Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 27[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 27, 2016.

Upper Saone[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. Thryduulf (talk) 14:42, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) Delete, mixed-language redirect. Si Trew (talk) 20:55, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. In English, the Saône is still called the Saône, and there's no reason to disallow the diacritic-less English translation per WP:DIACRITICS. This is valid {{R without diacritics}} redirect. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 03:50, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete couldn't find usage in sources, all I could find was Wikipedia mirrors. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:06, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Searching "Upper Saone" on Google Books gets a 3k+ hits, both for "Upper Saône" [1], [2], and "Upper Saone" [3][4]. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 20:31, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There are perhaps hundreds or even thousands of "mixed-language redirects", so this is not in and of itself reason to delete. It is reasonable to believe that readers would search for this term without the diacritical mark.  Paine Ellsworth  u/c 08:00, 31 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:R from legal name[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#Template:R from legal name

OEthelwald of Deira[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep (non-admin closure) – Uanfala (talk) 14:32, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) Not used in sources, which say "Othelwald" or "Oethelwarld". They don't say "OEthelwald", because, frankly, that would be WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 20:32, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Useful for those who are unfamiliar with or don't know how to type dipthongs.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 05:29, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Patar knight. Note that google (and all other general purpose search engines, to my knowelge) are case insensitive so it is not possible to say that this capitalisation is unused, only that it appears less common than "Oe" or "Œ". Thryduulf (talk) 09:53, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep since I cannot find the "Œ" key on my keyboard. Steel1943 (talk) 17:03, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - As stated above, this appears to be useful enough. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 01:48, 5 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.

Wee 3 Friends[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) 21:09, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned, at target article. --Nevé–selbert 20:13, 27 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.

Flambéed[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep (non-admin closure) – Uanfala (talk) 15:04, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both. In French it would be, er, Flambé, as indeed it is, that is already in the past tense, "flamed" strictly. You can't say "Flameded", and you can't say this. I don't see any sources using these, well, just crap ones that should know better. Just nonsense, WP:RFD#D5. Si Trew (talk) 19:48, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Flambéed and flambeed are both English words. A Google Books search for flambéed returned over 20,000 results. It's definitely not nonsense. - Eureka Lott 20:29, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is nonsense, when something has been imprpoerly burnt to impress the guests it has been "flambé". Si Trew (talk) 20:39, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're veering into WP:IDONTLIKEIT territory here. It's a valid word in several dictionaries, including the OED, and that makes it a solid {{r from verb}}. - Eureka Lott 20:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep both Wikipedia is descriptive, not prescriptive. Whether they are grammatically correct or not, they are both used in English. In fact, if you look at Google ngrams, you'll see that "flambeed" and "flambéed" are used about 40% as often as "flambé" and "flambe". As an aid to our users, common variants should be kept as redirects. --Macrakis (talk) 20:32, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's not true. Wikipedia is incredibly prescriptive, for example, the names of page titles are prescribed at WP:TITLE. It's not just a free-for-all. Z'all above are probably right on this one, but you must remember that since Wikipedia is the fifth most looked at site in the world, it can be repeated and so on as if it were a reliable source, which it is not. There's no point at google ngrams, that just says something was used smewhere once and I know what an n-gram is, it doesn't even mean it's a word, in fact it's more to do with morphology than lexicography. But never mind. Si Trew (talk) 20:39, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep  "flambéed" is listed in Merriam-Webster (mw.com).  I get 497 Google Books hits for "flambéed".  Unscintillating (talk) 03:55, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both. As a French speaker, I share Si Trew's feeling of annoyance but I agree with Macrakis' descriptive-not-prescriptive reasoning. Mihirpmehta (talk) 19:52, 28 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.

Lauluväljak[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep (non-admin closure) – Uanfala (talk) 14:28, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(NOT Eubot) No mention at target, no idea why this should redirect there. WP:RFD#D2 confusing. Si Trew (talk) 19:37, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as an entirely appropriate foreign-language redirect. It's the Estonian name for the target, is mentioned in the lead and again in the main section heading, and has been noted in every version of the article since its creation in 2007. Sideways713 (talk) 20:58, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Sideways713. It's mentioned in the very first sentence of the article. Thryduulf (talk) 09:55, 28 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.

Lauluvaeljak[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) 21:08, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) as far as I understand it, Talinn is in Estonia, not Germany. Estonian language is not Germanic. WP:RFD#D8, Delete. Si Trew (talk) 19:34, 27 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.

Maggie's 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 delete. -- Tavix (talk) 21:08, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Searching Google for "Maggie's Party" AND "Simpsons" rendered two videos on the first page for me, from YouTube and Dailymotion respectively. Having watched the two videos (they're interchangeable), I think this was a TV ad to promote some sweets that sponsored the show, rather than an except from a Simpsons episode from the 1990s. I don't watch the show too often (unfortunately), so I haven't got a clue. Maggie's Party on Simpsons Wiki, an external wiki isn't good at helping me decipher this, either. I have no idea where this should be retargeted. I should note that the redirect's edit history has been affected by numerous page moves/merges. Possible targets at {{The Simpsons}} seem rather unhelpful ("Maggie's Party" renders nothing). --Nevé–selbert 19:25, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Not seeing any standout usage in news articles or books. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:52, 29 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.

