Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 8[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 8, 2014.

Some redirects to Super Mario All-Stars[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The result of the discussion was withdrawn/retarget all to Super Mario All-Stars#Super Mario All-Stars 25th Anniversary Edition. The IP and John Vandenberg have discovered some information that I had not found previously: "Super Mario All Stars Limited Edition" seems to be an alternate name for the 25th anniversary edition on English sites, and I found that "Super Mario Collection Special Package" seems to be an alternate name for the 25th anniversary edition on Japanese sites that have been translated to English. I'm not sure the reasoning behind this, but upon finding this information, I must determine that these are useful redirects. As I am the one who opened up this discussion, I'm closing it as a retarget. If there are any concerns about this, please feel free to open another discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 04:14, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There do not seem to be any applicable sections or subjects on its target article that can be disambiguated with these titles: in the article, there is no version that is referred to as a "limited edition", and the term "Super Mario Collection" is very ambiguous and could refer to any number of subjects collectively that are mentioned on Mario (series). However, since there are no games or collections that have been referenced in any media (that I can find) specifically by these titles, or titled as so by their developer/publisher Nintendo, it is probably best to delete these redirects for now. Steel1943 (talk) 22:33, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: each of these redirects currently point towards a "25th anniversary edition" on the page: that section has since been retitled. However, with these redirects having these titles, it is difficult to believe the usefulness of these titles due to their ambiguity and/or inaccuracy. Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment [1][2] Seems like Amazon sells this, and it is the 25th Anniversary version of the game. So... a good reason why redirects should have documentation. -- 70.24.250.235 (talk) 04:26, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I totally agree with being able to add a bit of documentation/reasoning to redirect pages and have said so before: if nothing else, it allows other editors to work out why something that looks odd is actually there by being able to say "This was someone's maiden name" or "they've paved paradise and put up a parking lot" or whatever, which is useful to then go ahhh.... I see the point of the redirect now. Si Trew (talk) 07:41, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:PROMO. The article, fine, but these redirects are just to encourage searches to people to buy the thing, and to my mind that is PROMO. Si Trew (talk) 07:44, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all per 70.24. John Vandenberg (chat) 14:33, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@John Vandenberg: I was thinking that at first, but the fact that the "25th Anniversary" wording is not in these redirects make each of these titles rather ambiguous. If you see the redirects that currently point to this section right now, they all have the "25th anniversary" wording in them:
...I spent a bit of time trying to fix quite a few "Mario"-related redirects so that they redirect to their proper targets/sections. However, due to the lack of specific wording, the 3 specifically nominated redirects seem too ambiguous to be helpful. Steel1943 (talk) 02:21, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If there is no other 'Special Package', 'Special Pack' or 'Limited Edition', they are all reasonable search terms for the '25th Anniversary Edition', which does use the subtitle 'Limited Edition'. If these redirects are ambiguous (there are other Limited/Special sets), then I would vote delete. John Vandenberg (chat) 03:31, 13 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Vertebral border[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 21#Vertebral border

Inferior border[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 21#Inferior border

Healthcare overhaul[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. --BDD (talk) 16:36, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a vague term that shouldn't redirect to a specific policy, and it's kind of USA-centric to assume it means the PPACA. Propose changing it to redirect to Health care reform. Brainy J ~✿~ (talk) 20:58, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

:Delete. It could just as well refer to the Beveridge Report or a hundred and one other things. That is what the search engine is for. Si Trew (talk) 07:18, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to Health care reform. This is essentially just a synonym, even if it connotates a somewhat strong case thereof. WilyD 09:02, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect per nom and WilyD. That article is a bit vague but has all the appropriate links. Si Trew (talk) 11:25, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Coney island disco palace[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) 16:38, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect's subject is not mentioned at the target article. I looked for alternate articles to retarget this redirect (both on Wikipedia and search engines), and the only other target I found is a business in Brooklyn, New York that seems to not have a Wikipedia article. For the time being, it might be best to delete this redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 20:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Steel. Si Trew (talk) 07:23, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Virtual Boy Mario Land[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) 16:38, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The subject is not mentioned at the target article. From the minor research I did, it looks like this was a cancelled project due to the commercial failure of the Virtual Boy. Probably best to delete to either promote article creation, or create an applicable section for this topic in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 19:27, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Steel. Si Trew (talk) 08:16, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sentence fragment[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 21#Sentence fragment

Noob combo[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) 16:40, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The subject is not mentioned in the article. Also, upon reviewing the redirect's edit history, this article that was here before looks like some sort of failure to comply to a neutral point-of-view, and has no references. Steel1943 (talk) 05:48, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Steel1943. Si Trew (talk) 08:13, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete could refer to thousands of different things, such as a move combination for a hidden character in Mortal Kombat. -- 70.24.250.235 (talk) 04:28, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Junk. John Vandenberg (chat) 14:47, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Tool.exe[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) 16:44, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is not mentioned in the article. Also, a search for "Tool.exe" on the English Wikipedia comes up with no results in any pages; the only definite results are at the top, referencing this redirect's existence. Steel1943 (talk) 05:42, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Steel. I have often knocked up small computer programs called "Tool.exe" but they tend to just be one-offs to serve a very specific purpose then get deleted. The same should happen with this redirect. Si Trew (talk) 07:59, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per SiTrew -- 70.24.250.235 (talk) 04:28, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; it looks like there is a tool.exe that helps create custom maps for this game. It might be part of the package, or a mod/hack, but it doesnt really matter as there are lots of tool.exe and no reason this one should be given prominence with a redirect. John Vandenberg (chat) 14:51, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Leader of Government Business[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 25#Leader of Government Business

Wikipedia:Bishop Simon Bruté College Seminary[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 as WP:CSD#G6. §FreeRangeFrogcroak 04:32, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

left over from some kind of accidental move it looks like Sailsbystars (talk) 00:55, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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/2014_April_8&oldid=1141906320"