Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 February 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 20[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 20, 2015.

Eyetie[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 List of ethnic slurs#E. Since the term doesn't seem to be discussed in relation to italic type, this makes the most sense. I'm not entirely sure what Si was advocating here. --BDD (talk) 18:20, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I use this a lot. I created it in Jan 2010. It was redirected to derogatory names#e or some such, when my original text of 2010 says it is not derogatory when used as a typographic term. So I redirect it now to the term for which it is slang. It is not derog. and I have a good friend who once met an Italian. Collins, OED and Cambridge (offline, not the online dictionaries) list "eyetie" as being used as sl. for italic (font), Wiktionary doesn't, only lists the derog. sense. Si Trew (talk) 23:52, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That talk is from six years ago with me starting it. In all that time I have not found an RS, that is slang for you. All I can say is it is definitely not derog. when used as printers' slang. And I know a stout mother from penalty type (in Mathematical Typography, Dr. Dobbs Journal of Computer Calisthenics and Orthodontia, vol. 4, Knuth D. Donald Knuth, 1970, discussing METAFONT and TeX, pp. 87–91), but I am just going from memory, but I know it when I see it.
  • So, then, must be Delete per WP:RFD#D3, ""The redirect is offensive or abusive", by its own count. You can't have it both ways. It's offensive therefore should be deleted by the policy at the top of this very page. No matter that it may direct people to lists of abusive words, or that I made an article to indicate its use in a way that is not offensive but couldn't source it: since it's offensive, delete it. Or change D3 to what you mean by "offensive". It may be different from what I mean by it. Si Trew (talk) 01:47, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of ethnic slurs#E or disambiguate if suitable sources can be found for the typeface usage. Si Trew seems to have access to offline sources; I couldn't find this usage in sources available online. I think that WP:RFD#D3 doesn't apply here - the ethnic slur is reliably sourceable and falls under WP:NOTCENSORED. Ivanvector (talk) 16:02, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Further note because I thought of a better example: this would be WP:RFD#D3 (offensive) if the target was Italians. Ivanvector (talk) 16:13, 27 February 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.
  • Try searching for "eyetie italic font" on Gsearch, then... Si Trew (talk) 04:20, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, really not happy about this. You don't know an X bar from a penalty copy but you tell me that it is a racist slur. It is not a racist slur, it is slang for italic type. I am probably the only person here who actually does inky print and knows a t bar and what an em dash actually is, are you going to say em dash is a slur against all em dash emmigrents? You are wrong and I am right. It is not a racist slur. For if not, the Italian I have worked with closely for a month would probably have knocked my eyes out, were it not that I speak a bit of Italian. Now, who's the racist? I insist, it is not a racist expression when used in that slang way. Si Trew (talk) 04:24, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My Collins dic lists it as "n. adj. br. Slang". Offensive, "Italian". I insist, without sources, it is not derogatory in printer's slang, just means italic font. But you are probably right that for an encyclopaeida it should go that way. My annnoyance is that printer's slang never gets a long elbow. These terms are not used derog, just as brief slang, stick in the eyeties on that copy. I dunno why I should have to teach people the difference between a typeface and a font, but it seems I have to. I don't get paid for it either. Si Trew (talk) 04:34, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Heat-beam[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 Heat-Ray (disambiguation). --BDD (talk) 18:27, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it does make some sense because it is a common superpower, but there may be a better target. Mr. Guye (talk) 23:45, 20 February 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.

Theresienbad[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 March 26#Theresienbad

