Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 10[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 10, 2015.

Saarland Protectorate[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 no consensus, default to keep. Deryck C. 14:14, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of the redirect page Saarland Protectorate. The name "Saarland Protectorate" is a pointless name as it not only combines the names of two incarnations of the region (the contemporary German Saarland state, and the historical French Saar Protectorate) which could potentially cause confusion, but it also contributes nothing to Wikipedia and is a waste of a page. The term "Saarland Protectorate" is a completely inaccurate term that has never been used anywhere in the world or at any point in history. The redirect was only created in June and is hardly useful to Wikipedia as there were never any pages that linked to it. Nick Mitchell 98 (talk) 11:45, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom and lack of page views. Rubbish computer 12:49, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - plausible search term, that's sending readers to what they're looking for. Expecting readers to know exactly how names changed whilst doing our best to hide that information is inconsistent (and dickish to the readers). WilyD 12:51, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@WilyD: I would argue that it's not "dickish", it's a perfectly valid question: How do we know that's what readers are looking for? Could they be looking for Saarland instead? -- Tavix (talk) 22:04, 21 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think you can argue it isn't dickish to deliberately take a step to make the encyclopaedia harder to use with no upside. It's perhaps possible a small minority of readers will be looking for Saar (League of Nations) or Saarland, but I think it's quite unlikely, and both are linked right at the top for the lost reader anyways - much more convenient to get where they're going than an extended middle finger. It's much more natural to me, anyhow, to blend Saar Protectorate and Saarland when searching for the protectorate that used to be in what's now Saarland than quasi-randomly assign protectorate to the current state. Protectorate is very deliberate, while trying to remember whether the land called Saarland was called Saar or Saarland many decades ago is a lot more hit of miss-y. WilyD 09:17, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WilyD, as I appreciate and agree with his explanation (minus the "dickish" part, which I wholeheartedly disagree with). It should be tagged with {{R from incorrect name}} though. -- Tavix (talk) 13:52, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 14:15, 23 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete WP:XY - TheChampionMan1234 03:03, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep {{R from incorrect name}} it is the same area. At one time it was a protectorate, then it wasn't. This is a reasonable search term. With "Protectorate" they would only be looking for the protectorate era, so there is no WP:XY here. -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 05:36, 24 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per IP. Since "Saarland" is the contemporary name, I see this as a likely search term for the period of that place's history when it was a protectorate. {{R from incorrect name}}, certainly. --BDD (talk) 17:02, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Godsy(TALKCONT) 22:40, 10 October 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.

Anatidaephobia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 18#Anatidaephobia

Fatal1ty[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 discussion below has established that all notable uses of the name "Fatal1ty" are derived from Johnathan Wendel, gamertag "Fatal1ty". Other possibile targets have been suggested, but weighing up the possible options against policy, Wendel's biography page is the best target for this title. Deryck C. 12:36, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No indication that this product is primarily used for this individual. It is also associated with Creative Technology Limited which has a product of the same name. Redirect is inappropriate. The Dissident Aggressor 15:59, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Rubbish computer 16:10, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Fatal1ty as a brand has been licensed to different companies to manufacture gaming products. Another example of a company releasing products under the Fatal1ty branding is ASRock. Since many companies have released products under this name, the primary topic is still Johnathan Wendel. sst✈ 17:12, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Fatality (disambiguation) where prominent uses of "Fatal1ty" can be listed -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 18:20, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why? Surely nobody searching for Fatality is going to mistype "Fatal1ty". Si Trew (talk) 10:10, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"Fatal1ty" is an 1337 spelling of "Fatality" like other leet-speak, thus is a viable alternate (l33t) spelling for that term. And I don't see the need for a separate disambiguation page for Elite spellings vs regular ones. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 04:00, 14 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, obviously that is his gamer tag therefore a necessary redirect. This is common sense. Valoem talk contrib 22:17, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why not redirect to Creative Technology Limited which has a product line with the name? The Dissident Aggressor 18:12, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as {{R from nickname}}, with which I have rtagged without prejudice to this discussion (at the moment that is itself an R to {{R from alternative name}}, but is more future-proof in case we divide these categories farther in the future – else why have it?) Si Trew (talk) 10:05, 13 October 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.

