Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 April 22

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 22[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 22, 2015.

¡Oh, Mi Diosa![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 - WP:RFOREIGN. Just Chilling (talk) 02:14, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RFOREIGN. This anime is Japanese, not Spanish. Tavix |  Talk  20:34, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Lenticel (talk) 23:29, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete other than the fact the show aired in the Spain there is no significant connection between Oh My Goddess and Spain to make adding the Spanish name to the English Wikipeida relevant.--67.68.209.200 (talk) 03:02, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete original language is Japanese, not Spanish, and therefore no affinity for the language as the fiction covers Norse goddesses in Japan, neither of which involve Spanish. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:03, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete'. Whatever the original language (and I totally believe 65.94) the upside down exclamation mark would be extremely difficult to type on an English keyboard layout, so it seems a very unlikely search term in English WP. Had I would say one hit a week, accrding to the stats, before this discussion opened where it peaked at 4, but that's just cos we all are looking at it. Si Trew (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2015 (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.

Şehzade Abdullah (son of Suleiman I)[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 another topic is created on Wikipedia that renders the name "Şehzade Abdullah" ambiguous, then this can be revisited. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 15:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually there were at least two Şehzade Abdullah in Ottoman history. One of them was the son of Suleiman I and the other one was the son of Selim II. I think these two pages should become separated. Şehzade Abdullah (son of Suleiman I) will be about Suleiman I's child and I can create an article for Selim II's son titled Şehzade Abdullah (son of Selim II). Şehzade Abdullah will turn to a disambiguation page. Keivan.fTalk 14:03, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. No English reader can even type that first S with the cedilla (if it is a cedilla, but the tail on the back of the S) let alone will ever search on it. In that case it is useless and should be deleted. Sezeade Abdullah does not exist as an {{R from title without diacritics}}. These are harmful and I would say WP:POV, because no English keyboard has the marks to enable one to type that. And this is English Wikipedia. I can type őúüóáűéö as they are on the right of my keyboard, and various Polish symbols with AltGr key, but in English we don't have this symbol and nobody will search for it. Q.E.D. if you look at the stats it has exactly 0 hits. Si Trew (talk) 06:39, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

commment. i am a complete liar. In fact it has had 318 hits in this month alone. I think what we should do is create the R from title without diacritics. But don't want to do that without consensus. My comments about English keyboards I think are valid. Si Trew (talk) 06:48, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@SimonTrew: About English typing I said my opinion in Hafsa Sultan's section. I'll be happy if you or any other user who reads this take a look at it. Keivan.fTalk 14:10, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I mistyped Sehzade Abdullah, that is my fault. But we have a general problem with Arabic transliteration (I appreciate this is a Turk but the name is Arabic) because e.g. Mohammed, Muhammed, Mohammad (peace be with him) may be spelled in so many different ways, as can Abdullah or Abdollah and so on. It's just a problem of transliteration. Si Trew (talk) 00:16, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@SimonTrew: Yes, there are many types of transliterations, but as this person was Turkish, I think the name should be written in the way they write it, Abdullah. Keivan.fTalk 07:44, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Keivan.f: I totally agree, it should be written in the way that the person himself writes the name, after all, it is his name: I was just making sure it is his name and not that we have transliterated it badly. I don't like it when people spell my name "True" for example, especially when I have one of the easiest surnames in the world to type on a QWERTY (look backwards). Si Trew (talk) 08:26, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Right now, we have one article on a person named Şehzade Abdullah. He really was a son of Suleiman I, so the redirect isn't misleading. Once we have an article on another Şehzade Abdullah, it may be appropriate for the base title to be a disambiguation page. --BDD (talk) 19:25, 21 April 2015 (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) 15:04, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per BDD. If we get an article on another person of this name, then the current target can be moved over this redirect and the plain title converted to a dab page. Until we have such an article though, the status quo is correct. Thryduulf (talk) 15:55, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but I think if we do, we should create Sehzade Abdullah as an {{R from title without diacritics}}. Si Trew (talk) 04:53, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Didn't a bot used to do that? Maybe it started screwing up. --BDD (talk) 20:25, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I believe our good friend Eubot used to do that. I'm not sure if another bot took over that task or not... Tavix  Talk  03:49, 27 April 2015 (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.

