Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 10[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 10, 2016.

Organisation du Traité de l'Atlantique Nord North Atlantic Treaty Organisation[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete all as unopposed. Deryck C. 14:58, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mixed language title, implausible. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:40, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Hsuean-yeh[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete all. Deryck C. 14:59, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All of these are redirects from the wrong transliteration created by Eubot. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:13, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Genzyo Sanzo[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 Genjo Sanzo, without prejudice towards any action regarding that article. --BDD (talk) 20:38, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does not seem to be a valid name, Google only returns WP mirrors. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 21:18, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Kwang-hsue[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. 14:56, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) not a German umlaut. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 21:17, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Hsuean-tsang[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. 14:56, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) incorrect diacrtic. I'll also note that there are heaps of redirects to this target so I guess they all need checking, including the non-Eubot ones. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 21:09, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Lue Fan[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. 14:55, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) Not a Germanic umlaut: Chinese. Si Trew (talk) 16:16, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Novellae[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 20#Novellae

Three Eubot Sipilae[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. -- Tavix (talk) 18:41, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not a Germanic umlaut but a letter in the Finnish alphabet. I don't think it makes sense to do the transliteration this way, especially when we have Jukka Sipila, Elis Sipila and Tauno Sipila. Tauno has a reference at the International Ski Federation, or rather doesn't because that just brings up "no results" but his name is listed there. So perhaps it is a valid transliteration, but the FIS also has strange ideas about transliteration, as we saw with one other (I forget which). Si Trew (talk) 14:51, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Paiper-mache[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, G7. -- Tavix (talk) 18:43, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. To my mind, the spelling is too far off ("Paiper") to be a {{R from misspelling}} (as which it isn't marked). Si Trew (talk) 14:34, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A few search results, but I suppose not enough to justify a redirect. I was new to Wikipedia when I created this redirect. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 20:16, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Papier machet[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 20#Papier machet

Paper machete[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. -- Tavix (talk) 16:45, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. I can't decide if this would be some kind of primitive paper cutter, or a good way to slice up a chocolate teapot. Created by User:PaperMachete way back in April 2006. Si Trew (talk) 14:28, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This was created as an article about a "not-particularly-notable band", and later turned into a redirect to "a common misspelling" by DragonflySixtyseven. Thryduulf (talk) 23:18, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as implausible misspelling --Lenticel (talk) 01:02, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. In the remarkably unlikely event that anybody tried to type this into the search box, the existing redirect from paper mache (which is a plausible misspelling) would get them where they want to go before they actually had to type the "t". Bearcat (talk) 14:26, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

New coming car tata[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. 15:00, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsensical redirect, unlikely to be used JMHamo (talk) 14:25, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with JMHamo - Delete — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parkywiki (talk • contribs) 02:49, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Paper Mache or Papier Maché[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 appears the deletion discussion from 2004 was never closed, so it got redirected instead. -- Tavix (talk) 16:54, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both. Well, really.... we already have Papier Mache, Papier maché, Papier mâché, Papier-mache, Papier-maché, Papier-mâché, Paper-mache, Paper-maché and Paper-mâché (I probably missed some variants). I don't think we need to telescope two variants into one, especially when the first doesn't have the French "â" correctly and the second, a Eubot creation from it, has managed to mache up the accent it had. Just... oh please, just delete them, before I go mad and create Papier Mache or Papier-Mâché or Papier maché or Papier mâché or Papier-mache or Papier-maché or Papier-mâché or Paper-mache or Paper-maché or Paper-mâché.

Eleven hits between them in ninety days; no namespace links, this seems to have lurked around since a snowball decision to delete (electorate of 6) in 2004. Si Trew (talk) 14:01, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

República dos Pampas[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. -- Tavix (talk) 19:06, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at at target. I couldn't find much for this on a Web search in the plural. The Portuguese article doesn't have it, nor are there any redirects on the Portuguese Wikipedia for "República do Pampa" or "República dos Pampas" (or similar). It's nearly WP:RFD#D8 as the only things I can find from search are not RS (Twitter accounts, etc). No internal links; 5 hits between them in 90 days. The redirect Pampas Republic was an article until 2it was turned into a redirect in 2007 (diff here)... we might need to consider that too. Si Trew (talk) 13:40, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I've found pt:República do Pampa, guessing from Google Translate that it's some separatist movement in Rio Grande do Sul which might still be active, and has little connection with the historic republic except they probably want to associate with it. That seems to fit in with page history of Pampas Republic. Probably better to redlink to let someone write an article about it later if it's notable, or maybe retarget it to Rio Grande do Sul (although it's not mentioned there either). Daß Wölf 23:03, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Mandrice[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 20#Mandrice

