Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 28[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 28, 2016.

Laystan[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) 21:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. These redirects are in romanized Hebrew. The first one is a typo for the second. The Hebrew language is not especially relevant to the topic of clowns. Gorobay (talk) 20:28, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The first redirect gets a lot of google hits, but none of them make much sense to me and they certainly appear unrelated to clowns. The second redirect finds mostly surnames, but not of anyone notable or related to clowning. Thryduulf (talk) 23:48, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per the above CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:03, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete to encourage redlink to Hebrew clowns should that topic be notable. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:37, 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.

Donald Trump presidential campaign[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The result of the discussion was Withdrawn... per below. But, specifically per BDD's comment which makes this discussion seem like it should be on WP:DRV, and I didn't even realize it. Either way, yes, this will probably have to be revisited if Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2020 is created in the future. Steel1943 (talk) 17:50, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So ... should this redirect be converted to a disambiguation page listing its current target (Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016) and Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2000 ... or should we just keep the current situation, claiming that the 2016 campaign is the WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT target for the term? (For the record, I support disambiguation.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:05, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would say the 2016 campaign would be the primary target, and we can handle the 2000 campaign with a hatnote, as described at WP:TWODAB, which is the current situation. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 19:46, 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.

Parc Étang[edit]

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

Republican debates[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 11#Republican debates

Swiss Powerhouse[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. Ranze's statement that they are not this wrestler in question is accepted. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:42, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Misuse for selfpromotion. ZH8000 (talk) 10:45, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This is a widely used term and the wrestler is not in the first three pages of a google search for "Swiss Powerhouse". Searching for Swiss Powerhouse wrestling -Wikipedia finds only one mention of Cesaro and that is in the middle of a long list of wresting nicknames in an unreliable source. Thryduulf (talk) 10:57, 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. [1]. Thryduulf (talk) 16:58, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 16:56, 28 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. Plus it's vague; there's numerous other persons or things that can be called the same thing. 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) 11:46, 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.

Swiss Superman[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. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 16:00, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Misuse for selfpromotion. ZH8000 (talk) 10:45, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The first two pages of a Google search for Swiss Superman -Wikipedia finds only this person, so they are clearly the primary topic for this term. Thryduulf (talk) 10:58, 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. [2]. Thryduulf (talk) 16:58, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 16:55, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf. Common nickname for target page. JTP (talk • contribs) 20:52, 4 January 2017 (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) 11:44, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf. A Google search shows that it isn't just a one-time ring thing, it gets used in the headlines of news articles [3] as well. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:38, 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.

Fifa Ultimate team 2013[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 refine to FIFA 13#Ultimate Team. -- Tavix (talk) 17:04, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems implausible to me, especially now that the game is four years old. (This wasn't the first edition of Ultimate Team, either, which I might have understood.) — foxj 14:57, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. --BDD (talk) 16:53, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
AngusWOOF - Sure, but Ultimate Team has existed since FIFA 11, and exists in the most recent edition of the game. It seems totally arbitrary to redirect to 2013's edition of the game, which is now four years old. — foxj 23:24, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's true. the Ultimate Team one should go to FIFA (video game series) and be explained there. You can use Polygon's review [4] Then comes the question whether it's worth having Ultimate Team redirects for each year and if so which formats should stay: Fifa Ultimate Team XX, Fifa XX Ultimate Team, and so forth. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:33, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@AngusWOOF: Sure, we could do that. (Though honestly I reckon Ultimate Team is probably worthy of a standalone article by this point, that's a different discussion.) The question is, do you think that "Fifa Ultimate team 2013" - bear in mind that it is case-sensitive - is a realistic redirect to keep around? It does receive a (barely) non-zero number of pageviews per day, but I reckon that's mostly because it's linked to from so many random places still. — foxj 13:50, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - highly improbable search term. GiantSnowman 17:06, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. With almost 300 page views in 2016 prior to the nomination it is clear that this is well used redirect and not improbable in the slightest. Thryduulf (talk) 17:48, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    @Thryduulf: Again, it's linked to from a lot of places - I think it's probable the vast majority of those 300 views are from there. — foxj 22:30, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    If it's linked from articles then that means it's a useful redirect directing people to the article the editors of the article intended to link to (as there seems no argument that the target is incorrect). If it is unlinked now then we would need to wait a while (at least a couple of months I'd say) and look at the stats again before we can know how many of the page views are/were coming from those internal links. Thryduulf (talk) 00:02, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and refine to FIFA_13#Ultimate_Team per Thryduulf and AngusWOOF. Notable feature of the game. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:40, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and refine. If this is a feature of the game that is covered in the article, and it receives 300 views per year, then it's a useful redirect. I'm looking at the places it's linked from and all I'm seeing is links related to the current RfD (and the nominator doesn't seem to have delinked anything in the meantime), so it doesn't seem the traffic is coming from incoming links. – Uanfala (talk) 19:42, 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.

