Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 28[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 28, 2014.

Template:R from English name[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 Number 57 11:08, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This has caused confusion by being added to English-language redirects to non-English titles. These should actually be using {{R from alternative language}}. At the time of writing, this has 18 transclusions total, of which five are such mistakes and 13 are correct redirects to scientific names (for the other two, neither applied). I'm about to fix the errors, but I'd rather see the redirect deleted to avoid such confusion in the future. --BDD (talk) 21:31, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The nom summed up the reasons; I have nothing to add. Steel1943 (talk) 22:21, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Having been confused by the purpose of this REDIRECT, I agree that its REDIRECT-functionality should be removed; it should be replaced with some text pointing out the correct alternatives: {{R to scientific name}} or {{R from alternative language|en}} – a kind of category disambiguation page. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:20, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, if this should exist, then it should be called {{R from vernacular name}}, ... -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 07:59, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – Part of the issue is the problem with remembering the names of templates for redirects involving scientific names of organisms or groups of organisms: in the pair {{R from scientific name}} and {{R to scientific name}} the "to/from" distinction is the key one, but in the pair {{R from scientific name}} and {{R from alternative scientific name}} it's the descriptive text. So it is in principle helpful to have differently named redirects, but I agree that "R from English name" meaning "R from English name to scientific name" is misleading. "R from vernacular name" would, I think, also be liable to be misused. So I guess deletion is the best. Peter coxhead (talk) 09:29, 29 May 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]

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 converted to disambiguation page so now out of scope of RFD. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 23:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The destination doesn't make sense. Leader of Government Business is a position in many governments. Recommend turning into a disambig page. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:37, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or disambiguate per nom. Misleading redirect. -- 70.24.250.235 (talk) 03:47, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate. In the UK, the Leader of the House of Commons or Leader of the House of Lords is the MP or Lord who basically organises the business of the day, and both are Cabinet posts but not the Premier (Prime Minister). This redirects to the Premier. If the Premier of the Cayman Islands is also the Leader of Government Business then there are obviously different meanings. There is also the Father of the House (or Mother of Parliament) who is the longest sitting MP, and perhaps that should go at the DAB too, although it is purely an honorary title. Si Trew (talk) 08:11, 8 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • make an article This seems to be a standard position in parliamentary governments. Rather that make links to the countries where such a position exists, it makes more sense to explain what the position is. Mangoe (talk) 00:13, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
But if it means different things in different countries, then the article would essentially be no more than a disambiguation page. Anyway, who's going to make the article? Are you offering? Si Trew (talk) 07:04, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - delete, as it stands. Could be disambiguated, or made into an article? If someone has an idea of how to do that. WilyD 09:00, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate or Keep; 'Leader of Government Business' was a previous name of 'Premier of the Cayman Islands'. John Vandenberg (chat) 14:55, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep for now. Most instances of the phrase on Wikipedia do refer to the Caymanian usage, but I have no objection to overwriting with an article or a dab. It's just unclear to me right now what else would go on that dab. --BDD (talk) 16:46, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is clear that Leader of the House of Commons, Leader of the House of Lords, and Premier of the Cayman Islands would go to that DAB. Si Trew (talk) 18:36, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 22:05, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could Sven, Si, or someone mock up a dab? It can go under the #REDIRECT text. I do think we're headed that direction, but I still don't know what that dab would look like. And we still have the incoming links to clean up as well. --BDD (talk) 19:25, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Relisting comment: This is largely a cosmetic relist to superficially decrease the backlog. Further comments are still appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 19:17, 28 May 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.

