Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 December 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 18[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 18, 2015.

Feroz Khan (singer)[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 as unopposed. Please propose the deletion of related redirects in a fresh RfD. Deryck C. 12:45, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This person is not mentioned at target page. Natg 19 (talk) 19:57, 18 December 2015 (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.

Counter-missionary[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 all. Deryck C. 12:48, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Although this was originally the article's title, it seems clearly suitable and misleading. Any group targeted by missionaries may have "counter-missionary" reactions, and anything opposed to missionaries could be called "anti-missionary". Unless opposition or reactions to missionaries is a topic we can address in general, these are better off red. --BDD (talk) 19:20, 18 December 2015 (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.

Cole's Law[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 and salt both as this is an unhelpful long-standing joke. Deryck C. 12:48, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Delete as a joke redirect. The coleslaw article has nothing to say about the joke. McGeddon (talk) 18:22, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 00:20, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep for the same reasons as last time. It's easier to watchlist and protect a redirect than to monitor a blank target. Rossami (talk) 00:52, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Rossami, I noticed that you made the same argument at the previous RfD discussion for "Cole's Law." What has happened in the past when this was a redlink? Did someone make a hoax article? -- Notecardforfree (talk) 01:37, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Per the deletion log, it was deleted before in November 2005 "per rfd vote," which would make it a redirect then too. Here's a diff of that discussion. -- Tavix (talk) 18:55, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nominator and Wp:R#D2 (confusing) and D8 (unlikely synonym). The previous RFD did not show particularly strong consensus either way, and anyway consensus can change. If someone re-creates it, {{db-repost}} or {{db-hoax}} it. If re-creation rises to the level of vandalism, Wp:SALT it. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 09:40, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, with 210. I'm not sure what Rossami was referring to, the redirect has been stable since 2007. It'd be more exciting to watch grass grow than this redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 18:43, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and WP:SALT both titles. Not harmless joking; this redirect is misleading since there is no discussion of it at the target. There is a senate bill in California regarding evidence gathering in child sexual predator prosecutions which may be referred to as Cole's Law, but we don't have an article about it. Beyond that, there's no general agreement on the internet about what the supposedly jocular Cole's Law has to say about coleslaw. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:05, 21 December 2015 (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.

Wikipedia:Personendatan[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. Deryck C. 12:42, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is a misspelled version of "Personendaten", the German term for persondata. With persondata deprecated, no incoming links, and three views in the past 60 days (what I'd call less than noise level), this should be deleted. BDD (talk) 16:27, 18 December 2015 (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.

Rabbi yeshua bar abba[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. Deryck C. 12:48, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I learned from the target article that some scholars believe Barabbas and Jesus to be the same person. That's fascinating, but as long as we treat Barabbas as a separate character, there's no indication that he was any sort of spiritual leader, let alone a rabbi. BDD (talk) 14:55, 18 December 2015 (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.

October, 1914[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 speedily deleted by RHaworth. --BDD (talk) 01:58, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The current target is in the draft namespace. This should redirect to October 1914. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 14:30, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I mistaken used up some of my Sandbox place as redirects so I figured I'll force a move on a redirect page to a draft page I'm working on. Not the greatest of protocols but I don't see anyone seriously affected by it. If Draft:Decemeber 1914 needs to be de-linked from October, 1914, I'm alright with that. I'm the first to admit I'm not an expert on all the functions of Wiki. Freeman1865 (talk) 14:00, 18 December 2014 (MST)

  • Retarget to October 1914 as plausible misspelling. I'm fine with a housekeeping Speedy Delete given that this was simply an error on the creator's part --Lenticel (talk) 02:42, 19 December 2015 (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/2015_December_18&oldid=1037882355"