Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 April 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 24[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 24, 2015.

List of Microsoft Project Viewers[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) 14:20, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Does not lead to anything. It was originally a standalone list of red links; then a redirect to a list of red links and now a redirect to nothing. Euthanize it? Codename Lisa (talk) 17:14, 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.

Soitenly![edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 May 1#Soitenly!

What's happening to my body[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. Hell, it could be puberty, mutation, illness, parasites... I don't know what's happening to your body, reader. I just don't know. --BDD (talk) 14:17, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Meh. JZCL 16:36, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete looks like this is a book series about puberty. Maybe better off as a redlink to encourage article creation --Lenticel (talk) 23:56, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, with @Lenticel:. Not sure what the difference is between puberty and adolescence in this sense, but I am not a doctor. Si Trew (talk) 10:46, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the term is not mentioned in the article and there are othet possible things people could be searching for such as sickness.--67.68.161.47 (talk) 20:23, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as an implausible redirect. Like Lenticel, I would say this sounds like the title of puberty-related literature. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:44, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget Lynda Madaras the author (Area Madaras and Simon Sullivan has no article). 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 05:34, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as hoax. Fleet Command (talk) 14:17, 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.

Islam means[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) 14:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is not only a highly unlikely search term, but also redirects to the wrong place (if it should redirect at all). If anything, it should probably go to Islam#Etymology_and_meaning but I say delete. JZCL 16:24, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete. I agree that it could be retargeted, but "Islam" means "peace" doesn't it (roughly speaking, to an audience that does not speak Arabic). I am with User:JZCL here (and to declare an interest I lived in Cairo and went to school in a mix of Arabic and English for two years when I was in my teens and know a bit of Arabic, but not much). Si Trew (talk) 21:04, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as vague. "Means" may refer to "method" or "meaning" --Lenticel (talk) 23:54, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Are you thinking in the sense of The means justify the ends? We don't have that I think it is in Shakeseare somewhere but certainly in Orwell and he didn't invent it and didn't pretend he did. It's in a paper he wrote for in 1954–43, Tribune. I have all of Orwell here but I kinda know it word for word and am just throwing it out as a sugggestion. Si Trew (talk) 22:01, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I got that wrong, it is the ends justify the means Orwell was arguing against, but perhaps he would reverse it. In a Scott Adams cartoon as a deliberate ploy Dilbert misspells it as "Neans", so that it can be punned "The N's don't justify the 'Neans'", but I don't think that's vvery reliably source. Si Trew (talk) 11:39, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weal delete. Not an unlikely search term but one that is not catering a search method, but rather, a searching peculiarity. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 02:15, 25 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.

WISDOM OF HINDUISM[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) 14:15, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Particularly the caps lock on this redirect leads me to believe this is a bit NPOV JZCL 16:22, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Retarget to Wisdom#Hinduism. I think the better retarget there would be "Wisdom in Hinduism" --Lenticel (talk) 03:48, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: the CAPS make this implausible and it seems to be promotional to me. We don't have Wisdom of Hinduism, for example. Tavix  Talk  15:46, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Obscure redirect. People who search for its title would reach the same destination even in absence of the redirect. Fleet Command (talk) 14:19, 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.

Chawah[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) 14:14, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned once in the target article, all I could find was that it seems to be Hebrew for "to breathe". Type it into Google and you'll find a whole load of unrelated pages. JZCL 16:16, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • WP:NOTGOOGLE but I couldn't find anything on it, what I got most was chihauha. Howevever, others are more talented for searching than I am. it appears somehow to be the name for Eve, Adam's missus in the Book of Genesis, but this is blocking the search so I am having trouble finding it. A Jewish scholar I am sure would know instantly, I will search around for WP:Judaism or something and drop them a note. Si Trew (talk) 21:15, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I left a note at WP:WikiProject Judaism, which seems quite active, referring back to this section. Si Trew (talk) 21:29, 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.

