Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 19[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 19, 2016.

Greed is good[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 2#Greed is good

Unknown Prime Minister[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 to delete, defaulting to keep While there was one "delete" vote, I see no strong argument in favour of that option, and stronger arguments to keep, thus, I'm closing it this way. (non-admin closure) - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:03, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:R#PLA maybe? This redirect is dubious. --Nevé–selbert 01:45, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The term is commonly associated with Law, not least because it's the title of Blake's biography of him. The phrase appears in the introduction and it's unsurprising that the redirect leads here. Timrollpickering 02:05, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I am aware of that, that's why I think The Unknown Prime Minister would be a better title for the redirect to be moved to. I'm just thinking about whether someone might want to link Unknown Prime Minister as a placeholder for an obscure/future prime minister of any nation in a list or whatnot. Maybe that's just pedantry on my part, I don't know.--Nevé–selbert 00:53, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, without prejudice against the recreation of a replacement redirect from the title with "The" in it (or, even better, a standalone article about the book if at all possible.) Wikipedia does not elide "The" from the title of a book, so the fact that it corresponds to a portion of a book title about him doesn't carry a lot of weight — regardless of whether this exists as a standalone article or a redirect to Law, it has to include, not exclude, the word "the". Bearcat (talk) 22:00, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It's not dubious, the target discusses why he's known as the Unknown Prime Minister. I also don't think the 'the' matters. Sure, The Unknown Prime Minister should be created, but I don't think that affects this redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 22:32, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tavix. If an article about the book is written it should be at The Unknown Prime Minister, and we can discuss at that point whether this title should point to the prime minster, the book or a dab page. If there are other prime ministers who are or become referred to in this fashion then when they have articles that note this we can discuss whether this title should be a dab or at hatnote should be added to one or the other. Until one or both of these actually happen though, this redirect should continue to point where it currently does. Thryduulf (talk) 10:29, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 21:11, 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.

Squiff[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 disambiguate. Feel free to add to it if there are more. -- Tavix (talk) 16:42, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rather vague. --Nevé–selbert 01:45, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • It's mentioned at target but Asquith isn't the only person to have had that nickname. The search results do a decent job of listing the people who have, so it's best to delete unless a disambiguation page is created. – Uanfala (talk) 11:38, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. A dab page listing all people who've had the nickname might be reasonable. But it's not so strongly associated with Asquith to the exclusion of other "Squiffs" that he should have locked down ownership of a straight redirect from it. Bearcat (talk) 22:02, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig per Bearcat and Uanfala's first sentence. Search results are not guaranteed, are not shown in all situations and cannot be presented with any context so dab pages are far better for situations like this. Thryduulf (talk) 10:32, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 21:00, 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.

Electric light bulb[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/Retarget. WP:SNOWCLOSE Srleffler (talk) 06:27, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These should I think all point to the same target. My preference is for Electric light which lists the various different types of bulbs rather than directing people to only one of the five types listed (incandescent, fluorescent, LED, carbon arc and discharge). Note Electric lightbulb, Electric Light Bulb and Electric Lightbulb are all redlinks at present, but they might be worth creating as redirects when to the same outcome as this discussion decides on for the extant ones. Thryduulf (talk) 19:35, 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.

💡[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 2#💡

Correlation diagram[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 3#Correlation diagram

Gongchantang[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. -- Tavix (talk) 16:36, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a valid romanization, it is either Gongchandang (accurately Gòngchǎndǎng with the tones) or Kungchantang. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:49, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This romanization is used in reliable sources, e.g. [1], [2], [3]. Thryduulf (talk) 09:05, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - If this is actually used in print, then I feel like we should just leave the redirect be. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:39, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – if there are sources that use the odd transliteration (and they don't raise any flags) then this is something readers are likely to be looking for. – Uanfala (talk) 01:59, 3 January 2017 (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.

--LINUX-.---[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 FAT filesystem and Linux#Data structures of umsdos. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 21:35, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lacks a mention at the target. Search engines (internal and google) ignore the "-- -.---" and pull up results for Linux. I'm quite puzzled by this redirect. Dropping a notice at WT:WikiProject Linux. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 08:32, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion does not apply, and R3 would have been an invalid criterium, as this is not implausible and not a typo. See [4] --Matthiaspaul (talk) 12:19, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refine to FAT filesystem and Linux#Data structures of umsdos [5] indicates this is a feature of Umsdos, which is "an alternative to the EXT2 file-system". Umsdos redirects to FAT filesystem and Linux#umsdos (I've just fixed the capitalisation of the section link). The title of this redirect is mentioned in the "Data structures of umsdos" section of the target article (with 5 sources). I make no judgement about whether it should be mentioned, but given that it currently is the redirect seems useful. Thryduulf (talk) 09:16, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Matthiaspaul has added "--LINUX-.---" as an anchor to the target page [6] at the section currently called "Data structures of umsdos", I have no preference as to whether the anchor or section title is used in the redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 12:42, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, the idea of using a logical anchor (in parallel to the longer section header) is that section headers tend to break with contents reorganizations. This requires redirects to be updated as well. Short anchors, however, can be more easily moved around with the corresponding contents and since they typically remain static they do not require the redirects to be updated.
Of course, I'm also happy with linking to the section header. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 13:03, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to FAT filesystem and Linux#Data structures of umsdos per Thryduulf.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 09:52, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep. First of all, a redirect may be perfectly valid even if the redirected term is not mentioned on the target page (although this is often the case and desirable). What is important for a redirect is to "make sense", that is, that the term logically belongs to the target. Redirecting "--LINUX-.---" to the UMSDOS topic makes sense simply because "--LINUX-.---" is a hidden filename created on the FAT volume when using UMSDOS, and a user, who happens to run into this filename and wants to know what it is, is served well, when pointed to UMSDOS, where s/he'll find the answer.
Targetting this redirect to the section "Data structures of umsdos" makes sense, but this hardly needs the overhead and stress created by an RfD. Just go for it.
Therefore Speedy keep. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 12:19, 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.

