Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 October 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 18[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 18, 2014.

Jalan Asahan[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) 20:30, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Name of some randon, non-notable road which is nowhere near the target, see [1] - TheChampionMan1234 23:17, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is the road being referred to. I don't know how notable it is, but a stub formerly existed, and it's signed as M125 (a state highway?). This is probably enough to restore the article and bring it to AFD. --NE2 01:54, 19 October 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.

St. Mary's School, Kuching[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) 20:29, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is linked at St. Mary's School, so its better to be a redlink. - TheChampionMan1234 23:00, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per Champ. Not at target. There are no other internal links (except for those relating to this discussion), so I wonder why it was created in the first place. It was turned from an (extremely short ) stub, with a comment for padding to avoid listing at short pages, with this edit, citing non-notablity per WP:SCHOOL; it should probably have been deleted instead, but wasn't.
I'm not a great fan of redlinks as headwords in DABs, though, and am inclined to delete its entry altogether (nothing to DAB). I'll try to have a look with DABsolver at fixing some other links to that DAB. Si Trew (talk) 09:41, 20 October 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.

Kuching North[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 to Kuching#Local authority and city definition (non-admin closure). The arguments accompanying the "keep" !votes are actually in favour of NE2's retarget argument, unless I have interpreted incorrectly, in which case please revert. Ivanvector (talk) 23:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No plausible target can be found. - TheChampionMan1234 22:57, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose and possibly change to point at Kuching#Local authority and city definition, which explains these two phrases. --NE2 01:40, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per NE2, the nomination is wrong, it already has the plausible target targetted. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 21:26, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, refined as an R to section per NE2. Si Trew (talk) 09:27, 20 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - discussed at target. No argument has been presented for deletion. WilyD 09:08, 22 October 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.

Gate Panic! (video game)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 10#Gate Panic! (video game)

I Am Bread[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. The issue presented in the nomination has been resolved. Steel1943 (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The subject of the redirect's title is not mentioned in the target article; thus, the association is not clear. Steel1943 (talk) 18:18, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • ... it would have taken less time to actually check the connection than it would have to send this to RfD. Anyway, it's there and sourced now. czar ♔ 18:44, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't admit that I had the time to search the web for a source when I nominated this redirect as I was looking at the new pages feed. Anyways, I'll withdraw this. Steel1943 (talk) 20:59, 18 October 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.

␣[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 to Whitespace character. --BDD (talk) 16:28, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not a space � (talk) 18:15, 18 October 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.

Android L[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)} NickGibson3900 Talk 01:36, 23 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As now Google has already confirmed that the next version of Android will be codenamed as Android Lollipop. So why there will be article of Android L, it was a working title not permanent. Moreover it may create a confusion among people that Android L is original name of the OS version, Google search also shows this article when searched as "android l". Lastly, there is no article named "Android K" or "Android J", so why there will be "Android L"?  HPD   talk  17:41, 18 October 2014 (UTC)  HPD   talk  17:41, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep an {{R from former name}} which is actually discussed at the target page (so anyone who reads the article will be cured of whatever misconceptions they may have about the name "Android L") and which does not seem to refer to any other notable topic. 61.10.165.33 (talk) 18:48, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: "Android L" has been around long enough to become notable, and Android Lollipop article is there to describe naming history of the actual Android release. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 21:13, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep {{R from previous name}} -- viable search term, valid former name -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 01:31, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Invalid reason for deletion. ViperSnake151  Talk  05:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - sends readers to what they're looking for. WilyD 09:09, 22 October 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.

Enrique Peña[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) 16:29, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Currently redirects to Enrique Peña Sánchez. My proposal is to redirect it instead to Enrique Peña Nieto's page. This seems more like a WP:TWODAB situation, and Peña Nieto seems to be the primary topic here. Note that "Enrique Peña Nieto" is the common name for him, so if you think to ask a move from "Enrique Peña Nieto" to simply "Enrique Peña", it would require a RM discussion. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 11:58, 18 October 2014 (UTC) © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 11:58, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Nieto per proposer as WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. According to stats, Peña Nieto gets 500–2500hits/day, Peña Sánchez gets 4–10.
Minor points that may influence consensus:
  1. Enrique Nieto (architect) (15–20 hits/day), is hatnoted at Enrique Peña Nieto but there is also (I would say unnecessarily) a DAB at Enrique Nieto with only those two mentioned, which seems over-egging the pudding. The DAB gets 4–10 hits/day. I could reason that we should follow that precedent, then, and make Enrique Peña also a DAB, but I argue that would just over-egg a second pudding.
  2. Peña Nieto has {{Spanish name}} but Peña Sánchez doesn't. Not sure if he should, is this name form used by Cubans?
Anyway, those can easily be fixed when we have consensus on the main point. Si Trew (talk) 09:22, 20 October 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.

