Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 October 16

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 16[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 16, 2014.

Android porn[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 Robot fetishism. --BDD (talk) 21:04, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsensical redirect name. Redirects to an article in which Android has only a passing mention and certainly mentions no such thing as Android porn. uKER (talk) 20:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pornography and fetishes are certainly related, though that article doesn't specifically mention pornography. And people with a fetish don't necessarily need actual pornography to indulge that fetish. Balloon fetishists, for example. --BDD (talk) 13:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well, maybe, but this was about Android as in the mobile operating system. There is nothing linking to this redirect so there will be no issues if its semantics change. --uKER (talk) 16:22, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Robot fetishism , which also covers sexdolls rebuilt to look like anthropomorphic robots -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 07:06, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per 67.70 and hatnote to mobile porn. "Android porn" seems to have actually been a thing 5 years ago, as in there was a potential niche market for pornography sites and pornographic apps catering specifically to users of Android mobile devices. It doesn't seem to be any more, though, but it's possible someone will come here looking for info on it. Ivanvector (talk) 18:56, 20 November 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.

Wikipedia:GFYA[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. Long-standing redirect and no suggestion that it is doing any harm - WP:RFD#HARMFUL applies - and there are many links to it that would be broken by deletion. I have updated the shortcut at the target article. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 14:23, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like an implausible typo to me. Launchballer 17:26, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, maybe even a speedy keep, there are hundreds of links to this shortcut, and you've broken all of them with this discussion. If it was so implausible, you wouldn't see hundreds of links. BTW, it probably is Guidance for Young Adults. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 18:05, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
One would wonder why the phrase "young adults" does not appear in the entire body of the text, because I couldn't tell that. (I'm technically a young adult myself - I turned 19 less than a month ago.) If we're being picky, the discussion didn't break the redirect - I have a policy of moving redirects from perceived implausible typos should I intend to RfD them because it helps keep attribution in the 'right place' should the implausible typo be deleted, and we have a bot for dealing with double redirects.--Launchballer 19:00, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but people are gonna keep making new ones, even after this is deleted, people will enter this shortcut and some won't check to see if it's redlinked. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 20:09, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - reasonable as an acronym for Guidelines For Young Authors, if nothing else. No one else appears to need the redirect, and no reason has been suggested for deletion. WilyD 08:53, 22 October 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.