Redirects to Wii[edit]

Consensus is to split this discussion. sst✈ 16:53, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Implausible redirects. There may be more inappropriate redirects to the Wii article. sst✈ 15:40, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo revulution[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 18#Nintendo revulution

Nintendo Revolution (Fall 2006)[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. Deryck C. 12:43, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:35, 10 October 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.

Nintendo 2006[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. Deryck C. 12:43, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:XY - a combination of the company that makes the console and the year it was released. Seems unambiguous with the potential to be helpful at first glance, but this could equally refer to the Nintendo DS Lite, looking only at Nintendo game consoles.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 19:19, 11 October 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.

Wii, Page 1[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 both. Deryck C. 12:40, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I don't think this redirect is actually helpful. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:42, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:R#D5.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 04:21, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, this one is real weird. I would've thought that someone decided to split the Wii article in two at one point in time, but I don't see any evidence of that. -- Tavix (talk) 19:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Delete: At one time, there was a split between Wii pages, and somehow, the original Wii, Page 2 got deleted. I recreated it as a redirect. However, all this was years ago. Seeing how the redirect is almost a decade old for a forgotten issue, go ahead and kill it. TheListUpdater (talk) 03:09, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, to gate it, we haven't Wii, Page 0 nor Wii, Page 3. We haven't Wii Page 1 nor Wii Page 2. WP:RFD#D2 confusing since neither "Page 1" nor "Page 2" is mentioned at the target. Si Trew (talk) 10:14, 13 October 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.

Wiintendo[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 18#Wiintendo

Nintendo Revo[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. Deryck C. 12:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:35, 10 October 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.

Ninty Wii[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. Deryck C. 12:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:35, 10 October 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.

Ninty Revolution[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. Deryck C. 12:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Implausible slang term, especially because the Wii isn't commonly known as the "Revolution" -- Tavix (talk) 19:54, 11 October 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.

Nindendo Revolution[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 18#Nindendo Revolution

Nitendo Wii[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) 15:35, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Keep {{R from typo}} -- typo by omission of an "n" -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 18:24, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep, which I thought was surprising. It got 47 hits last month and that shows that it's in use. -- Tavix (talk) 14:05, 17 October 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.

Wiitis[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 Exergaming#Injury. --BDD (talk) 15:34, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:34, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite. It is mentioned twice independently in the literature, and the other mentions are all references to those two articles. Si Trew (talk) 10:20, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Exergaming#Injury, as it is mentioned there.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 18:21, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget, not just mentioned, but RS mentioned, with the references given above by 211.30. As far as I can see, the medical literature has this twice from separate independent sources, the other medical references themselves quote those two papers, as is common practice. Well referenced at WP, and that is just fine for us. Nice find. Si Trew (talk) 10:20, 13 October 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.

Wiihabilitation[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 17#Wiihabilitation

Wiihab[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 Exergaming. --BDD (talk) 15:30, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:34, 10 October 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 nintendo we[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) 15:26, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:34, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep {{R from incorrect name}} it's a lowercase redirect to a product produced by Nintendo and pronounced the same as "we"; and frequently stated as "The Nintendo Wii" using the "The" -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 18:23, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep per my rationale at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 10#The nintendo wee. To reiterate 70.51.44.60: "we" is pronounced the same as "Wii".—Godsy(TALKCONT) 03:28, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as above and below. Presumably when it was named it was intended to indicate inclusion ("we") rather than explusion ("wee" in the sense of urine) but I imagine it did not get past the admen that such a use would be put of it in both senses, schoolboy sniggers increasing sales. Yet oddly that does not seem to have happened, in that we don't get third-rate comedians (and all schoolboys are third-rate comedians) making puns on "wee" very much, at least not that I have seen or heard. Si Trew (talk) 10:25, 13 October 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 nintendo wee[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) 15:25, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:34, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep {{R from incorrect name}} it's a lowercase redirect to a product produced by Nintendo and pronounced the same as "wee"; and frequently stated as "The Nintendo Wii" using the "The" -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 18:23, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep as it is unambiguous. Weak because three errors are present (WP:RTYPO): "nintendo" should be capitalized, "wee" should be capitalized, and "wee" is misspelled. Lower case form of the redirect, only 1 misspelling if you boil it down.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 03:25, 11 October 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 wee[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) 15:24, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:33, 10 October 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.

