Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 November 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 27[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 27, 2015.

North American Football League[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 December 8#North American Football League

Microsoft wireless display adapter[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) 16:59, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The title is not a trademark (lowercase title), and the only link to it is on its target article. So, delete per WP:XY since a lot of wireless adapters made by different companies are compatible with Microsoft Windows operating systems. Steel1943 (talk) 20:17, 27 November 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.

Retzol or Retzawl, Assam[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 speedy deleted, R3, by Ponyo. (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 19:38, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect that has very little or no use, created by a new editor performing mistaken moves. I cannot find a CSD category for this Fiddle Faddle 10:02, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tavix: There is not, and never has been, any redirect or any other page at Retzol or Retzawl. You must have made some mistake in copying the title of whatever redirect you had in mind. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:54, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, it's been taken care of. -- Tavix (talk) 21:26, 27 November 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.

Retzawl or Retzol[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 Speedy delete. Inappropriate redirect left as a result of page-move vandalism: Speedy deletion criteria G3 and G6. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:52, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Housekeeping after a new editor did a load of imperfect moves. Can't find the CSD category for this Fiddle Faddle 09:51, 27 November 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.

Short Road, Cambridge[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) 16:57, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target; WP:RFD#D5, nonsense: there isn't a Short Road in Cambridge (or on Wikipedia); it's Short Street. here at Google Maps.

It was only used in article Jesus Lane, which I have fixed with this edit. I can find no evidence it was ever called "Short Road". In the meantime, I'll tag as {{R from incorrect name}} and {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}: we don't have Short Road.

Declaration of interest: I lived and worked in Cambridge for many years. Si Trew (talk) 06:10, 27 November 2015 (UTC) Si Trew (talk) 06:10, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No such road. It wouldn't help to move the redirect to "Short Street" either, because although Short Street is not far from Christ's Pieces, it is not Christ's Pieces, nor relevant to Christ's Pieces, and Short Street is not mentioned in the article Christ's Pieces. (I too once lived and worked in Cambridge, but I don't think that requires a declaration of interest.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:55, 27 November 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.

Milton's Walk[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 December 8#Milton's Walk

Wash your hands[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. --BDD (talk) 16:58, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

strange redirect. Unfortunately I can't put an RFD template on it as for some reason it is protected from editing. RightGot (talk) 01:55, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. I added the usual RFD entry header here. Si Trew (talk) 05:25, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Seems harmless, Keep Johnbod (talk) 16:45, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, I don't see a problem with this. The only thing "strange" to me is the fact that it's fully protected. -- Tavix (talk) 18:41, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the deletion log: A decade ago, it was created a few times and speedy deleted (once even as a redirect), before resting as a redirect to its current target.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 01:43, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I changed it to semiprotection. It might even predate the existence of semiprotection. Semi should be sufficient for vandalism. Scott isn't around much. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 02:59, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep How is it strange already? Wash your hands is a very common term. So it's not unlikely at all that someone would search that. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 17:59, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's not a WP:NOUN, but I'll mark it as {{R from verb}}. In casting around for analogues, I found Brush your teeth, too. (But not Wash one's hands nor Brush one's teeth.) Si Trew (talk) 01:41, 29 November 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.

Third planet from the Sun[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✈(discuss) 12:04, 5 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is an odd redirect. RightGot (talk) 01:53, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry I don't see how that confusion can occur. Why would anyone search "planet" if they aren't even looking for the planet? Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 17:31, 28 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The first sentence of the article literally states that it is the third planet from the sun. So I don't see an issue. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 17:31, 28 November 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.

Peter's Two Fathers[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. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:01, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, I made this redirect a long time ago, most of the redirects I made back when I was active in 2007/2008 were pointless, and this one is no exception. This is a name of an episode, it's very unlikely that someone looking for an article of this episode would search Peter's Two Fathers. If it was an article about a character who's referred to as dad, it would make sense to have father as a redirect, but that's not even close to being the case. I don't know what I was thinking when I made this redirect. But I assure you I don't make redirects like this anymore. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 01:12, 27 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I totally forgot that I can do that if I'm the author. I guess that happens when I'm gone for so long. Blaze The Movie Fan (talk) 11:29, 27 November 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_November_27&oldid=1037882060"