One share, one vote[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 common stock because it describes the concept, but it's worth nothing the exact phrase isn't used there either. I, JethroBT drop me a line 18:17, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Phrase not mentioned in article. I am not a business expert. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:27, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proxy fight doesn't really cover it.
I am not sure what "other parts of the world" means: I guess those in the List of countries that are not the United States? But the section specifically refers to the UK. Si Trew (talk) 22:53, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Relisting comment: It indeed looks like the redirection of Voting stock has stuck. How might that affect the outcome here?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 21:20, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Simple. We create List of countries that are not the United States. I tried this one before, by the simple expedient of taking List of countries and removing "United States", for the unspeakable benefit of mankind. (to quote Ambrose Bierce, a Californian). Unfortunately, my suggestions on the matter have always been refused, or in WP parlance, "Speedily Deleted". It's easily done, or, as Our American Cousin would say, "easy done". Blame Noah Webster for that one, not me. Si Trew (talk) 22:36, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That was somewhat of a joke as I am sure you imagine, most of mine have a serious point behind them. There is rather a tendency here to claim anyone who has set foot on American soil as American, so one gets "English-born American engineer" even though he spent all but his dying days in England. There is something of a US bias here and I am here to counter it and restore the British Empire as the fearless defender against hanging, drawing, quartering, racist abuse, and putting taps the wrong way round and driving on the wrong side of the road, etc.
As usual, a joke with a serious point: with the casual use of these words they become very US centric, and actually did get my back up. I know Wikipedia is hosted in virginia and I get my tobacco from black slaves picking it off the cotton trees in virginia, I am smart like that. Why tobacco grows on cotton trees I have never discovered but they have gin made from cotton (cotton gin) and that makes it grow and then I guess it grows from that. The world is not the United States. All that really needs doing is to reword the lede mildly so it doesn't seem so. Si Trew (talk) 22:46, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
F'rexample, we have it at another, Stocks and shares → Stock, not Shares → Share (finance). Presumably that is argued over and WP:PRIMARYTOPIC and all that, WP:ENGVAR, and that is fine. (Though I wonder what the difference is between a Stock (finance) → Stock and a Share (finance)). The thing is, if it seems that the rest of the world is not the United States, i.e. who gives a shit, you're not the United States, fuck off, that is not the impression I should like Wikipedia to be giving out: especially if it is done accidentally rather than intentionally (intentional ones are much easier to deal with). Si Trew (talk) 22:49, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Clue: A stock and a share are the same thing. Si Trew (talk) 23:00, 20 February 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.

Charles Gordon (actor)[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) 15:19, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There are various actors named Charles Gordon listed in IMDb,[1] but even the best of them (Gordon II) isn't worthy of an article, so it's pretty pointless to redirect to a list with no actors on it. Clarityfiend (talk) 14:10, 20 February 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.

Template:Angola Basin[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 deleted by RHaworth. --BDD (talk) 21:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Non useful redirect to articlespace. Jim Carter 09:27, 20 February 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.

List of American films of 2016[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 Procedural close. Converted to article. (non-admin closure) by Si Trew (talk) 02:01, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is jumping the gun. It's too early to be able to list any 2016 films. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 05:07, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I've added info. Chander 16:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:RFD#D5 'makes no sense', WP:RFD#D2 'confusion'. Not mentioned at target, even though User:Chandler says it is, that would be WP:CRYSTAL if it were, but last edit at target was at 28 March 2014. Edits before that were vandalism reverted by bot and GF admin. Which leads me to presume, unless I am an idiot (I am), films for 2015 must have been added before March 2014, which seems unlikely but seems to be the case. I can't be bothered to trawl the history back farther. Si Trew (talk) 23:07, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake. The info is added as content below the RfD tag at the redirect, not at the target. I suppose theoretically the RfD tag should be removed and let it stand as an article, then, but that would be rather unsatisfactory for everyone, I imagine. Si Trew (talk) 23:13, 20 February 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.

Diskis[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) 14:58, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Self-referential redirect created by User:Diskis. It's tagged as an {{R from member}}, so apparently User:Diskis is/was a dishwasher? Either way, I couldn't find any information relating the two. Tavix |  Talk  02:25, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disky (pl. Diskies), Discy (pl. Discies), Diskey (pl. Diskeys), DiscKey (pl. DiscKeys), Disk key (pl. Disk keys), Discy (pl. [Disc Keys]]) and all other variants of "disc key (pl. disk keys)" that I tried for, are all red. (I had a vague feeling there was once a popular dongle called something like this? Or at least it might mean product key (or, as was common in the 1980s, deliberate reproduction of bad sectors on mass-recorded disks as a form of copy protection - home copying could not reproduce the bad sectors. I should write a section in bad sector about this.)
But since those are all red, that indicates none of those are encylopaedic. So delete. Si Trew (talk) 19:28, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. I can't find good cites for this one.--Lenticel (talk) 05:58, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete non-notable autobiography with no sources; fails BLP ; and WP:NOTFACEBOOK -- 70.51.200.101 (talk)
  • Weak retarget to Diski Dance. I don't know that this would be considered a potential pluralization, but there it is anyway. Ivanvector (talk) 16:07, 23 February 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_February_20&oldid=1138580073"