Thee nintendo wii[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) 15:22, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:33, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Well "nintendo wii" is correct disregarding capitalization, "Thee" is implausible and archaic.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 19:49, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless we suddenly get a large number of Shakespeare buffs looking up the system I don't see anyone using thee to look this up.--67.68.29.107 (talk) 05:54, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as WP:R5 nonsense, it is not even grammatical. Thee is second person singular pronoun in familiar form (depending on your dialect, it may be a formal form) so it would mean "You nintendo wii". The "th" there in "thee" is what became "ye (pronoun)", the "thou" becaome "you (pronoun)", as the thorn (letter) transmogrified into a Y, well before Shakespeare but around the time of the introduction of the printing press, roughly thirteenth to fifteenth centuries – and mainly because of that, since printers hadn't the thorn in their font (typeface)s so used the nearest thing, the letter "Y". By Shakespeare's time thorn had entirely disappeared. A pity we did not adopt theta (letter) at that time, but presumably for the same reason, that Greek letters would not be in a printer's font case. "Thee", "thou" and "thy" still are used daily in some Yorkshire dialects. Modern Standard English i.e. Southern British English is very sadly lacking in second person pronouns, we don't have y'all or yous for example which are bloody handy. Si Trew (talk) 10:32, 13 October 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.
  • Si, completely off-topic, but I suspect many printers in Shakespeare's day would indeed have Greek letters in their font case. Study of New Testament Greek was still quite common then, so someone had to be printing that out. --BDD (talk) 15:24, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo weii[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) 15:17, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:33, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep {{R from typo}} lowercase redirect with a single letter addition "e". The "E" key is located next to the "W" key, making a two-key-press plausible with QWERTY keyboards, such as found in most of the English-speaking world. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 18:43, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Not only is it a plausible typo, but the words are pronounced the same anyways. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:44, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but this is pushing it a bit. How would it be pronounced in Japanese? As three syllables Wey ee ee? Our East Asian language expert @Lenticel: might know, but I am assuming this was invented for English speakers not Japanese. Si Trew (talk) 10:44, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I'm just an ordinary editor Si Trew :D. I think there are better East Asian language experts here. Anyways, ウィー seems to be a long wi so I guess it's not unlike the western pronunciation of the gadget. "Weii" is just weird. I guess it would sound like we plus two "i" so it probably sounds like a long "way". --Lenticel (talk) 11:01, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Take the compliment when you get it, they are few and far between :) My Japanese is very rusty but I can remember the sound system but not so good on the kana any more (and Heaven knows how I would even attempt to type it, I guess I would install something on top of a Hungarian or Belgian keyboard, which would be fun...) I was just going on that it would form separate syllables.
Not weird, but weiird. :) Si Trew (talk) 11:06, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep This is probably a plausible misspelling due to a keyboard issue per 70. --Lenticel (talk) 11:01, 13 October 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.

Nentendo we[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) 15:16, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:33, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Two misspellings, one improper capitalization. Separate they'd be plausible, together they're not. WP:RTYPO.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 03:50, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete due to spelling issues --Lenticel (talk) 00:27, 12 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Too far, as said above. Si Trew (talk) 10:45, 13 October 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.

Nintendo wi[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 as {{R from typo}} per WP:SNOWBALL. I've mark as such. (non-admin closure) by Si Trew (talk) 10:50, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:33, 10 October 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.

Nentendo wii[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) 15:15, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:33, 10 October 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.

Wiiitis[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 Exergaming#Injury. --BDD (talk) 15:14, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:33, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Exergaming#Injury, as it is mentioned there.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 17:55, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Exergaming#Injury. I added a comment above but it seems to have disappeared. It is mentioned twice originally and independently in the medical literature, all the other references both via Scholar and a more-general search refer to these two papers (as is the norm to quote one's sources). A lexicographer would certainly take these as RS in the absence of others, but WP does better with the proposed retarget as we have an RS for its use in the popular press as well (albeit that comes essentially from the medical journal, but where do you think the press gets its stories from, thin air? Well... OK...). @Godsy: Nice find. Si Trew (talk) 10:57, 13 October 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.

Mindgames'd[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) 15:12, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:33, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is not specifically about the Wii, and Mindgamesed is red (and ugly). Mindgamed, Mind gamed and Mind-gamed, less ugly, are also red. Si Trew (talk)

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.

