Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 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, 2018.

Drooping[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 Droop. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect is more vague than just being exclusively connected to its target article's subject. Steel1943 (talk) 22:15, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete various meanings amd that is not one I've heard of. Legacypac (talk) 23:31, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Droop for voltage drooping or airplane drooping, and also for the wiktionary of drooping. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:51, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Droop as present participle for certain verbs in that dab --Lenticel (talk) 00:52, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Droop - Better off redirecting to a dab than to a potential useless article. –Davey2010Talk 18:03, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • For what it's worth, the first thing that this did was make me think of Droopy (the cartoon character). Anyways, I also support a retarget change to the article mentioned by AngusWOOF and others. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:38, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's why I added Droopy (and rapper Droop-E) to the the dab. Also Ptosis for the drooping of body parts. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:07, 26 April 2018 (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.

Katrin Doerre[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't seem like a likely misspelling of the target's name. Steel1943 (talk) 21:30, 24 April 2018 (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.

Template:Alu[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 as G7 by Athaenara. Hopefully that's the last of these, I had an WP:ANI post drafted and ready to submit. -- Tavix (talk) 14:40, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Following RfD discussions at

Another attempt to create a 3-letter shortcut for something that doesn't have any true meaning to the target nor need one since {{Album}} already exists, serves the same purpose and is much more logical. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 21:19, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, bad idea. Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 02:48, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - "Alu" are three letters in the word "album". This TfD is extremely similar to the 2013 RfD about Template:Cop and the 2014 RfD about Template:wprk, which I am incorporating by reference for the sake of brevity. There are several templates like this, such as {{Tb}} which is not about tuburculosis, {{pot}} which is not about cannabis, {{hat}} which is not about headwear, etc. WP:R#D8 does not apply as this is not an article space redirect. WP:R#D2 does not apply as confusion is less likely to occur in other name spaces.
  1. "Unless a WikiProject [or anyone else, for that matter] has actually expressed interest in usurping [these redirects], I don't see [them] doing any harm." To date, no other use for {{alu}} has been suggested at all. Per WP:R#KEEP, "If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do".
  2. "Alleged confusion is not very plausible at all. So absent evidence of any harm there is no reason to delete."
  3. "There seems to be no evidence of confusion, and no argument grounded in WP:R. Laziness is the exact purpose of redirects, to be perfectly honest, and the creator of a useful redirect that saves one or two characters should be commended. We don't delete redirects based merely on conjecture. Someone obviously found these useful given they were created."
  4. "One of the lowest things one can do is steal another mans tools. So you have no use for it. That it's being used is good enough, and there is zero reason to take away something that has no higher use. Such Nominators should be required to be the one to hand edit and remove any deleted tags."
  5. "Redirects are not only cheap but this is a redirect from and to template namespace. That would tend to indicate to me that anyone using it is an editor rather than a general reader and they are hardly likely to get it confused. There are lots of little abbreviated things pulled up over the years such as {{tlc}} or {{tlx}} or whatever as useful shorthand for editors."

--Jax 0677 (talk) 13:56, 25 April 2018 (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.

Trillion Dollar Bill[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. No harm in the nomination! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:37, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the trillion dollar bill is barely mentioned in the article, it's about the Simpsons episode. I mean there is some information about the trillion dollar bill but it's very little. There is not even a paragraph of information. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 19:59, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how a hatnote would help, seeing that the article on the episode barely even talks about the dollar bill itself. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 18:29, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There was a scaling of 10^12 to 1 (trillion to one) for Paper money of the fourth dollar (ZWL) so I suppose Trillion Dollars would have suited that section. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:23, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The redirect isn't "Trillion Dollars", it's "Trillion Dollar Bill", which Zimbabwe did not have. -- Tavix (talk) 15:43, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, singular moments from a Simpsons episode make for bad redirects, moments that mean something outside of the context of the show doubly so. gupdoo3  3oodpug 20:02, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. I thought this was an important part of the plot. But is there another notable work featuring a trillion-dollar bill? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:48, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep in the absence of other use. This was an important plot point for the episode in question. -- Tavix (talk) 00:05, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I get that, but when people search "trillion dollar bill", they expect to find information about a trillion dollar bill, which the article on the episode has very little info on. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 16:15, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What kind of information do you want? The article includes such information as: ...to try to obtain a trillion dollar bill..., ..printed a one trillion-dollar bill..., ...asks to see the trillion-dollar bill..., and ...pitched the idea of the trillion-dollar bill... -- Tavix (talk) 16:20, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I admit it I was wrong. I never should have made this nomination, now I feel like such a moron for doing it in the first place. It probably is too late to withdraw the nomination now as it's close to ending, but yeah I regret it. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 17:23, 1 May 2018 (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.