美[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 2#美

Mrs. Pippy[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) 16:35, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not SOP to have a redirect for a minor movie character. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:28, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm not sure that the notability guidelines apply to redirects; I've often seen minor characters/locations/whatever get a redirect. Mihirpmehta (talk) 09:39, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - The character doesn't seem to be even that important in the context of the movie. I don't see much worth in keeping this. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:37, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete' not discussed in one of the two films with the title, and not listed in the other film. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:23, 22 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.

Workers (Communist) Party[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 Communist Party, USA. -- Tavix (talk) 21:45, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Zero pageviews recently, WP:XY for we also have Workers' Party. There are many entities such as Worker-communist Party of Iran, Workers' Communist Party (Italy) etc. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:54, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - "Workers (Communist) Party" — Spelled exactly like that, including he parenthesis, was the official name of the organization that became the Communist Party, USA in 1929. See, for example, C.E. Ruthenberg's pamphlet, The Workers (Communist) Party: What It Stands For, Why Workers Should Join. Or, for additional illumination: The Platform of the Class Struggle: National Platform of the Workers (Communist) Party, 1928, Or, for a scholarly confirmation of what I am saying, footnote 1 in Taylor's The History of the North Carolina Communist Party. And so on. I'm sure there are scores or hundreds or thousands of similar examples to be found if one actually searches for the precise redirect phrase "Workers (Communist) Party" — with the parentheses, which, I repeat, was the exact, precise name of the group specified in its own constitution. This is not to say that there aren't organizations called the "Workers Communist Party" with no parentheses — but one and only one used that exact spelling, the American Communist Party in between its 1921-1924 "Workers Party" and 1929 "Communist Party" iterations. Carrite (talk) 09:30, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I see now that 5 minutes after my creation somebody changed my redirect to a more or less useless and nonsensical target. Bad cowboy... By all means the original redirect should be restored, in fact I'm gonna boldly do that myself right now. Carrite (talk) 09:37, 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.

Treed[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 move Treed (disambiguation) over the redirect. --BDD (talk) 21:13, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a synonym for the plant and should not redirect there. Tree planting exists, but I don't know if it is more likely. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:38, 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.

Jupiter(planet)[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) 20:52, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect disambiguator. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:34, 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.

Erde[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 Betty Skelton Erde as a(n) {{R from surname}}. -- Tavix (talk) 02:56, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not especially related to German. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:32, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate. Change into a disambiguation page as both above suggested redirects make sense.
While the topic "Earth" is not primarily related to German, I think, the topic "as is" is so much more important than an individual named Erde, that redirects at least from major languages like German are helpful. Someone might run into the term in an (historic) illustration or book.
Also, there are several more meanings not yet covered in the English Wikipedia. There is a (German) magazine called "de:Die Erde" and a village in Conthey, Switzerland named de:Erde VS.
There are also a whole lot of other meanings alongside the term "Earth", some of which may be important to "catch" also in foreign languages. For example: Someone might find a label "Erde" on an electrical device and it might save a life if the disambiguation page had an entry pointing to earthing.
--Matthiaspaul (talk) 14:01, 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.

Blue and green planet[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 2#Blue and green planet

Mr. Trump's 757[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) 00:22, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only one mention at target article, in fact, I'm surprised we don't have an article on the jet. It is also mentioned at List_of_aircraft_by_tail_number, also I believe they will be more likely to search "Donald" rather than "Mr. Trump". - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:18, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete this isn't notable. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:36, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per AngusWOOF. Also, the use of "Mr." is incorrect per MOS:HONORIFIC and makes for an unlikely search term, as the nominator stated. Daß Wölf 17:22, 22 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.

Political regime[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 Regime#Politics. -- Tavix (talk) 20:13, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if it is better to retarget to Regime as that article says the two are different. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:09, 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.