Criticism of the Boy Scouts of America[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 May 4#Criticism of the Boy Scouts of America

Hafsa Sultan[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 May 4#Hafsa Sultan

Hatice Sultan (daughter of Ahmed III)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 May 4#Hatice Sultan (daughter of Ahmed III)

Video vixen[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 Video Vixens. --BDD (talk) 14:00, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or retarget WP:REDLINK video vixens are not an exclusive hiphop topic, indeed, Alicia Silverstone and Liv Tyler are not hiphop models, yet are famous video vixens from Aerosmith's videos. The current target is misleading. Video vixens have existed since the rise of MTV. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 09:23, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting thought. I would clash by suggesting that those two examples aren't so much "video vixens" per se, as much as they are just would-be vixens, who happened to wind up in a few music videos, but were otherwise known for other things. I believe the overwhelming majority of video vixens are known for being that and only that, without any other overriding source of prominence, fame or notability. Still, you're right that they could be present as models in other genres. I think the term is just most widely associated with the genres of hip hop/rap. 24.6.187.181 (talk) 17:59, 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) 13:55, 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.

I Am (Leona Lewis album)[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 closed as unnecessary. When Draft:I Am (Leona Lewis album) is ready to be moved to the mainspace, please contact any available admin or drop a line at WP:RMT to move over redirect. Deryck C. 20:36, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A draft already exists: Draft:I Am (Leona Lewis album). Someone else last week created this redirect and it got deleted. Something needs to be done to stop people from creating this redirect all the time.  — ₳aron 12:48, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Is the draft ready for the mainspace? If yes, then this discussion is meaningless. If no, then the redirect is harmless and should remain in place until the draft is ready to go. - Eureka Lott 16:20, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment albums are not ready for mainspace until a title, release date, and full tracklist are confirmed per WP:NALBUMS. If this redirect is kept, I feel it should at least be fully protected until article is ready for mainspace. I'm currently on the fence as to whether or not it should be kept. Snuggums (talk / edits) 02:46, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I don't see why it should be fully protected or even semi protected. Oxygen isn't, as a counter-example, (an I delibertaly edited it and reverted my edit to prove the point, if you check its history) even though we'd be hard up without it but can manage without a singer. We only protect things in cases of WP:VANDALISM, and that hasn't happened here, WP:AGF someone simply has slightly the wrong target and that's what we're here for, to discuss it. Si Trew (talk) 09:45, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Protection is performed for more than vandalism; other reasons include content disputes and unsourced/poorly sourced changes. I recommend full protection to prevent users from prematurely transferring information to mainspace. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:19, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's premature. Protection happens after WP:VANDALISM, not before. This sounds like a case of WP:OWNERSHIP to me. Si Trew (talk) 18:24, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Really more of a WP:TOOSOON case. Snuggums (talk / edits) 20:15, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, I'd forgotten WP:TOOSOON. Si Trew (talk) 09:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'd also recommend that @Calvin999: ("Aaron") does a WP:RM because to my mind, having looked at it, it is perfectly fine to go into mainspace. WP:NOTPEFECT, WP:NOTFINISHED, but it is far better than what we have there at the moment. Si Trew (talk) 09:12, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Not yet; it needs a confirmed release date AND full tracklist first in addition to confirmed title before it is ready for mainspace per WP:NALBUMS. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:32, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Until we have a mainspace article on this album, this is a legitimate {{R from album}}, and not misleading to readers as there is some discussion of the album at the target page. Keeping will prevent constant recreation of the redirect, somewhat paradoxically. To really satisfy the nominator, we'd have to delete and salt, which seems uncalled for. --BDD (talk) 16:13, 4 May 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.