Bireek[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The connection between the redirect and the target is unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 18:58, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - no evidence that this is either a logical search term, and nothing to suggest any reliable source relevant to either sailing or period sailing vessels includes this as a common phrase. -- Euryalus (talk) 09:34, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Not used in books / news articles. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:16, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 01:55, 26 April 2018 (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.

Maggagie[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable throwaway gag. Averages about 6 views a year. Thegreatluigi (talk) 18:09, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom as fancruft neologism. This isn't The Simpsons wikia. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:16, 25 April 2018 (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.

Muckville, USA[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is an absurdly obscure reference (I believe this is on a sign in homer's fantasy) that nobody's ever going to type in, let alone in this format. 16 views in over 8 years. Thegreatluigi (talk) 18:04, 24 April 2018 (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.

Toronto Conservatory of Music[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 keep. Former name-redirects should always exist, Have added the below template. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010Talk 18:04, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this redirect should be deleted. This redirect is not commonly used and the name "Toronto Conservatory of Music" has not been used since the 1940's and since then it is now known as "The Royal Conservatory of Music". This previous name is explained and expanded upon within The Royal Conservatory's Wiki page. This is now a historic name/term and is not a well-known name for The Royal Conservatory of Music. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ClassicalBob (talk • contribs) 14:31, 24 April 2018 (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.

Portal:Rapid transit[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 as P1 by RHaworth. (The portal never had any content before it was redirected.) -- Tavix (talk) 18:49, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading redirect (though well intentioned). There has never been a Portal about Rapid Transit. No subpages, no content except a link to Rapid Transit Legacypac (talk) 03:52, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect as if there's never been a portal there's no use to redirect to one. Remagoxer (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 11:26, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It is a redirect now. We need to delete the redirect. Legacypac (talk) 11:28, 24 April 2018 (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.

Forc[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. Oddly old ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This word doesn't seem to refer to its target in any language. Per wikt:forc, most languages which use this word use this word to refer to fork. Steel1943 (talk) 03:41, 24 April 2018 (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.

List of members of the National People's Congress[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. No consensus ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:44, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The title "List of members of the National People's Congress" means a specific,comprehansive list of members of the National People's Congress of PRC instead of a redirect to a specific term(eg.11th or 12th).Also,the current term of NPC is the 13th(See National People's Congress and 13th National People's Congress).It might not suitable to perserve the redirect. Alneth (talk) 13:42, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well your idea might be a helpful solution.However there are some problems about the article you've linked above-The article List of current standing members of the National People's Congress is a list of standing members of the NPC.However just as I've said,"List of members of the National People's Congress" is a list of members of the NPC,not standing members.If it is redirected to that article,it might not accurate.(Besides,that article is not accurate as well because it shows the information of the 12th term of standing members of the NPC.The latest one is on Chinese Wikipedia.)So maybe we can delete that redirect and create a disambiguation page or "list of lists"of "List of members of the National People's Congress".--Alneth (talk) 15:46, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like a good idea.In my opinion,maybe a disambiguation page is suitable as well.--Alneth (talk) 15:46, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I drafted a list of lists under the redirect, with "see also" links to the lists on Chinese Wikipedia as they have lists for all 13 National People's Congresses. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 06:53, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:35, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:26, 24 April 2018 (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.

Final Fantasy Online[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 May 2#Final Fantasy Online

Template:Uw-vandalism6[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:44, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

implausible redirect Septrillion (talk) 00:25, 24 April 2018 (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/2018_April_24&oldid=1138582227"