Template:WPFK[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. Number 57 11:05, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As below, another redirect to a redirect by Jax 0677. — Scott • talk 18:47, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, it's silly of Jax to create double redirects, but I don't think it makes much sense to discuss them as such. I assume the RfD tag will prevent bots from fixing them. Why not just fix them and discuss accordingly? --BDD (talk) 20:03, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • speedy keep until the discussion about these sorts of redirects concludes. Thryduulf (talk) 20:13, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete FK is a country code for the Falkland Islands, which has its own taskforce. -- 65.94.77.36 (talk) 20:36, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • FK has many possible meanings and there is no reason why a country code should automatically have precedence, and you have not given any reasons why this country code should get precedence over any other use. Thryduulf (talk) 11:08, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • FK is not a recognized abbreviation for funk, so is a novel creation. As there are uses for recognized uses for FK having wikipedia content, the use of this for funk is inappropriate in all cases. -- 65.94.77.36 (talk) 04:38, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - See my response at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_14#Template:Wprg. Also, "FK has many possible meanings and there is no reason why a country code should automatically have precedence, and [no reason is given] why this country code should get precedence over any other use." --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:28, 17 April 2014 (UTC)÷[reply]
This is getting tiresome, Jax 0677. 1. There were numerous responses to the list you link to, you do not seem to have even read them let alone process the thinking. And why do you leave out the XfD's where the very same arguments (or 'arguments', see next point 2) have not prevented a deletion? 2. Several points in your linked list do not relate to this one at all. In other words, you are talking irrelevant stuff. 3. You created this one [1] right after posting that list, so you knew it was disputed. 4. Actually, you have been making a WP:POINT. That is a speedy. -DePiep (talk) 19:25, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Jax 0677 created this one to make a WP:POINT only. See my response above. Jax did not actually use (or need) this one. So any argument that it is a reasonable or useful development is not existing. Jax should not talk for other editors. -DePiep (talk) 19:25, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Whichever statements apply to this discussion are the ones to which I am referring. The discussions are getting long, so I am incorporating other discussions by reference for the sake of brevity. If one does not use the redirect themselves, it will not take up mental bandwidth. As of late, I have refrained from creating WikiProject redirects, and I plan to comply with the decision to be made at Wikipedia_talk:Shortcut#Template_shortcuts. Also, there is no proof that I am violating WP:POINT. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:37, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So I am let to find it out myself what you mean to say, & why you do so? Thanks. Yes RfD has this drawback of repetition, but at least you could be sincere in argumentation. For me, this is not a serious reply at all. -DePiep (talk) 21:26, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 16:28, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete FK isn't a common abbreviation for funk, so this isn't intuitive. There's no Template:WikiProject Funk, so the existence of an abbreviation for it adds to the confusion. No prejudice against repurposing for the Falkland Islands work group. --BDD (talk) 16:29, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Relisting comment: This is largely a cosmetic relist to superficially decrease the backlog. Further comments are still appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 19:13, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete too many meanings for FK, including Falkland Islands. Frietjes (talk) 20:35, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. "What the FK???" Steel1943 (talk) 00:14, 30 May 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.

Template:WPCL[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. Number 57 11:04, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another Jax 0677 redirect (see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 April 14). WP:CL is the shortcut for Wikipedia:WikiProject Constructed languages. That project may be moribund, but it doesn't change the fact that they got the initials. — Scott • talk 18:30, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy keep until the ongoing discussion at WT:SHORTCUT concludes. This nomination is disruptive to that discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 18:37, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Take your accusations of bad faith somewhere else. — Scott • talk 18:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • That I find that these nominations are disruptive to an ongoing discussion is a simple factual statement, and this is an appropriate place to make such observations. Thryduulf (talk) 20:15, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That may be bad discussing practice (though I disagree), but there is no bad faith in there. -DePiep (talk) 19:44, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I clarify: The bad faith accusation does not belong here. No bad faith in the nomination. -DePiep (talk) 19:46, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete CL is a country code for Chile, which has its own {{WikiProject Chile}} -- 65.94.77.36 (talk) 20:33, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • If you think that country codes should be respected in redirect titles, you'll need to raise that opinion at the WT:SHORTCUT discussion, as it's not an accepted practice at present. P.S. Are you the person who was editing from 70.50.*? — Scott • talk 21:01, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, I hadn't noticed my IP jumping to the 65... range from the 70... range. At any rate, this deletion opinion is based on being a misleading redirect, which is an accepted deletion criterion, because CL and WP are accepted abbreviations either (A) worldwide [CL] or (B) on wikipedia [WP]; "CL" is not an accepted abbreviation for classical music worldwide. -- 65.94.77.36 (talk) 05:14, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • "CL" is also an internationally accepted abbreviation/code for "chlorine", "Shilluk language", "Lufthansa CityLine", "Centilitre" and other uses, why should the country code automatically take precedence? Thryduulf (talk) 11:12, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • There's no WikiProject Centilitre and unlikely to be one. There is no wikiproject for Shilluk or CityLine or Chlorine. But you've just stated my case as to why this is misleading. -- 65.94.77.36 (talk) 04:34, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - See my response at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_April_14#Template:Wprg. Also, CL "has many possible meanings and there is no reason why a country code should automatically have precedence, and [no reason is given] why this country code should get precedence over any other use." --Jax 0677 (talk) 04:32, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why "strong"? Did you actually read your own linked points, since not all seem relevant (mildly put). And where are your consequences of replies to those points? -DePiep (talk) 19:50, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Created as a WP:POINT, right after stating that point in an RfD discussion by Jax. -DePiep (talk) 19:50, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Whichever statements apply to this discussion are the ones to which I am referring. The discussions are getting long, so I am incorporating other discussions by reference for the sake of brevity. If one does not use the redirect themselves, it will not take up mental bandwidth. As of late, I have refrained from creating WikiProject redirects, and I plan to comply with the decision to be made at Wikipedia_talk:Shortcut#Template_shortcuts. Also, there is no proof that I am violating WP:POINT. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:41, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 16:55, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not do nothing - Either this redirect should be deleted, or WP:CL should be retargeted. The status quo is unacceptable; shortucts should agree with each other. --NYKevin 19:10, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reply - @NYKevin:, to where should {{WPCL}} be retargeted? --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:04, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Jax 0677: I have not suggested retargeting {{WPCL}}, so I'm rather confused by this question. I did suggest retargeting WP:CL, but that's an entirely different thing. --NYKevin 01:44, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Confusing inasmuch as it doesn't match WP:CL. CL doesn't commonly refer to classical music, so it's not intuitive either. --BDD (talk) 18:02, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Relisting comment: This is largely a cosmetic relist to superficially decrease the backlog. Further comments are still appreciated.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 19:12, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete, too many meanings for CL, including Chile. Frietjes (talk) 20:36, 28 May 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.

