Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 24[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 24, 2017.

Binibining Pilipinas Globe and others[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 Binibining Pilipinas titleholders. -- Tavix (talk) 03:16, 8 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article was originally created as a redirect. It's superfluous and non-essential since the first word or two of the title will automatically direct you to Binibining Pilipinas article. Richie Campbell (talk) 21:37, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I combined the other entries as they all refer to titles within the Binibining Pilipinas event. Richie Campbell, please check/edit if I missed any of your comments. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:52, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article was originally created as a redirect. It's superfluous and non-essential since the first word or two of the title will automatically direct you to Binibining Pilipinas article. Also, this redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam.Richie Campbell (talk) 12:21, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep These all appear to be the names (and/or titles awarded to winners) of one or more Binibining Pilipinas competitions and so are likely search terms. Redundancy is not a reason to delete a redirect - not everybody searches using the internal search engine and the search suggestions only work for those with javascript enabled (which is not everybody). Redirects from official names related to the target are not spam or promotion, they exist to help readers find the content they are looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 13:05, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'd also support retargetting as suggested below. Thryduulf (talk) 09:05, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete These all appear to be combinations of the name of the Philippine national beauty pageant + one or another unrelated international beauty pageant. I don't see any more reason to keep them than other frivolous combinations like Miss France Universe. – Uanfala (talk) 20:36, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of Binibining Pilipinas titleholders, where these titles are explained more in depth. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 22:56, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 21:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Menv[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 May 2#Menv

👋[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 Wave (gesture). (non-admin closure) Anarchyte (work | talk) 04:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Wave (gesture)? This emoji seems to represent a hand wave, not a hand itself. Steel1943 (talk) 20:02, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. I agree, this doesn't seem to be just a hand. Every search of this emoji categorizes it as a wave. Nohomersryan (talk) 14:05, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Wave (gesture) - this character is U+1F44B WAVING HAND SIGN. Thryduulf (talk) 16:16, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Category:Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Triology[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 delete G7, author requested deletion. -- Tavix (talk) 13:19, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely misspelling —swpbT 18:07, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Not particulary unlikely to misspell trilogy as triology (which redirects to Set Enterprises), but this is a category not in reader space, or at least not read in reader space, and editors should kno how to get it writ proply. Si Trew (talk) 03:28, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteAuthor himself wants deletion .The category was actually supposed to be named Category:User:Forceradical/Hitchikers guide to the Galaxy(fun)FORCE RADICAL (talk) 09:30, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Cavaliers-Warriors rivalry[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 May 2#Cavaliers-Warriors rivalry

Bluehole Inc.[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 restore article. (non-admin closure) feminist 10:55, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect seems like someone stealing links to their video game to advertise it. From what I can tell Tera has nothing to do with the videogame publisher Bluehole Inc. (creators of PlayerUnknown's_Battlegrounds). 66.54.123.66 (talk) 16:06, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Bluehole is the developer of both Tera and PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds. Official site lists both games: https://www.bluehole.net/en/game --Mika1h (talk) 22:58, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore article without prejudice to AfD. This was unilaterally redirected, but two different users have objected to this by reverting to the article so I think it best that this be discussed at a suitable venue to see if there is actually consensus for having this as an article, a redirect or neither. Thryduulf (talk) 16:46, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Going in Style (2016 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 keep. (non-admin closure) feminist 10:47, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not released in 2016. Steel1943 (talk) 14:21, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep This is an {{R from move}} as the film used to have a planned release for May 6, 2016. Here's the source the article uses to support that release date. As the pushback happened when the film was in production, and that it's only one year off (someone could easily misremember the film as being released in 2016 instead of 2017), I think this is a plausible redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 14:35, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedily keep per Tavix. Si Trew (talk) 03:34, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@SimonTrew: Is there a reason for wanting this "speedily" kept? It doesn't seem to meet any of the criteria at WP:SPEEDYKEEP. -- Tavix (talk) 13:20, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Aavacations.com[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. Thryduulf (talk) 19:07, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is linked in the external links section, but otherwise isn't at target, thus it is not a useful redirect and nearly make it a soapbox, delete. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 09:00, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 08:53, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, for once I am being the fly in the ointment on the "keep" side. Since the first two are oviously back-formations from "AA Vacations", why would we not keep that as [[WP::RFD#K5]] useful? Si Trew. Just to be sure, AA Holidays etc. are red. I don't think it means just to book a round trip. It means a package tour (in Brit. Eng.) I can understand delete all three or keep all three, but not to perm it that way. (talk) 02:50, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I cannot imagine that anyone looking for information would not know to look under the airline. DGG ( talk ) 08:02, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not mentioned in the target article. --BDD (talk) 16:15, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Ready Player One (2016 film)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 May 2#Ready Player One (2016 film)

