Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 September 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 15[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 15, 2014.

Languages of Crimea[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 Demographics of Crimea#Ethnicities & languages. --BDD (talk) 13:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We need to delete this because, as many of you know, there is a territory dispute going on in Crimea, and we at Wikipedia do not want to take part in either side of the dispute. - TheChampionMan1234 23:34, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclined to say this is deliberately introduced as a politically loaded phrase and thus delete.
Scotland has the Scottish vote for independence (oh, a redlink: Scottish independence referendum, 2014 is the article but is probably short on redirects, even allowing WP:RECENT and WP:NOTNEWS) on Thursday but the English are not massing at the borders (I am well out of it, I am in Hungary, but as an Englishman I don't get a vote to keep the Act of Union 1707, only the Scots do – and even they are vote franchise in the Highlands and Islands, besides being over-represented in the United Kingdom House of Commons). Berwick FC has changed what side of the border, what football league, it plays in several times. Witout a single ounce of lead being fired. The Scots almost invented democracy, after we lost it when the ancient Greeks died out.
I draw that as a parallel: this Union that Scotland and England have had for four hundred years and ten, could disappear on Thursday. But we are not fighting guns at each other, nor even making pointless redirects. (Champ will probably now find 700 biased Scottish redirects: and all the better if he does!) We have Scots Gallic Wikipedia, we have Irish Gaelic Wikipedia, and Lallans and all sorts of stuff like that. Who made the Erie Canal? Mostly Scots protestants. I have no trouble with the Scots. "Wha' da' meddle wi' me'?" Si Trew (talk) 09:35, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm at a loss to understand the relevance of the Scottish independence referendum to this redirect, which has existed uncontroversially since 2007? Thryduulf (talk) 20:53, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I wasn't trying to use this as a soapbox. What I was trying to say is people on either side of the Scots vote have not been bombarding EN:WP with loaded redirects, but people in that battle patently have been. I didn't put it clearly. It was a bit of a ramble, and muddied the waters maybe, I was attempting to draw the parallel, but evidently failed. Si Trew (talk) 09:13, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Am I beginning to see a pattern here? Olivier (talk) 21:58, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any evidence that this was created as part of any bombardment, or that the creator saw this as a loaded term (WP:AGF). In 2007 Crimea was unambiguously part of Ukraine just as Corsica is unambiguously part of France as of 2014 so a Languages of Corsica redirect to Languages of France created today would not be partisan or bad-faith creation even if the island's status becomes disputed 7 years hence. Thryduulf (talk) 10:06, 17 September 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.

Uragan (spaceplane)[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. Anything that needs to happen to Spaceplane can happen through the usual editorial process; this discussion has gone stale. --BDD (talk) 13:34, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The only mention of Uragan in this article is in an external link, now that the section on it has been removed. An ip requested this be either mentioned in the article or the redirect deleted at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft#A very small tropical disturbance. I believe this is similar to reason #10 for deletion. —PC-XT+ 04:01, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The ip's request has now been archived to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Aircraft/Archive 38#A very small tropical disturbance —PC-XT+ 21:51, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to Gleb Lozino-Lozinskiy this project never existed. Apparently there was a project of space rocket Uragan, which would serve an good target for this redirect if "(spaceplane)" disambiguator was not attached – space planes and space rockets are sufficiently different topics. Reported off-site link for this subject deserves some explanation; I can't find any appropriate target, so I could suggest to retarget this redirect to Uragan DAB, where its entry should be changed to
    • Uragan, rumored, reportedly non-existing Soviet project of spaceplane
    On the other hand, incoming links for baseless speculations should be punished, so it could make as much sense to delete this redirect per WP:CRYSTAL. — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 11:17, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would support either of those options. —PC-XT+ 05:34, 8 August 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, Thryduulf (talk) 13:19, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The DAB would need changing, either way, because a red link would encourage article creation. We could retarget to the DAB, which will also have the rocket, but I assume the displayed deletion log would link here for explanation, as well, so the difference between the two options seems basically moot. The DAB may be more user-friendly, but this discussion provides more information than a DAB would, more of it relevant to the subject, if the people know to click the discussion link. —PC-XT+ 07:28, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Make a DAB at Spaceplane (disambiguation). spaceplane mentions several (I worked for a little while on HOTOL, for example.) can scrape many out of the article, hatnote etc, but the article would seem primary. I don't do these things while they are under discussion, but I am quite happy to do the gnoming once we have a consensus. Si Trew (talk) 09:48, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That may be acceptable, too. As I said, the Uragan DAB would need changing, either way, but a spaceplane DAB may be useful. I'm not sure which would be a better target for this redirect, or if the DABs should link to each other. The Uragan DAB would include the rockets, which may be more directly related to this redirect than other spaceplanes, though. Otherwise, we could make a list of spaceplanes that includes more information, perhaps including spaceplane concepts (or fairly notable rumors) that were never produced for one reason or another, if there are enough sources. —PC-XT+ 05:17, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Would you include the British Rail flying saucer on that list? ;) Thryduulf (talk) 06:58, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, that would be a fun list —PC-XT+ 06:36, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Well it's OK for you to laugh, you never had to travel with them. The nearest I got to the British Rail flying saucer was having a cuppa in the restaurant car of the Advanced Passenger Train as it tried to get around a curve. Si Trew (talk) 17:00, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Come to think of it maybe I make an article on British Rail jokes. They were a bit of a stock-in-trade joke, like mother-in-law jokes. I am not sure how encyclopaedic I could make it though. Si Trew (talk) 17:03, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
F'rexample:
"This is the age of the train" – ours was about 62.
The British Rail Sandwich, improved by Clement Freud, was a stock joke
In Open All Hours the stuttering shopkeeper Arkwright states "I would not do that for all the tea in ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch, all the tea in ch-ch-ch-ch, all the tea in British Rail.
Their 80s slogan "We're getting there" was frequently graffito'd "eventually".
.... and various others. But I would find it hard to RS these. Some are in books by Nigel Rees, but I haven't them on me and no way to get hold of them. Stacks of cartoons by Ed McLachlan (strangely redlink, that) and [[|Matt Pritchett|Matt]], the pocket cartoonist for the Daily Telegraph. Si Trew (talk) 13:49, 20 September 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.

