Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 7

[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 7, 2016.

The Man That Mother Nature Forgot To Make Good-Looking

[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. WP:SNOW NeilN talk to me 16:22, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A one-time insult, not a notable nickname. LM2000 (talk) 22:26, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Not notable. Prefall 22:36, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I would inform the above 2 editors and any below that per Wikipedia:Redirect#When should we delete a redirect? that lack of notability is not listed as one of the 10 "Reasons for deleting". Notability is a consideration for ARTICLE content. Less notable things can be used in redirects without having to be notable enough for an article. Now I will quote 2 of the "Reasons for not deleting" which apply here:
    1. They aid searches on certain terms.
    2. Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways.
    Reviewing admins: I think you should discount any "votes" considering that Wikipedia:Polling is not a substitute for discussion. People voicing dissent here should do so in context of policy by referencing the 10 WP:R#DELETE reasons or the 7 WP:R#KEEP reasons. Even though there's more possible reasons to delete than keep redirects, I'm winning 2-0 in terms of actually referencing policy here. I would posit that people are ignoring policy and just treating what is supposed to be "discussion" as WP:POLL/WP:VOTE. The numerous "delete per nom" comments for example, are merely polling/voting, not discussion. Ranze (talk) 03:15, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ranze, a redirect needn't pass WP:GNG but it also can't be so obscure that nobody would ever go searching for it. This falls under deletion rational #8:If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name, it is unlikely to be useful. It's remarkably obscure, this one-time nickname isn't notable enough for somebody to type into their search bar. It's useless.LM2000 (talk) 03:21, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    "so obscure that nobody would ever go searching for it" doesn't apply to many of the things you have nominated. People do go searching for Cryback/Rybotch, for example. It even applies here. Someone reading this January 2014 tweet for example, would have no idea who the name is referring to. It's already one step of research to find out that the man who said it is Tyler Breeze, and even steeper research to find out that Tyler Breeze said that about Adrian Neville in their feud. We save a lot of time for people by simply redirecting it to the wrestler whom the phrase refers to. You're basically making declarations here you can't support. Any unique phrase used by a wrestler is something people are likely to be curious about. This isn't just something some fan called Neville, it's something Tyler called him on live TV, TV that thousands of people watch, so of course people will type in the name, we already can see they did that. Ranze (talk) 03:41, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirects that are pejorative or insults, however can, and have, been deleted via WP:CSD#G10 ("pages that serve no other purpose ... than to disparage their subject"). Unless they're very notable and covered in multiple high quality sources, that will probably be their fate. Black Kite (talk) 09:23, 9 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.

Dawn of the Altitude Era

[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. -- Tavix (talk) 01:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect, per consensus at Unicorn Freaks, Iron Man of the WWE, and Madame McMahon, nicknames used once are not useful redirects. LM2000 (talk) 22:23, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@LM2000: consensus at the other redirects you mention is entirely irrelevant to this. This is not 'used once' it is a slogan he has pushed to sell merch and which his fans push by wearing the merch. Yet again I really doubt you looked into this and are just making malicious assumptions about anything I make you don't immediately recognize.

Pre/War/Crash/Angus/JTP this is not a WP:POLL it is "for discussion" so if you're just going to "per nom" please go away.

HHH Pedrigree this is a slogan associated with Neville through official WWE merchanise, see http://shop.wwe.com/neville-altitude-era-authentic-t-shirt/W09608.html how could you possibly argue this isn't notable?

Admins, please note that none of the 10 WP:RDELETE reasons are given here, while the WP:RKEEP reasons 3 and 5 defend this redirect's existence. Reviewing administrators: please recognize that only actual discussions form a consensus, not polling/voting, and look at more than just the numbers here. Ranze (talk) 04:26, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's a thread on ANI on your behavior because you keep doing the same things again and again. I knew this was on a shirt when I nominated it for discussion, it falls under deletion rational #8:If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name, it is unlikely to be useful. LM2000 (talk) 04:40, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The thread YOU made, yes. I'm well aware of your canvassing everywhere possible to try and get people to gang up on me. No, this doesn't fall under number 8. A mass-produced slogan associated with the wrestler is not "very obsure". Here's some more help:
As you can see at http://www.wrestlezone.com/assets/uploads/2015/05/Screenshot-5_24_2015-11_23_19-PM.png the name Neville only occurs in tiny print on the bottom of the left sleeve. Anyone viewing a fan wearing this from the back/front/right would not be able to see it. The "Dawn of the Altitude Era" slogan is very visible on the back though, so the redirect helps someone looking for that slogan get bounced right to the person the shirt is for. Ranze (talk) 05:30, 9 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.