வண்ணார்பண்ணை வைத்தீஸ்வரன் கோயில்[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 tag as appropriate. Deryck C. 15:01, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non English page on English Wikipedia Dan arndt (talk) 11:11, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Were the target article not in English, there would be a case for taking it to WP:PNT or speedily deleting it (especially as there's ta:வண்ணார்பண்ணை வைத்தீஸ்வரன் கோயில், so WP:CSD#A2 "Foreign language articles that exist on another Wikimedia project" would apply). But it's in English. There's "affinity" to Tamil, and so I 've marked as {{R from other language|ta}}. The Tamil article has a proposed merge discussion here. The article could do with mentioning the Tamil name, and also the picture captions are still in Tamil, but that is just a bit of minor editing. Si Trew (talk) 11:31, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Angouleme International Comics Festival Other awards[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) 19:58, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(All Eubot). Delete all. These are all created from similar redirects with the diacritic, starting "Angoulême". None of those were section links. So, I was going to go through them and add section links (even though I find the usefulness of any of these redirects at best marginal). But now I'd need to go through twice as many, i.e. the maintenance burden described in WP:COSTLY.

In any case, Eubot didn't preserve the rcats/templates in the redirect from which it cast the shadows, so I'd still need to add back in all the {{R to section}}s on the shadows. As it stands, if any one of the redirects changes, its shadow has to follow it. I have had the headache in listing these, and some poor old admin will have the headache of closing the listing, but at least let's have that headache once rather than evermore.

See WT:CSD#Redirects created by Eubot, this iswhat User:Lenticel and User:Tazerdadog wished for a good example that could be batched up. There are similar pages/redirects for other Angoulême International Comics Festival awards, but I'm sure these are enough for now. I repeat, redirects cloned by Eubot drop the categorization templates, so any redirect created by Eubot from an existing redirect has to be laboriously checked. The only saving grace is that Eubot listed the original redirect in the edit summary. Si Trew (talk) 10:38, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Prize for Best French comics publisher[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, unopposed. -- Tavix (talk) 16:51, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

'Delete as WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target. There are prizes for best French publisher and best foreign publisher. Considering that there are 45 redirects to this target, most of the form "Angouleme International Comics Festival xxxx", and presumably there are other awards for comics besides those awarded at the Angoulême International Comics Festival, these seem like unhelpful attempts to pre-empt the search engine. They don't even R to section. Si Trew (talk) 10:28, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Guensbach[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 Gunsbach. --BDD (talk) 19:55, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) (This was back-formed from Günsbach. There is now an article for this place, at Gunsbach. Since that is presumably the way we should spell it in English, this is either a delete as WP:RFD#D8 novel or obscure synonym, or a retarget as {{R from misspelling}}. Which? No internal links, 2 hits in 90 days. No history. Si Trew (talk) 09:21, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I should translate some content from the French for that article... Si Trew (talk) 09:31, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Gunsbach. From reading the article, the region was part of the German Empire so there's some affinity to the German spelling. -- Tavix (talk) 03:37, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Gunsbach. For historical reasons it is common for place names along the French-German border to have an official name in French that is essentially a German-origin name respelled in French - e.g. Strasbourg / Straßburg, Niederrœdern / Niederrödern. In this case the French spelling is Gunsbach and the German spelling is Günsbach (which "flattens" to Guensbach). Deryck C. 15:03, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

