Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 July 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 27[edit]

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

The mighty black stump[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.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:17, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing anything in the linked article to justify this exact redirect name and Google News and Books don't help either. Even without "mighty" it seems tenuous. DanielRigal (talk) 21:32, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 11:03, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The first ref at the target page does not support the assertion. "Black Stump Adelaide" yields various hits, notably a tree removal service and a winery, so maybe there is something at the bottom of all this. I also found this unreliable source that links to the same ref, so possibly there was a mention of a nickname in that ref. But in any case, that is not the "mighty" black stump. TigraanClick here to contact me 16:47, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's a local, probably ephermeral, meme, promulgated by a podcaster. There are T-shirts, etc., but no reliable sources. If it turns out to have legs, it can always be recreated. — Gorthian (talk) 21:25, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Big Daddy Kaine[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 Big Daddy Kane. -- Tavix (talk) 20:44, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is amusing, but it's not a legitimate nickname for Tim Kaine. We could revert to targeting Big Daddy Kane, as this did for over eight years, or delete. I did find an instance of this nickname for the politician on YouTube, but that's a one-off pun. We might as well redirect MC 'Bama to Obama. BDD (talk) 19:26, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

The Night Stalker (2014 film)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete both. Deryck C. 13:35, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This looked like a faulty WP:CRYSTAL ball. The film was released in 2016, not 2015/4. There are no notable 2015 or 2014 films by this name. -- Tavix (talk) 18:45, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete The 2016 film is an entirely different beast, not the one that Wright was supposed to do. Be that as it may, 2014 and 2015 have come and gone, so these redirects are useless and confusing. — Gorthian (talk) 02:17, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, thanks for the clarification. It goes to show how confusing these are! -- Tavix (talk) 02:30, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Border Security: America's Front Line[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 on the best choice of target, default to keep. If the draft article is accepted, contact me or any available admin to move it over the redirect. Deryck C. 13:38, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

deletion (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) This redirect would interfere with another page Draft:Border Security: America's Front Line. Wmulder (talk) 07:14, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • keep. When the draft is ready (it's currently awaiting review), it can just be moved over this redirect without the need for deletion. However, until then this does take people to a related show and it's getting a hundred or so hits a day. Thryduulf (talk) 10:39, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:52, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as although the shows are very similar (title sequences, opening music, writing, and narrator are all the same), they're not the same show. The target (the Canadian show) also only mentions the American show in the info box so it's confusing for readers to be redirected there. If a redirect must exist, Force Four, the production company, would be a better choice. Ca2james (talk) 04:39, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Isben[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 16:08, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This could also be a misspelling for Sharon Isbin and it's also the middle name of Leslie Isben Rogge. Without any obvious targets, this is better off as a redlink. -- Tavix (talk) 03:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep if either of the other two are referred to as "Isben" then they can be linked to from the current target by a hatnote. However redirecting a surname to the article about the only (or most prominent) person with that surname to have an article is common and beneficial. Thryduulf (talk) 10:31, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Thryduulf: I'm not sure if you noticed this, but "Isben" isn't Henrik's surname. It's "Ibsen." It makes this a typo for multiple things so nothing notable is known as "Isben." -- Tavix (talk) 16:53, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete WP:XY for multiple typos, and the partial match is not worth a retarget. The target is surnamed Ibsen not Isben. Incidentally we don't have a {{R from misspelling}} from Henrik Isben whereas we do have one from Sharon Isben. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 12:04, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Plausible typo and likely that a last name search would be performed. Hatnote or dab will solve all other problems Montanabw(talk) 04:34, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:52, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Gorthian: Could you explain? Why is the current target more plausible than the others? -- Tavix (talk) 18:16, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've personally had problems keeping Ibsen's name straight all my life; I doubt I'm alone. Also Henrik Ibsen is by far the most prominent person of people with Ibsen or Isben names, and the most likely article people would be looking for. — Gorthian (talk) 18:49, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate your explanation. It's a good case for creating Henrik Ibsen, so I've gone ahead and done so. It also has the secondary benefit of guaranteeing that Henrik will be in the search results if someone were to search "Ibsen" if this redirect were to be deleted. I'm rather adverse to having hatnotes from error though, although I can see why someone would want it. -- Tavix (talk) 20:11, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Tavix I think you meant to say you created Henrik Isben (good idea!), and if someone were to search "Isben". Yes, it is confusing! :-D — Gorthian (talk) 21:12, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you got it! -- Tavix (talk) 21:26, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete. Ambiguous typo redirect. Hatnote is only appropriate when the redirect is from a correct but ambiguous short name. Deryck C. 13:30, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Sprung rhymes[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) 20:00, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These Neelix redirects all point to Half rhyme, but there is no content about them on that page or on any other page on Wikipedia I can find. However the Wiktionary entry suggests that it's a concept not entirely unrelated to half rhymes. I'm honestly not sure what the best solution is here. Thryduulf (talk) 03:09, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Patar knight, I'm basically ready to close this as keep, but would you mind adding the term with those references to the target article? I'm not able to view them here in the US. Especially in light of DGG's comment below, we'll want to address this confusion (with a hatnote as well). --BDD (talk) 16:06, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Added the term with two sources; hatnote is up to your/others' discretion. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:15, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! --BDD (talk) 20:00, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all - I'm not entirely sure what to make of this, but I'm also seeing a lot of commentary directly equating the terms. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:08, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:52, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Suman Shetty[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 August 3#Suman Shetty

