Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 2[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 2, 2018.

22.86 Centimetre Nails[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 10#22.86 Centimetre Nails

Chimpanzee caricature[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. I used R3, but I'm sure a couple other criteria apply as well. -- Tavix (talk) 14:34, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously? Guy (Help!) 22:14, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete (but not speedily). There is no mention of chimpanzees in the caricature article (and no mention of caricatures in the Chimpanzee article). The only thing I'm getting from Google is some sort of controversy about a 2009 newspaper cartoon of Obama as a chimpanzee - even if that does (or should) have content about it on Wikipedia (I haven't looked) it wouldn't be at the caricature article, and I'd be inclined to say that this was too generic a phrase to target something that specific anyway. This was just created by Wikid77 with the edit summary "redirect until expanded" - if there is a good reason for this I'm not seeing then I'm prepared to listen to it (hence my comment about not speedying it) but I'm not certain what it could be. Thryduulf (talk) 23:41, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete - see [1] for where this is coming from - David Gerard (talk) 09:17, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per David Gerard. This looks like trolling. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:39, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete. SarahSV (talk) 14:27, 4 June 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.

Redirects to Consolidated Laws of New 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 WP:TRAINWRECK. Thought about relisting, but there's enough work that probably needs to go into deciding some of these in relevant/related batches (pinging Steel1943 and Thryduulf. Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation Law, Agriculture and Markets Law, and Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding Law are keep as there was some general agreement and discussion on them. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:46, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Per similar consensus at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 April 12#County Law, these redirects are a WP:SURPRISE given that they are genetic terms that redirect to a subject about New York laws. Probably best to delete these so that Wikipedia's search function can attempt to direct readers to the article or information they are attempting to locate. Steel1943 (talk) 20:02, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Generally seems to be going the way of WP:TRAINWRECK, but let us see what a relist generates.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:56, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If this is closed as no consensus, please ping me as I'll then nominate at least the two I propose retargetting (and possibly those I suggest disambiguating too) separately. Thryduulf (talk) 23:45, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would prefer a no consensus / trainwreck close at this point. The only things that seem obvious are "keeps" for Agriculture and Markets; Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation; and Racing, Pari-Mutuel Wagering and Breeding, though whether a close calls them "keep" or they're just not nominated again wouldn't make much difference. --BDD (talk) 16:14, 4 June 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.

M22 graph[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 moot. Draft moved over redirect so no longer in scope for RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 15:46, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect prevented my Draft:M22 graph from being accepted. The M22 graph is currently not mentioned in the target. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:50, 2 June 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.

Stadtpolizei Zürich[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 with no prejudice against recreation once there is content on the subject in question. Until or unless that happens, I will accept the nominator's rationale for deletion. -- Tavix (talk) 21:32, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would like this redirect to be deleted, as the target does not incclude any information on the subject and could be misleading. A Lambent Eye (talk) 18:53, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - Isn't it appropriate, though, for an article about a major city to include said metropolis' police force? If the information isn't there right now, then it likely should get added in. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 16:57, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:46, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Create an article from w:de:Stadtpolizei Zürich. It can be mentioned in the article as well. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:52, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Create content either at the current target or as a standalone article per LaundryPizza03. Deletion is not required in either case. Thryduulf (talk) 10:07, 10 June 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.

Government Act[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 11#Government Act

-. .. --. --. . .-.[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 by Boing! said Zebedee under criterion WP:CSD#R3. Thryduulf (talk) 09:41, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

nuff said Kingoflettuce (talk) 07:45, 2 June 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.

U.S. Route 71 in Iowa[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. Nothing is ever stopping a redirect from being replaced with an article should the article be deemed appropriate. Until then, redirect is kept. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:37, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is an inappropriate redirect created as a block to the promotion of a good draft that was at Draft:U.S. Route 71 in Iowa that the creator refuses to allow other users to work on. This should be redlinked to encourage page creation by any interested user. Legacypac (talk) 06:07, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Seems like a plausible redirect to me (the US Route 71 article has a section on Iowa). {{3x|p}}ery (talk) 15:26, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It is customary for U.S. road articles to have this sort of state-detail article redirect to the national-detail article if the state article does not currently exist. Any interested editor can expand the redirect. LJ ↗ 16:45, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy/Snow Keep—the draft wasn't ready for promotion into the mainspace, so the redirect should have remained. It is the standard practice that the links for potential state-detail articles on national highways (Interstate/US) are redirected to the national article until such time as and appropriate state-detail article is created. Nothing is blocking the creation of such an article now or in the future. Imzadi 1979 → 18:08, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There exists a decent, though not perfect, draft that I placed there. This redirect was placed after that page was removed from mainspace for unclear reasons. Legacypac (talk) 20:22, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The draft to which you refer, Legacypac, is an infobox and a junction list. State-detail highway articles containing that little content have been consistently redirected until such time as they actually have a route description or a history section added. So no, it was not a "decent, though not perfect, draft", and had it been moved over, it would have been converted back to its present state per past precedents. Imzadi 1979 → 20:57, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Also, the draft was never moved into mainspace. Legacypac nominated it in essentially it's current form for review through AfC back in February, and I removed that nomination since it wasn't ready and it wasn't nominated by the page author as I would expect. The draft was moved out of draft space into the author's userspace yesterday instead. Imzadi 1979 → 00:23, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep A useful redirect. 172.73.149.44 (talk) 01:11, 5 June 2018 (UTC) strike !vote by ipsock of blocked user Zixuan75 --bonadea contributions talk 05:48, 5 June 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.

RILP[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 need for an RfD as the redirect can simply be changed to a dab page (as already done by Thryduulf. Randykitty (talk) 10:15, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Propose delete the existing re-direction. The acronym 'RILP' also applies to the medical condition Radiation-Induced Lumbar Plexopathy. Consallforge (talk) 05:33, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambig. I've drafted a disambiguation page below the redirect as I found a couple of other uses in addtion to the current target and that noted by the nominator. Thryduulf (talk) 09:52, 2 June 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.

Greater Virginia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 10#Greater Virginia

Mario Kart Ultra[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. Amazing ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:35, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

An incredibly implausible misinterpretation of MKULTRA. power~enwiki (π, ν) 05:13, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Part of a recent series of implausible redirects, hatnotes, and dab entries by Prisencolin. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:42, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete completely nonsensical, definitely a WP:SURPRISE to anyone thinking this is a new Mario Kart game, and maybe possibly WP:R3. <RetroCraft314 talk/> 20:04, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • @RetroCraft314: This is about 3 weeks old, which is in the very greyest area regarding R3, but as it's been nominated here I'd say it isn't eligible for speedy deletion under that criterion. Thryduulf (talk) 23:58, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Thryduulf: Yeah I figured as much...either way the idea of "implausible" still stands as an argument. <RetroCraft314 talk/> 00:06, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete completely nonsensical, implausible redirect. There is no connection at all between these two pages. —usernamekiran(talk) 08:22, 4 June 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_June_2&oldid=1127488328"