Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 13[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 13, 2016.

Las Vegas Outlaws (NHL)[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.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 18:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. This is just a rumored name unsupported by the article and/or reliable sources. -- Tavix (talk) 19:52, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Candidates for names shouldn't have redirects, only officially adopted names. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:03, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete possibly speedy delete, for this looks like an attack to me. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 08:24, 19 September 2016 (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.

Sentential[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 20#Sentential

Raphael Warnock[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. 13:06, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:REDLINK. It's rightly tagged with {{R with possibilities}}, but since he's not mentioned at the target article, this isn't doing readers any good. There are a few mentions of him elsewhere on the encyclopedia. I figured he was likely to be notable after reading about him in this Washington Post article. --BDD (talk) 15:06, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment He is the senior pastor of Ebenezer Baptist Church. [1] Question then becomes whether the current or former senior pastors of churches should have redirects to church articles and whether there should be a history section tracing the leaders of the church? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, apparently this redirected to an article on the church before that was redirected to the historic site. But that page really only discusses the church as a historic entity, in connection with King. Is it otherwise notable, enough to merit its own article? I don't know. If so, I think that would be a reasonable place to retarget. But I still suspect Warnock is notable in his own right, especially if he does end up entering politics. --BDD (talk) 20:56, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 15:52, 13 September 2016 (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.

Volnovakha checkpoint attack[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. WP:INVOLVED close given unanimous consensus after 2.5 weeks. --BDD (talk) 16:16, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tough call. This was merged into the target article, and the section does describe an attack on a checkpoint in Volnovakha. Problem is, Volnovakha bus attack does too, and appears to be more notable by virtue of its having a standalone article. Simple enough to move the redirect to a new title, e.g., 2014 Volnovakha checkpoint attack. What about the old title, though, which is really just a descriptive one? I'm leaning towards retargeting to Volnovakha bus attack and hatnoting, after moving the history of the uncapitalized version to preserve the merge history. Open to other suggestions. --BDD (talk) 13:42, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hatnote sounds good. There appear to be a ton of attacks on checkpoints all over the region. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:31, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 15:49, 13 September 2016 (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.