Al-qaida in iraq[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. There are decent arguments for why these perhaps should not have been created, but not for why they should be deleted. See WP:RM for renaming articles. --BDD (talk) 13:36, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Old redirect, not used, wrong caps. ~Technophant (talk) 05:36, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per nom, old is not a deleiton reason, not used is not a deletion reason, alternate formats are why redirects exist, and the target was formerly known as "Al-Qaeda in Iraq" -- 70.51.46.146 (talk) 08:51, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • NOTE nominations merged. Thryduulf (talk) 10:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per 70.51.46.146. These redirects are classic examples of ones that should exist. Thryduulf (talk) 10:14, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There does not seem to be Al-Quaeda in Iraq, Al-Quaida in iraq, Al Quaeda in iraq and so forth. Arabic is always difficult to transliterate; how many perms and combs do you want? The Q is only an approximation (e.g. Qatar doesn't have the "u" following it; Caliph is not spelt Qalif).
Patently we have to stick to WP:CAPS, Q should be cap, hyphen permissible. But surely we can't do every possible transliteration. The search engine will find it, and the Rs defeat its purpose. Obvious case of overdoing it. {{R from alternate capitalization}} is possible, but tricky when it is a transliteration to start with and Arabic alphabet does not have caps s such but front middle and end forms for letterforms. None is marked as such. Si Trew (talk) 21:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • More info. In mid 2014 User:Xqbot fixed a bunch of redirects. He is a good little bot but it would be good to search out the bot request that did so – I am not suggesting the bot itself is at fault but there must have been a request somehow. For example before that used to point at Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (an even more bizarre search term for an English-speaking audience I would think). And yet now they all point at Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant? The "old" argument, at least for some (I haven't checked them all) does not hold water because the creation was back in 2007, agreed, but the redirects have been redirected/retargeted (typical message "fix double redirects" where I am not sure they all were) in mid 2014 and something fishy is going on. Si Trew (talk) 07:51, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
With this change the second nominated was changed from Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn to [[Al qaida in Iraq, in 2007. That was not controversial, it seems; and presumably rearely read, since the next we hear is that User:EmausBot on 10 Nov 2003 "fixing double redirect", then User:Xqbot doing the same. I state explicitly: I am not fingering the bots or their owners, in case there is any doubt. But it does seem fishy to change these things after (as upwards) they were stable and I imagine low traffic for about 7 years. Si Trew (talk) 08:01, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Reverse redirect. between Al-Qaida in Iraq and Tanzim Qaidat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn. That is a ridiculous title for an article, for all kinds of reasons (MOS:TITLE and so on), but Al-Qaida in Iraq would be the better title. I don't know if English-speaking Arabs e.g. in the United Kingdom would think of using that exact transliteration. For example al-Rafidayn seems a bit out to me. Do we have a kinda "standard" transliteration like we do with romaji etc? I don't think we do... so there tend to be all these variances, especially for the front and back voiced fricatives that we don't really have in English. ("Q" being one such transliteration). When I was growing up in Cairo we tended to transliterate as "Kh", or "Gh" as you see in words like Khan or Ghee. The phonetics community has changed all the bloody terms but I would call them voiced fricatives. "Q" (Kh) is perhaps a back labial sounded plosive, which sounds like something you get when you put in a search term into Google, but it is not a glottal stop, which as a Cockney I do all the 'ime. (i.e. T is swollen in the back of the throat rather than pronounced as a front dental plosive). I only do it in English, I don't do it when I speak other languages. I'm entitled to my accent. I am a bit worried about the phonetics articles that all these redlinks are not there; that was what I was taught half a life ago but the terminology has changed. Not sure that helps our readers. Si Trew (talk) 08:09, 16 September 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.

