Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 December 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 24[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 24, 2015.

Biggity[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) 16:10, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Biggity does not refer to size, nor is it mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia. There's an entry at wikt:biggity, but I don't think the redirect gets enough hits to merit soft redirecting there. Absent any better ideas, I think this should be deleted. -- Tavix (talk) 19:56, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 17:49, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - refers to a conceited person; conceit is an extreme expression of self-esteem but it's a long stretch to redirect this there, and besides it's not mentioned there (even conceit appears only once in a very brief mention). Better off without it. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:01, 25 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.

Discolor[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) 16:32, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I propose retargeting this to color as a more plausible target. Discoloration is not mentioned at the current target. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 18:08, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: I have added Discoloration to this nomination. For the redirect "Discoloration", the fact that it currently targets Bleach seems like a WP:XY issue: bleach can cause discoloration, but discoloration isn't caused exclusively by bleach. Steel1943 (talk) 19:40, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm not sure if Color is the best retargeting option for these redirects. These redirects could also refer to the subject at Stain. Steel1943 (talk) 19:45, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
After giving this some thought ... my opinion is either: delete as vague and/or per WP:REDLINK, or soft retarget to wikt:discolor and wikt:discoloration respectively. I don't have a strong opinion either way on my options, but redirecting the redirects to Color possibly as an {{R from antonym}} I oppose since the term isn't exclusive as an antonym of "color", nor is it actually usually used as an antonym but rather refers to other subjects. Steel1943 (talk) 19:50, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Also, I oppose converting either redirect into a disambiguation page since the only possible outcome of the page's creation would be a list of WP:DICDEFs with blue links: we have Wiktionary for that. Steel1943 (talk) 19:56, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I created the Discoloration redirect on December 18, 2013, in response to this edit earlier that day by Jarble, which added the hatnote to Bleach: "Discoloration" redirects here. For discoloration of paper, see Foxing.
That hatnote survived until September 10, 2014. The first attack by a one-time drive-by IP was quickly reverted, but the second attack by a different one-time drive-by IP stuck, until I just reverted it.
Ask yourself the question, "what causes discoloration?" A question you would expect an encyclopedia to answer for you. Most would respond, I know the answer, of course bleach does that. Hence the logic for making bleach the primary topic. Now show them an old book that looks like this and ask them to look up the answer to what causes that. I had never heard the term before myself. Retargeting to color would be stupid; as a reader I would feel like the Wikipedia editors were, well, neither option I'm thinking of reflects well on them. Discolor should redirect to the same place; I have no idea why it should go to Penicillium echinulatum either. The creator of that redirect hasn't edited since November 2011. Wbm1058 (talk) 22:52, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
diseases can do it to skin, dye to hair... Legacypac (talk) 06:08, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Right, OK, I have no strong objection to deleting it. Anyone searching for paper discoloration should search on paper discoloration, a redirect I just created, as I'll likely not remember the term foxing a month from now. And we could also add fabric discoloration, skin discoloration, wood discoloration, but I won't even suggest a dab for this as I know how well partial title matches go over on disambiguation pages. Wbm1058 (talk) 14:11, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, if a band ever decided to name themselves Discoloration, we would be rushing to create an article on the topic, so we could shuttle the band off to Discoloration (band), because no relatively unknown band can occupy the primary topic of a common everyday English word – just as we created the silly stub Brand-new so that the band could be shuttled off to Brand New (band). Wbm1058 (talk) 14:24, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Follow-up comment: I am fine deleting both "discolor" and "discoloration" to create redlinks. I think that redirecting to "bleach" would be more misleading than helpful. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 17:56, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - in addition to the other rationales presented, these are spelled wrong. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:13, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Now you nailed it, definitely spelled discolour. Legacypac (talk) 19:06, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's perfectly fine American spelling. But we all know you Canadians and Brits add a "u" between the "o" and the "r". Wbm1058 (talk) 18:31, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I see, that redirect was created July 5, 2008‎, so could explain why Jarble added the hatnote two years ago. – Wbm1058 (talk) 19:46, 25 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.

Aaron Goldstein (rabbi)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 January 5#Aaron Goldstein (rabbi)

Koreakrieg[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) 16:02, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Wp:FORRED. Germany didn't participate in the Korean War at all. Norway and Sweden did send medical units, but I don't think that really makes Norwegian and Swedish "related languages" for Wp:FORRED purposes. At risk of breaking Wp:OTHERCRAPDOESNTEXIST, I'll note that we don't even have Korean-language redirects to this page for any of the names listed in the lede at ko:한국 전쟁 (e.g. 한국 전쟁, 조국 전쟁, 6·25 전쟁). 210.6.254.106 (talk) 09:21, 24 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.

NFFNSNC[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 as patent nonsense (Wp:CSD#G1) by User:Bencherlite. (non-admin closure) 210.6.254.106 (talk) 09:36, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No idea where Neelix got this from. Legacypac (talk) 07:11, 24 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.

Yamulka[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) sst✈ 05:02, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

|Misspelled alternative name. Legacypac (talk) 07:08, 24 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.

Jarmulka[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. Deryck C. 00:09, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not an alternative name for the target, but a possible Polish origin word. Legacypac (talk) 07:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Some older English sources borrowed the Polish transliteration "jarmulka" before the Yiddish transliteration "yarmulke" became the commonly accepted spelling (see, e.g. this and this). I think this redirect is still useful for people that come across the word "jarmulka" in older sources. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 17:32, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Notecardforfree. J and Y aren't nearly as interchangeable in English as in other Germanic languages, but this seems like a plausible transliteration from Yiddish. And I think it would work as intended, precisely because this is an odd form. Say someone finds it in an older source. They wonder what it is, search for it, and get "Oh, ok, it's an alternative form." I'm often wary of letting redirects speak for themselves like that, but this probably isn't common enough to bother explaining it at the article. --BDD (talk) 15:46, 31 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.