ZoidêLhai[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. (non-admin closure) Si Trew (talk) 06:10, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I know; I nominated the second to CSD as it wasn't automatically swept away, not technically being a redirect at that time because of its listing here. All done now. Si Trew (talk) 06:10, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Malarguee Department[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. 15:06, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) Not a Germanic umlaut. Delete as WP:RFD#D8 novel or obscure synonym. J'éspere cette requeste n'est pas malarguée. Si Trew (talk) 08:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Hötorgscity[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) 19:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Non-notable shopping centre, correctly "HötorgsCity", but WP:RFD#D2 confusing as not at target. (WP:REDLINK as we could add a brief bit of content there.) I can't see that there was ever any content at the target. Translated the name literally means "Hay Square" but is better translated as "Haymarket", according to this edit of 2007; at no time has it been "Hay City". Si Trew (talk) 08:20, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I wouldn't call it non-notable; there is a great deal written about this complex within the context of the controversial modernist transformation of parts of Norrmalm. But it is adjacent to Hötorget, not identical with it, and it would be better left as a redlink for whomever would like to write an actual article. (CamelCase may be used in marketing but is not more correct in Swedish.) --Hegvald (talk) 12:35, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please see also Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_December_17#Hoetorgscity, and treat as included here' I missed it when listing. I doubt User:Hegvald would have any objection to that? OK, so perhaps it might be notablish, but as you say, that's WP:REDLINK territory as I said in the nomination. 23:11, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
  • No objection, as it should be included here. (The only comment there, by Narky Blert (talk · contribs), displays a misunderstanding of the origin of the "city" part of the name, but it is not really important.) --Hegvald (talk) 12:45, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don't know what you mean by it being "not more correct in Swedish"; I assume it is as incorrect in running text in Swedish as it is in English, and used only in marketing terms: for which it has a longer history than one might expect, and predates its use on computers by quite a margin.) 23:13, 17 December 2016 (UTC)
  • The issue of language-as-used-in-marketing as opposed to what would be expected in a reference work is probably too complicated to be discussed here. It was, after all, only mentioned in parenthesis. If Hötorgscity, or whatever the title should be, is ever recreated as a real article, the CamelCase version could be a valid redirect. --Hegvald (talk) 12:45, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Dreamfall[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) 16:49, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What to do with these two probably falls out of the discussion immediately below: they're perhaps WP:XY between the current target and the sequel, but a hatnote probably suffices. I hesitate to do so boldly while the one below is being discussed, but we can probably resolve these all fairly quickly and painlessly. This was a {{R from page move}} by admin User:Anthony Appleyard back in 2007, when the (2014) sequel didn't exist. I can't find a page move discussion for it. Si Trew (talk) 07:56, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Dreamfall: The Longest Journey (version 2)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete and keep, respectively. --BDD (talk) 16:48, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of these is linked to a section, but Dreamfall: The Longest Journey#Sequel has a {{main|Dreamfall Chapters: The Longest Journey}}. I'm not qualified to know whether this is "version 2", but perhaps we should retarget there? I've dropped a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games. Si Trew (talk) 07:41, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Remember Steve Jobs[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. -- Tavix (talk) 16:02, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:26, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Who's Steve Jobs? Si Trew (talk) 07:36, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@SimonTrew: hahaha, idk, r? - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:45, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I believe that (although, I'm not positive) Apple's official administration has an organization dedicated to Jobs' memory that's known as "Remember Steve Jobs" and "Remembering Steve Jobs". That's possibly why this was created in the first place. However, the redirect still isn't appropriate. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:25, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This was created by user:Remember Steve Jobs as a copy (or trivially adjusted copy*) of the infobox and "Illness and death" section of the main Steve Jobs article as it appeared at the time* for no obvious reason. It was redirected to the current target, that was reverted, reinstated, blanked and then reinstated. There was nothing to merge back that wasn't already there, so there are no attribution issues. If there is an organisation or memorial with this name that has coverage anywhere on Wikipedia in future (there doesn't seem to be any I can find currently) then the title can be recreated to point to that content, but targetting Steve Jobs' article in general doesn't assist anyone looking for that. *I haven't identified a specific revision with identical wording, but edits were being made to he article at a rate of 2 per minute so there are many possible ones and tracking the individual one down doesn't seem a worthwhile use of time. Thryduulf (talk) 02:20, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, I wonder if this was created as an attempted sandbox? Not that this makes any difference, but it would be a way to avoid what must have been repeated edit conflicts. Thryduulf (talk) 02:23, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Watilla[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) 16:47, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RFD#D2, confusing, not at target. This is some kind of one-of-a-kind of species I guess, as the character is Wonkers the Watilla, but I guess we need to WP:REDLINK it. As just "Watilla" I'm not sure it's even {{R from character}} (it's not marked as such).I had to manually add the tag to the page because WP gave me an "invalid token" for the creator, User:Rainynight65. There's certainly plenty of RS for this but we don't have any content about it. Si Trew (talk) 07:19, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Tsistekeriia'kón:ke[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 20#Tsistekeriia'kón:ke