Barbara and Jenna Bush[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 11#Barbara and Jenna Bush

Stroem Vodka[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep (non-admin closure) This is the consensus that emerged after the finding that the terms is Swedish and not Finnish. – Uanfala (talk) 14:25, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) Delete as WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. That's an "ö" in the Finnish alphabet, not a Germanic umlaut. Si Trew (talk) 16:24, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Finnish is a lesser known language than German, so it could reasonably be confused. DGG ( talk ) 21:09, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete only a bot would make such confusions, there is zero usage of this term in reliable sources. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 21:14, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: "Ström" isn't Finnish. It's Swedish. --Hegvald (talk) 13:20, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Placing an "e" after the "o" is a valid alternative method of styling the name without an umlat. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 01:12, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, this is nonsense. Per Finnish orthography: The Germanic umlaut or convention of considering digraph ae equivalent to ä, and oe equivalent to ö is inapplicable in Finnish. -- Tavix (talk) 03:35, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Tavix: That could have been relevant, had the name actually been Finnish. It is not. One may still debate whether redirects like this one are needed, but I don't see them doing any harm. As I said elsewhere, redirects like this one may as well be left as harmless and potentially helpful, unless there is some particular reason to remove them. --Hegvald (talk) 12:47, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm pretty lax on these redirects. If there's any evidence of attestation, it's an automatic keep for me. That being said, I didn't see this spelling used anywhere, but I'm more than willing to reconsider if I'm wrong. -- Tavix (talk) 14:09, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'd assumed it was Finnish because the product is made in Finland, and the word is listed in Suomi Wiktionary (but only to say that it's Swedish: English will lists it too, as cognate with "stream"). I guess this is just one of those marketing ploys (like faux Cyrillic) that vodka seems particularly prone to. Si Trew (talk) 21:33, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 03:37, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:19, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well I think we should keep it (as nom). It does no harm, and has done some good thanks to User:Hegvald of trying to work out what we do with the Finnish ones (which are not Germanic) from the Swedish ones (whic hare). The consensus on Finnish ones is still far from clear, but the consensus on Swedish ones is: they are keepsies. Si Trew (talk) 19:06, 27 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.

P Day[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#P Day

GT (TV 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 retarget to GT (disambiguation)#Other media. (non-admin closure) – Uanfala (talk) 15:33, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is there potential for confusion with Dragon Ball GT here? Depending on how common this name is for either show, we could either keep as is, keep with hatnote, retarget to GT#Arts and entertainment, or delete. BDD (talk) 18:10, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • weak retarget to Dragon Ball GT or GT (disambiguation)#Other media. I'm not familiar at all with Dragon Ball GT and not very with The Grand Tour but from Google it seems that "GT" is used very frequently to refer to the first and less, but still used, for to the latter. This may though be an artefact of the anime being significantly older than the car show and so there has been a lot longer for there to be uses so whatever we decide here it will probably be worth revisiting in future when we have more data to work with. Thryduulf (talk) 18:58, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not likely to be confused with the anime, as opposed to Great Teacher Onizuka which is frequently abbreviated as GTO. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:15, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:13, 27 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.

Bibliothèque[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. This was a tough call, but I think Uanfala's argument about usage in English is sufficiently strong and supported to make this a keep rather than no consensus. Thryduulf (talk) 14:53, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not particularly related to French. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 06:58, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. We have ten different articles starting with "Bibliothèque", and this could mean any of them. Delete to aid searches, and WP:RFD#D8. Si Trew (talk) 19:49, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - libraries are not especially French any more than they're especially any language. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:42, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as it's a synonym (at least according to the OED: although the examples given there are all pretty old, it falls within "frequency band 4", so it's not particularly rare in modern usage). Also, I can't imagine any of the partial title matches being referred to simply as bibliothèque. – Uanfala (talk) 22:47, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I can exactly imagine that. In context, if a book or something was referring to "the Bibliothèque", it may be obvious (to the author or reader of the day) which one it referred to, just as Oscar winners thank "the Acadamy" and not the whole shebang. (Well, they do thank the whole shebang, but do so individually..) Si Trew (talk) 23:29, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well, if this is the case then the solution is to create either a dab page or a List of bibliothèques. I somehow don't find the prospect very appealing but wouldn't object if someone goes forward with that. – Uanfala (talk) 01:33, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it would be little more than a list of WP:PTMs. Better to delete it and let the search engine do it. Si Trew (talk) 07:33, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Uanfala since the word is common enough. -- Tavix (talk) 22:19, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 16:57, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I don't really see this as a synonym. It's not surprising that French words, especially those related to scholarly endeavors, would be recorded in the OED for older periods. Overall, I don't see this as having any more significance in English than any other language's term for a library. --BDD (talk) 17:36, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:10, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. The odd thing also that makes it confusing is it's a false friend really, because a fr:Bibliothèque is a library but a fr:librairie is a bookshop. This extends to many other languages and not just Latinate ones; it extends as far as Hungarian, which has sod all to do with any other language except Estonian and Finnish. Si Trew (talk) 18:14, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Uanfala per actual usage in English. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:37, 31 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.

