Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 3
May 5 >

May 4[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 4, 2014.

List of Pokémon (0)[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. Since everyone who expressed an opinion supports deletion, the redirect has been listed for over two weeks, and the backlog continues, I'm doing an IAR/WP:INVOLVED close. --BDD (talk) 16:42, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term created as a fork of MissingNo. You wouldn't believe how much cruft there is in Pokémon redirects. Or maybe you would. BDD (talk) 22:17, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment there was that great WP:POKEMON deletion drive years ago -- 65.94.171.206 (talk) 04:30, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to MissingNo. or Delete: There is nontrivial history, but it doesn't appear to have been used elsewhere in Wikipedia, so no copyright concerns. Missingno makes more sense as a target, but I could also see deleting it outright. --NYKevin 02:47, 27 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) 17:55, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to MissingNo. well the article does mention that it appears at the "Pokémon index as number 000". --Lenticel (talk) 08:35, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That would be logical for a redirect like Pokémon 0, but this one pretty clearly suggests a list, and there is no such list. --BDD (talk) 17:49, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good point, I'm okay with Delete if consensus dictates it.--Lenticel (talk) 08:59, 16 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.

Cult of the Helix[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. --BDD (talk) 17:50, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable at all. Pelliesh (talk) 18:38, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete - Not discussed by name in the target, but related information is present there, and it could be explicitly named with minimal editing. Notability is irrelevant to redirects. --NYKevin 19:22, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Take to Wikipedia:WikiProject Pokémon, per BDD yesterday with French-language redirects to Pokémon. We have a lot of Pokémon redirects coming up lately and [[User:BDD is going to take them as a batch to see what their opinion is. Si Trew (talk) 19:49, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • How is this even a discussion, oh my god!? This was a troll article set up during the Twitch Plays Pokémon phenomenon, just redirect it to there. Bureaucracy at its absolute worst joke level here. Andre666 (talk) 20:24, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Mark Arsten doesn't seem like the type to make a "troll article," though I see he's on an indefinite break. Also, it's already redirecting to Twitch Plays Pokémon; does that mean you want it to be kept? --BDD (talk) 22:40, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - This is a meme associated with Twitch Plays Pokémon. While the actual words "Cult of the Helix" isn't in the Twitch Plays Pokémon article, the meme is described there (the part in the "viewership and reception" section that talks about the Helix Fossil). Since the subject of the redirect is described at the target article, the redirect seems useful. Calathan (talk) 15:04, 25 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) 17:54, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep since it is indeed described within the target article. However, can a more pokemon-savvy editor insert the phrase within the article? I think non-pokemon players can understand it better that way. --Lenticel (talk) 08:39, 6 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.

National Award[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) 17:51, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to a broader title, or turn into its own disambiguation page. Surely there are national awards for areas other than film. bd2412 T 00:23, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

  • Delete. For once I hit the jackpot. Searching (with Wikipedia's search engine) for "List of state awards" brings up in this order:

...[etc cetera ad nauseaum] Error: {{Lang}}: text has italic markup (help). There seems to be a pattern here with these lists and I am disappointed to see Elizabeth II doesn't even make the Top 10, coming in at No 13 with List of honours of the British Crown awarded to heads of state and royals.

Now these seem to follow a pattern presumably dictated by WikiProject:Monarchy or some such, but that is what comes up on my search. We could put in a list of lists but that is what the search engine is already doing. Hence, we have comprensive lists of awards for almost every country and this redirect should be considered harmful. Admittedly, these are lists of awards to the heads of state and royals rather than by them to hoi polloi, but I agree with BD2412 that national awards tend to be broader than just the flicks. I put in state awards not national awards, I will try that next but don't want to flood RfD with needlessly multiplied examples. Si Trew (talk) 13:12, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. A WP search (not external search) for "List of national awards" brings up, in the top ten:
...et cetera ad nauseaum ad infinitum. There does seem more a preponderance of film awards in the "national" results than in the "state" results, but by no means is one country's national film awards particularly predominant – if anything, the Indian subcontinent seems to have the edge in the search results (but I haven't been counting the stats).
It would seem to me, then, there is no primary topic for National Award (and no {{R from alternate capitalization}} at National award, thankfully). There's no point in creating a DAB for what the search engine copes with perfectly well. For those reasons, it should be Deleted to let the search engine deal with it. Si Trew (talk) 13:29, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Si Trew's findings.--Lenticel (talk) 08:54, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - per Si Trew. This name is not unique to the target; in fact someone who types in "National Award" is very unlikely to be looking for this particular target. And no other target suggests itself. --MelanieN (talk) 21:30, 5 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_4&oldid=1138579807"