Wii launch games[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 18#Wii launch games

Instant Messenger (!!M)[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. (It seems that we haven't pointed out that "!!M" is "Wii" upside-down. I think this title refers to some [third-party?] instant messenger service on Wii; either way from the discussion below, the correct thing is to delete the redirect for now until "!!M" becomes notable. Then we can write about it and point the redirect to the page.) Deryck C. 17:03, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect sst✈ 15:32, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The parens would indicate this is a disambiguation from that, but if so, we should have Instant Messenger (Wii), which is red. WP:RFD#D2 nonsense. I would have thought there was a DAB for this, but if there is, there is no hatnote at Instant messaging. (Listing Windows Messenger and so forth, and other Message services, even perhaps telephony such as pagers (beeper is a DAB at which pager is the first entry): later models had a limited text display, IIRC. Si Trew (talk) 11:53, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Odd. Both message service and message services are red. I would have thought they should go somewhere. But it is not in the ambit of RfD to create redirects. (massage service is red, too, though I think that means something else, and certainly not massage, at least, not a back massage; but then we don't have back message either as meaning, in cryptography, either a confirmation sent in plaintext or a sotto voce confirmation of receipt of cyphertext, and more generally in a synchronous communication system to mean confirmation of receipt. It appears our articles, or at least our redirects, on basic messaging terminology are sadly lacking.) Si Trew (talk) 11:57, 13 October 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.

Bat-Embargo[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. Initially I thought there could be a problem as the redirect arose from a merge, but I've checked the current Batman page and no content from the history of Bat-Embargo survives in the current edition of Batman. Deryck C. 12:47, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently a fan nickname for a licensing dispute that affected Justice League (TV series) or something. It doesn't appear notable enough to be discussed there, let alone at Batman. BDD (talk) 15:32, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Rubbish computer 16:11, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The fact is, it is not mentioned at Batman (at least, my case-insensitive search for "embargo" found nothing). Thus WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target. More weakly, WP:TITLECAPS, unless this was some title of an episode from a Bat-man comic or Bat-man show, and presumably were it so it would be thus listed, because we are not short of editors who reliably source encyclopaedic content for Marvel Comics and so on here. Fortunately, Bat Embargo, Bat embargo and Bat-embargo are red. Si Trew (talk) 12:02, 13 October 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 Batman Handbook: The Ultimate Training Manual[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. Deryck C. 12:46, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This book is used as a reference at the target article, but not discussed. BDD (talk) 15:30, 10 October 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.

Film & TV[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 moot. Redirect now points elsewhere. DrKiernan (talk) 11:17, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Directs to an article that is not the primary meaning of the term. DrKiernan (talk) 15:18, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom and per WP:REDLINK to encourage article creation. --Rubbish computer 16:12, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Is there an article on the visual medium, if so, that could be the target? -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 18:31, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The Microsoft app, Movies & TV is titled Film & TV in Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Daylen (talk) 19:14, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. "Film & TV" title is directly addressed in the target article. And I don't believe anyone would search for "film" and "TV" in the same search when he or she is looking for two articles. At least, not a person who knows how Internet in general works. Not to mention that redirects like Windows 9 have survived deletion with community consensus. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 00:18, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • "film and television" is a real world topic about the visual moving picture medium. We just don't seem to have an article on it, even though, in the world outside of Wikipedia, such a thing exists. Perhaps video, another imperfect target ? -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 02:30, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • If this is going to be kept, then my edits to the redirect should be undone so that it targets back to Movies & TV. DrKiernan (talk) 07:22, 11 October 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.

