Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 26[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 26, 2017.

Metro-North Railroad redirects, Part 1[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 split decision. I find no consensus for M.n.r.r. and M.n.c.r.; the rest will be deleted. -- Tavix (talk) 00:27, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible typos (spaces and punctuation inside acronyms). — Train2104 (t • c) 23:41, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep "M.n.r.r." and "M.n.c.r.". as full stops after letters in acronyms is common (possibly even "correct") in American English. Delete the others. Thryduulf (talk) 10:11, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all I don't see any logos with any of these acronyms, only MTA. MNR on the other hand has tons of logos. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 06:11, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all, although I'm somewhat willing to consider keeping M.n.c.r. and M.n.r.r. (against my better judgment). Ultimately, these typos and excessive use of lower case letters are unbearable to look at. Some more than others. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 19:39, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep "M.n.r.r." and "M.n.c.r."., agreed as common. The others should go. ɱ (talk) · vbm · coi) 04:13, 31 March 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.

Metro-North Railroad redirects, Part 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 retarget to MN. --BDD (talk) 16:11, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Too generic - propose retargeting to MN (disambiguation). — Train2104 (t • c) 23:41, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • retarget as proposed. Thryduulf (talk) 10:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom. Not associated with the railroad. Logos lead to MN and Mn combinations covered by the dab. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 06:13, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom. ---------User:DanTD (talk) 12:30, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per everyone else. For a second I thought this was about Minnesota.--Mr. Guye (talk) 03:28, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both none of the entries on that dab page are known by these initials with these exact forms, neither is the current target known as such. Unlike S-m-n, for example. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:11, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both per Champion. I could see M-N redirecting to the current target though. -- Tavix (talk) 00:24, 4 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.

Metro de la Ciudad Nueva York[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) 16:10, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORRED, no particular affinity for Spanish. — Train2104 (t • c) 22:52, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: This is not the Spanish Wikipedia. KGirlTrucker81 huh? what I've been doing 23:25, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:FORRED. Thryduulf (talk) 10:12, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Spanish is a relatively common language in parts of the United States, as per Demographics of New York City states:Hispanics and Latinos make up 27.5% of New York City's population. According to the American Community Survey, there were 2,287,905 Hispanic or Latino Americans residing in New York City. The Hispanic/Latino population is categorized with four groups, "Puerto Rican" (785,618 or 9.4%), "Mexican" (297,581 or 3.6%), "Cuban" (42,377 or 0.5%), and "Other Hispanic or Latino" (1,165,576 or 14.0%)., I would not be opposed to deletion, though, and the Spanish article is at es:Metro de Nueva York, this particular name is not mentioned there. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 02:56, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: Which dialects of Spanish would you find Metro de la Ciudad Nueva York and Metro de la Ciudad de Nueva York translating to New York City Subway? ---------User:DanTD (talk) 03:41, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Spanish is simply too common there. There is an especially strong Puerto Rican population there.-Mr. Guye (talk) 21:36, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the first one, Keep the other two. I get literally 8 g-hits for "Metro de la Ciudad Nueva York". The city is "Ciudad de Nueva York" or "Nueva York". It'd be like saying "City New York" instead of "City of New York"—it's just awkward. The other two are fine, especially echoing others who noted the strong hispanic population in NYC. One just uses the longer name of the city, and the other uses the shorter name. -- Tavix (talk) 21:26, 3 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.

History of the United States (1991–present)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 7#History of the United States (1991–present)

Skiagraphy[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 4#Skiagraphy

Dubya See Dubya[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. -- Tavix (talk) 21:06, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Target is not known by this name, see Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2017_February_19#Dee_dee_are. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:15, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This got 36 hits last year, which shows the redirect is used, and a google search for "dubya see dubya" finds many instances of the term being used, exclusively referring to the target. Thryduulf (talk) 13:42, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala (talk) 10:50, 26 March 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.

Roosevelt Republican[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, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target, unsure if this is a notable term or not, also Roosevelt is ambiguous. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 10:06, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't; in the latter case a "Roosevelt Republican" could be akin to a Blue Grit. Although I see now that's a Canadian invention. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:42, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't the popular concept of a "Roosevelt Republican" be the opposite of a "Blue Grit" kind of politician? Socially traditionalist in terms of restrictive immigration, increased defense spending, and proud nationalism coupled with a centrist, somewhat Keynesian-esque economic policy having a strong welfare state... I suppose 'communitarian' or 'populist' fit better to describe the underlying TR philosophy. This is somewhat of a tangent, though. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:38, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 14:41, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to 'Political positions of Theodore Roosevelt' since the term appears to have some historical legs in describing TR's followers, influence on his Party, and legacy. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 14:47, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is Progressive Party (United States, 1912) worth consideration at all? On one hand, I can see how it would be misleading, since members of that party were, by definition, not Republicans. On the other hand, you could argue that "Roosevelt Republicans" became the Progressive Party. That article doesn't mention this phrase by name, but it does mention candidates running as "Bull Moose Republicans", which seems pretty darned close a synonym. --BDD (talk) 23:53, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I see your argument, but I can't quite agree since the general concept and specific term of "Roosevelt Republican" preceded the existence of that group by years. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:38, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Then I think the best result would be a new section in the target article on historical factions. The article includes some history, but mostly just starting in the New Deal era, and it's presented as the history of individual factions rather than now defunct factions like the Roosevelt Republicans. --BDD (talk) 14:22, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala (talk) 10:47, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete. From what I can tell, it's a legitimate term and there should be some discussion of it somewhere. However, there isn't at the moment, so I believe the best solution would be a WP:REDLINK-like deletion until it can be discussed somewhere. I'm weak because failing that, I'd have no other issues with a retarget to Theodore Roosevelt. -- Tavix (talk) 19:03, 5 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.

MT GDF Suez Neprune[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 per WP:CSD#G7 as both people who have contributed to the redirect want it deleted and nobody has expressed an opinion otherwise. Thryduulf (talk) 14:35, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

deletion due to mistyped title CeeGee 04:00, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete very nearly WP:G7. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:24, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It was only a this title for 3½ hours, and it's clearly a typo, so if it hadn't been nominated here I'd have speedied it as WP:CSD#G6. As we're here though I've invited Manxruler (who moved the page to this title) to comment. Thryduulf (talk) 10:19, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Thanks for notifying me, Thryduulf. I have no issue with the deletion, seeing all I did was to move the article from "M/T GDF Suez Neprune" to "MT GDF Suez Neprune", getting rid of the forward slash. It seems the Neprune bit was a typo by the original article creator, so it seems to be safe to delete away. Manxruler (talk) 10:48, 27 March 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.

RWBY: Grim Eclipse[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 and refine to RWBY#Video game. (non-admin closure) – Uanfala (talk) 20:01, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelled redirect (probably just an {{R from misspelling}}, but might as well list it)  ONR  (talk)  07:11, 26 March 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_March_26&oldid=1088106678"