Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 May 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 18[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 18, 2015.

Untitled (Rick Astley 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 delete, with no prejudice against recreation if anyone can find a WP:RS saying this album actually exists. Deryck C. 14:30, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an inappropriate redirect. Rick Astley doesn't have an untitled album and any rumors that he does is a violation of WP:CRYSTAL Tavix | Talk  19:06, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As I said on the previous deletion discussion, which turned the article into a redirect, there is an album by Rick Astley that goes by the title Untitled, and it was a minor release. I think the redirect should stay. --Diego Grez (talk) 19:10, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Diego Grez: I'm having a hard time finding a source. Even his own website doesn't list an album titled "Untitled" (see here). I feel like if there is, in fact, an album by that name, it should be listed in his discography. Tavix | Talk  19:59, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment is the album without a title or is it called "Untitled" ? [1][2] ; it seems to be a single. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 20:59, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Diego, which of Astley's albums is known as Untitled? Is it mentioned at the target article? --BDD (talk) 14:02, 26 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.

2019 in video gaming[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) 16:38, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. List of video games in development doesn't contain any information about specific years in video games beyond 2016. As such, these redirects are misleading and unhelpful. See also: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 April 16#2020s in film closed as delete. Tavix | Talk  16:44, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete none of the games lisited are scheduled to be released in any on these years. It's too soon.--67.68.29.125 (talk) 20:50, 18 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.

Ma Ying-ba[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) 14:01, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No obvious connection, no inbound link. Does not appear to be a plausible search term for this subject. Mosmof (talk) 14:26, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment according to [3] it's the older brother of Ma Ying-jeou; though I don't see why it would redirect to King and not Ma -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 05:16, 19 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.

K31IA[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 no consensus—restoring the article seems like the option least likely to confuse readers. --BDD (talk) 13:58, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

According to Channel 31 low-power TV stations in the United States, K31IA is licensed to Great Falls, Montana. However, it is redirected to a channel 33/40 out of Santa Ana, California. I am really confused by this and don't think this should be redirected in this way. Tavix | Talk  20:40, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, it is a bit dodgy that. All the sources I got, the FCC and so forth, are for the station in Montana. European stations don't tend to put in the frequency, you just hit the button, so it's a bit idle of me to say against it, but something is iffy here, channel 36 is usually what your analog(ue) video recorder was on and computer on a UM1223 which you could tune a few kilohertz either side, but this is way out. I did suggest for something else earlier Spectrum management or something like that, but not sure that is close enough. Si Trew (talk) 21:01, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • restored as article I have restored this to the version before it was redirected, per other Channel 31 articles. I'm not that strong on the FCC lingo, but by my reading it is now back on the air again as a digital station; in any case it needs the attention of someone familiar with the material. Mangoe (talk) 20:30, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of Trinity Broadcasting Network affiliates It's a translator station of the Trinity Broadcasting Network, of which it carries the signal of their flagship station KTBN without any kind of deviation, so the article history would be merely 'the translator with a Dish Network tuner permanently locked to TBN is located in (X place)'; this is a common redirect action with many of TBN's translators; same with any other translator with a 'the transmitter was put up and does nothing but retransmit (X network) with no deviation' description. It was sold to Regal Media, a company allegedly doing something with these stations, but so far most of them are still carrying TBN or else have gone dark because they haven't figured out what to put on them (often Regal puts on something that isn't much more watched than TBN and doesn't get any cable coverage for these rural translators). Until Regal does anything with this, the redirect should remain; it should go to List of Trinity Broadcasting Network affiliates. Nate • (chatter) 04:25, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Retarget" is not a reasonable outcome here because the intended target doesn't mention any of the various TBN repeaters. This would be a merge of the old article into the proposed target (and presumably all the other such repeaters). Mangoe (talk) 09:21, 14 May 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) 13:57, 18 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.