HGFS[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) 14:04, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is zero information on HGFS; not in the old target (VMware), nor the new target (VMware Workstation), nor anywhere. Codename Lisa (talk) 16:22, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Information 176.92.183.71 (talk) 04:02, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not WP:RS and neither are any of the others I found. www.minix3.org is patently WP:PRIMARY and the others I found essentially refer to that page. We need WP:RS, reliable, secondary sources. It seems to be used a lot by Ubuntu but again I am not sure that would count as a reliable, secondary source. You might as well take it to Harry Gee's Fantastic Shop (a small electrical shop run by i think he must be octogenerian by now, in Mill Road, Cambridge: his wife suffered a stroke some years ago unfortunately, and also his H fell off the front of the shop, but everyone knows Harry Gee's, I think the first Acorn Computer parts were supplied from there, according to a friend of mine who worked for them) if we are playing that game. Si Trew (talk) 12:49, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I think the main challenge is where to put those info. VMware Workstation is certainly not a suitable place; it is the kind of places that link to the actual contents of HGFS. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 03:41, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's now mentioned at the target article, though just once and obliquely. --BDD (talk) 14:44, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's an outbound mention, not inbound mention, i.e. it is the place where one would either links to somewhere containing info on HGFS or adds a footnote explaining what it is. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 13:49, 23 April 2015 (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) 15:02, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa, in fact, there IS another (small) part of information when searched anywhere in the right way: MINIX 3. That's the information I found before I did this edit. -- Juergen 87.155.45.62 (talk) 17:50, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Congratulations, you found another outbound mention! Still worthless. Outbound mentions beckon information; they don't give. The more you haggle, the more it is obvious that there is no info whatsoever on this subject in Wikipedia. Hence, there should be no redirect. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 17:56, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is a bit weird, whenever I try to edit this section I get the previous section, has something gone wrong with the back end? Anyway, I would say Retarget to Ubuntu. Not entirely happy with that as it seems a bit WP:PROMO (but not very), but that seems what the most likely search term is. Si Trew (talk) 03:49, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Si Trew: Please double check your link's target. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 18:05, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Redirects' sole purpose is to lead people to authentic information. This redirect does not. Neither of the recommendations above do that either. So, delete it. Si Trew's advice is especially careless because Ubuntu is a disambiguation page. If he meant Ubuntu (operating system), that page has no information on HGFS either. Fleet Command (talk) 14:40, 28 April 2015 (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.