Trade and Industry[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 Ministry of Trade and Industry, which seems to satisfy most people here. I wanted a wait a bit to see if anyone had any objections to BDD's plan. Since I haven't seen any, I'm going to go ahead an enact it. -- Tavix (talk) 17:35, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to the current target [[Department of Trade and Industry, a disambig] there is a dab page at Trade and Industry Committee, an article at Trade and Industry Bureau, Ministry of Trade and Industry (Norway), Minister for Trade and Industry (Singapore), Ministry of International Trade and Industry, Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry, Minister of Economy, Trade and Industry (Japan), Ministry of International Trade and Industry (Malaysia), Secretary of Trade and Industry (Philippines), Ministry of Trade and Industry (Singapore), Secretary of Trade and Industry (Philippines), Secretary for Trade and Industry, Minister for Trade and Industry (Ghana), List of Ministers of Trade and Industry of the Faroe Islands a set index at Ministry of Trade and Industry (which lists some of the above) and redirects Trade and Industry Secretary (→ Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy), Trade and Industry Minister of Israel (→ Ministry of Economy (Israel)).
Trade and industry is obviously a very common pairing so there isn't an XY problem here, but I think we need to take a comprehensive look at what redirects to what dismabiguation where - for example most of the links above are plausible destinations for the Trade and Industry redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 09:05, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • PS: I've added Trade & Industry to the nomination, which I think should go to the same place as Trade and Industry. It's current target is just plain wrong imo. Thryduulf (talk) 09:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think my preferred solution is to expand the set index to cover all the various trade and industry government bodies and their ministers, whether they are ministries, departments or committees and put it at Trade and Industry with other ambiguous terms redirecting there. Thryduulf (talk) 12:17, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Which set index are you referring to? I closed this, but then realized I wasn't entirely sure what you were recommending. --BDD (talk) 20:39, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    (ping) --BDD (talk) 12:49, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @BDD: Ministry of Trade and Industry. Thryduulf (talk) 12:51, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @BDD: fixing ping. Thryduulf (talk) 12:52, 9 September 2016 (UTC). Thryduulf (talk) 12:52, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok. Would you list all of the articles given in the nomination? I haven't seen enough examples to know what we do when there are ministries and departments with the same name. Don't we often have a "List of foo ministries" or something? That might be more advisable than a set index. --BDD (talk) 12:54, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Basically I think there should be a page that lists all the departments/ministries/etc that are or were called "Trade and Industry", together with their associated secretaries/ministers/etc. I don't have time now to research how this is done elsewhere, but I think the list in the nomination plus those mentioned in the set index and dabs listed forms a reasonably complete set. Thryduulf (talk) 13:20, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Aren't all these partial title matches in which the words trade and industry happen to be next to each other in a longer phrase? I'm not entirely sure I see enough encyclopedic purpose in listing all such phrases together. Uanfala (talk) 19:07, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, if you're searching for a government department/minister for trade an industry (which is quite likely given how many different countries use(d) the title) it's very plausible that you either wont know/remember whether they are departments, ministries, committees, etc and/or want to get an overview of all of them so it seems to me there is value in having one place for all of them rather than having to guess and having to look at 2 (more?) pages if you guessed wrongly. Thryduulf (talk) 20:00, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • True, this makes sense as a search aid. Uanfala (talk) 10:05, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opinion:- Redirect them both to Trade industry or Trade association, or something very similar, without any specific reference to a specific country or anything like that, and similar effect to all of the others, not redirecting to a government with a similar title, but to a page about the job role such as Trade and Industry Minister not redirecting to the UK position but a page about trade and industry ministering in general from where specific countrys versions can be found. They should end up only pointing to a handful of articles. ~ R.T.G 11:01, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't think Trade industry is a good target for someone who is clearly not looking for a single industry but for either "trade and industry" ministers/ministries etc or an article about the responsibilities they have. Trade association is even worse and would be a big WP:SURPRISE. I don't understand why you think the number of targets on a dab or set index should be restricted to fewer than exist? Thryduulf (talk) 09:49, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both. Neither have gotten very many hits and no articles link to either one. (Note: for some reason, the "stats" link for Trade & Industry gives the stats for the article Trade, which is indeed heavily used.) — Gorthian (talk) 19:36, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • That no articles link to disambiguation pages is expected and not a reason to delete. They are not the most used redirects but they are both used, so I'm not seeing any justification for deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 09:49, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Expand set-index per Thryduulf. It's extremely common to just refer to government ministries/departments etc. by their official name without "ministry"/"department". ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 02:59, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good news, everyone! The page we're talking about already exists. Retarget both to Ministry of Trade and Industry, at which point those items at Department of Trade and Industry not already listed there can be merged in. --BDD (talk) 16:14, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Ministry of Trade and Industry was already listed (albeit not very conspicuously) by Thryduulf and it seemed it was already part of their master-SIA plan. Uanfala (talk) 19:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. I think my eyes must have glazed over with all these similar titles. Thryduulf, it looks like there's consensus to consolidate there, when you're ready. --BDD (talk) 19:14, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 15:48, 13 September 2016 (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.

Las Vegas (something) Knights[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.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 18:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL, with an extremely implausible search term to boot. -- Tavix (talk) 14:02, 13 September 2016 (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:Multiple preview software releases[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 speedy deleted, WP:G6, by Ronhjones (talk · contribs). -- Tavix (talk) 19:49, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirect for Template:Multiple releases. Owing to its long name, I don't think anyone would use it. This originally redirected to Template:Multiple stable software releases and should have been deleted when the former was deleted. But it was re-targeted to its current target, and hence, we are here. Codename Lisa (talk) 13:24, 13 September 2016 (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.

Paulownia coreana[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.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 18:32, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There are other Paulownia species, which are not redirects, and this one shouldn't be a redirect either. Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 09:53, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom to create redlink like the other species. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:19, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I'm largely responsible for populating Category:Plant redirects with possibilities, and have vague intentions of someday turning those redirects into articles. But I have no objection to deleting them at present. Keeping the redirects is misleading as blue links for species almost always go to articles about species, not higher taxa (long extinct organisms known from fossils are the major exception). Better to have a redlink to encourage creation of a proper article. Plantdrew (talk) 21:10, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete to encourage article creation --Lenticel (talk) 00:38, 14 September 2016 (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 Ultimate Collection (Barbra Streisand 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 retarget to The Essential Barbra Streisand. (Note that the title suggested by AngusWOOF now redirects there.) --BDD (talk) 19:11, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Propose retargeting to Barbra Streisand discography. Not mentioned in main article but mentioned in discography article. SSTflyer 07:18, 13 September 2016 (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.

La Salle Primary School[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 retaret to La Salle College. --BDD (talk) 19:06, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redundant redirect, the list article to which is redirected doesn't provide any further information about this school (except the fact that it exists). Marcocapelle (talk) 05:36, 13 September 2016 (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/2016_September_13&oldid=1146664061"