Denise Lee Richards (previously Sheen)[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) 16:29, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very unlikely search term for this actress. Yes, she was previously married to Charlie Sheen, but her surname was never changed to "Sheen"; also, due to Charlie's last name being in parentheses (appearing as some sort of disambiguator) makes this an even less likely search term. (On a related note, I just created the redirect Denise Lee Richards since it did not exist.) Lastly, since the actress's last name was never publicly Sheen, this redirect could pose as some sort of BLP violation/issue. Steel1943 (talk) 17:52, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, per the nominator's final point. It is indeed a bona fide BLP-issue. Joefromrandb (talk) 09:59, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom/impossible search target. Nate • (chatter) 01:29, 1 June 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.

Reading rainbow dude[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. This is a long-standing redirect, over 5 years old, and such redirects are only deleted if they are in some way harmful. WP:RFD#HARMFUL states "Therefore consider the deletion only of either really harmful redirects or of very recent ones.". No policy-compliant reason for deletion has been advanced nor is there any suggestion of harm. This phrase is not in any way offensive and is a potentially useful search term. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 19:01, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this. Anyone could just look up the Reading Rainbow article to find the information. 2001:470:1F15:1A45:0:0:0:6 (talk) 17:03, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Question:Is Burton known as the "Reading Rainbow dude"? The nominator has not provided a policy-based reason to delete, but WP:BLP may come into play, as this could be considered mildly offensive. If this is a genuine nickname, then the redirect is both harmless and useful. Joefromrandb (talk) 09:54, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep Informal, but not offensive. "reading rainbow dude" -wikipedia shows a few thousand results that always seem to refer to Burton. A bit like The pope's wheels in that while it might not be an especially likely search term, it's unambiguous. --BDD (talk) 16:34, 4 June 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.

Patriarch of Smyrna[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) 16:31, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There never was a "Patriarch of Smyrna", and the sole page that erroneously linked to this has been corrected. Constantine ✍ 08:51, 28 May 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.

Ferroviário de Luanda Basketball[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) 16:30, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Non-recently created typo redirect. Mark Schierbecker (talk) 05:52, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Seems perfectly plausible to me. Joefromrandb (talk) 09:55, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. As far as I can see, there is no typo in this redirect; there's a disambiguator that's not a disambiguator in the redirect, but that's all. Perfectly plausible. Steel1943 (talk) 11:34, 29 May 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_May_28&oldid=1138579792"