T'ang hsuean-tsung[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) 16:46, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect transliteration created by Eubot. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:56, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. In general with the Chinese-language ones I'm one of (I hope) the silent majority that will have these Chinese-language ones deleted with no fuss. It's not apathy not to comment. Si Trew (talk) 06:02, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Paakkoenen[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) 16:41, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Well, it had to happen. This is a nonsense Eubot redirect created from a nonsense Neelix redirect ("Paakkönen"), that was deleted nearly a year ago. Delete; unfortunately this can't go WP:X1. There may be others on this pattern. Si Trew (talk) 05:55, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need to say there's no links, or no stats, either: people can look them up for themselves. It just shows I've done a bit of basic checking. Si Trew (talk) 06:03, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've added the others from the other discussion for completeness. -- Tavix (talk) 20:01, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all the ones that treat the letters ä and ö inconsistently; weak delete the remaining five (Kaeaeriaeinen, Seppo Kaeaeriaeinen, Jasper Paeaekkoenen, Seppo Paeaekkoenen and Paeaekkoenen). I'm not a big fan of those five, and none of them are getting any hits to speak of, but at least they're consistent and not completely implausible. If the other Finnish ä->ae and ö->oe redirects currently at RfD are eventually kept, then those five (and only those five) should also be kept; really, they should be bundled together with stuff like Kuolemajaervi and Tuomarinkylae, not with Neelix-based nonsense. Sideways713 (talk) 19:05, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Feng Yuehsiang[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) 16:40, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) Incorrect transliteration "yue" is a different syllable altogether from "yü", which is also often transliterated without the diacritic. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:43, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Accadians[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 Acadian (disambiguation). --BDD (talk) 16:36, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure. The singular (which could be an adjective) and the plural go to different places. I've tagged both as {{R from incorrect spelling}} without prejudice. It might be better to retarget them to Acadian (disambiguation), or even to create a DAB at Accadian (perhaps I should make a draft). We don't have Accadian people but Acadian people → Acadians, as does Acadian. Si Trew (talk) 05:15, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Accadian language[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 20#Accadian language

