Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 May 26

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 26[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 26, 2015.

Jokeware[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 June 2#Jokeware

Remote Access Trojans (RATs)[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 Remote administration software#RAT trojan horses. --BDD (talk) 13:53, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think we can redirect this to a more specific page, like Trojan horse (computing). Mr. Guye (talk) 18:50, 26 May 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.

Unwanted software[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 and refine to #Grayware. --BDD (talk) 13:48, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unwanted software is not inherently malicious. Mr. Guye (talk) 18:48, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, unless a more suitable target can be found. Unwanted software can be a broad definition of just about anything that somebody doesn't happen to want installed on their computer, such as an add on that comes with a software update, but would by no means be classed as malware. This is Paul (talk) 19:30, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete REDLINK, we should have an article on this topic, really. - TheChampionMan1234 23:10, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete to encourage article creation. The real term seems to be PUP (potentially unwanted program). It is related to spyware and computer viruses but not necessarily one of them. --Lenticel (talk) 01:00, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Malware#Grayware per SiTrew. Nice catch. --Lenticel (talk) 01:06, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Malware#Grayware per SiTrew. Seems reasonable enough. Dimadick (talk) 15:34, 29 May 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.

圣彼埃尔.德.克拉日[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. 08:20, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not related to Chinese. Gorobay (talk) 17:06, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Agreed, no reason to carry a redirect from the Chinese transcription of this. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:42, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete French-speaking Switzerland has no particular affinity for Chinese -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:00, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Deéete. WP:RFOREIGN. Si Trew (talk) 11:31, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete If this is as an alias of the village, it is an unsourced one. Dimadick (talk) 15:33, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is a French name, and redirects aren't usually created unless there's a connection between the language and the target. And the village is located in Switzerland, so there is no connection between it and Chinese. SONIC678 (Let’s hang out) 21:13, 1 June 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.

Florida Federation Of Black Republicans[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. Just Chilling (talk) 18:03, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target article. This was created as a promotional article by a local school board candidate, who also created an article on herself, back in 2006. BDD (talk) 14:35, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Wikipedia does not have a relevant article and google offers few results. If this group exists, it is probably non-notable. Dimadick (talk) 15:29, 29 May 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.

Air traffic[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 Air traffic control. --BDD (talk) 13:44, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Could refer to air traffic control, I don't think that the current target is a common usage. - TheChampionMan1234 12:19, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I've never heard of this particular Brit band, but I do know that I've sometimes just typed "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Some_article" and found that it was actually listed at "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Some_Article". I've created a few redirects that way. Perhaps the creator of this redirect did the same? Modified a good URL to a bad one, and created the redirect so that the previously bad URL now works? In any case, I'd want to either make "Air traffic" a disamb (which seems ridiculous) or put a hatnote on the "Air Traffic" article. Jm (talk | contribs) 20:48, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 13:22, 26 May 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.

Hindustan Murdabad[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 June 2#Hindustan Murdabad

Flag of the Europe[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. 08:20, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Same reason as Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_May_22#National_Anthem_of_the_Pakistan - TheChampionMan1234 02:52, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I don't see much harm being done by having this redirect exist. Why can't it be an {{R from erroneous name}}? Mr. Guye (talk) 22:22, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "the Europe" is not commonly used. Unclear use in a redirect. Dimadick (talk) 12:13, 29 May 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.

KE923[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. 08:20, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable flight that is not mentioned in target - TheChampionMan1234 02:48, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete NN flight -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 05:24, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This appears to be served also under flight number KAL923 (not sure exactly as code sharing or just different in different markets/alphabets), but that is red, as you see. Si Trew (talk) 11:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The two letter code is the IATA code and the three letter one the ICAO code for the same airline, although not all have both. - TheChampionMan1234 23:19, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can believe that, but the pages I were looking at implied it was used as a traveller-facing code, which ICAO codes usually aren't (are they?) Si Trew (talk) 11:33, 27 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No notability. Who will ever search for this term? Dimadick (talk) 12:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Searching around, we don't seem to name articles (and, by implication, redirects) by the airline code + flight number, but spell the airline name in full. I searched WP:MOS for "flight code" and "flight number", and WP:WikiProject Aviation/Style guide similarly, but there seems no guidance on this, but some famous examples (such as BA001 or BA 001 for one of the scheduled Concorde flights) one would expect to have, if we had anything. (We don't have British Airways Flight 1, for that matter.) Notable flights are usually "<full name of airline> Flight <Flight number>", so we have e.g. Korean Air Flight 85 but not KE85 nor KE 85, so this presumably would be Korean Air Flight 923, were it notable enough to exist. So, I'd add WP:RFD#D2 confusing to my reasons to delete (which was essentially WP:RFD#D10, if notability could be established). Si Trew (talk) 21:19, 31 May 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.

Das Persien[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. 08:14, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated language, and not in common usage, anyway. - TheChampionMan1234 02:45, 26 May 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.

The Telephone: Alexander Graham Bell[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. 08:14, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No plausible target can be found, and pretty implausible search term. - TheChampionMan1234 02:42, 26 May 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.

Emirados Arabes Unidos[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) 13:32, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated to these languages. - TheChampionMan1234 00:12, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Arabic speaking Arab countries with little affinity for romance languages; its colonial master was the UK not France; and was never dominated by Spain or Portugal, since it didn't exist in that era -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 05:39, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would cause WP:RFD#D2 confusion. Si Trew (talk) 21:27, 31 May 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.