Ortakoey Mosque[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#Ortakoey Mosque

Swiss Sensation[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) 15:49, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Misuse for self-promotion ZH8000 (talk) 10:44, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • keep. Cesaro is the most common topic found for this search term, although other people and things are describe as being a "Swiss sensation" only the wrestler appears to be using as an actual nickname and no other use is getting multiple hits so the current target is the primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 11:02, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note user:Ranze, the creator of this redirect, has since been topic banned from redirects related to wresting, including participating at RfD, but wishes to respond to the nomination statement. Specifically, they state that they (Ranze) are "not the subject of this redirect", have "never been involved in any form of sports entertainment or employed by any of the companies that man has worked for." He thus asserts that the redirect is not self-promotion. [6]. Thryduulf (talk) 16:58, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Merely having a nickname is one thing, but this is a title that appears to be used by official commercial publications, being stamped on at least one DVD for the wrestler. This, in my opinion, puts it beyond the silly pejoratives and such that have been shot down in previous decisions. I lean to just keeping this. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:56, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 17:59, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unlikely search term, as it's just a nickname used in passing by the announcers; anyone actually looking for this article would use the actual ring name. Should it be mentioned in the article? Sure. But that doesn't make it something we need to keep a redirect around for. While this isn't wholly made up or used once in passing like some of the other redirects created by the same user, it's still part of the same pattern of creating exceedingly unlikely search terms as redirect just to say they created it. That said, I don't understand the nominator's rationale at all; are they claiming that the user who created this is the wrestler in question? Strange. oknazevad (talk) 11:49, 6 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.

Gaevle Goat[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 all. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 14:35, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Combine all into a set as described at WT:RFD. Sorry, I meant delete per WP:RFD#D2, confusing, not at target. Very confusing for Eubot to take some other confusing ones. Delete the lot, we are at RfD the keepers of the primary index to the wikipedia, so no buggering about, what we are here to do is make things easier, not harder, for people to find. Having lots of stupid redirects makes it harder, therefore, delete the buggers. Si Trew (talk) 18:01, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep all as useful search terms based on the native name for the subject, with some standard substitutions regarding diacritics. It seems I need to remind Si Trew yet again that my proposal for sets is completely independent of anything to do with diacritics or deletion of redirects, but simply "if multiple redirects should always have the same target, then mark them as such so people know to keep them in synch." Nothing more, nothing less. Thryduulf (talk) 18:25, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It seems once again I mist remind User:Thryduulf that the proposal at WT:RFD has everything to do with all these titles without diacritics, and it must be an astonishing coincidence if Thryduulf came up with that proposal at about the same time as all the Eubot redirects started getting listed: perhaps it was just a coincidence, or perhaps it was because of these Eubot redirects that the proposal was listed, within a few days of the Eubot redirects starting to appear here at RfD. It is a very strange coincidence in my mind, and I don't believe in coincidences, so I just assumed that Thryduulf got that proposal after seeing that Eubot had bound together about 130,000 redirects to various targets. I have actually been giving Thryduulf ammo by listing lots of redirects, such as this one, that should be bound together. But this is the first one that Thryduulf has said "keep all", and even then, has not suggested "keep all as {{R in set}}". I have suggested as politely as I can that since User:Thryduulf has a direct interest in the outcome of that discussion, it would be gentlemanly not to participate in redirect discussions that may fall within its ambit. I hereby suggest that again. I should not want anyone to think that an admin is playing a WP:GAME. Si Trew (talk) 18:55, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I think I might now understand the source of your misunderstanding. Whether a redirect is part of a set or not is completely irrelevant to whether it should be kept or deleted, so "keep as a redirect in a set" makes no more sense than "keep because it's categorised" or "delete because it's linked from a page in user space". The only difference between a redirect in a set and one not in a set is that the former should not be retargetted to a different target than other members of the set without discussing it first, but if you want to retarget all of them to the same place then go ahead. Thryduulf (talk) 09:49, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep  I checked Google for "Gaevle Goat", and found this from motortrend.com on the 6th hit, "...we reached the city of Gaevle to check out the world’s largest Yule goat, aka the Gaevle Goat. ...In fact, the Gaevle Goat has been burned down 26 times since it first appeared in 1966. Every year, the merchants of Gaevle erect a 40-foot straw goat (Guinness certified as the world’s largest), and every year, attempts are made to burn it, break it apart, or throw it into the river."  Obviously this is a well-intended and valuable redirect, and I fail to see that anyone gets confused if they search for "Gaevle Goat" and find "Gävle goat".  I'll assume that the remainder need no further attention.  Unscintillating (talk) 22:51, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above, especially Unscintillating's discoveries. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:43, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep all as valid spelling variants of the different names for the target. Noting however that this target has an almost unmanageable number of redirects, probably like many others in this area. I think the best way forward is for a general solution – maybe proposing a change to the search engine that could handle cases of ä ~ ae ~ a and similar? – Uanfala (talk) 14:32, 9 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.