Táiwan[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. No consensus to delete, keeping it might help in some circumstances, unclear it's actually harming anything. Adding {{R from typo}} as suggested. -- Beland (talk) 00:09, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Note that the tone mark (pinyin) for the second syllable is missing, the correct form is Táiwān - TheChampionMan1234 05:12, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Why keep? It is an unlikely typo, see Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_July_8#Shànghai - TheChampionMan1234 11:06, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dropping an accent is a highly common type of typo. Just look at languages with accents on the internet, and see how people spell accented words on internet forums. There's quite a lot of typos of this sort. As this is a transcription with accents, it would be even more likely as no one writes this in everyday speech as their primary form of communication, so even more likley to drop accents -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 05:42, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep. An English speaker missing a diacritic, particularly one they wont be familiar with from French or Spanish words and borrowings, is a likely typo or thinko. Thryduulf (talk) 12:26, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment @Thryduulf: @65.94.169.222:} You obivously haven't read the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_July_8#Shànghai , people unfarmilar with the original language will type the title without the tone marks in the first place, and note that the target's title is the same if you remove the tone marks, this redirect is not getting a lot of hits, so deletion won't hurt. - TheChampionMan1234 23:00, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    I've explained above why I believe this is plausible, and stand by that - just because most people will enter both or no tone marks does not mean that all will. This does not get many page views but it looks to me like it is above the level of just bot visits, and so deletion will harm the encyclopaedia by making it harder for people to find the content they are looking for (seeing search results is not guaranteed, some methods of navigation will result in an invitation to start the page or just a note that there is nothing and would you like to search?). As deletion will harm the project while bringing no benefits, this is a clear keep. WP:WAX arguments are irrelevant. Thryduulf (talk) 23:19, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thry. It is not just a case of being an unfamiliar diacritic, but English people might know it but not be able to find it easily on their keyboard; this is why we have {{R from title without diacritics}} and so on, and it's standard to create those Rs when one creates an article with diacritical marks in it. I have to switch between a couple of keyboard layouts, neither of which has a cedillafor example, so although I know better I just bung in the C without the cedilla. That is not stupidity; that is expedience. Si Trew (talk) 14:24, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Redirects from typos are no longer appropriate because the Wikipedia search function does a better job. These redirects disable the default search function behaviour and can provide misleading text and hover text. Stop embedding misinformation, leave it to the search engine. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:50, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • The Wikipedia search function is only one of many ways that people use to locate Wikipedia content (and even then search suggestions only work for people with javascript enabled) - bookmarks, links (internal and external), external search engines, browser plugis, directly typing the URL, are just some of the others. If a page does not exist you are only sometimes shown search results (which are not guaranteed to be relevant) other times you are invited to search, invited to create the page, or just told that there isn't a page with this title. Redirects from typos are still very much needed. Thryduulf (talk) 07:07, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • But in my testing, a logged out Wikipedia search (actually a "go") for "Táiwan" produces a single page, someone's manual best guess, that today is a pretty ugly page. If it weren't for the redirect existing, the default search would be the proper search, which gives a page full of useful links, automagically ranked in order of likelihood, as best determined continuously by the AI. I don't think javascript or pluggins are relevant to this. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:36, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Javascript is not relevant to that method of searching, correct. However you are forgetting that that is not the only method of finding Wikipedia articles. Other methods include, but are not limited to: typing in the search box and selecting from the drop-down list of suggestions (requires javascript), directly entering the URI (e.g. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/like_this_one or en.wp.org/like_this_one ), using an external search engine (Google, Bing, etc, etc), using a browser search plugin (some are listed at [1], there are others), scrolling through a list of article titles, following a link on an external website, following a link from another Wikipedia page, opening a previously bookmarked page and searching from the URL bar of your browser. Depending which method you use, if the title you are searching for does not exist you will either be taken to the search page (as you desire to be) and either shown search results or (as I just was shown a red error message saying "An error has occurred while searching: HTTP request timed out.", told "Wikipedia does not have an article with this exact name. Please search for Like this one in Wikipedia to check for alternative titles or spellings. " and invited to start the page directly or using the article wizard, or taken to the edit window to start creating a new article. If a search term has a single most likely term, then it should redirect to that page; if it has multiple equally likely targets it should either be a disambiguation page or a redirect to a disambiguation page at a different title. Thryduulf (talk) 16:28, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • Javascript producing suggestions while I am typing, or just before I press enter with it having captured the cursor, and the javascript functionality significantly slowing my device response time are things I really don't like. Can javascript be disabled without breaking other things? I'm sure that excessive number of useless suggestions, such as produced by this redirect, do more annoyance than help. Why would someone typing perfectly accented but unusal forms want to see this mis-typed version suggested while they type? --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:36, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
            • Javascript can be disabled, but as far as I am aware unless you are using third-party tools (like adblockers or noscript plugins) this is a binary operation with all javascript or all javascript off. It may be possible to add something to your custom js that disables the search suggestions, but if so I haven't a clue how to do it.
            It used to be that redirects tagged as "unprintworthy" (including misspellings) did not appear in the search suggestions list, but this functionality quietly disappeared some time ago (1-2 years I'd guess) and a request to re-enable it has been met with silence from what I remember. All printworthy titles, which include valid alternative spellings, should be displayed as suggestions though so people who are looking for those spellings are not mislead into thinking the article does not exist.
            Ultimately though we do not have the ability to discriminate between search methods and we must determine whether this is a useful redirect in either 0 or >0 environments. Extra search suggestions are an inconvenience to some users, but actually harmful for none, so the utility of this redirect for others is the important factor.
            If you want the ability to discriminate between search methods, you will need to raise a bug at bugzilla asking for it, ideally with at least an idea for how it could be implemented. Thryduulf (talk) 22:27, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Simply too unlikely a typo. I doubt many readers are going to try writing "Táiwān" at all, as opposed to just plain "Taiwan". --BDD (talk) 16:07, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 14:51, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - plausible typo, sends readers to what they're clearly looking for. No argument for deletion has been advanced, nor do any seem to exist. WilyD 08:58, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, per SmokeyJoe (let the search do the search), and BDD (unlikely, half-baked, typo) - Nabla (talk) 09:41, 29 November 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.