Lamb of Tishri[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. The rough consensus below is that this redirect title is so obscure that it is unlikely to help anybody navigate Wikipedia. Deryck C. 14:39, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Allegedly a title of Jesus in "one of the Bible Codes", this term does not appear at the target article and seems an unlikely search term. BDD (talk) 19:44, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as a potentially useful search term per WP:RFD#K5. --Rubbish computer 21:20, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I just did a few searches for Lamb of Tishri and all I can find (other than copies of the Wikipedia article) are this and this. Fried Gold (talk) 05:52, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep per Rubbish computer. I can't see this being harmful or confusing, unless someone is looking for a specific named sheep with some sort of connection to the month of Tishrei, which seems unlikely. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 15:15, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • When the user ends up at Jesus, but finds nothing there related to Lamb of Tishri, won't they just be frustrated? I'm just trying to understand deletion criteria; I'm not arguing with you — well, maybe a little.  ; ) Fried Gold (talk) 16:15, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      • Likely no, since in order to know to type this, they would likely already know that it's a title of Jesus. I don't think it's likely at all that someone with no knowledge of the phrase at all would happen to type it, because it doesn't seem to refer to anything else. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 16:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
        • Oh, I completely agree that someone typing Lamb of Tishri wouldn't be surprised to end up at Jesus, but my point is that – making an assumption here – they wouldn't type "Lamb of Tishri" simply to navigate to the Jesus article; they'd be doing so to find out more information about the supposed epithet itself. Fried Gold (talk) 17:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: If you already know it's Jesus, you won't use it, but just type in Jesus. If you don't know it's Jesus, the redirect is not helpful since the appellation is not mentioned or explained anywhere in the article, leading one only to wonder "Is this a farm animal or pet that Jesus had? Something He at the Last Supper? A nickname for Him? Or what?"  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  07:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete seems to be a obscure name at best. My search only brought up Wikipedia mirrors --Lenticel (talk) 03:50, 7 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 14:54, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, Not at target. Tishri is a redirect to Tishrei, which doesn't mention Jesus, being an article about the Jewish month (I'll mark that as {{R from other spelling}} if not already done.) The lede there states that it usually starts in Sep/Oct by the Gregorian (i.e. our current) calendar, but even so it is very unsure when Jesus was born, although I think the majority of biblical scholars accept that it is somewhere around the autumn, from the context of the surrounding verses etc. It is purely nominal that Jesus was born on December 25 (or 24 or January 6 according to your persuasion), and in the Christian calendar it is not a particularly important date (his death is an important date, but Easter takes place depending on the phase of the moon, as Islamic religious months and festivals do, as a moveable feast → takeaway food (nah it don't.)
As far as I can tell, this one requires a hop beyond an RfD. Jesus is the Lamb of God, for which we have an article separate from Jesus. So I start hopping....
Comment boggling WP:SURPRISE The only thing containing "tish" is in the Gallery, and arbitrary collections of pictures of galleries are discouraged at WP, and now you can see why. The only thing in the whole article containing "tish" is a picture of the coat of arms of Perth, Scotland, which contains the Scottish flag – that's where I got the "tish" from.
  • So Delete confusing WP:RFD#D2. Not the Lamb of Tishrei however spelled, as far as I can make out. Lamb of God, may or may not have been born during Tishrei (however spelled). Never referred to as Lamb of Tishrei. I'll probably have a ping at WP:CHRISTIANITY. Si Trew (talk)
Have done so. here at one of those odd concordance things using some kind of biblical arithmetic we find that he was born in Tishri, and the reference is to Leviticus 23:34. However that is computed from assuming that we know when John the Baptist was born. Anyway, that is one for the Christian (or Jewish or Muslim sleuths, he is a prophet in Islam) not for RfD. A step too far for a redirect, I think. Would make an interesting addition to the article on biblical chronology, though. But useless as a redirect. Si Trew (talk) 12:48, 13 October 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.

Role of Geography in World War I[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 restore previous target article for rework. @BDD, DGG, and SimonTrew: I note that the article was previous deleted under A10, which isn't valid anymore because the main World War I article no longer talks about cartography. So in the absence of a formal DRV, I think I'll just remove the {{TempUndelete}} and ask you guys to work on it. Deryck C. 14:31, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't addressed at the target article. An article about this topic was deleted at Role of geography in World War I, but it was deleted on A10 grounds. I'm not sure which article it was apparently duplicating, so I'm pinging the CSD tagger and deleting admin in case they have anything to add. --BDD (talk) 14:31, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete'. The role of geography is not specific to World War I, battle maps or plans of campaign tend to be drawn in every war, although on both those titles we are sadly lacking a general article about ground war or something, which I am sure exists but is hard to find cos this is blocking.