Wikipedia:MOVER[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. There was already a hatnote before this RfD. Deryck C. 13:23, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Almost orphaned. Suggest delete (due to WP:ASTONISH possibility with the new Wikipedia:Page mover), or retarget to Wikipedia:Page mover — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 16:47, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and add a hatnote at the target. I don't think you can credibly suggest WP:ASTONISH applies to a redirect that has pointed at the same target since creation in 2011. Thryduulf (talk) 21:03, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Okay, thanks, that works. — Andy W. (talk · ctb) 23:32, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and hatnote. Age is not itself a counterargument to WP:ASTONISH; but it is, when we are talking about a redirect from the Wikipedia namespace. TigraanClick here to contact me 16:54, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

British Girls Adult Film Database[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. It's not typical for a closer to write an article; I'll leave this to someone else to test whether the site is considered notable. --BDD (talk) 16:05, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unhelpful, as the name of the database is a link on {{Bgafd name}} and it is not mentioned at the target page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:29, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • stubbify. I agree that this doesn't make sense, and Alice2Alice raised the same concern on the redirect talk page in November, but given it's apparently frequent use as an external link/reference the problem is probably best solved by writing a stub (or better) about it over the redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 21:06, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Trillian (sculpture)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete as unopposed. Deryck C. 13:26, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually surprised there's a redirect for this. Trillian is a cancelled sculpture in Northern Ireland and this redirect is to a passing mention in another article. This really shouldn't exist in its current state; I would only warrant a redirect were there to be a section about the sculpture in the destination article. st170etalk 14:29, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Cole Albert[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.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:17, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can find no evidence that Cole Porter was referred to by only his first and middle names, but this redirect gets a surprising number of hits. Albert Cole (disambiguation) is a sort-of plausible retargetting option. 10:32, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

  • Delete as a WP:PTM. We don't create redirects using the Eastern name order to Western names, so I don't see the point of the retargeting suggestion either. -- Tavix (talk) 18:14, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as it seems more helpful to just let people search CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 14:25, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Tavix Someone typing in Cole Albert will see Albert, Cole (hmm curious) and Cole Albert Porter AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:27, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

List of Australian universities by endowment[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. Request unopposed and granted. Deryck C. 13:26, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to delete this redirect. The original article was called "by endowment" but its content was about annual revenue. While I have renamed the article, it is misleading to the reader looking for an article on endowments to be redirected to an article on annual revenues as there is no information on endowment there. Kerry (talk) 11:02, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Persian Quran[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 August 3#Persian Quran

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_July_27&oldid=1089911419"