File:ITC Logo.png[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. Deleted by RHaworth per the rationale in {{Db-redircom}}. The page on Commons is now visible. Steel1943 (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect shadows Commons, otherwise unused. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:21, 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.

File:Committee.jpg[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. Deleted by RHaworth per the rationale in {{Db-redircom}}. The page on Commons is now visible. Steel1943 (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect shadows Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:20, 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.

File:LogoRED.png[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. Deleted by RHaworth per the rationale in {{Db-redircom}}. The page on Commons is now visible. Steel1943 (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect shadows Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:11, 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.

File:Hands.png[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. Deleted by RHaworth per the rationale in {{Db-redircom}}. The page on Commons is now visible. Steel1943 (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect shadows commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:10, 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.

File:Hostels.jpg[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. Deleted by RHaworth per the rationale in {{Db-redircom}}. The page on Commons is now visible. Steel1943 (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect shadows commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:09, 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.

File:Hillary.png[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. Deleted by RHaworth per the rationale in {{Db-redircom}}. The page on Commons is now visible. Steel1943 (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Shadows Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:08, 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.

File:Mehran.jpg[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. Deleted by RHaworth per the rationale in {{Db-redircom}}. The page on Commons is now visible. Steel1943 (talk) 15:12, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect shadows Commons. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:08, 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.

Sebastian Cohn[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 by Nthep per WP:CSD#R3 and salted for three months by me. Thryduulf (talk) 23:52, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No information about a "Sebastian Cohn" on the linked page. HaeB (talk) 13:29, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This qualifies under WP:CSD#R3. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 13:45, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - no sign of how this could make sense. Would be great if its originator popped in to explain but, having viewed their edit history, I would be pleasantly surprised. DBaK (talk) 13:56, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. This redirect has been deleted, but per its deletion log, the redirect's title may need to be salted due to repeat recreation. (Can't do that myself since I'm not an admin.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:16, 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.

United Airlines Flight 953[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 SNOW delete. --BDD (talk) 15:55, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recommend deletion. At the moment we are RDing a non-notable flight to the famous person who had a heart attack on it. The flight will never be notable for this association, and I can see no plausible reason for the redirect - albeit it was created in undoubted good faith - to exist. DBaK (talk) 13:01, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom, and since Carrie Fisher was never an airplane flight. Steel1943 (talk) 13:47, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Flight number is definitely not notable per se, and nobody could possibly ask "What was the name again of that person who had a a heart attack on UA flight 953?" --T*U (talk) 19:06, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Flight numbers are rarely notable, and this redirect appears pointless. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 02:48, 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.

Trumpisim[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) 21:25, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible misspelling. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:51, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment This was originally an article, it was nominated for speedy deletion under criteria G3 (vandalism and hoaxes) and A11 (obviously made up), but was redirected here rather than being deleted. Having looked at the content, I don't think it qualifies as G3 and I'm uncertain about A11 but I would delete it under G10 (Pages that disparage, threaten, intimidate, or harass their subject). For this reason I don't think we need to revert to the article and send it to AfD as is the normal practice for content converted to a redirect and then nominated here. Thryduulf (talk) 12:42, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It certainly needs deleting one way or t'other. In a way it's a pity that the redirect has obscured the original problem. It seems, (thanks Thryduulf), at first to have been a silly neologism coined by someone who was desperate to make up a word, or who thought they were saying Trumpism but can't spell. For that, it should have been deleted as a waste of space and a made-up one at that. Now it's here then it should be deleted as an implausible misspelling. Either way, it should go away. DBaK (talk) 13:53, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I agree that this seems useless. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 23:59, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:47, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. An ugly redirect. scope_creep (talk) 12:54, 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.

Lue Ju[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) 21:24, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) Not a Germanic umlaut, Chinese romanization. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:04, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Unsued for the target outside of scrapes of Wikipedia, although there does appear to be a non-notable person with this name. Thryduulf (talk) 12:44, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Thryduulf AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:48, 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.

Douglas Home[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) I've created a surname index article at Douglas-Home (surname), which is now linked from a hatnote at the target. No prejudice against a formal move request to move the surname index over to the base title. – Uanfala (talk) 14:58, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should Douglas-Home (disambiguation) be created? All pages with titles containing Douglas-Home renders quite a few people. --Nevé–selbert 00:10, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Added Douglas Home. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:11, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Keep' and hatnote to DAB. The current target is clearly the primary topic, and a DAB page can be created from to include anyone with this surname. This RfD does not need to be open for seven days. I can't see any opposition to having the British PM as the primary topic, so if the nom boldly created the DAB page, that would work fine without the need to block these redirects for seven days with the RfD notice. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 03:47, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and hatonte per Patar knight. Thryduulf (talk) 12:45, 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.

Back Button[edit]

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

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_December_28&oldid=1088109805"