Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 5[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 5, 2018.

Lokendra singh journalist[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. Target deleted. Randykitty (talk) 02:46, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Improperly capitalised title Regards, User:TheDragonFire300. (Contact me | Contributions). This message was left at 21:55, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - simply not necessary to aid finding the main article. Saw this at WP:NPP - pointless. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:31, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Note that this redirect is a leftover from a page move I did, but the original article was here. Regards, User:TheDragonFire300. (Contact me | Contributions). This message was left at 23:00, 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.

Mac Action Sack[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. Frog Blast the vent core! ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:31, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Lordtobi (✉) 16:53, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete no content at destination to support redirect.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:04, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's a game collection from Bungie, but not mentioned in the article. Could be listed in the List of Bungie video games article though if mentioned. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 13:31, 8 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.

Arete Seven[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. Honestly, surprised there isn't more seven content at Bungie#Culture. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:33, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Lordtobi (✉) 16:53, 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.

Stereogum Premiere[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) Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 13:38, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Term not found in target article: no evidence that this is a useful redirect. PamD 22:01, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 13:25, 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.

Dance by country[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 13#Dance by country

Western Dance[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 disambiguate, mostly. Technically, I'm making the disambiguation page at the correctly capitalized Western dance, which was previously a redirect to Dance#Europe and North America, and retargeting there. This seemed like common sense to me and in line with the discussion here, though of course, feel free to contact me if you think I've erred. --BDD (talk) 17:55, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as too ambiguous; unless you're from the American Southwest, this phrase probably suggests a list of folk dances of Western cultures (a plausible article, though at a real title that starts "List of").  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:22, 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.

Artist to artist redirects[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) 17:44, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reflective of the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laura Brehm; an argument was made by the nominator Z0 stating a redirect has no point if it does not explain what the reader is expecting. These redirects are simply pointless as there is no information about each of the subjects at their respective targets; only mere listings. No other suitable target with information about each subject exists and they are not alternate names of these targets, therefore all redirects listed here should be deleted. 99.203.30.34 (talk) 06:20, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as non-helpful and confusing, and per the "redlinks encourage article creation" principle.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:38, 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.

MOS:AMEN[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) 14:40, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

...nor do we need another shortcut with a puzzlingly overcompressed name. EEng 02:47, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:AMEN
  • Delete - what does this even stand for? Personally, I'd expect it to lead to some policy or guideline concerning Christianity, or perhaps on how to end an article. Pointless, redundant and confusing. John from Idegon (talk) 03:26, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Amen, brother! EEng 03:30, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It stands for “American English,” but I see how it can be confusing. However, I think that MOS:BRIT is fine. Interqwark talk contribs 03:28, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I’ve created MOS:AMENG and MOS:BRITENG. I don’t think that these abbreviated terms are ambigious like “AMEN” is. I still think that MOS:BRIT should be kept. Interqwark talk contribs 12:56, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - As stated above, this seems frustratingly ambiguous to where deletion is the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:38, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Very confusing. Natureium (talk) 14:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Made-up contraction that nobody would use except to be obfuscatory. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:56, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I didn't even know we had a Manual of Style entry for the Amen break. XOR'easter (talk) 23:11, 11 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.

MOS:BRIT[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. --BDD (talk) 17:43, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We don't need yet another shortcut with a name that could mean any of a zillion things. EEng 02:46, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As noted below we already have BRITENG. EEng 15:18, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see the problem with MOS:AMEN, but MOS:BRIT seems fine to me. Interqwark talk contribs 02:49, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
MOS:EEng would be simpler. For Every English variant. Natureium (talk) 14:03, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Heh.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
We already have MOS:ENGVAR. We don't need BRIT, CAN, AM, AUSTR, INDIA, COMMONWEALTH, and god-knows-what-else. EEng 02:58, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don’t think that “BRIT” is ambiguous, and it’s easier to remember than “ENGVAR.” It’s also shorter. Interqwark talk contribs 11:36, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This doesn't mean "any of a zillion things" but has been a common slang term in "Brit" form, and common abbreviation as "Brit.," for British, for a very long time. All the "but we already have another one" arguments fail in light of the extremely insistent arguments over the last two days to keep even silly typo redirects that pertain to the MoS. So, this one wouldn't be deleted in a million years. It's not even confusing/ambiguous, since we have no MoS page pertaining to Britain or the British (or to anything else "Britfoo"), and likely never will. We don't need creation of a bunch more of these like MOS:UK, etc. But this extant one is WP:CHEAP and plausibly useful to editors.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:35, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    we have no MoS page pertaining to Britain or the British – well, we've got British currency and British billion and whatnot over at MOSNUM, so if anything this should be BRITENG. EEng 18:27, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    MOS:BRITENG already exists and already redirects to the same place.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  22:05, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect. So this one is unnecessary and puzzling. EEng 15:18, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I've edited the nomination to make it clear this redirect targets the National varieties of English section (it would be really useful if Twinkle and other tools did this automatically). Thryduulf (talk) 12:46, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Intergwark and SMcCandlish's comments about this redirect (I disagree with their comments about other redirects, but their not relevant to this nomination). Thryduulf (talk) 12:46, 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.

John Cena![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. Solid meme need not equal solid redirect ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:37, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unnecessary redirect. Interqwark talk contribs 02:09, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, as silly nonsense, unless we have evidence of a TV show, autobiography, or whatever which is titled John Cena!, that could explain this exact text string.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:37, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless there is evidence of use of this style. There are an impressive 53 exclamation marks in the target article, all but 5 of which are in the references. Not one of them follows the subject's name. Unfortunately Google is being "helpful" and showing me results without the exclamation mark, even when verbatim mode is selected. The only search engines I know of that do a truly verbatim search are Google ngrams, which produces only the number of results from books and doesn't give context, and Symbol Hound which has a very limited corpus as it is intended for searching computer code snippets - so unsurprisingly finds no results for a professional wrestler with or without an exclamation mark. Thryduulf (talk) 13:01, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Anybody's name can be shouted. That doesn't mean anything. We don't have 'Barack Obama!' or 'Obama!' either. Neither do we have 'Donald Trump!' or 'Trump!' (and so on). CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:40, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. As much as some individuals may want to yell the target's name when hearing the beginning of his professional wrestling theme song, this just isn't a useful as a redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 17:31, 6 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_5&oldid=1036307272"