Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 June 21

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 21[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 21, 2014.

Simia maxima[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) 19:17, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase "Simia maxima" does not appear on the King Kong article, nor does it appear anywhere else online in connection with King Kong as far as I can tell. I can see Simia maxima being a joke scientific name for King Kong, but I think it unlikely that users will come up with this joke scientific name independently when searching for King Kong, especially considering that the phrase does not seem to appear in any of the relevant media. As such, I recommend that this redirect be deleted. Neelix (talk) 16:20, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I believe it's from the 2005 film, but I don't have a reference. —Pengo 00:04, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I don't believe you. A film from the internet era, that's big budget, heavily promoted worldwide, and a google search with -wikipedia (which eliminates us from results) doesn't get anything? I don't think so. Ego White Tray (talk) 02:00, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete My Google, Google books and Google scholar searches did not yield any results that points this phrase to King Kong. --Lenticel (talk) 02:29, 24 June 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.

Genocide of the Kurds in Turkey[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 per use of the term in the target article. Number 57 21:36, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Which genocide is this? Never heard of before. A denomination for something that has not occurred, not notable, not present in multiple independent reliable sources; not much of a rationale for this action is necessary, in my humble opinion. This is pure anti-Turkish propaganda. Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 15:21, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete: I can't find any discussion of such event, thus I can't prove the existance of this POV. Otherwise perfectly legal redirect from POV title. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 22:06, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: In the article, they refer to a "cultural genocide". -- Kndimov (talk) 19:59, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Read it again please. --Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 18:44, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: The word "genocide" appears repeatedly in the article, with specific attribution to identifiable people. The accuracy of the term is wholly irrelevant so long as there's even a small minority using it. --NYKevin 23:03, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The term 'genocide' appears often enough in this context to make it a valid search term. Whether the phrasing of the redirect is accurate is not a factor - WP:RNEUTRAL refers. The Whispering Wind (talk) 14:56, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • General note: the target article should be moved to the more concise Human rights of Kurds in Turkey regardless, which also matches Kurds in Turkey. Doing so now might be minorly disruptive. --BDD (talk) 19:21, 28 June 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.

Turkish Armenia[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. This is a long-standing redirect, over 8 years old, and such redirects are only deleted if they are in some way harmful. WP:RFD#HARMFUL states "Therefore consider the deletion only of either really harmful redirects or of very recent ones.". Redirects are purely search aids and do not need to be backed up by reliable sources. No policy-compliant reason for deletion has been advanced nor is there any suggestion of harm. This appears in the target and is thus an useful search term. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 16:06, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are not multiple "independent" reliable sources for this name. Why should I have a User Name? (talk) 15:07, 21 June 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.

Geo Entertainment[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 keep. This redirect was recently nominated with the same rationale. Discussion was closed on 1 June 2014. (non-admin closure) — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 22:15, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It should not be moved to Geo TV because Geo TV is a network name, whereas Geo Entertainment itself is a channel like Geo News, Geo Super. Please delete this redirect so that we may create it as independent article. Check out official website of geo entertainment. UBStalk 15:01, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy keep - Hi, at the moment this redirect is correctly targeted. However, if you consider that the topic is separately notable then the way forward is simply to write the article over the redirect - deletion is not a necessary prerequisite for conversion of a redirect to an article. As previously advised, no deletion rationale has been presented. The Whispering Wind (talk) 15:44, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep ... again. Please refer to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 31#Geo Entertainment. The redirect doesn't need to get deleted for the article to be created; just create the article over the existing redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 19:39, 21 June 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.

Republican Era[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 dabify. Thanks, Ego White Tray. --BDD (talk) 19:16, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Could refer to many other periods of history, elsewhere, if you google this term. TheChampionMan1234 03:25, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This should be made into a disambiguation page if other reliable sources indicate this refers to other periods. In China "Republican Era" means when the Republic of China controlled the Mainland. http://hua.umf.maine.edu/China/republic.html WhisperToMe (talk) 04:51, 21 June 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.

Cristóvão Colombo[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. The consensus is that there is sufficient connection with Portugal but,in any case, this name is found in the article so it is a valid search term. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 17:16, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not particularly Portuguese TheChampionMan1234 03:14, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: You mean "this subject is not related to Portugal." Please use clear language for the benefit of readers. WhisperToMe (talk) 04:52, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Columbus is related to Portugal and his Portuguese name is mentioned in the article. —Kusma (t·c) 13:29, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:FORRED: there are several theories about Columbus' Portuguese origin, which is quite enough to keep this redirect. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 22:18, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or retarget to (Cristóvão Colombo - O Enigma) Christopher Columbus – The Enigma, a Portuguese film that talks about his Portuguese origins.--Lenticel (talk) 00:53, 23 June 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.

China (historical region)[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 History of China Number 57 21:38, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The target clearly states that the article is about the People's Republic of China, not a historical region. I know that the PRC article was merged into China (which was about the historical region) a while ago. But other language versions, especially the Chinese Wikiepdia, retains the separation of the PRC article and the article on the historical region, thus i don't see a need for this redirect now. TheChampionMan1234 03:10, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to History of China, where several past regions are documented (alternate targets are Inner China and North China Plain) -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 06:22, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete since there's no history and this is a useless redirect. No one is going to search for this exact title, though they might search for e.g. Historical China, which I just created. --NYKevin 23:07, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to History of China. The default for redirects is to keep unless harmful. This, as retargeted, is harmless and potentially useful. This is a long-standing redirect, over 9 years old, and the original title of the article. Conversely, deleting could be harmful due to breaking long-standing external links. The Whispering Wind (talk) 17:27, 28 June 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_June_21&oldid=1138579717"