Big E Jackson

[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. -- Tavix (talk) 01:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not a plausible redirect, not a real nickname. LM2000 (talk) 22:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I won't contest this. The guy has been called Big Ryck and Big Zeke so I figured noting Ezekiel begins with E the same way Ettore was is harmless. I did find some other people calling him this but probably not enough to convince you. It's not as notable a nickname as the others which I am trying to defend, even though I still maintain it is a harmless redirect to keep. Ranze (talk) 03:02, 9 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.

Rybotch

[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. -- Tavix (talk) 01:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not plausible redirects, not real nicknames. LM2000 (talk) 22:11, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom, sounds like a one time insult.Chris "WarMachineWildThing" Talk to me 22:41, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@LM2000: I get the impression that you don't spend much (any?) effort looking for sources before taking it upon yourself on your mission to dig through my edits and try to demonize them. You begin with falsehood, saying that this is not plausible (wrong, both are things Ryback has beein recurringly called) and that they are not real nicknames (also false).

Crash_Underride and HHH Pedrigree are non-neutral parties who have had past disagreements with me so I would encourage any overseeing administrators to discount their support of these falsehoods. JTP and other "per nom" folk who blindly support this falsehood, I would remind you that RFD is not a vote, you are supposed to actually discuss policy and do your own analysis. All 4 of you are now posting incorrect things.

@AngusWOOF: thank you for honestly acknowledging that Cryback is a meme. "Traction" is a relative concept I won't quibble about, but I disagree about it being 'short-lived' considering there is still discussion of it by fans and activity in the hashtag in the present year.

We might dispute on whether they are notable enough nicknames to list on his article, but redirects have a lower burden of proof for notability than something you'd list on a page. Plausibly typos, for example, are made into redirects, but not actually mentioned on the article.

I would remind overseeing editors who might want to embrace this so-called "consensus" (it is not, I detract)

Beginning with the most notable, #Cryback is quite popular, and people still talk about on Reddit and while it did originate as an insult from Jericho used 28 June 2013, it took root and influenced articles about him:

  • "Don't Cryback Me a River, WWE".
  • "Ryback to Cryback – Will he ever be the monster WWE wants him to be?".

Rybotch similarly has coverage to this day in fan discussion. Angus I'm not sure what search engine you're using to get Robotech typos, but if you Google Rybotch it's all wrestler-related I see on the first page. This nickname has stuck with him since 2012, and recurs every year since then until even now. Is it a notable enough nickname to mention on his page? That's a separate discussion. It doesn't need to be for it to be verified as a nickname associated with him to redirect to his page.

Aside from the podcast, you can see fans calling him this in comments on 5 pages worth of articles. Writers may be hesitant to say that openly out of respect or not wanting to burn bridges or future interviews. Ranze (talk) 02:57, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ranze, you have the list of reliable wrestling sources plastered at the top of your talk page, yet you share random twitter feeds, reddit, unverified youtube videos, and dirtsheets. I know you know better than this yet you keep making the same mistakes. This is why you've been in conflict with so many in the professional wrestling wikiproject and this is why you'll likely be topic banned from there someday.LM2000 (talk) 03:04, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

LM I notice you conveniently sneak the more notable nickname Cryback under Rybotch's entry. You want a verified YouTube video? Here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHfakJwfuUE&t=1m15s Are you going to call THIS tweet "random" too? https://twitter.com/iamjericho/status/351886641301946370 Do you need more than the official YouTube channel of the WWE and the official Twitter account of Chris Jericho to convince you of the worthwhileness of Cryback? Ranze (talk) 05:10, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A couple more to consider:

  • Jericho, Chris (1 July 2013). "The Miz vs. Ryback". Raw. Episode 1049. Cryback .. Cryback just waved off his own match. Listen to the fans' reaction here, booing Cryback for doing just that.
  • Dilbert, Ryan (2 September 2016). "Ryback Is Right: WWE Missed the Boat with the Big Guy". During a match with The Miz, Ryback pulled the WWE version of boxing's famous "No mas" incident. The Big Guy quit mid-match, refusing to take any more of The Miz's kicks. That opened the door for rival Chris Jericho to start calling him "Cryback."

It is a recurring nickname repeated multiple times on 2 different programs, reported on in the news. I'd question if the nicknames that LM doesn't object to are this well-supported. Ranze (talk) 07:22, 9 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.

Internals

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 15#Internals

Idiotia

[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. -- Tavix (talk) 01:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is Portuguese for "idiot", I don't see how it can refer to South Korea. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 04:41, 7 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.

其他國家

[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. -- Tavix (talk) 01:00, 14 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This just means "other countries", even that is not a specifically Chinese concept, and even that is not a Chinese-related topic. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 04:38, 7 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_7&oldid=1136448105"