Pauloftarsus[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) 21:12, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This page was created as pure silliness that should have been speedily deleted instread of being turned into this redirect. Senator2029 “Talk” 06:00, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • weak keep. Paul of Tarsus and Paul of tarsus exist as good redirects to the target, but this redirect is harmless and sometimes used with 32 hits since January (including 7 hits on 15 July for no immediately obvious reason). Thryduulf (talk) 09:43, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:COSTLY, this title has no affinity for the omission of spacing.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 17:40, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 17:52, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as implausible variant due to the two missing spaces --Lenticel (talk) 01:30, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I suppose maybe there's not much harm to having this, but it doesn't seem that particularly helpful either. We also have ample precedent for deleting other such quasi-CamelCase redirects. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 11:02, 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.

Julbocken i Gavle[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) 15:47, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

wc Si Trew (talk) 17:52, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I had assumed it was Wikiquette to apologise when there is an edit conflict, I should remind admin reg User:Thryduulf. Thsis and below should be combined with the one above, but stet for now. Manners maketh man. Si Trew (talk) 18:04, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:DIACRITICS. This is the native name for the subject with diacritics stripped and such is a very useful search term. As for edit conflicts, only the person who gets the edit conflict notification knows that an edit conflict has happened, and unless a page is marked as "in use" there is no reason for anyone to hold off editing in case they cause edit conflicts. Thryduulf (talk) 18:20, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:44, 9 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.

Julbocken i Gaevle[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) 15:46, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target. Si Trew (talk) 17:51, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. This translates to "Christmas goat in Gävle" and "Julbocken i Gävle" is an official (or at a standard) native name for the article subject, and recent consensus is that ä → ae is correct for Swedish. Thryduulf (talk) 18:18, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:44, 9 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.

Yukon--Mackenzie River[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep (non-admin closure) – Uanfala (talk) 14:22, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot). Must be a mighty big river cos it takes two hyphens to cross it (but only one em dash). Delete per WP:RFD#D8. Si Trew (talk) 17:42, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per user:Bearcat's reasoning at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 26#Saint-Leonard--Anjou. Thryduulf (talk) 18:14, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. As I've noted in other discussions, even the official documents used to print electoral district names with double hyphens in lieu of em-dashes, back in the days of manual typesetting when em-dashes were impossible to type and a double hyphen was the only available way to approximate one. With the result that, for a defunct electoral district from the 1940s, the double-hyphened form is the one that readers are actually going to see in the sources — meaning that if they aren't cognizant of what the real naming convention really is, they are going to think double-hyphen is the correct form. (As I've noted as well, when the rise of electronic typesetting meant that we were first starting to actually see em-dashes in electoral district names in printed documents, many people did think that was the error at first. I was working at a newspaper at the time, so trust me, I was there for more than my fair share of "why the hell are we using an em-dash there instead of double hyphens?" discussions.) Accordingly, WP:CWNB has always had a consensus in place that federal electoral district names with em-dashes in them did have to have redirects in place from the double-hyphened form. So no, this isn't eubot doing random stuff for its own nonsense reasons; it's eubot assisting with something that a human consensus explicitly decided upon. Bearcat (talk) 19:27, 4 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.

Hullu yoe[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#Hullu yoe

Wikipedia:LAWYERS[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#Wikipedia:LAWYERS

Rabenstein/Flaeming[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) 15:40, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's officially Rabenstein/Fläming according to the one and only sentence in the article. Since it's officially that, it's not officially Rabenstein/Flaeming, more Eubot nonsense per WP:RFD#D8 leaning WP:RFD#D5. Si Trew (talk) 17:33, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The target is a German municipality and ä → ae is the correct way of writing a German word when diacritics are not available. Thryduulf (talk) 15:01, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf and current practice. – Uanfala (talk) 15:06, 9 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.

List of municipalities of Queretaro by population[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#List of municipalities of Queretaro by population

Template:CC-BY[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 10#Template:CC-BY