Gurjia[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) 13:38, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A google search for this term returns many things, most notably a town in Nigeria, but it does not appear to mean Georgia in any language - TheChampionMan1234 04:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:REDLINK - we should have an article on that town in Nigeria. Thryduulf (talk) 10:15, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Thryduulf (If, somehow, this does have something to do with Georgia, it could be a DAB page) —PC-XT+ 22:48, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as above. Si Trew (talk) 08:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep per Name of Georgia it's the name the Georgian Jews use for Georgia. In Hebrew it's גורג'יה. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.170.55 (talk) 17:55, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. This apparently used to be a word used for Georgia, though I am unsure if it was actual English. Other names are either more prevalent or preferred. I'm unsure if a DAB page, or a hatnote on an article about the Nigerian town, would be appropriate, though. —PC-XT+ 21:30, 11 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.

Learn Japanese[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. Ruslik_Zero 20:26, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTGUIDE TheChampionMan1234 03:47, 5 August 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, Steel1943 (talk) 03:02, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The best way to take this is to find parallels, I think. Learn French, Learn Hungarian, Learn Russian, Learn English, Learn Ancient Greek, Learn Latin, Learn Spanish, Learn Italian. All are common languages, but all are redlinks – and I don't imagine by accident. Si Trew (talk) 21:31, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST is especially applicable to redirects. Siuenti (talk) 20:37, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to where learning Japanese is discussed. Siuenti (talk) 20:37, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. You mean Japanese language#Study by non-native speakers? That would seem a reasonable {{R to section}}, or were you thinking elsewere? I chucked in "Japanese for foreign speakers" into WP's search and I think the hits above this (which is 5th on my results) are not as relevant. Si Trew (talk) 12:14, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, that's what I meant. Siuenti (talk) 13:14, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Wikipedia isn't a how-to guide for learning Japanese, and we might as well emphasize that by not accommodating such searches. --BDD (talk) 19:04, 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.