Despicable Me (TV series)[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) 16:13, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Despicable Me franchise does not include a TV series. -- Tavix (talk) 03:37, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete no such TV series. Yes, they have animated shorts they show at Universal Studios Hollywood, but they aren't broadcast like TV episodes. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 11:02, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. A set of shorts that you can watch in kinda a random order, like Looney Toons cartoons or whatever, regardless of quality, is not a series. A series has to be watched 1-2-3-4.... I thought that was the definition of a series. That it is serial. Si Trew (talk) 03:07, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It could be if it were posted as a web series, but no, they're just a list of shorts over at Despicable Me#Short films and attached to various theater and home media. It should have a different dab from (TV series). AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:42, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Agent Zigzag (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) 16:11, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All of these redirects are to a director, actor, etc. that was rumored to be a part of a potential film. The problem, however, is that there is zero mention of such a film at the targets, so anybody who wants to know more about these potential films will end up confused or disappointed. Most of these films are in development hell. They may or may not progress to production, and the director, actors, production studio, etc. could all change before then. Therefore, these redirects should be red, and if any of these enter production, then an article on the film should be created. (As always, a raw list is available on the talk page.) -- Tavix (talk) 02:48, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have a very small doubt about The Hauntrepreneur going to The Entrepreneur. I do realise it's a deliberate pun, but is it a likely typo? Boot is on other foot with me tonight/this morning, isn't it! Si Trew (talk) 03:25, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Salt (franchise)[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) 16:12, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Salt is a single film, not a franchise. A film franchise requires multiple films, and it doesn't appear that a sequel is going to happen (but then again, I don't have a crystal ball). -- Tavix (talk) 02:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Secret State Police[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. (non-admin closure) Anarchyte (work | talk) 04:27, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a general term targeting a specific term. Should target Secret police, Intelligence agency (largely due to the "State" part of the redirect name) or something similar. Not opposed to moving it to a more WP:R#USEFUL name, deleting it, or disambiguating it. I am opposed to keeping it as is. Mr. Guye (talk) 00:45, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as translation of "Secret State Police (Geheime Staats Polizei)". [1] as listed in the lead paragraph. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 11:00, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Secret Police. To AngusWOOF: There are many articles with many translations of this name in various lanuages. I don't think to pick one translation is a particularly useful one. It's kinda {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}. We do also have Police State -> Police state, and I suppose the two are similar but probably far enough apart to keep them distinct for now, crosshatting each to the other. That particular article has a pic article from the Stasi. We could DAB it, but I am not sure we need to. Si Trew (talk) 03:14, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to hatnote this to secret police or other terms that would work too. Police state isn't the same as State police though. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:35, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
  • Keep per AngusWOOF and for the same reasons I gave when this was nominated less than a year ago - see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 August 28#Secret State Police. Thryduulf (talk) 16:53, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf last time. I was inclined to suggest a retarget to secret police, but as Thryduulf notes, this is a translation of the official name of the Gestapo: it's not merely a description. "Secret State Police" is slightly odd as a general term, too; not so bad that I'd consider advocating deletion, but odd enough that it's not likely to get a lot of use by people who want secret policy in general. Vaguely comparable (although of course a radically different context) to the "Suggestive" bit at United_States_trademark_law#Strength_of_trademarks, I'd say. Nyttend (talk) 23:57, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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/2017_April_24&oldid=1143743575"