Holiday tree[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#Holiday tree

Slavin cemetery[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Keep. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 04:18, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(EUBOT) This is about as much use a a snake in an arse-kicking competiton, when we have Slavín cemetery from which this was back-formed. I need not explain for the fifth time to Thryduulf why the presence of these redirects makes it harder, not easier, to search: just delete it per WP:RFD#D8. Si Trew (talk) 16:44, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Slavín cemetery exists as a redirect to this target, so this should be kept per WP:DIACRITICS. If you want to try and explain how the presence of redirects that demonstrably make it easier for people to find the target they are looking for actually make it harder for people to find what they are looking for then you are welcome to try, but given you've not convinced me (or seemingly anybody else) yet you'll need to have a new argument if you want to succeed this time. Thryduulf (talk) 16:49, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So what if it does? I know that because I checked it WP:BEFORE I listed it here. I have a better argument, and was about to put it, but you stopped that by (edit conflict)'ing me. Thryduulf, I hope it is accidental, but if as an admin you are deliberately subverting my listings, I shall have to say I don't think that is worthy of an admin. I don't think that, but don't push it old bean. I don't mind you disagreeing with me, but you are being rather rude, which is not becoming of an admin, and not what admins sign up for. It was you who played the J'accuse card for telling me to do WP:BEFORE, which doesn't even apply to redirects, only articles, and since you argue that redirect titles don't have to conform to WP:TITLE and I say they should, that's playing a card from the bottom of the deck. Si Trew (talk) 16:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Let's put it straight. You want to keep useless redirects, but propose at WT:RFD that once kept we bunch them into sets: an argument that I have replied to there, most people are in support, I am in dissent, because I can see the logical consequences of what would happen if we did that. My argument there is basically a reductio ad absurdem, but since it is absurdem in the first place it was not hard to reductio it. I think, Thryduulf, when you have a proposal for combining redirects it would be the civil thing to do on not commenting on redirects. That is what the gentlemanly thing would be to do. To step back and let the hussle-bussle go by you and let a consensus emerge on your proposal. Making, as far as I see it, not condsidered "keep" votes at RfD but "I don't like it" keep votes at RfD, because three times now in two days on my listings you have given the information I have already spelled out in the nom, had you read it, is just waning my WP:AGF, and that disappoints me to say so. I thought User:Tavix was my main battle for the "keep" side, but at least Tavix had the decency to give me a Christmas thanks and say "keep it up" (not in those words), so at least I know that Tavix and I are in good faith. Si Trew (talk) 17:07, 27 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.

Brezany, Presov District[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#Brezany, Presov District

Triewalds grand[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) 15:37, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) not called, this, unlikely search term. That's like confusing "Oxford Street" with Oxfordstreet. Not used in any WP:V sources, purely WP:MADEUP by a bot. Si Trew (talk) 16:32, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete unused and not verifiable in reliable sources. Thryduulf (talk) 17:21, 27 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.

Coitus a unda[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, G8. The WP:PROD was successful. -- Tavix (talk) 20:55, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) I've prodded the target, since it's single source. There's no point here knocking off the diacritic since the whole thing is a pun to start with, "Coitus" being latin and greek, "á" I assume being French (should be "á la" but never mind) and "unda" being English nowitspeak for under. Three languages, one knock off of diacritics, I make four, makes WP:RFD#D5 nonsense, We could of course retarget to Greene King IPA, cos that's fucking close to water. Si Trew (talk) 16:16, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per WP:DIACRITICS. If a title exists with diacritics there should be a redirect to it from the same title without diacritics (unless that is ambiguous, in which case it should lead to a disambiguation page or article with a hatnote). If the target is deleted then this redirect will go per WP:CSD#G8 and everything else is irrelevant. Thryduulf (talk) 17:24, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Straightforward keep per Thryduulf. – Uanfala (talk) 14:08, 5 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.

List of Governors of the Department of Atlantico[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#List of Governors of the Department of Atlantico

Urpo Yloenen trophy[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) 15:36, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) nem nemetul hanem finnul, Finnish, Finno-Ugric, not Germanic umlaut. Delete as WP:RFD#D8. Si Trew (talk) 15:58, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete. The only ghits for "Urpo Yloenen trophy" -Wikipedia are things obviously derived from Wikipedia. Thryduulf (talk) 17:27, 27 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.

Wikipedia:Transmed holding[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 deleted by Ad Orientem. --BDD (talk) 17:15, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Transmed holding was for some reason moved here and back, and I don't see the point of this redirect. Adam9007 (talk) 15:44, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Steel1943 has already requested a speedy on this; I would do the same. Si Trew (talk) 16:04, 27 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.
Comment after discussion close
  • Delete unused redirect and not present in sources so unlikely to be used in future. Thryduulf (talk) 17:29, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Roupakio[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) 20:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot by Pumpie) Another "Let's create every conceivable name to a greek place" by Pumpie, thence "Let's create every conceivable redirect to it" by Eubot. Complete WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 15:23, 27 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.

Santo Domingo de Copán[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#Santo Domingo de Copán

Deja Dead (book)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Keep. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 04:03, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot). No, the book is not called Deja Dead it is called Déjà Dead. The R at Déjà Dead (book) is (as I've tagged it) an {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}, but this doesn't have to unnecessarily reambiguate an unnecessary disambiguation, that's just WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Anyone wanting to find this book who has not heard of it will type "Deja Dead" and son oncle s'appelle Robert, they will get exactly where they expected to go. Si Trew (talk) 15:14, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. In almost all cases if a term with diacritics is a useful redirect then the same term without diacritics will, if it is not ambiguous, also be a good redirect to the same target. Thryduulf (talk) 17:34, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 18:54, 31 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.

De la Tour[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 De La Tour. -- Tavix (talk) 20:52, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(NOT Eubot) Well, I would think in Britain (that is, to a sizeable English-speaking audience) that this name would be most associated with the actress Frances de la Tour and not the French painter; in the absence of that, we should at least hatnote, I think, but I'd probably retarget it there (and hatnote). Perhaps if there are others we need to DAB it; De la Tour (disambiguation) is red. Si Trew (talk) 14:44, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget or disambig with a very weak preference for the former based on the search results. I'm not finding any obvious third candidate that has a Wikipedia article. Thryduulf (talk) 17:36, 27 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.

