Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 June 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 24[edit]

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

Quite easily done[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. Just Chilling (talk) 02:48, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HOAX/bogus definition of latin QED not defined in article. Widefox; talk 22:13, 24 June 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.

Current events/May 2002[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 July 1#Current events/May 2002

File:Talos No. 2, Portland, Oregon.jpg[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The result of the discussion was withdrawn by nominator (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 20:36, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete. I moved this file page to its correct name. No page links to this page and I would like to upload the correct image using this title. --Another Believer (Talk) 19:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

UPDATE: I have since uploaded the correct image using this same file name. This file and page is now being used correctly, so please disregard and close this discussion. Thank you. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:22, 24 June 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.

Berlin-ru.net[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 all. Just Chilling (talk) 02:51, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really know what's going on here, and none of these are mentioned at the target article, so they're likely to disappoint readers. berlin-ru.net exists, and is presumably a Russian-language resource on Berlin; I'm not sure if it's official, or whether that matters. The other two don't even exist. --BDD (talk) 18:12, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all - yes, I think it matters that they're not official. I would lean towards delete for official links but there was no consensus for that at the American Airlines discussion, but these are way off the mark. Berlin-ru.net looks like a personal blog (in Russian, available in German) with a focus on Berlin. Berlin-turkish.com looks like a personal blog with no relation to Berlin whatsoever, but Google Translate is down at the moment and I can't be sure. Berlin-china.net is a parked domain. None have any affinity with this target. Ivanvector (talk) 19:08, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think berlin-turkish.com is also essentially parked. If Google Translate is correct, it's a Japanese page about car buying. --BDD (talk) 19:29, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. They are confusing, not mentioned at the target article, implausible search terms, harmful, etc. -- Tavix (talk) 20:06, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I made these redirects back in 2009 (21 June). This is what the websites looked like at the time:
IMO it's good to cross-check the date when the redirect was created with the date of the website in the Wayback Machine. Then the reason why the redirect was created may become apparent. I'm not voting Keep because I don't have a big opinion on the redirect today. I just want to show why I created the redirect @BDD:
WhisperToMe (talk) 20:51, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation. I think this sort of illustrates why we should be sparing with domain name redirects. --BDD (talk) 13:22, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Even if the websites were still functioning as originally, there's no reason the domain name of a website operated by one department of a city government should redirect to an article about the whole city. 58.176.246.42 (talk) 18:44, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as no reason to link websites ...., Websites aren't even mentioned in the article... –Davey2010Talk 00:54, 26 June 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.

Mesopotamia (film)[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) 14:08, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I see no point of creating a "film" redirect to Mesopotamia. Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 18:04, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - there is a 2008 film Mesopotamia but it's entirely non-notable. Ivanvector (talk) 19:10, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Ivanvector. Thryduulf (talk) 10:55, 25 June 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.

Predestination 2[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) 14:08, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No sequel is announced yet, officially or un-officially. So, no point of creating it so soon. Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 18:04, 24 June 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.

Spy 2[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) 14:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is a not a sequel announced yet, not officially or un-officially. So, there is no point of creating a redirect. Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 18:02, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. Ivanvector (talk) 19:11, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This title would be appropriate if this film were a sequel to another called Spy or if it had information about a sequel inlcuded on the article. It does not appeal that either is the case, nor are any of the other films by this name sequels or have sequels. There is an online game called "Spy 2", but it appears to be non-notable. Thryduulf (talk) 11:01, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. --Lenticel (talk) 00:18, 30 June 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.

Harbinger (film)[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) 14:06, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a point of redirecting it to a DISAMB page Harbinger. Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 18:01, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - there don't appear to be any films called Harbinger; none are listed at the dab and I found none by Googling. There is Harbinger Down, but this redirect is not a commonly known short form for that film, so retargeting wouldn't make sense. Ivanvector (talk) 18:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. My findings match Ivanvector's. Thryduulf (talk) 11:02, 25 June 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.

Chrononauts (film)[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) 13:49, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a point of redirecting it to a DISAMB page Mark Miller. Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 18:00, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:TOOSOON and/or WP:NFILM. It was recently announced that a film would be made from the comic Chrononauts (which we don't have an article on, but it's published by Image Comics), a comic apparently authored by Mark Millar (not Miller), although he is not listed on the publisher's Wikipedia page, and the comic is not listed on his Wikipedia page. It's a long way off from both notability and verifiability at this point. Ivanvector (talk) 19:00, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per Ivanvector. Thryduulf (talk) 11:03, 25 June 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.

Big Hero 7[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 July 1#Big Hero 7

Guardians of the Galaxy 3[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) 13:44, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is not a third film announced yet, not officially or un-officially. And I don't see a point of creating a redirect so soon and then directing it to a DISAMB page. Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 17:57, 24 June 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.

Timeless (2014 film)[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. I'm amused at the idea of a redirect called "Timeless" which is dated. --BDD (talk) 13:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing any connection between Nicolas Cage and a 2014 film named "Timeless" -- Tavix (talk) 16:41, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • The redirect should be deleted now. It was created when Cage was attached to star but he is not anymore. Thanks. --Captain Assassin! «T ♦ C ♦ G» 17:39, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - IMdB has two films named Timeless in 2014: [1] directed by Marshall Copous, and [2] directed by Justin Minor. I can't find a suitable target for either one of them (including the redlinked directors) so probably this should also be redlinked. The film which Nicholas Cage was attached to seems to be a 2016 work in progress, but IMdB also has multiple listings for Timeless in 2016. The redirect Timeless (film) targets Phillip Noyce, apparently that film's director although it's not listed in the article's filmography, and the redirect has no history. Ivanvector (talk) 18:07, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Taking this even further, Timeless (2016 film) redirects to Alexander Tuschinski, where it's mentioned a few times but there's no prose about it. -- Tavix (talk) 18:12, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete if there is anything notable here we haven't got content about it (yet), so this redirect is at best premature. Thryduulf (talk) 11:04, 25 June 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.