Grand Theft Auto VI[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 no consensus, default to keep. (I consider this RfD and the one below as one package.) Deryck C. 14:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion per WP:CRYSTAL. Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation. All coverage on this game is speculative with no confirmation of existence. The1337gamer (talk) 10:41, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete: title is speculation and confusing, however some may potentially find it useful. Esquivalience t 13:46, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep the series article is certainly where it should point to, if it were to be kept. It's a de-confusion redirect, allowing people to see what are the extant games in the series. It can obviously be a typo for "IV" by transposition. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 14:02, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - per nomination. AdrianGamer (talk) 14:12, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - This redirect covers mistyping/misremembering. - hahnchen 15:26, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Very plausible typo for Grand Theft Auto IV. Redirect has received nearly 700 views in the past 90 days. Elassint Hi 04:04, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Elassint, does that mean you'd want to retarget to Grand Theft Auto IV? --BDD (talk) 17:13, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Hahnchen and Elassint's comments about the viewing figures. Thryduulf (talk) 16:40, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete All the views only prove that there are readers looking for information on this topic. Since we don't have any information, I can pretty much guarantee those nearly 700 views resulted in nearly 700 disappointed readers. This redirect is actively contributing to such disappointment and confusion. --BDD (talk) 17:12, 14 May 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) 13:56, 18 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.

Grand Theft Auto 6[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 no consensus, default to keep. (I consider this RfD and the one above as one package.) Deryck C. 14:34, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion per WP:CRYSTAL. Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation. All coverage on this game is speculative with no confirmation of existence. The1337gamer (talk) 10:41, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep the series article is certainly where it should point to, if it were to be kept. It's a de-confusion redirect, allowing people to see what are the extant games in the series. -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 14:02, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - per nomination AdrianGamer (talk) 14:12, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - This redirect covers mistyping/misremembering. - hahnchen 15:26, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Regarding the IP's comments, I think this redirect will cause confusion. If a reader types in "Grand Theft Auto 6" and finds nothing, that's a fairly clear indication that we don't discuss the topic. If we take them to the Grand Theft Auto (series) article, they're likely to look around for information on it, which we don't have. --BDD (talk) 17:10, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. Tavix | Talk  15:08, 16 May 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) 13:56, 18 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.

CJ Lang[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) 13:57, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lang is no longer a member of the Chicago White Sox organization (and hasn't been since 2009). As such, this redirect is no longer helpful. Tavix | Talk  05:19, 18 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.

Beatlemanía[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) 13:56, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RFOREIGN. Beatlemania isn't a Spanish phenomenon. Tavix | Talk  05:12, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:RFOREIGN: The Í is not particularly Spanish either, I have it on my Hungarian keyboard here í as a primary key (there, I just typed it, between my left shift and my where probably your Z is) without even having to shift it. So could equally say it is not an Hungarian phenomenon, and I am sure in many other languages too. Si Trew (talk) 00:29, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
In the meantime I have marked it as {{R from title with diacritics}}, without prejudice to this discussion. Si Trew (talk) 00:33, 21 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.

Benefits of of lotus positon[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) 13:33, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

These are all unlikely search terms. There was a previous consensus to delete the "the the" redirects earlier this year (see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 January 5#List of Royal Consorts of the the United Kingdom, Great Britain and England) and I don't see how these are any different. Tavix | Talk  05:03, 18 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete on the same principle as before. Seyasirt (talk) 01:29, 19 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, on that principle, but, but, "of of" is, is, valid sometimes, whereas "the the" is not, not, never, never. Si Trew (talk) 00:36, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The reason I am thinking that "of of" cannot be automatically taken this way (someone will suggest a bodge job, I can imagine whom, but we put in the hard work here" is the use in phrasal verbs ending in "of" such as "think of". I think there is a famous sentence that has nine different prepositions and it is one of those contrived sentences The woman didn't take much to threw out up of. This is done deliberately against the "rule" that you can't put a preposition at the end of a sentence, and the two "ofs" serve different purposes, one as part of a phrasal verb and one as a disjunction or connector or possessor depending on which grammar you wish to read. As if English had any grammar! Night night. Si Trew (talk) 00:45, 21 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_May_18&oldid=1138580585"