Forog[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. Deryck C. 20:39, 4 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be Hungarian for "rotate". I feel like there is more to this than I can clearly perceive, mainly looking at the redirect creator and a human rights org on Facebook about Macedonia and others. I just don't know. It doesn't make much sense to me. Mr. Guye (talk) 02:30, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment It seems to be about a certain "Former Ottoman Republic Of Greece" or FOROG. I'm not that familiar with Greek history and politics to add a Keep or Delete vote. Perhaps a more knowledgeable editor can shed light to this?--Lenticel (talk) 05:56, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I checked my Hungarian dictionaries (the kinda equivalent of the Oxford English Dictionary published by Akademia Kiadó, kinda the equivalent of Oxford University Press, the absolute bible which my missus is very proud to own). In the Hungarian to English volume it lists "forog" as turn, revolve, go around and there are derivative terms for "my head"s spinning" and so on. In the English to Hungarian "rotate" is listed as "forgat" as a verb and "forog" as a noun (amongst other alternatives). I don't know how useful that is to this discussion. In English there is no noun that cannot be verbed. Verbs are generally listed in th second person singular without the -nithat forms the infinitivem so it would probably been forgatok, te forgat Mr.Guye forgats, Mr. Guye and I forgatünk, and so on, but I am not entirely sure about that. Si Trew (talk) 07:56, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There seem to be quite a few Facebook pages for film site which literally translated would say "I spin the reels" and indeed Hungarian: forgatok is the correct first person conjugation (I don't really know how one translate that, "I am a projectionist" does not seem very satisfactory). Si Trew (talk) 14:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • perhaps (not sure) retarget to Ottoman Greece? Si Trew (talk) 11:56, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Given the redirect's creator and some similar redirects that have come up recently, I'm inclined to see this as an attack. It's probably a parallel construction to (the completely legitimate) FYROM, cf. Macedonia naming dispute. --BDD (talk) 16:11, 4 May 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.

FTPOY[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. At this time, there's strong consensus to delete Former Turkish Province Of Yunanistan. I could hold off on this one or close that one as WP:SNOW, but I won't. If the other redirect is unexpectedly not deleted, I may reopen this. --BDD (talk) 13:56, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are other things that have this acronym. Looking at the history, this title appears to stand for Former Macedonian Republic of Greece (maybe in another language?). I am open to deletion, redirection, or disambiguation. But clearly the redirect as it is is inappropriate. Mr. Guye (talk) 02:25, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete. could it have been a transliteration from Greek where gamma has been transliterated as Y (badly) because it kinda looks similar although obviously is a different literal, G? But that's just me playing detectivve: patently nobody wanting to find the article on Greece is going to type this. But it's had 54 hits in the last 90 days according to the stats, so something must be linking to it, but there's no internal links (except to this discussion). Thryduulf is more conservative about this than me, and I would say that's below the threshold for a keep, but @Thryduulf: may well disagree. Si Trew (talk) 08:00, 25 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Defer It seems to be an acronym for "Former Turkish Province Of Yunanistan". "Yunanistan" is the Turkish for "Greece" (cf. tr:Yunanistan), as testified in Muslim minority of Greece, there is an official recognised Turkish minority in Greece so that redirect is good and need concern us no more (I've tagged it as {{R from other language}}). Greece has never been a Turkish province, although it was (excluding the Ionian Islands) part of the Ottoman Empire (of which Turkey is the modern successor state) - see Ottoman Greece for the main article on this period of Greek history. The Administrative divisions of the Ottoman Empire fluctuated but based on our articles, there was no single province covering the modern concept of Greece. Those parts of the territory now forming Greece that were part of the Ottoman Empire were included in at least the following divisions: Pashalik of Yanina, Morea Eyalet, Salonica Eyalet, Ottoman Crete and Eyalet of Adrianople, most of which also covered land not in contemporary Greece. This, along with Google results, suggests that "Former Turkish Province of Yunanistan" is not a term used outside of a few discussions concerning Turkish Irredentism and/or suggestions to sell Greece to Turkey to pay off the former's debt (nothing even approaching a reliable source), and so I will nominate that redirect on today's page (incidentally, the term seems to have been inspired by Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)). If that is deleted then this acronym should be too, unless we have an article it could be retargetted to (I've not found one, but I haven't looked hard). If people do see value in the long-form then the acronym is should be kept (unless something else is the primary topic), so I suggest dererring this discussion until the one I'm about to start completes. Thryduulf (talk) 15:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Striking my weak delete, that seems the more sensible way do it. According to Name of Greece#Ionia-derived names the "yun" or "ywn" is a borrowing grom the greek for Ionia. If nothing else, I think we should redirect it there where it is described, but I agree with Thryduulf that this discussion is better off defered until that listing is sorted out. Si Trew (talk) 15:00, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete per the other discussion and Thryduulf's clear explanations. These two redirects were created by a SPA, probably in a lame attempt at being rude. They have no meaning, serve no purpose and can be speedily deleted according to WP:G3 and WP:G10. Place Clichy (talk) 13:22, 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_April_24&oldid=1138579981"