Adrien, Count de Rougé[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) 20:48, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, mixed-language redirect. Another Windishgraetz; he was the Count of Rougé or the Compte de Rougé, don't stick "Count" + "de" together. his English surname was not like Delevingne or De'Ath or De la Tour; he didn't have one. Si Trew (talk) 14:39, 27 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.

Adrien, Count de Rouge[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) 20:47, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) Yes, I know this probably gets people to where they want to go, but rouge is not Rougé, so this is WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target, and WP:RFD#D8, novel (patently "Rouge" is not a syonym for "Rougé, if it were, one would not be a DAB and the other a small French commune). He was not red, he was from Rougé. (he wasn't the Count de Rougé either, he was the compte de Rougé, but one at a time; he might have been the Count of Rougé but the noblesse oblige it seems). Si Trew (talk) 13:12, 27 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.

Hoedhr[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) 20:30, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) The opening words of the first sentence of the target says, with a reference, "often anglicized as Hod, Hoder, or Hodur". It has been seldom, if ever before, anglicised as "Hoedhr". WP:RFD#D8, Delete. Si Trew (talk) 12:54, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This got 18 views this year, which is clearly human use, and google is showing glimpses that this is an old transliteration used for example by "Grimm" (presumably one of the Brothers Grimm) - see [7] for example. I suspect that this will be something found in offline sources, particularly 19th Century ones, and so as something less familiar to contemporary readers will be searched for. Thryduulf (talk) 13:14, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Thryduulf: I think it would be reasonable, at this point, to say if someone shouts "keep" it should just be kept. For meself I don't think 18 in a year is enough, but I think that's pretty much WP:RFD#K5 (is it?) "somebody finds it useful, and if they say so, it probably is", so I'm quite happy for it to be kept, but can we kinda just take it that if I list these and someone shouts "keep" I'll withdraw them straight away as "keep" per K5? You don't know how many I keep (about 90%) without even bringing them here and sometimes Rcatting them... lots... and am reluctant with those I think should be retargeted boldly to do so, so when I bring one here it's almost bound to be a delete on my part, with a possible suggestion for a retarget. Si Trew (talk) 13:19, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
18 human uses in a year is way more than enough in my book to demonstrate the usefulness of a redirect (remember the stats exclude all (with the possible exception of up to 4/year) non-human views). I am not calling for these discussions to be withdrawn as soon as I, or anyone else, opines that it should be kept and I'm really perplexed as to where you get that impression. Unless I explicitly !vote "speedy keep" or "speedy delete" I am anticipating that the discussion will remain open for others to express their opinion for the full duration. How many redirects you do not nominate at RfD is completely irrelevant here. Thryduulf (talk) 13:25, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I do know that the stats tool excludes bot hits etc, or tries to: however there is a common theme in many of these that the excluded results get hit once a month around the eleventh of the month (tenth or twelfth sometimes, but that may just be a time difference) and others on the twentieth of the month. I'm a human and so an expert at pattern recognition and to me, without having to scan the logs, if the stats graph shows one hit each month on the same day(ish) of the month, that is not random human activity, that's an external bot search. Quite happy for you also to leave them open for discussion, I only offered it out as that was pretty much what we did with the Neelix ones, that if someone cries "foul" it's kept and discussed separately, but then we had the X1 concession later for that (and many went X1 that shouldn't have done, in my opinion.) Si Trew (talk) 14:32, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I don't know why User:Thryduulf thinks that my and Champ's good-faith contributions to reducing the Eu backlog, to improve Wikipedia, are "completely irrelevant here". Less is more. It's not irrelevant that Champ and I are trogging through about 130,000 redirects made by User:Eubot without any approval or any discussio; it's not irrelevant that Champ took the time to split the lists out, it's not irrelevant that Champ and I are trying to fix them up and nobody else, Thyrduulf included, is doing so. I'm used to the flack, I had it over Neelix, and Champ did too. Those edits are not "irrelevant" to anything, because hard work went into them by two good faith editors. Saying "it's irrelevant", tossing it aside as if it don't fucking count for anything, is not just irrelevant, it's a fucking insult. Administrators shouldn't do that. If it is a hundred or a thousand a day, here at RfD, so be it: the consensus is not to have a facsimile of WP:X1, so they will all get dumped here. don't want an X1, and have said so, but you can't have it both ways, so they'll b ehere, where redirects for deletion go (so Twinkle says). Si Trew (talk) 15:28, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf's reasoning. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 18:54, 31 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.