Virginia State Route 638[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 17#Virginia State Route 638

Oakey Creek[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 dabify. --BDD (talk) 14:40, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Watercourse with broader pastoral significance that's been randomly redirected to a town. The town article contains nothing of use on the watercourse, and there is no way someone looking for information on Oakey Creek (which I was) would think "this helps me in any way" by getting redirected to an article on a town somewhere along it. The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:58, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Change to Disambiguation page. Because virtually every creek east of the Great Divide is lined with creek oaks, Queensland is full of Oakey Creeks and Oaky Creeks. The one at Oakey isn't special. The only Oakey Creek that is broadly notable in Queensland, and the only one that could generally referred to as "Oaky Creek" and understood outside the local area, would be the coal mine at Middlemount. Even that isn't exactly famous but at least people living more than 50km might understand that as "the" Oaky Creek. So this redirect needs to be changed to a dimanbiguation page for the dozens of Oakey/Oaky creeks in the country.Mark Marathon (talk) 03:54, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabbify or convert to set index per Mark -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 04:33, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
RfD shorthand for "convert to disambiguation page". --BDD (talk) 14:40, 12 December 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.

Myall Creek[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 to Myall Creek massacre, with a hatnote. While there are only two usages, it's best to avoid a dab if practical. --BDD (talk) 14:28, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a watercourse that's been completely randomly redirected to a town. I would normally associate the name Myall Creek with the Myall Creek Massacre, which wasn't even in the same state, but with a random redirect to a town in Queensland I'm not even sure if it's the same creek. Either way, it needs its own article or disambiguation page and shouldn't have an incredibly unhelpful redirect. The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:54, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think we need disambiguation rather than redirect. There are two Myall Creeks (possibly more for all I know). Myall Creek is the former name of the town of Dalby and the creek that flows through that town. If you live in SE Queensland, that's probably what Myall Creek means to you. It's also a creek in NSW at which there was a massacre. I don't think it's worth arguing over which is "primary", let's just disambiguate. Kerry (talk) 04:03, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabbify or convert to set index per Mark -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 04:34, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It doesn't become a disambiguation page until the two articles exist, and right now the number is zero. Since Myall Creek is a former name for the town, this redirect is going to exactly the right place. On a side note, are creeks considered notable in Australia, since they most aren't elsewhere. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 05:07, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment does "creek" have a greater significance in Australia than elsewhere? dictionary.com lists the meaning for it as Aus, NZ and US (wiktionary.org also includes Canada) as being "a stream of water smaller than a river"; and that is the sense that I would use it in British English, although both those dictionaries specifically exclude Br. Eng. from that definition but say in Br. Eng. it is used to mean a bay or estuary, impling "brook" would be the right word in the Br. Eng. I dunno, I've used both in the UK. Si Trew (talk) 06:54, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • It isn't widely known as an old name for Dalby, whereas the Myall Creek massacre is taught in schools nowadays. I'm not sure how you arrive at the conclusion that that's the "right place". The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:33, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Myall Creek massacre. It's not mentioned that Myall Creek is a former name for Dalby, Queensland (in that article). Si Trew (talk) 06:54, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I still don't feel like this is very helpful, because the context I found this in was about the actual watercourse Dalby used to be named after, and there's clearly some notability there as well. At the bare minimum it should be a disambiguation between Myall Creek Massacre and Dalby. The Drover's Wife (talk) 11:33, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think it is a WP:SURPRISE to redirect it to Dalby, Queensland when there is no mention of that being its name at that target. I am not sure it is better to DABify it with an entry, for the same reason: sure, the DAB entry could be "Until 1854, the name of Dalby, Queensland, Australia" or some such wording, but it would still be better if it is mentioned at target. I could be bold and do that now, but I'd probably better not until we have consensus. If "Myall Creek" is the former name, it is better I think to add the info saying so and then R it Dalby, and then hatnote there to the massacre, rather than have a DAB with two entries. Si Trew (talk) 12:06, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment IIRC, there is some consensus for creating set index articles even when none or only one of the individual entries have articles. The best-developed examples can probably be found in Category:Set indices on Greek mythology. For the life of me I can't remember where this was discussed for placenames, but there's some examples in Category:Lists of places sharing the same name, e.g. Cherkaske and Fabrichny. I'm inclined to think that this would be a better solution than the current target. 61.10.165.33 (talk) 13:12, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: In Australia, creek is the term used for watercourses smaller than a river, but some creeks are actually significant watercourses, while some of our rivers are actually unimpressive. Because of our drought/flood cycle, our watercourses can vary quite a lot and so the title Creek or River may depend on whether they were named during a flood or a drought. The Myall Creek that flows through Dalby Qld is around 70km long (by my rough measurement). It drains an area of 1375 square kilometres. It is listed in the Queensland Globe (which is the Qld Govt authoritative resource on Qld geography) as a "major watercourse". It might not have an article yet, but it's certainly not a "brook". The town name changed from Myall Creek to Dalby in 1854 according to this 1936 newspaper article which is consistent with the Dalby article that mentions the renaming of the post office at that time. Kerry (talk) 21:47, 18 October 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.

List of cities in Somaliland[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. JohnCD (talk) 16:00, 28 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:REDLINK While the target does indeed cover cities in the Somaliland region, there is no article restricted to Somaliland. - TheChampionMan1234 02:37, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This is an obviously incorrect redirect that would be better off as a redlink. The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:56, 18 October 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.

Tadsch Mahal[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 17#Tadsch Mahal

Plowback retained earnings[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 10#Plowback retained earnings

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2014_October_18&oldid=1138579852"