David Salzberg[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. There remain clear advantages and disadvantages to each approach. I'll add a hatnote as Ivanvector suggested, and I think we can all agree that overwriting with an article on Salzberg would be optimal. --BDD (talk) 15:21, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion. David Salzberg is a filmmaker, on The Hornet's Nest. Moreover, IMDb lists rather extensive credits. This redirect, to a differently named person, causes confusion. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:06, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep/Replace: This redirect was likely put there to catch misspellings of an article title already present. Simply deleting the redirect does not improve Wikipedia. If David Salzberg the filmmaker is notable enough, replace this redirect with an article about that person. Otherwise, leave the redirect until Salzberg can meet notability guidelines--RadioFan (talk) 17:47, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • — Note to closing admin: RadioFan (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shawn in Montreal (talk • contribs) 17:52, 6 September 2014
  • Keep, very plausible misspelling. It's unfortunate that the filmmaker is also a possible search target, it would be great if someone could make a stub to prove he's notable, then both articles could be hatnoted. Siuenti (talk) 19:01, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:SURPRISE. There is a high possibility that this is not a misspelling. � (talk) 15:35, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 14:50, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete to clear the space for a plausible new article.--Lenticel (talk) 00:50, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Siuenti. Nothing stops an article being created over a redirect at any time, and I did a quick search in case I could make a stub, but could not find any RS. (The nearest to it was at The Huffington Post, which is often considered RS, but this is on a blog part of the site.) Si Trew (talk) 07:16, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. If this redirect is gone, the MediaWiki search will offer the target as a result. See Italian Wikipedia search results. John Vandenberg (chat) 17:49, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - it's definitely a plausible misspelling, and it doesn't appear that Salzberg the filmmaker would meet WP:GNG. Add a hatnote at Saltzberg, something like: for the 2014 film co-directed by filmmaker David Salzberg, see The Hornet's Nest. I think that's the best we can do at this point. Ivanvector (talk) 19:08, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete and let the search engine do their thing, or redirect to The Hornet's Nest which mentions the correct person. As it is now, searching for the 'real' David Salzberg will send me to the wrong page (David Saltzberg). Why mislead our readers? - Nabla (talk) 09:48, 29 November 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.

Li Holokauste[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 Comments that stated or implied only English languge redirects are appropriate were ignored as contrary to consensus guidelines. The remaining comments formed a consensus to delete Li Holokauste & Maangamizi makuu dhidi ya Wayahudi wa Ulaya and to keep Olokosto & Olucaustu. There was no consensus on Olocàust, defaulting to keep. --ThaddeusB (talk) 16:44, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not related to any of these languages. - TheChampionMan1234 00:10, 3 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

See the talk page of that article; it's been discussed a few times. --BDD (talk) 15:45, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the first two, keep the other three. An auxiliary language hardly has a logical connection to any topic, and Swahili seems mostly irrelevant, though it wouldn't surprise me if there were a few Swahili speakers among the total victims of the Holocaust (cf. Holocaust in Italy). The others, as languages used by populations that were victims of the Holocaust, seem relevant enough for me to be comfortable with keeping them, though I wouldn't necessarily oppose deleting them all. --BDD (talk) 15:45, 14 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 14:44, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Judeo-spanish one, as this is a Jewish language. Delete the rest. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 17:30, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - sends readers to the content they're looking for. No reason for deletion has been advanced, nor do any seem to exist. This appears to be at best a nonsense request, since it can only serve to damage the usability of the encyclopaedia. WilyD 09:00, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. If you can not search for "Holocaust" in English, what are you doing reading the English language WP? - Nabla (talk) 17:22, 30 November 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.

Basket sodomy[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) 20:16, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just a joke? Deli nk (talk) 12:07, 16 October 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.

Ecount[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) 20:15, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Citibank owns this company, but this redirect isn't helpful - it's not mentioned at the article, and almost certainly shouldn't be. Best to red link - it might be worth an article but probably not. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:00, 16 October 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.

漢城[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. We have a clear consensus that this is a potentially useful redirect that should be kept. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 18:06, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is only a Chinese name, not a Korean one. - TheChampionMan1234 03:18, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep it seems to be Hanja for Hanseong, the Baekje era name of the city, according to the article. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 04:00, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Hanseong (Korean pronunciation of 漢城) was an actual former name for the city, as stated at Seoul#Etymology and confirmed in academic sources [2]. Could also retarget to names of Seoul where this is explained better, but since Hanseong points to Seoul I think it's better to be consistent. 61.10.165.33 (talk) 04:07, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or Retarget per "Hanseong" arguments above. Optional disambiguation with Hansung University. 野狼院ひさし Hisashi Yarouin 11:25, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Some people still write Korean language using Hanja, and 漢城 is tha Hanja form of Hanseong.--RekishiEJ (talk) 11:55, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per 67.--Lenticel (talk) 00:51, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - directs readers to the content they're looking for, no argument has been presented for deletion. WilyD 09:01, 22 October 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.