Communism (religion)[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) 14:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as misleading. Communism is not a religion. Mr. Guye (talk) 02:01, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No, that is not my point. If someone is looking for a religion of communism (implied by the disambiguator) then religious communism is the appropriate target. Not an opposite. Ivanvector (talk) 14:44, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This redirect treats communism as a religion, whereas religious communism deals with communism as a component of religious observance (and of many different religious traditions, no less). These are fundamentally different concepts. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 04:24, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Are they though? If, for example, Jesus Christ throws money-lenders out of the temple, that would seem quite Communist to me, but that is just my WP:POV (and I am not particularly Christian). I am not qualified to argue that farther, as I am no theologist, but it would seem to me that even if this term is incorrect it is still useful for people to find out about it. Si Trew (talk) 15:08, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Religions are mostly not intercompatible - if you mix & match elements of religious belief, the end result is heresy to whichever traditions you took inspiration from and is a new religion all on its own. On the other hand, you can mix & match political systems, which can be observed regardless (or at least mostly regardless) of your religious leanings. I don't know if any of that is particularly relevant to this discussion, but Wikipedia's all about sharing cool stuff and points of view, so I figured I'd throw my two cents in. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 15:14, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment How so? Political Allegiance does not seem very much of a difference from religiion to me. I think that's just your WP:POV. Si Trew (talk) 09:35, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, if there is a not-so-normal WP:POV it is yours. Obviously, the established view is that politics and religion are two different things. 78.87.40.250 (talk) 12:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well then, we are agreed the term is WP:POV and mine is different from yours. I don't see why your POV should be more "normal" than mine (tyranny of the majority?) The question is, how to make it WP:NPOV? I think my suggested retarget does that. Si Trew (talk) 12:59, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Since Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is both head of the Church of England and head of the Government, I don't think it's as clear as all that. She is both Defender of the Faith and appoints the Government. Her son is constantly getting into hot water for expressing political views which the Establishment do not believe an heir to the throne should do. Yes, in the U. S. Church and State are kept separate (in theory), but in the United Kingdom they are inextricably bound together in the person of the Monarch. Si Trew (talk) 15:00, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
A correction: Elizabeth II is head of state, not of government. And her responsibilities in both are (sadly, will I say, but not open such a discussion right now) just a little more than pure formality. Especially Defender of the Faith can be even considered a sinecure. But even if it was more than that, how does this one example of yours justify the view that politics and religion are the same? Even in a theocracy, there is the political aspect of the state and the (different) religious aspect. And this is the case with one′s everyday life, too. 78.87.40.250 (talk) 23:20, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not just one example. It's on every coin, so there are millions of examples: D. G. REG ELZ II F. D. By the grace of god, Elizabeth the second, defiender of the faith. It is the same roughly speaking in Canada (by the way you can use in a Toronto parking meter a British tenpenny for a Canadian quarter but whether it is worth it depends on the exchange rate). Si Trew (talk) 19:31, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In case anyone's wondering, I am not the IP (the IP comes from Greece, I live in the United States and have never been to Greece in my entire life). What the IP and I are trying to say is that X (y) is a way of calling X the name of a y. In such cases, y is the disambiguator - that is, the form of X under discussion. For example, we have The Beatles and The Beatles (album), the former not carrying a disambiguator because it is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. If it did, however, it would be The Beatles (band) (which exists solely as a redirect). In this particular case, the redirect is basically saying, "The religion of communism," which there patently has never been. Again, communism or forms thereof have been components of religious observance, but that is not the same thing as making communism a religion. That would be like making multi-floor housing a religion because that's how monasteries are commonly built, and therefore warranting a redirect called storey (religion) to storey. All that being said, if we had Communism in religion, that would make more sense, but that is not what the redirect appears to say. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 14:53, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Yes, but storey (religion) would have something to do with the Tower of Babel or something like that, perhaps the Hanging Gardens of Babylon. This is disambiguating, or trying to, Communism from something else – not very successfully, I think we all agree. The nub of the gist is, are we talking about the role of religion in communism (e.g. the suppression of the Russian Orthodox Church) or the role of communism in religion? I think that is the crux, if you'll pardon the pun. Si Trew (talk) 15:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My view is that it's neither of those, that it's appealing to a specific variety of communism that is being treated as a religion - which does not seem to exist. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 15:22, 16 April 2015 (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) 15:01, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete The variety of suggested targets demonstrates that no matter where this is pointed, someone is going to get a surprise. Seyasirt (talk) 13:13, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Seyasirt. This seems like it is more harmful than it's worth, and it looks like an unlikely search term as well... Tavix  Talk  17:03, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as above. Let the search engine do it. I'm not striking my !vote before the relisting because that seems like cheating to me, to alter the past, but take it as struck. Si Trew (talk) 04:12, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as misleading, at least in its intent. Fleet Command (talk) 14:42, 28 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - sticking with my proposed retarget above. Religious communism is a concept which has been practiced by religious orders dating back years before Marx and Engels wrote about it as a socioeconomic philosophy. Our redirect here started life as a POV essay a decade ago and was redirected to Communism, but the religious concept is a better target for this redirect. It's not misleading at all - it's not implying that Communism (or Marxism-Leninism) is a religion, it's disambiguating one concept from another. Ivanvector (talk) 21:49, 28 April 2015 (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.

Kinky boots (boot)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 April 30#Kinky boots (boot)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_April_22&oldid=1138579973"