Ukrainian Coup[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. Though it's close in terms of numbers, those arguing to delete have the stronger arguments; that this is an uncommon term mostly used by fringe, POV-pushing sources. If I had any doubts that the potential reader using this as a search term wouldn't be able to find the page otherwise, I wouldn't be carrying this out. --BDD (talk) 19:03, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is nothing but an attack page. It is not used by reliable sources to refer to these events, other than by some WP:FRINGE sources that we don't cater to. This redirect is implausible. RGloucester — ☎ 02:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The descriptions in the PROD request tag and the nomination above are incorrect. This is a commonly used term to refer to the events in Ukraine in early 2014. There are over 1 million hits on google for Ukrainian coup - many of them in reliable sources. There have also been numerous discussions on the Ukrainian Revolution page with regards to the name of that article with substantial support (but alas no consensus) for a change. A re-direct from Ukrainian coup to 2014 Ukrainian revolution seems like an obvious solution to this issue. Certainly this isn't an attack page due to the masses of sources that refer to this event by this name. I'll also point out that this re-direct has been in existence for 5 months (created 14 April 14). Also i'm not sure that Prod is the way forward for this - maybe it should go through the whole AFD process.----GreatestrowereverTalk Page 03:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a bunch of nonsense. The only "sources" that refer to this as "Ukrainian Coup" (which is not a proper noun, anyway) are unreliable WP:FRINGE conspiracy sites and Russian state media, which one will find if one does take a look at search results. These are not reliable sources, as has been established at WP:RS/N numerous times. Regardless, even if "coup" is used in reference to these events, it is not used in the proper noun form "Ukrainian Coup", which is nonexistent. This redirect only exists as an attack page and for PoV pushing. RGloucester — ☎ 03:01, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Potentially it could be changed to Ukrainian coup if it is normal form on Wikipedia not to capitalize article titles - I am unaware of the nuances of this area of Wikipedia policy. ----GreatestrowereverTalk Page 03:05, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate what about the Orange Revolution ? -- 70.51.46.146 (talk) 08:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC) h[reply]
  • Delete. This is an encyclopaedia not a newspaper. It was created on 14 April 2004, so hardly has a history to it. Call a war what you want, but this is not what most people call it. I can elaborate if necessary. Dmitri with (I assume) his knowledge of Russian language may have something to add. Si Trew (talk) 21:39, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a commonly used term backed up by over 4 million English language hits on google. As per the discussion on the 2014 Ukrainian Revolution page there is a strong argument to include the term Ukrainian coup in that page so having a re-direct to the page makes sense --71.110.128.41 (talk) 15:05, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
When I do a general Google on "Ukrainian coup" I get 29,100 hits, not the 4 million you asserted. (Nor the "over 1 million hits" Greatestrowerever asserted.) Browsing those 29,100 hits hits I see a substantial proportion of false hits using the words in a way that contradicts the application here. The remainder look rather unreliable. Fringe, obscure, and/or translations of foreign sources. Alsee (talk) 22:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • DELETE My Google News search on "Ukrainian Coup" came up with 12 hits. There did exist some insignificant foreign-source-suplied-in-English usage... the only "Native" English sources included at least one Blog, one source that had photoshopped Obama next to Hitler, and another was a UN-Communist source outraged that action might be taken against the terrorist group ISIS. I can hardly imagine more obscure, insignificant, and fringe sourcing for this term. "Ukrainian Coup" is not remotely accepted as an English term for any current or recent event. Alsee (talk) 22:06, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Having a redirect from Ukrainian Coup is fine because the term is currently in use in English language sources [1]. My very best wishes (talk) 19:48, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Absurdity incarnate. Are you being dense? Your search proves absolutely nothing, because it is not narrowed down at all, and includes any pages that include the phrase "Ukrainian coup" (much of it not referring to Euromaidan). Secondly, no reliable sources use "Ukrainian Coup" to refer to Euromaidan, which one will see if one look at your search. Some blogs and Russian state media do, but they are not "reliable sources". Is this anti-Semitic tripe of a blog your definition of a reliable source? If so, I have nothing else to say. RGloucester — ☎ 20:02, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, there are many sources which qualify as RS, for example that one. Actually, the "coup" could be even a standalone article (rather than redirect) - as a notable conspiracy theory promoted by state-driven propaganda (source above). There is nothing wrong with having articles about notable conspiracy theories. My very best wishes (talk) 20:28, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Absurdity. RGloucester — ☎ 20:58, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete as I don't find this redirect particularly useful, but too close to WP:OR and non-notability. Some may find it useful, though, or want to try to make it into an article, so I make my !vote weak. —PC-XT+ 08:09, 21 September 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.

Еmperor of Bulgaria[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) 19:01, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this begins with a Cyrillic character. - TheChampionMan1234 00:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I believe you. The cyrillic K on another you listed I could very vaguely distinguish on my screen, this I can't distinguish from a Latin E at all, pixel for pixel, with my eyeglass and zoom etc, rendered at 12 point. That has to be a WP:SURPRISE if nothing else. Si Trew (talk) 21:43, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
To emphasise, or perhaps the opposite, a screen reader for those with visual impairmants would not pick tis up.. (Don't worry I just wear glasses). It wrongfoots to the extreme, it should go. I know a bit of various languages for people who have lost one of their senses (I for example have lost the sense of smell, so what?) and this kind of thing is completely wrongfooting. WP is designed, if it is written correctly, to make it accessible to as many people as possible. This kind of redirect defeats that. Delete with extreme prejudice. Si Trew (talk) 22:47, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @SimonTrew:, absolutely correct, and, believe it or not, there are about 20 articles on Wikipedia with this misspelling, as can be seen here. I just can't believe it - TheChampionMan1234 23:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I have a very useful firefox extension installed called "Character Identifier" which reports the first character to be "U+415 CYRILLIC CAPTIAL LETTER IE" while all the other characters are latin small letters as expected. I don't know why redirects like this exist (some sort of input method switching error perhaps?), but I don't know of any reason for them. If for some reason this is kept, it should point to Emperor as Bulgaria is not the only country that uses the Cyrillic alphabet to have had an emperor. Thryduulf (talk) 23:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • While this redirect should clearly be deleted, if kept it should not be retargeted, since the title includes the word “Bulgaria”. Gorobay (talk) 03:34, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above (NVDA reads this redirect title as Cyrillic Yeahmperor of Bulgaria, which sounds more like a political slogan) —PC-XT+ 03:08, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@PC-XT: LOL, I can't possibly imagine what it might sound like, but this is even more ridiculous, as you probably cannot make out the first word. - TheChampionMan1234 05:40, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Depending on the language, the letter is named either Ye (or Ie), (pronounced similar to the word yeah, [at least, with this accent,] or yes without pronouncing the s,) or E, pronounced without the initial consonant Y sound. So it could be transliterated Yemperor of Bulgaria, Iemperor of Bulgaria or Emperor of Bulgaria, the last one apparently being least common, ironically. —PC-XT+ 07:11, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Haha PC-XT, it sounds more to me like the name for a Soviet puppet government! Perhaps it should stay after all then! Si Trew (talk) 08:15, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ahaha, true! Though, even as a joke redirect, I'd still say delete. —PC-XT+ 06:11, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarify mine. When I said screen reader I was probably thinking more of an Optical Character Recognition type rather than one that reads the Unicode text in the XML/HTML/whatever document at the back end. I accept the latter could tell the exact Unicode if it was coded correctly, but this is obviously deliberately coded incorrectly. You can do tricks like that with Turkish Dotted_and_dotless_I, for example: but we do not serve our readers by playing tricks. I am all for a joke but don't tend to do it in mainspace. (You all have to suffer them instead.) Si Trew (talk) 08:19, 16 September 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.