Guillermo Dávila (Album Self-Titled)[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) 16:23, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as WP:RFD#D8, novel or obscure synonym. The target is not an album, Self-Titled or otherwise. It could be a {{R from work}} to section "Discography", I suppose, but the disambiguator "(Album Self-Titled)" is rather odd to start with. The non-diacritics one is a Eubot doppelganger. Si Trew (talk) 04:28, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've already refined others to Guillermo Dávila#Discography as {{R from work}}{{R to section}} and will leave a WP:RSECT courtesy note. Just these two are redundant bordering on WP:RFD#D2 confusing when we already have Guillermo Dávila (album) and Guillermo Davila (album). It's confusing to have a disambiguator that does not, in fact, disambiguate: it suggests some difference between the eponymous album and another album of that name which does not, in fact, exist. Of course there are large swathes of exceptions such as for {{R from more specific geographic name}} but I'd argue they are no more disambiguators than {{R from full name}}: on the other hand this is just a {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}} if it is anything: it's never going to point to anything but an album by (or I suppose relating to) Guillermo Dávila. But nobody actually searches or links this way (precisely 1 hit each in 90 days; no internal links), so these are just WP:COSTLY. Si Trew (talk) 04:42, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Vaeinoe Raitio[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, unopposed. -- Tavix (talk) 17:00, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) Delete er WP:RFD#D8, novel or obscure term. Finnish alphabet, not Germanic umlaut. Si Trew (talk) 04:18, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Alūksnes Apriņķis[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) 16:22, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as WP:RFD#D8, mix of Latvian and ?Kurdish ("Apriņķis"), the place is in Latvia, not particularly Kurdish. We don't have Apriņķis. I guess it might be spelled this way in some Slavic langauges, but Gtrans detects as Kurdish: the Latvian for "district" is "rajons". Si Trew (talk) 04:14, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Apriņķis is an old Latvian term for the German administrative unit Kreis, and was used in administration vocabulary prior to 1949, when a change was made to the Soviet term rajons. Alūksnes apriņķis [lv] existed briefly from 1946–49, and its article on English Wikipedia is not written, yet. For reference: Latvijas apriņķi. Talk/♥фĩłдωəß♥\Work 10:40, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks User:Philaweb: I don't know if this makes sense or not, then. The term is not used at the target. Si Trew (talk) 13:18, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Sip Kin-ping[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) 16:20, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a Korean romanization. A quick google shows many machine translated articles. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:31, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Seems to be an alternate (maybe incorrect?) romanization of Korean that gets use in the wild and so will be encountered making it a useful search term. Thryduulf (talk) 21:52, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 04:09, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm torn on this one. There are several CJKV variants that pronounce 習 as "sip" (eg. Hakka), 近 as "kin" (eg. Taiwanese), 平 as "ping" (eg. Cantonese), but I can't find any that have exactly this pronunciation for the 3 characters except the romanization of Korean that Thryduulf seems to be talking about. Leaning towards delete as I'd argue modern Korean alone isn't sufficient topic affinity. Deryck C. 22:33, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • I may as well pick a side. Delete. Deryck C. 22:58, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Vorstandsvorsitzender[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 Vorstand. Good find, Tavix. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:15, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not particularly related to German. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 06:54, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Rejectwater:, what User:Champion means is that the target is not particularly related to the foreign language or to German culture, and consensus is often to delete foreign-language terms without a strong relation: see WP:RFOREIGN. Si Trew (talk) 20:41, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I think the nom is saying the article is not related to the German word i.e. that it's only about CEOs in English-speaking firms. I disagree. I think the article is intended to be about CEOs of firms worldwide. Where a firm is German speaking, they will call the role a Vorstandsvorsitzender, so I think the redirect is appropriate. However, it may be that the article itself should state what the equivalent term is in other major languages or, alternatively, the languages of countries that are major international economic players i.e. the foreign language equivalents of CEO that we are most likely to encounter. --Bermicourt (talk) 20:44, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, WP:NOTDIC, and not a translation dictionary. The article has an Interwiki link to de:Chief Executive Officer, so perhaps that is less than helpful in this case. Si Trew (talk) 22:33, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:RFOREIGN. While I understand Bermicourt's argument, it does not generalise. If someone encounters Vorstandsvorsitzender it is almost certainly going to be in a German-language context and so they can either use a translation dictionary (which Wikipedia is not, unlike Wiktionary) to find the English term or look it up in the German Wikipedia. Including foreign language redirects in the English Wikipedia makes it more difficult for speakers of those languages to find encyclopaedic content in their own language. Accordingly, we restrict such redirects here to those which are likely to be encountered by English speakers looking for English language content about the subject the redirect relates to. In practice this means subjects with strong ties to a specific language such as the native or original names of people, places and products. Thryduulf (talk) 22:04, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
As I note above, the DE:WP Interwiki link for this is an article at de:Chief Executive Officer. That's perhaps less than helpful to an English audience looking for a translation, but I am not sure what we can do about that from the EN:WP point of view. de:Vorstandsvorsitzender has no IW links at all, so I'm suspecting this is a case where the Wikidata requirement for a 1:1 correspondence of IW links (more accurately, that they must all form a closed set) is less than ideal. Si Trew (talk) 22:33, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 04:08, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Shiists[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 Shiist and Shiists. Delete the rest. -- Tavix (talk) 16:38, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

N*****-esque redirects. You know, I'm tempted to open an SPI due to the redirects because of the striking similarity with the redirects at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_November_26#Muslimites, but it seems like the user isn't active anymore. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 02:29, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 04:07, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Shi?a Islam[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. --BDD (talk) 16:18, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) Implausible typo. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 02:25, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. The proper transliteration is Shīʿa(h) and the ayin sign in the middle may display as a question mark on systems without good support for diacritics. Is this by itself enough to keep? I guess this is a case that had better be discussed in a more general context. However, what slightly tips the balance for me is the visual similarity to the question mark: less so for the diacritic /ʿ/ but more so for the IPA symbol /ʕ/. – Uanfala (talk) 14:41, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 04:06, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Template:Namco's X series[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) 16:17, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Template moved to a new location per company name change. If this was a main space redirect I would recommend keep as it is a plausible redirect. That is not a consideration for template space. All transclusions of the template have been updated for the new template location. This redirect can safely be deleted as unnecessary. Safiel (talk) 00:42, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I second the notion that Safiel has provided. All the pages that have used the Namco X series navigation box have been edited so that they now have the Bandai Namco X series navigational box instead. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 08:57, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a former name of the template for several years. I can see the redirect getting use via external links and histories of the articles where the template is used. -- Tavix (talk) 21:45, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 04:05, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Being a former name is no reason for deletion. Second, the inevitability of company mergers makes the former names historical. George Ho (talk) 09:41, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - both this and the newly named template, honestly. There is no such series, the company has just done a number of cross-over titles over the years. It's not recognized as an actual series. Sergecross73 msg me 16:10, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Ironically, despite me changing the name of the navigational box, I second the notion of deleting both of them. I've given it some thought, and I've personally concluded that, if it goes against Wikipedia's guidelines of what constitutes as a series then it may as well be deleted, after all, there's alternate navigational boxes that link the Bandai Namco X games. Iftekharahmed96 (talk) 10:09, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Dellbuntu[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, unopposed. -- Tavix (talk) 16:59, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There is a mention in the "further reading" section, but can't see why this is helpful. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 03:41, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Casino books[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. -- Tavix (talk) 15:57, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have such a list, the closest I could find was Black Book (gambling). - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 03:34, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Or Bookmaking, I guess. Delete as WP:XY, too vague. Si Trew (talk) 03:48, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Thomac Hanks[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) 16:16, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a seismologist that was instrumental in the development of the moment magnitude scale:

I don't know how this came to be (the "c" is close to the "s" on they keyboard) but I don't think it is necessary. Dawnseeker2000 03:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't get many hits, but got five on 4 October (out of eleven in ninety days); no internal links. Perhaps it was an email name or just a typo because of his middle initial. I'd normally say delete but considering it's been around since 2007 it might be better to retarget it as {{R from incorrect spelling}} to Thomas C. Hanks. Si Trew (talk) 03:53, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I think those few hits are probably just that someone found it and showed their friends a few times, saying "look at this craziness – they don't know what they're doing..." All kidding aside, I actually think that the hits aren't really where we should be looking. What struck me are the activities of the creator. They amassed a total of 523 edits over the course of six months back in 2007. The namespace that the bulk of the edits are in? User and talk, as in his user and his talk. Take a look. With all respect, it appears that he didn't really know what to do with himself around here, and that's why I think we have what we have. Can we please just get rid of this apparent mistake? Our image will not suffer with it gone. Dawnseeker2000 01:15, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not a plausible error. -- Tavix (talk) 15:54, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Mao Tse-Tounge[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) 16:14, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Does not appear to be a valid romanization. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 02:29, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Unknown Prime Minister[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 19#Unknown Prime Minister

Squiff[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 19#Squiff

Xuantong (宣統) (era name)[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. -- Tavix (talk) 15:55, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mixed language and mixed script, unlikely. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:26, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Liberal Toryism[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) 16:13, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Prime Minister Liverpool wasn't the only advocate of Liberal Toryism. --Nevé–selbert 01:21, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as WP:REDLINK. We haven't Liberal Tory, Tory Liberal or Tory Liberalism (these may mean different things to different people, of course). The redirect is not to a section, but beyond a mention in scare quotes in the introduction (and the title of the first entry of the Further Reading section), nothing more is said about it at the target. Si Trew (talk) 03:13, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • oppose I made the original redirect--I think there should be a full standard atrticle. the term is challenged by some but actively used by most scholars. 1) Lee, George Canning and Liberal Toryism, 1801-1827; online review says "Lee makes several arguments that are reasonably compelling. The first is that by the 1820s, 'liberal Toryism' was a concept that meant something. More than anything else it meant “piecemeal reform of obvious abuses as an antidote to calls for organic restructuring of the constitution” see review 2) Snow, Lord Eldon and Liberal Toryism, 1822-1827 3) Kebbell long ago wrote : "Toryism began to run in two distinct channels, the one representing the original and more liberal Toryism of Pitt himself, the other the narrower creed, which was favoured...."; 4) BUT Evans warns, "the phrase 'Liberal Toryism' should be used with care. It is seductive, but misleading, to see the suicide of Castlereagh and the resignations of Sidmouth and Vansittart in 1822–23 as initiating a new, more enlightened form of Tory government." 5) "Liberal Toryism' The phrase 'Liberal Toryism' has been used by historians such as W.R. Brock and Barry Gordon to describe Liverpool's administration between 1822 and 1827." 6) "The phrase 'liberal Toryism' is an inappropriate, incorrect and unhelpful description of Liverpool's administration"; 7) "Brock coined the term 'Liberal Tory' in his 1941 book Lord Liverpool and Liberal Toryism to apply to those Tories on the left of the party The leading Liberal Tories were supposedly Canning, Huskisson, Robinson and Peel." 8) it's used in standard histories such as 17 times in Hilton A Mad, Bad, and Dangerous People?: England 1783-1846 (2006). Rjensen (talk) 02:01, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nobody is stopping you or anyone else making the article, that is what WP:REDLINK encourages, as does the second sentence of the Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Header. Si Trew (talk) 09:55, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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/2016_December_10&oldid=1051102236"