Anti-Eminem humor[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) 13:40, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as the article doesn't address this concept and it seems to be a WP:POV violation. -- Tavix (talk) 16:22, 24 June 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.

The First Car to be Mass Produced[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, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, this is more trouble than it's worth. The lede of the article says why this claim is ambiguous: "Although credit for the development of the assembly line belongs to Ransom E. Olds with the first mass-produced automobile, the Oldsmobile Curved Dash, beginning in 1901, the tremendous advancements in the efficiency of the system over the life of the Model T can be credited almost entirely to the vision of Ford and his engineers." So the first "mass produced" car could be the Ford Model T due to Ford's major improvements, but technically it's the Oldsmobile Curved Dash. It's a grey area. The other problem with this redirect is the caps: it should be The first car to be mass produced. -- Tavix (talk) 16:16, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:NOTYAHOOANSWERS. Ivanvector (talk) 18:11, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:RFD#D2 confusion, I can't find a better target: We don't have List of mass-produced cars ((with or without the hyphen) nor Timeline of mass production nor History of mass production. In any case, the defining characteristic is not that the Model T was mass produced – in the most general sense, lots of things such as foodstuffs had been mass produced (i.e. farmed on a large scale) for a long time – but that it was done on an assembly line. That is the wording used at Mass production#Use of assembly lines, giving the example of the Ford River Rouge Complex. Si Trew (talk) 09:18, 25 June 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.

Passersby were amazed by the unusually large amounts of blood[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, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently this is sometimes used at The Onion as filler text. However, it has apparently never been mentioned at that article, and there was agreement that it didn't belong at filler text since there are zero sources outside the Onion itself. I don't think we have anything useful for this phrase so it is best deleted. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 14:08, 24 June 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.

Mad munk[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 Mad Monk. --BDD (talk) 13:37, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible typo. If it is considered plausible, then retarget to Mad Monk. The Theosophist (talk) 11:36, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Mad Munk is a (possibly German) manufacturer of motorcycle equipment, according to searches, but they don't seem to have a website and I'm having trouble finding any other sort of information about them. In other searches, I'm seeing evidence that "The Mad Munk" refers to Rasputin in that spelling, but can't be certain that isn't just an alternate spelling. I suggest retarget to Mad Monk as nom suggests; I think it is definitely a plausible misspelling. Ivanvector (talk) 15:35, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget as {{redirect to disambiguation page}} per nom. Chipmonk, for example, redirects in the other direction (to Chipmunk: I've just tagged it as {{R from misspelling}})). That being said, that mispelling is not at the DAB, so that would be slightly misleading... Si Trew (talk) 09:32, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Mad Monk as {{R from typo}} -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 05:15, 30 June 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.

User talk:F9T[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'll leave it to Finns, should he or she return, to either leave the content as is or move it to an archive of the old or new user talk page. --BDD (talk) 14:11, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User changed username, old content of talk page remained in redirect. The Theosophist (talk) 11:32, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The page history shows that the content was added after I renamed the user (the page was automatically moved and replaced by a redirect as part of that process - the redirect was later updated by a bot fixing a double redirect). As page content (e.g. links in signatures) is not amended in the rename process, we keep the redirects to ensure that users are directed to the current username if they click on links in signatures etc. The page has 179 inbound links that would become redlinks were this page deleted. WJBscribe (talk) 12:37, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@WJBscribe: It looks like you figured that I proposed the redirects deletion, which I did not. I thought that my (short) rationale made it clear that I proposed the old content to be moved to the archives of the new talk page of the user.--The Theosophist (talk) 14:06, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, that wasn't clear. I still think we should leave it alone. The user hasn't edited since November 2012 and the most recent post you are proposing to move is from June 2012. Moving the threads would would give the incorrect impression that the messages were delivered to the correct talkpage and not responded to. WJBscribe (talk) 15:13, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to User talk:Finns since one's usertalk page should not point to a user page, unless they want people leaving messages on their userpage, which does not appear to be the case, since the usertalk page for the new userpage does not redirect to the userpage. -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 04:34, 26 June 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.

Herrainpäivät[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 House of Nobility (Finland). --BDD (talk) 14:14, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:NOT#DICT, strengthened by the fact that it is the only foreign-language redirect to this article, and strengthened by the fact that the Finnish Wikipedia calls it House of Lords. The Theosophist (talk) 11:22, 24 June 2015 (UTC) Retarget to House of Nobility (Finland), per Thryduulf, below.--The Theosophist (talk) 12:15, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to House of Nobility (Finland), based on what I've been able to figure out from much investigation "Herrainpäivät" translates as approximately "House of the nobles". The Finnish article fi:Herrainpäivät gives the Swedish name (Swedish is an official language of Finland) as Herredag, which on en.wp redirects to House of Nobility (Sweden). I think it's slightly more complicated than that, as the Herrainpäivät evolved into the House of Nobility but it's the most useful place for us to send anyone who is looking for this term and coverage of the word would not be out of place there. Thryduulf (talk) 11:56, 24 June 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_June_24&oldid=1037879493"