奥克兰大学[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) 16:37, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant language. - TheChampionMan1234 02:59, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - directs readers to the content they're looking for; no reason for deletion has been presented. WilyD 09:02, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly reasons have been presented. If you simply don't agree with them, say that. --BDD (talk) 20:12, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If you have a reason for deletion, please present it. Otherwise, please don't make false claims like that. WilyD 11:59, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There's no apparent connection between this university and Chinese. See WP:FORRED. --BDD (talk) 20:12, 23 October 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.

奇安德拉[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) 16:38, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant language. - TheChampionMan1234 02:58, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - directs readers to the content they're looking for. No reason has been suggested for deletion, nor do any exist. WilyD 09:03, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly reasons have been presented. If you simply don't agree with them, say that. --BDD (talk) 20:12, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No reasons have been presented. If you're aware of some, please present them. Otherwise, making a false assertion like that just makes this discussion more difficult to parse. WilyD 12:01, 27 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There's no apparent connection between this settlement and Chinese. See WP:FORRED. --BDD (talk) 20:12, 23 October 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.

声母[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 22#声母

企城[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) 20:05, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Irrelevant language. - TheChampionMan1234 02:52, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Seems to be a Chinese short name, similar to how 加州 = "Ca" syllable + "state" comes to mean California. But nothing I find supports using the 企 character to transcribe Cleveland (克利夫蘭). Delete 野狼院ひさし Hisashi Yarouin 11:34, 16 October 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.

Y0-Y0 Ma[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 9 years old. Such redirects are only deleted if they are in some way harmful per WP:RFD#HARMFUL and there is no indication that this is anything other than harmless. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 00:55, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Too implausible typo, it has to be deliberate if someone does type this. - TheChampionMan1234 02:47, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Keep the zero key is near the o-key, and I've made such typos before (but usually not twice in the same sentence). -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 04:03, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but with a capital Y? Wouldn't the typo be Y)? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:07, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That would be a different typo. (or a stuck shift-key) -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 05:01, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - "typo" is not a synonym for plausible typo. Close proximity & natural language confusion mean people make this typo regularly. WilyD 09:05, 22 October 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.

भारत[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, after no discussion after two months of listing. No prejudice against speedy renomination, preferably with a clearer argument. --BDD (talk) 15:17, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Either retarget the first one to India or the second one to Rossiya, I don't know which would be better. I mean they are both the native name for a country and have their respective DAB's - TheChampionMan1234 02:41, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • TheChampionMan1234, I still don't really know what you're asking here. Your phrasing suggests you only want one of these retargeted, but that doesn't make sense. --BDD (talk) 14:15, 29 November 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.

Chong Il[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 Jong-il. If Kim Jong-il isn't WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Jong-il", he shouldn't be for an alternative romanization either. --BDD (talk) 20:01, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No need to be disambiguated, it can refer to Chung Il-kwon, Jang Jung-il, etc, just like how we don't have a list at John_(given_name), etc. - TheChampionMan1234 02:38, 16 October 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.

Wikipedia:DECIDER[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) 19:56, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, and would typically be incorrect if it was used. John Vandenberg (chat) 02:22, 16 October 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.

Wikipedia:JimboWalesIsGodOnWikipedia[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 by user:CambridgeBayWeather with the summary "G3: Blatant hoax. Thryduulf (talk) 13:11, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessarily sacrilegious for project space. Other redirects exist and are not hard to use. Special:WhatLinksHere/Wikipedia:Role of Jimmy Wales John Vandenberg (chat) 02:19, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as per this, which currently isn't a policy but should be, if for no other reason than it supports me, and because I just created the redirect. It's been a long time since anybody posted a suitable red link to ANI that I could turn into a redirect and I just had to do it. I fully expected it to be speedily deleted by the time I got back. That's happened before to some of these. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 03:31, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Biased title, useless (cause it's so long), and if Jimbo really thinks he's God, then he's not really on-board with his own consensus-building concept. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:12, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure that Jimbo doesn't think he's a god. It came from here. Anyway it isn't a problem as the redirect has now reverted to a red link. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 04:38, 16 October 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.

藤村 新一[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) 19:55, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect page's name is problematic. It contains a redundant half-width space RekishiEJ (talk) 11:54, 16 October 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_October_16&oldid=1085561685"