C‑SPAN[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 2#C‑SPAN

Sugar Land[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 hatnote. -- Tavix (talk) 20:03, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Sugarland (disambiguation). I think people searching for "Sugar Land" is more likely to be looking for Sugarland instead of the city. SSTflyer 03:38, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I think the re-target makes sense and I just performed it; but I guess the discussion should continue. Mihirpmehta (talk) 09:48, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • You probably shouldn't be doing that during an RFD and especially if no one else has weighed in yet. Nohomersryan (talk) 15:25, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per nomination. Thryduulf (talk) 09:52, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as is. This is the only topic on the dab page to be spelled "Sugar Land", and when I search Google for "Sugar Land" with a space, the city is primarily what pops up first. A hatnote on the city's article should be added, however. Nohomersryan (talk) 15:22, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and add a hatnote to the dab per Nohomersryan --Lenticel (talk) 01:46, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and add hatnote per users above me. Daß Wölf 17:33, 23 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.

Unpresidented[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. We'll see if this persists, but for now, there's consensus to delete. --BDD (talk) 21:12, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target, unlikely to be helpful. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 03:35, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Unprecedented as a misspelling. -- Tavix (talk) 03:48, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I made this redirect. It's a valid search term as a word mistakenly coined by Trump. Huge amounts of coverage, globally. —МандичкаYO 😜 11:54, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per [8]. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 13:15, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is a fleeting little thing that the internet briefly latched on to and is unlikely to ever be mentioned at the target, and we don't need to be making redirects for every minor bit of Trumpery. I don't support a retarget because unprecedented is a DAB page that lists nothing associated with the spelling error. Nohomersryan (talk) 15:20, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to wiktionary:unprecedented, users might look up the word. I AM THE ONE WHO EDITS (talk) 15:54, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The disambiguation at unprecedented has a link to Wiktionary. I agree users might look up the word, but what if they're looking for one of the topics listed at the disambiguation? Let's keep redirects local if we can. -- Tavix (talk) 16:06, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Unprecedented per Tavix and do not keep per consensus at a similar discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 November 29#Pretzel incident. This term will eventually become old news and fall into obscurity. Steel1943 (talk) 19:41, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and salt. (Salting need only be temporary.) Would accept retargetting to unprecedented, but seems unlikely as an accidental mispelling. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 22:46, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete/Retarget It's more likely that users searching this will be trying to find "unprecedented".LM2000 (talk) 01:54, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It should probably be its own article. Deleting such a notable term makes no sense. "'Unpresidented': Donald Trump invents the Guardian's word of the year" —МандичкаYO 😜 18:19, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Donald Trump in popular culture and add some content about this there. There isn't really a great home for this at the moment, but it would really not surprise me if we had an equivalent to the Bushism article by this time next year. Thryduulf (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and salt, WP:NEOLOGISM, and messes up searches for unprecedented. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:38, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. If wikipedia would create one article for each misspelling someone famous has made we would get to 10 million articles even before that president gets to the office; all garbage, of course.Aisteco (talk) 19:48, 21 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is a topic for Wikinews, not Wikipedia. Daß Wölf 17:48, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete  This redirect is worse than useless without explanation at the target article.  The case is a misspelling in a tweet that was corrected within a few hours.  The Guardian article appears to be a political opinion piece, "The original term seems so appropriately descriptive of Trump's behaviour, however, that it seems a shame to let it go to waste. The Guardian is therefore nominating 'unpresidented' as its own word of the year."  Unscintillating (talk) 02:50, 26 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.

The Spanish Society[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) 19:58, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

PTM, Ambiguous, it is unclear what it is meant to refer to. We have very specific articles like Spanish society after the democratic transition, Spanish Society of Vexillology. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:49, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Most google hits for the exact phrase are various non-notable student organisations at different universities in the US and UK. Thryduulf (talk) 09:55, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No good target. Daß Wölf 17:49, 22 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as potentially confusing to our readers since we only have partial title matches for potential targets. --Lenticel (talk) 02:20, 24 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.

Regne d'Espanha[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. -- Tavix (talk) 19:57, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not a valid name in any language. Correct form in Catalan is ca:Regne d'Espanya whereas in Portuguese it is pt:Reino da Espanha. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:46, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment, according to various google hits this is the official name in the Occitan language, although our article gives "Reiaume d’Espanha" as the correct form in that language. Pinging @Aussie Oc, Capsot, and Jfblanc: who seem to be the most active users who indicate a high level ability with Occitan. Thryduulf (talk) 10:05, 19 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Answer to comment. Occitan (aka Aranese) is official in Catalonia. The Aranese form is Reiaume. It is the form in the Gascon (Aranese included in it), Auvergnat, Limousin, and Provençal dialects. Languedocian and Vivaro-alpine dialects use Reialme. Regards. --— J. F. B. (me´n parlar) 20:27, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep We have at least one cite from gl:España that gives "Regne d'Espanha" as the form in Occitan: even if it's wrong, it's at least a mistaken version that has got some currency and might be linked or searched for by someone, and if it redirects anywhere on enwiki, should redirect to Spain. -- The Anome (talk) 23:09, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Anome, a plausible mistake. Daß Wölf 19:43, 30 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_19&oldid=1138580905"