Antonio maria[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) 20:31, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) created from the redirect Antônio maria. Since we have one {{R from incorrect capitalisation}} (was {{tlx|R from other capitalizaton) there's no need to have two; pages marked thus are kept to aid reader's searches and for no other reason, and all this does is clutter up that reader's search. Delete as WP:RFD#D8, a cursory search gives me only caps, and similar articles are hatnoted as using {{Spanish name}}, and as far as I can tell, of the Spanish naming customs, dropping a circumflex and spelling the matronymic in lower case is not one. Si Trew (talk) 12:42, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. All lower-case {{R without diacritics}} are very plausible and I see no reason why we should inconvenience the people who use them (and the stats show that people do use them, albeit in frequently). Thryduulf (talk) 13:16, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We're inconveniencing them by offering them two paths to the same destination, and they have to make a choice they would otherwise not need to make. I'd already done some WP:BEFORE (which is for AfD, not RfD, but I did it anyway), and tagged these as {{R from incorrect capitalisation}}, before I listed them here. Si Trew (talk) 13:21, 27 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.

Thiago Guimaraes Sales[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) 20:33, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) WP:RFD#D8, the original Thiago Guimarães Sales is (because I have catted it) an {{R from full name}} so the original redirect and the first sentence (and infobox) at the target are the only mentions of his full name; it's a bit of a novelty then for a bot to invent a name and make a redirect to it, just because his middle name contains a tilde. Si Trew (talk) 12:27, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Unless you are saying that "Thiago Guimarães Sales" is not his real name, I fail to understand what your rationale for deletion is - this is a redirect in accordance with WP:DIACRITICS to the person's full name. Very plausible. Thryduulf (talk) 13:19, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's not at all plausible. The stats are that it got two hits in ninety days: both on the twentieth of the month (and those two days often get hits at others, I've noticed, so despite the stats removing many bot hits I imagine that it's actually external search engine patrols etc for those two). It's not at all plausible that someone searches this way, at least according to Wikipedia's own stats. I'm not saying that "Thiago Guimarães Sales" is not his real name, I just tagged it when opening this discussion, as {{R from full name}}, and said so in my nomination: but "Thiago Guimaraes Sales" is not his real name. I did WP:BEFORE but I am not going trawling through stats logs of where they came from, that is more than BEFORE requires (and anyway, BEFORE applies to AfD, not RfD: but since it was suggested I should do BEFORE, I have been doing so, which seems to me that User:Thryduulf, who has suggested before that I WP:BEFORE even when it's irrelevant to RfD, actually agrees with me that on the whole redirect titles should conform to WP:TITLE unless there are good reasons otherwise). Si Trew (talk) 13:26, 27 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]

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 wrong forum, see Talk:School of Paris. Thryduulf (talk) 13:21, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

open as to resolution. I am here to complain the article France in the 1920s has a section about the influence of Dada; the School of Paris is part of that, but the linked article opens with a discussion of illuminated manuscripts. That may be dada, but we're supposed to explain these things not embody them. Elinruby (talk) 11:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Elinruby: you're in the wrong place. The right place to discuss this is at Talk:School of Paris and Talk:France in the 1920s. I'll start a discussion at each of them, referencing back to here. Si Trew (talk) 11:59, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(This can be closed of course as WP:WRONGFORUM, but let me do that first.) Si Trew (talk) 12:01, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Take this to the School of Paris talk page first...Modernist (talk) 12:03, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Somebody raised this same issue there several years ago and it remains essentially unaddressed. I am open to taking this elsewhere or fixing it myself but am not sure what to do. Break it into two pages? For the record, both uses are probably true and notable but I can't stop what I am doing to research them Elinruby (talk) 12:04, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
in other words, not currently available to write two articles. Thanks for the help, Simon. Elinruby (talk) 12:07, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Mon plaisir, @Elinruby:, may I close this down now please? I've listed at both talk pages, cross-referencing each to each, and referring each back to this discussion. Si Trew (talk) 12:12, 27 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.

Menieres (Fribourg)[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) 20:26, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot). There's a whole class of these that I worry about. Essentially, this was back-formed from Ménières (Fribourg) which is fine as a {{R from geo}}; in fact that's categoised as {{R to Swiss municipality (canton)}}. According to the documentation at Template:R_from_more_specific_geographic_name/doc, "These redirects are mainly used to conform to Wikipedia conventions on geographic location article titles". Well this does not conform to Wikipedia's conventions on geographic location article titles, which are targeted at editors, not readers. While Menieres is fine, a likely search term, and Ménières (Fribourg) is fine, fits int those conventions, this is pushing it, in my opinion, into making an WP:RFD#D5 nonsense of that rcat. I can perfectly understand that people will search just for "Menieres", but they're hardly likely to search for "Menieres (Fribourg)"; because the purpose of the original redirect is not to aid search but to aid indexing and conformity. So, Delete. Si Trew (talk) 11:45, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}} and {{R without diacritics}} is an entirely plausible combination. While naming conventions are targeted at editors, regular readers of Wikipedia (an remember almost all editors are also readers) will become familiar with our article naming conventions and use them in their searches - that's one of the main reasons {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}} exists, and this is completely independent of whether someone is able to use diacritics (correctly, or at all) when they want to look up something. Thryduulf (talk) 13:29, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You're probably right, and as I said above, I reckon if someone calls "keep" on these Eubot ones with a decent argument (e.g. not just WP:ILIKEIT and so on) then it should just be speedily kept without further discussion. Si Trew (talk) 13:40, 27 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.