徐穹[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) 19:00, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not a valid name in any language, neither [2] or [3] finds anything relevant - TheChampionMan1234 00:43, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Seeing the old name Seorabeol/徐羅伐 in Seoul, I wonder if this is some obscure/deprecated hanja form for "Seoul", because they both start with Seo- (for the 徐 character?). 野狼院ひさし Hisashi Yarouin 01:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Take ít to the Japanese Wikipedia. I am not going to reiterate the point beyound saying English Wikipedia is for English speakers; other Wikipediae exist. Si Trew (talk) 21:46, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as non-English —PC-XT+ 05:33, 18 September 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.

Spanje[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) 19:00, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not especially Dutch. - TheChampionMan1234 00:35, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment once upon a time, there was a Spanish crown holding called Spanish Netherlands, which is what is now Belgium and parts of the Netherlands; there were quite a number of wars over the place; since Belgium is partly Dutch-speaking, and Holland is Dutch-speaking, there is a relationship. -- 70.51.46.146 (talk) 08:55, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Champ, the argument is not that it is especially Dutch, but it is definitely not English. This is the English WP. Interwiki links help; redirects don't. Si Trew (talk) 21:49, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as non-English —PC-XT+ 05:32, 18 September 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.

Tokei[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. --BDD (talk) 18:58, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to mean "clock" in Japanese, but I don't see how it could be linked to Tokyo. - TheChampionMan1234 00:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The etymology doesn't say that, Lenticel, it says during that period it was called "Tōkei". Not "Tokei". Now either your computer has knocked off the diacritic or you have; still it demonstrates the point it should be {{R from title with diacritics}}. I tried Tokuo or Tokyt as possible mistypes: Tokuo is a DAB with two topics (which should come under WP:TWODABS anyway but I can't change the whole world to revolve around me right now); the other Tokyt is a redlink. (Wouldn't surprise me if it is not when someone else reads this back.) Si Trew (talk) 22:10, 15 September 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.

Johall Bal[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) 13:39, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Does not appear to be a valid alternative name, see "Johall+Bal"&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=rcs&start=10 - TheChampionMan1234 00:26, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why, Si? Just because they look alike? --BDD (talk) 15:14, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it is rather a stretch for a typo. I suppose it was more that "Johan", "Johann" etc are cognate for "John" and are not far away – but in combination this is too far as a likely typo. Striking mine. Si Trew (talk) 06:30, 17 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.

Uniquely Penang[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) 15:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some random advertising slogan which isn't mentioned in the target, plus an unlikely search term. - TheChampionMan1234 00:23, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per Champ. I looked up, as a first guess, "Secondarily Penang" and my first hit was an academic paper at Mosquitos of Urban Penang: Abundance and Control". So, uniquely to Penang, as far as I can tell from reading the paper, it has the highest rate worldwide of people dying of mosquito bites. Other than that, I think it is claim to uniqueness might be exaggerated. Si Trew (talk) 21:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Steel1943 (talk) 19:48, 20 September 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_September_15&oldid=1142587312"