Angelic speech[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 January 5#Angelic speech

The lifting of the veil[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 January 4#The lifting of the veil

A sowing of seeds[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 January 4#A sowing of seeds

Donald Alfred[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) 15:40, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

stupid first+middle redirect by Neelix. Maybe G6 housekeeping? Legacypac (talk) 06:23, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete multiple people in Wikipedia with this first and middle name, none of whom are actually referred to solely as Donald Alfred; partial match not suitable for disambiguation nor anthroponymy page. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 09:48, 24 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.

ACFRB[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 January 4#ACFRB

SAEMF[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 deleted by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Needless redirect - and the target is useless too. Legacypac (talk) 06:12, 24 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.

CHHSW[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 deleted by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Neelix made up acronym Legacypac (talk) 06:11, 24 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.

FSACEC[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 deleted by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Made up by Neelix Legacypac (talk) 06:06, 24 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.

ACCHS[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 by nominator. (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 23:51, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense Neelix creation with no basis. Sorry there are a lot of these abbreviation redirects Legacypac (talk) 06:04, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The article itself refers to its subject as ACCHS, which indicates that other people are probably calling it that too. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 20:52, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw I must have nom'd the wrong bowl of alphabet soup here while sorting through dozens of them. Legacypac (talk) 21:39, 24 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.

LSNSW[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 January 5#LSNSW

ATSUSC[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 deleted by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's ATS - not what Neelix decided it should be. Legacypac (talk) 06:02, 24 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.

JMCHS[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 deleted by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

the don't seem to use this, going by Judge Memorial for short. No reason to keep all these invented abbreviations as redirects. Legacypac (talk) 06:00, 24 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.

WRBSR[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 deleted by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another case of Neelix turning the article or group name into initials. The org goes by WRB. Legacypac (talk) 05:58, 24 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.

ABQL[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. (The Neelix injunction is only valid if deletion is unopposed.) Deryck C. 00:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be made up by Neelix Legacypac (talk) 05:56, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Logical initialism, absent other uses. --BDD (talk) 16:26, 3 January 2016 (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.

ABXA[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) 15:31, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Neelix invented this one too. They go by ABX or ABX Air, dropping the ir would be silly. Not an official tag either. Legacypac (talk) 05:54, 24 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.

DBSICS[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. (The Neelix injunction is only valid if deletion is unopposed.) Deryck C. 00:07, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

School goes by ICS for short, not this Neelix creation of a redirect Legacypac (talk) 05:51, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Logical initialism for the school, absent other uses. --BDD (talk) 16:26, 3 January 2016 (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.

CWNFHT[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 deleted by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

given this team operates in Spanish, this is a very unlikely abbreviation of their name bu Neelix., but one of dozens of abbreviation redirects in a row. Legacypac (talk) 05:50, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete user-invented acronym based on Wikipedia conventional title which isn't an official name. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 09:38, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
could be Canada, China, or Czech just as easily - pretty dumb. Legacypac (talk) 21:33, 24 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.

WMWHS[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 deleted by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No use of WMWHS at target or on the school's website. They call it Williams for short. Neelix was on an abbreviation redirect spree abbreviating article title after article title. Legacypac (talk) 05:48, 24 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.

TABOP[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 deleted by Materialscientist (talk · contribs). (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence this term refers to the book Legacypac (talk) 05:38, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom as unlikely synonym. No evidence of reliable sources using this acronym. If this were a disambiguation, the target would fail MOS:DABACRO. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 09:41, 24 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.

CCGE[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. Materialscientist (talk) 00:35, 26 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not a valid abbreviation used by the organization. Let's look at the target too as it is unsourced and misnamed until I just moved it. Legacypac (talk) 05:26, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep given that their website used to be ccge.org (which still 302s to their new website cangeoeducation.ca), it would be reasonable to assume they actually used the acronym at some point in the past before their name change, and a Google Books search confirms that [1]. There's another usage of this acronym, Cold Cathode Gauge Experiment, mentioned at Apollo Lunar Surface Experiments Package, but I think a hatnote should suffice for that, no need for a full disambiguation page unless there's more topics using this acronym. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 09:32, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per 210.6. Likely former official acronym. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 16:52, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw based on IP210's findings. Legacypac (talk) 21:31, 24 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.

School-assessed coursework[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 January 3#School-assessed coursework

Natural-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 keep. (non-admin closure) sst✈ 05:06, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

not hyphenated terms, not useful in search as the search engines just ignore these. Still working on the Neelix list Legacypac (talk) 05:04, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - plausible misspelling if this is typed as a naked URL which would require an underscore; hyphen is just a shift error. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:15, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Ivanvector. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 19:56, 25 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.

"File:" namespace redirects with wiki markup[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) 14:55, 31 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion - "File:" namespace redirects with wiki markup[edit]

These redirects are redirects in the "File:" namespace that have at least one instance of consecutive apostrophes in their titles. Consecutive apostrophes has the potential to create wiki markup issues if the title is linked. At the present time, due to the technical issues associated with such titles, creating titles with consecutive apostrophes is restricted by the title creation blacklist. For similar RFD discussions for reference, please see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 November 20#Several redirects that have wiki markup in their titles and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 May 4#Some redirects containing wiki markup. (Also, at the time of me posting this, I have confirmed that none of the redirects nominated here are transcluded/have file links in any pages.) Steel1943 (talk) 04:44, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per the previous discussion; I believe we agreed that WP:G8 applies to these. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:15, 25 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_24&oldid=1037882353"