There is a great deal of difference
Between geography and biography
Geography is about maps
And biography is about chaps

— Hillaire Belloc, Biography for Beginners
Si Trew (talk) 07:13, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm I searched around and military strategy and plan of campaign and ground war all go to Irish battles. I think that is WP:UNDUE. Si Trew (talk) 07:19, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a liar, Ground war is a redirect to Ground warfare. But everything I searched came up Irish. I don't know why, it just did so I said so. [siante] Error: {{Lang}}: unrecognized language code: ir (help) Si Trew (talk) 07:21, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think the idea would be to describe how geographic features affected the course of the war. That could be a notable topic. What you're describing sounds a bit more like Role of cartography in World War I, which would be more of a stretch, but I've certainly seem stranger topics. --BDD (talk) 13:52, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I think I made a mistake here; it isn't explicitly covered, though it ought to be. I suggest an undelete and possible merge. I have undeleted for discussion. DGG ( talk ) 18:35, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, DGG. If you feel it's appropriate, I have no objection to speedily retargeting the redirects to the restored article and having it worked on, deleted, or merged through the usual channels. --BDD (talk) 19:15, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 14:52, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Undelete and Move as draft to User:SimonTrew/Cartography in World War I where I will work on it as a draft. @DGG:, @BDD: that's very noble to consider the undelete. It won't be quick work, and I will ask you again if I think it is covered by other topics and should be deleted again. Si Trew (talk) 12:59, 13 October 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.

Apple slate[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 rough consensus to retarget to Timeline of Apple Inc. products. Regardless of whether "slate" refers to the form of the device or a collection of devices, this proposed alternative is an appropriate target. Deryck C. 14:58, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not really a plausible search term, loads of other Apple divices were made form slate. Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 05:31, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect over to Timeline of Apple Inc. products as the reader will find information there that's helpful, given that he/she/they are likely looking for details about more than one product. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 06:28, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as there does not appear to be a suitable target. --Rubbish computer 18:20, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redir to the timeline article; "slate" in the technology sense can refer to tablets, or to phablets like the larger iPhones. It is very definitely a plausible search term, just like Apple laptop or Apple notebook, which really should also be redirects there. Not everyone in the world remembers the actual names of the Macintosh Portable, PowerBook, iBook, and MacBook (in chronological order). Same will be true of the smaller Apple devices.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  07:01, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apple registered iSlate as a trademark before announcing the iPad to throw off the press. See here, [1]. Not sure if this justifies a redirect, though. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:21, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • CoffeeWithMarkets and SMcCandlish, could you elaborate? "Slate" isn't mentioned at the article in any form as far as I can see. How would a redirect there be helpful? --BDD (talk) 15:18, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Presumably by adding the word. Any slate-formfactor devices should probably mention in their article that they are such. PS: Corrected typo in my earlier message: the note that Apple laptop and Apple notebook should "not" be redirs to the Apple devices timeline obviously should have read that they should redir there, for the reason I gave.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  05:23, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This may be a regionalism, but when I hear a company name or some other agency-related term attached to the word "slate" then it seems like "slate" is being used as shorthand for the phasing "a group of things offered for consideration together". One could compare with Microsoft rolling out new slate of products and School Board election draws full slate of choices. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 16:06, 9 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 14:47, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. It is common for firms to register trademarks before using them, not so much to throw off the press but so that the competition doesn't have them. Trademark law tends to mean that one has to prove the trademark is in general use, but since that can take rather long in a kinda Jarndyce and Jarndyce manner, it is then easy to use the trademark before it comes to court to show that the trademark is in use. The poet Marianne Moore was famously asked to finda name for the Ford Edsel and came up with some, let us say, interesting suggestions, all of which I believe were trademarked anyway, just in case. (As it was, the Edsel being such a disaster, there was no need.)
Apple do not own the trademark for "Slate", though. ("The colour red" is a trademark of Royal Mail, and we have Colour trademark), that is how general they can be: but a trademark can only apply in a specific field of trade, so Apple can own "slate" to refer to (I don't know what they tried to get trademark for) flat (no more than 1cm thick) slab devices of a certain size, that does not mean that nobody else can use the word "slate" or even iSlate or iPod or iPad outside of the realm of computing devices. If I came up with a recipe for beef or a one-man tent and called it an "iPod" there is nothing that Apple could do about it as there is no confusion with their trademark (assuming I did not violate copyright or attempt passing off of it being a product made by Apple, trading on their goodwill, but that would simply be fraud, deception or just possibly passing off, but unlikely to be passing off since they don't make beef pies or tents). That is the nub of it. Si Trew (talk) 13:09, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@CoffeeWithMarkets:. I think that is a regionalism, although vaguely I have heard it in Cockney. But On the slate means "on credit" to pay later, to write it on the slate rather than to pay cash, in my regionalism, especially in a pub when one hasn't any cash but the publican is sure you have the funds (this has kinda disappeared with debit cards). The verb "to slate" would mean shorthand for "to put it on the slate" i.e. I shall pay you later (of course from the days when you would literally chalk it on a slate). "Slated" I think also means drunk, but I don't know why, perhaps because a slate prefers to lie flat and horizontal. Anyway, WP:NOTDIC. Si Trew (talk) 13:16, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Mr Gypsy Rose Trew predicts we are going to have fun with the DAB at isolate and whether we should add iSlate, I see it in my WP:CRYSTALBALL... Si Trew (talk) 13:24, 13 October 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.

