, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - The redirect's target is being overhauled with new inclusion criteria, and the title now does not fit it, so I don't believe it belongs there anymore. I'd be open to changing the target, but I can't think of any that make sense off-hand, which leads me to my "delete" choice. Sergecross73 msg me 19:16, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - It is so non-notable that there isn't anywhere to redirect it to. It never even fit the redirection target, it just should have never existed, and its AfD process was erroneous. The whole idea was basically minor WP:FANCRUFT. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 19:36, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Air traffic control, the current target of redirect Air control. Steel1943 (talk) 00:26, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Air traffic control per Steel1943 (talk). However, I'm also open to a dab that points to Air supremacy (the military control of the air) as well. --Lenticel (talk) 00:45, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm fine with this option as well. It's an entirely different thing, but would certainly be a valid search term for that. Sergecross73 msg me 03:29, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment That would be an acceptable option to me as well. Safiel (talk) 04:27, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm fine with a hatnote as well. --Lenticel (talk) 02:07, 5 December 2014 (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.

Kathleen Courtney[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 procedural close - converted to an article. Thryduulf (talk) 00:19, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think this was probably meant to refer to Kathleen Courtney, also Kathleen D'Olier Courtney (1878-1974), the suffragist and relief worker. The redirect target, Catherine Courtney, Baroness Courtney of Penwith, was born Catherine Potter and I can find no evidence that she was ever referred to as Kathleen. gobonobo + c 18:54, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to where? We don't seem to have an article on Kathleen Courtney the suffragist, unless I'm completely inept with the search box today. Ivanvector (talk) 16:07, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Err good point, I must have misread the nomination. In which case delete per WP:REDLINK. Thryduulf (talk) 17:21, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Perhaps an article could be written, but in the meantime delete. Ivanvector (talk) 21:08, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gsearch for me for "kathleen courtney suffragette" gives several RS and I can probably make a stub. Will probably forget to do so though. Si Trew (talk) 21:43, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural close, please. I've converted it into a stub article. I don't want to add more since most RS are copyright and I need to tread carefully to expand it. There's a nice draft lifted from the author in draft space at this title, who I have asked by email permission to use his text. Si Trew (talk) 22:47, 4 December 2014 (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.

Bloodhound (missile):[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. --BDD (talk) 15:15, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No idea how this got created in the first place, but obviously in error. Perhaps I just speedy it?. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:55, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The redirect having a colon ":" is pretty obviously a typo, could just be speedy deleted by reason wp:R3, as an implausible typo. There are no inbound links to it. --doncram 02:43, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this redirect exists because of a typo in a page move made on 13 October which was not corrected until 3 December. I would decline an R3 speedy deletion on those grounds. Thryduulf (talk) 10:11, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. "Implausible typo", WP:RFD#D8. (That guideline is self-contradictary since it's not only plausible but certain that someone typo'd it to get here in the first place; but I'm done with arguing that the RfD reasons are logical.) Si Trew (talk) 23:32, 4 December 2014 (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.

Truth & Treason[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. -- Beland (talk) 20:26, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

According to its talk page, this film was in development in 2007. As an article, it described a 2011 film. At Jamie Thomas King, it's listed as a 2012 film in pre-production. You know, I really don't think it's coming out at this point. And regardless, it doesn't make sense to redirect to the subject of the film when the film isn't mentioned at that article. --BDD (talk) 16:40, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Seven years later, it's still "in development" on IMDb, Sounds pretty dead. JohnCD (talk) 22:20, 10 December 2014 (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.

Gun laying radar[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 with possibilities. I added a link to Category:Gun laying radars from gun laying, which is the new target. It at least gives good background information as-is. -- Beland (talk) 00:38, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Delete' This is an example of a gun-laying radar, not the gun laying radar. The term is most associated with a series of UK radars, not this one. Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:56, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Hisashiyarouin: Please note the correction I just made in the nomination; Gun laying radar currently targets and has always targeted Würzburg radar, not Würzburg. Steel1943 (talk) 18:26, 5 December 2014 (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.

Kobe (singer)[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. --BDD (talk) 15:16, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This redirect leads to the assumption that Kobe is DJ Khalil, which is not the case. 92.203.189.8 (talk) 10:35, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Kobe is a completely different person and looks as if someones attempted to promote him. –Davey2010 • (talk) 21:52, 3 December 2014 (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.

Serene Branson[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 24#Serene Branson

September 19, 2009[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 --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:56, 15 December 2014 (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.

Charles john david freeman[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 per criterion G3, as well as the other redirects referenced in this discussion. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 18:57, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The connect between the redirect's subject ... whoever the subject is ... and the redirect's target is not clear in the least. Steel1943 (talk) 01:38, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

this edit to Charles Freeman, a DAB page, by creator around the same time in 2009, together with the redirects below, would tend to indicate a bout of vandalism:
Si Trew (talk) 01:55, 3 December 2014 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_December_3&oldid=1090451089"