Vaestra Froelunda IF (disambiguation)[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) 20:02, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) Delete' per WP:RFD#D8. I can't find any use of "Vaestra Froelunda IF (disambiguation)" in any sources; all I get is "did you mean" and "how to pronounce". (Swedish, and we generally keep Swedish ones with transliteration of Germanic umlauts, but I think this is to be avoided on redirects to disambiguation pages, because it just reambiguates them.) Si Trew (talk) 11:36, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep how does this reambiguate? Surely, as long as more than one entry on the disambiguation page can be rendered in this manner it is exactly as ambiguous as the version with the umlaut? In this case what matters is not whether sources exist for "Vaestra Froelunda IF (disambiguation)" but whether sources exist for "Vaestra Froelunda IF" referring to multiple things (and they do). I frequently search for "X (disambiguation)" if I know or suspect that the topic I am looking for is not the primary topic for "X" but do not know what disambiguator was used, and I know from previous occasions this has been discussed that I am not alone. This redirect takes people to the target they are looking for, is not ambiguous with nor in the way of any other page, and so it's harmless. Thryduulf (talk) 13:34, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It reambiguates because all of the entries are for "Västra Frölunda IF", not to "Vaestra Froelunda IF". Frankly it's nonsense to have a (disambiguation) redirect that adds ambiguity. I have no idea who Vaestra Froelunda is, I guess it is someone in a Latin play or something, what do I whack into Wikipedia? "Vaestra Froelunda. What I don't whack in is "Vaestra Froelunda IF (disambiguation)". That's just not plausible. The whole point of a DAB is to, er, disambiguate similar page titles, thence to introduce similar but not-quite-the-same-because-a-bot-invented-it titles does not reduce misunderstanding, it increases it. The stats are that this was hit once in ninety days, on 17 October: it's not a likely synonym, there's no use of "Vaestra Froelunda IF (disambiguation)" in verifiable sources, so I can't understand why someone would mistakenly search this way. Si Trew (talk) 13:47, 27 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.

Han-yue Pin-yin[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 3#Han-yue Pin-yin

Jose Antonio GARCIA BELAUNDE[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) 03:18, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) I suppose this is harmless, in a way, but completely unnecessasry. It's not just a {{R from title without diacritics}}, it is (or rather should be) also {{R from full name}}{{R from other capitalisation}}; when you get to having three Rcats you might start to think it might be a bit WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 11:17, 27 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:NeuroethologyNavbox[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. Original creator and only editor agreed in deletion Magioladitis (talk) 12:33, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Now unused in mainspace. Bad name. Magioladitis (talk) 05:43, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It serves as a historical redirect. But we generally don't keep those. You can speedy it as far as I am concerned. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:42, 27 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.

English Wikipedia Quality Survey[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#English Wikipedia Quality Survey

Mysandbox[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 10#Mysandbox

Kill vehicle[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#Kill vehicle

Saturation (telecommunications)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#Saturation (telecommunications)

Ttul[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) 03:16, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Obscure (in 2016) Internet slang. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 04:11, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note I've added the alternately capitalised TTUL (also a soft redirect to Wiktionary's appendix) to this nomination. I'm neutral at present though). Thryduulf (talk) 14:05, 27 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.

1+[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 9#1+

God Hates 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 delete. -- Tavix (talk) 03:04, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a notable slogan, unlikely search term, no evidence it is associated with the target. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:50, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete It seems to get more use in relation to Shelley the Republican (deleted at AfD in 2006, and I'm finding almost no references after 2007) rather than Westoro Baptist Church, but a bunch of apparently unrelated uses as well. While I can easily imagine people searching Wikipedia for this, there is no good place to point it to so we should not mislead people into thinking we have content we don't. Thryduulf (talk) 02:09, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Misnomer , and not a notable term either. Devopam (talk) 04:51, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per the above CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 23:47, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no notable use as a snowclone either. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:40, 4 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.

Wikipedia:Neelix mass deletions[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 Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#X1. -- Tavix (talk) 03:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose retargeting to Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#X1 as I think that most people will not be looking for the ANI incident, if that is what they are looking for, they are easily lead there anyway. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:18, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. If we retarget this to the X1 criterion then it will (might?) need retargeting when that temporary criterion is repealed so I'd rather it go to a longer term target that gave background on what and why this is/was. I'm not yet sure what I think the best way to achieve that is. Thryduulf (talk) 02:12, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#X1. When this criterion is obsoleted, it will be moved farther down the page but the link will still work. At the time I created the redirect, the Neelix deletion was shoved under G6 so the redirect had no good target. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What does "obsoleted" mean? Is there no noun that cannot be verbed? It's not verbed at Wiktionary. Si Trew (talk) 14:58, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, in English any noun can be verbed. You'd need sources for a Wiktionary entry though. "Obsoleted" is a synonym (at least in this context) for "deprecated". Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:47, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lets at least depersonalise the hate. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 17:50, 27 December 2016 (UTC).[reply]
    • Does that mean delete or keep? Also: what hate? Gorobay (talk) 20:39, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget as proposed, seems a sensible long-term target with the background available through links from the section. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:47, 29 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_27&oldid=1088109815"