Masemola[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 as {{R from surname}}, without prejudice against disambiguation or article creation. Deryck C. 14:35, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Manche Masemola was a 20th century Christian martyr, apparently. According to Ga Masemola, one of a couple of related pages I am trying to clean up, Masemola was a 16th century historical figure in South Africa. My subject knowledge is zero, but these are clearly not the same people. But I do not want to remove the wikilink as Masemola should perhaps be red-linked for a future page. Elinruby (talk) 06:07, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:REDLINK to encourage creation of an article about the Masemola people [2]. Better yet, delete any {{R from given name}} or {{R from surname}} unless demonstrated that it's overwhelmingly associated with a single wildly-famous person and no other possible topic whatsoever.
Redirects from WP:PARTIALMATCHes are rarely more useful than search results, and when it comes to names from other cultures, such redirects are often actively harmful and cause mislinking: the earliest Wikipedia article about a person by that name is virtually never the most significant topic by that name. (This case isn't even that bad; at least the target has some sort of reasonable claim to long-term significance. In Japan-related topics, the "earliest article" is excruciatingly often an anime character, voice actress, porn star, or other pop-culture ephemera.)</rant> 210.6.254.106 (talk)
As for the link at Ga Masemola, I'd suggest adding a parenthetical disambiguator to prevent future mislinking, e.g. Masemola (son of Matlebjane II) or something; not quite sure what the naming conventions in this area are. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 11:53, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per anon. --Rubbish computer 14:25, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as typical {{R from surname}} ("It is used because Wikipedia has only one biographical article of a person by this surname..."). If we get other articles on topics that could be referred to as "Masemola", then it would be helpful to convert this to a disambiguation page. This may already be the case, however, if Ga Masemola is commonly referred to as "Masemola" alone. I suspect this title will eventually be about the historical figure and we'll have a Masemola (disambiguation), but for now, let's facilitate navigation to content that we already have. There's no sense in jamming readers here. --BDD (talk) 14:51, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Wikipedia has more content besides pages with this name in their title, and the redirect interferes with navigation to that content (e.g. the content about Masemola, the town of 30,000+ people in Makhuduthamaga Local Municipality). In any case, I'll suggest the easiest compromise solution: create a substub about Jafta Masemola (e.g. "Jafta Masemola (died 1990) was the founder of the military wing of the African National Congress and the longest-serving prisoner at Robben Island. [3][4]"), I'll expand it, and then we have enough to make this lemma into a dab page immediately (and we can WP:DABMENTION the town and all the other good stuff that shows up in search results but doesn't show up if you type "Masemola" into the box and hit <return> now). 210.6.254.106 (talk) 16:54, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per BDD. --Rubbish computer 16:14, 10 October 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.

Mark Miles (Oz)[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) 15:10, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect was originally at Mark Miles. Another editor did a copy-paste move of Mark Miles (priest) to Mark Miles. I cleaned up the copy-paste move and temporarily moved the old redirect to this new title, but noticed that the character Mark Miles is not mentioned in the main Oz (TV series) article nor at List of Oz (TV series) characters. I'm not sure we need this redirect. –Grondemar 05:48, 10 October 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.

Eduardo Hernandez (Days of Our Lives)[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) 15:09, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This character's name was nothing more than speculation, no confirmation was ever given that this character would have this name and, indeed, when the character debuted, his name was/is Eduardo Larson. Not only does this re-direct to a page with no entry for this character whatsoever, there isn't even (nor has there ever been) a character named Eduardo Hernandez on this show! This re-direct is just so bizarre.Cebr1979 (talk) 02:16, 10 October 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_October_10&oldid=1142655936"