Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 12[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 12, 2016.

Related redirects to Comparison of web server software[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete all JohnCD (talk) 10:23, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects are not mentioned at their target article, so the connection between the terms and the redirects is unclear. (Note: Scrinchy and SimpleW were articles that were redirected here as a result of WP:AFD discussions: See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scrinchy and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SimpleW for details.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:02, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete they were probably removed for notability purposes and are not required to stay on the list for WP:LSC. Keeping the redirect would create false expectations. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:26, 13 June 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.

Comparison of lightweight web servers[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 JohnCD (talk) 10:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The target article is unclear on the definition of a "lightweight" server or which servers listed in the target are considered "lightweight". Steel1943 (talk) 22:50, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This redirect is a {{R from merge}}, meaning that it was formerly an article that was merged into the target article. The lists in the redirect's former history as an article were merged into the target, but it seems that what the use of the term "lightweight" means in relation to the subjects listed in the target article is currently not present in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 22:53, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Sounds like classifications are needed on that table. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:18, 13 June 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.

Tiny web servers[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. JohnCD (talk) 10:28, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing since the definition of "tiny" in context of this redirect is not defined at the target, making it unclear which of the subjects listed at the target can be considered "tiny". Steel1943 (talk) 16:00, 12 June 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.

Many forms of ramayana[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 JohnCD (talk) 10:00, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The word "many" is subjective and indefinite. Steel1943 (talk) 15:51, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom because of the "many". AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:14, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. If instead of being about the Ramayama, it was talking about the forms of a deity, that would be different, but this doesn't seem like a plausible search term. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 03:57, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking deity forms as well when I first read this. Does they refer to book versions as "forms"? There is also Forms of Ramayana as an existing redirect. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:23, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I think forms is fine, it's the "many" in this redirect that doesn't seem right. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:12, 13 June 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.

Template:Events by Month[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 Template:Events by month as unopposed. -- Tavix (talk) 18:34, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't this redirect to Template:Events by month? I see 2 possible targets here. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 15:14, 12 June 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.

Indian crime detective series[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 16:01, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete overly specific target for vague title. "Series" could be a novel series or comics series as well as a TV series, and even just in TV there are other crime detective series like Suraag – The Clue. I can't find any overview article or category where this could be pointed. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 13:40, 12 June 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.

Business related redirects[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 21#Business related redirects

شرموطه[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 16:01, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RFOREIGN. From what I can tell, none of the entries at this disambiguation have any affinity with Arabic. -- Tavix (talk) 05:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This has really bizarre view statistics. It suddenly started getting hundreds of hits a day in July 2008 [1], then just as suddenly traffic fell off a cliff a year later [2] to around 1 hit/day and never recovered. In any case, barely anyone views it anymore, and we have no good target here or on sister projects: wikt:شرموطه doesn't exist, and ar:شرموطه redirects to their Prostitution article. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 10:10, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Yeah I made the redirect because of it being listed here as having over 500 clicks per day, but it must have been during that period that it came on the list. I wonder why. Happy for it to be deleted if community believes it doesn't serve a valuable purpose. Calaka (talk) 13:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Looks like a clear-cut case for deletion. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 13:02, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and add Arabic to the languages column on the left to link to Arabic Wikipedia if such an entry is there. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:19, 13 June 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.

Lawp[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 16:01, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea why this redirects here, but this has gotten less than 1 page view per day for the past 11 months. Crosswind kite power mentions "low-altitude wind power (LAWP)," so that could be a plausible (but obscure) retargeting option, but I think I'm leaning towards deletion. -- Tavix (talk) 04:32, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Deletep the all-caps version can deal with the wind power. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:12, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unlikely typo. 2 hits in the last 90 days. shoy (reactions) 13:18, 13 June 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.

Chloé Middle East[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete all. Deryck C. 12:21, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Since the target article doesn't explicitly mention these regions, these redirects can be seen as misleading. Someone searching this will want specific information, of which we have none. -- Tavix (talk) 04:02, 12 June 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.

Bad energy[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. Deryck C. 12:20, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Odd situation here. "Bad energy" is not mentioned in the target article. In addition, the antonomous redirect Good energy targets Good Energy, an article about a company. Steel1943 (talk) 21:25, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment sounds like Negative spiritual energy and Bad energy need those "redirects here" hatnotes. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:38, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the esoteric sense is what "bad energy" means - David Gerard (talk) 08:46, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the uses of "bad energy" that Google finds in Wikipedia lean predominantly towards this esoteric sense, though it's sometimes a bit of a stretch. There's also a possibility of "good" vs "bad" energy in the environmentalist concern about policies towards power generation and fuel use which may carry only a slight hint of this esoteric sense – but that usage will generally be clear in context. Is there something that can be added to the destination page that would make this better?  —jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 19:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 02:50, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep The article talks about "negative energy", which is obviously what is meant. Mangoe (talk) 10:41, 14 June 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 Trillion dollar club[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 restore content from page history that was boldly redirected. This semi-procedural close should seemingly be fairly agreeable to everyone below. It addresses the nominator's concern about lack of a mention at the target; the title is still being kept, so that should appease the participant advocating a keep on notability grounds; the other two participants have expressed consent for this action. Anyone who wishes to list what is now an article at AfD may do so without prejudice. (non-admin closure) —Godsy(TALKCONT) 03:48, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Trillion dollar club" is not mentioned in the target article, so the connection is unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 21:04, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep term is used in news articles. [3] but it should get a mention in the article to explain its definition. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:25, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 02:48, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete since the term still isn't mentioned and I don't think there's a good place for it. Perhaps a WP:REDLINK would help someone else figure out where a good place for content would be, but in the meantime, the red link would show we don't have anything on this. -- Tavix (talk) 18:32, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also fine with Deryck's suggestion of restoration. -- Tavix (talk) 13:43, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore article and send to AfD. It seems that substantial content was preserved in the page history and the article was boldly redirected due to sourcing concerns. I agree the redirect is unhelpful as it is, but we should let AfD decide if we should convert it back into a list article or redlink it. Deryck C. 10:37, 21 June 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.

Slowest organisms[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 both. The general consensus is that the current target is close enough / most plausible. When other articles about other slowest/fastest organisms are written, they can be retargeted or disambiguated. Deryck C. 12:17, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Organisms" ≠ "Animals". Steel1943 (talk) 22:01, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Unless we have a "slowest" and "fastest" article for non-animal organisms, which would make these redirects ambiguous (and thus still possibly useful as dab pages) these redirect targets are the most likely articles someone typing in "fastest organisms" or "slowest organisms" would be looking for. Rlendog (talk) 22:26, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do we have fast plants? Maybe the walking onion. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:20, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Seems sensible, although if someone wants to create fastest plants (or something) and dabify, I wouldn't oppose that either. shoy (reactions) 14:09, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There's fastest-growing plants but no article yet. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:19, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fastest growing plant, like bamboo, good point, maybe a hatnote would take care of it. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:07, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reverse redirect or retitle as "List of fastest/slowest organisms". I see no reason to limit the list to just animals, especially since there aren't many non-animals that move. -- Tavix (talk) 19:37, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no clear target or interpretation of fast or slow. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:29, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 02:46, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as nearly every moving creature is an animal anyway. Similar enough in this particular case. Whether to rename the articles can be a separate discussion. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 04:50, 13 June 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.

Kai Gjesdal[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Deryck C. 12:15, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an implausible [first + middle] name combination. I couldn't find evidence of him being referred to as "Kai Gjesdal" or "Kai Henning Gjesdal". -- Tavix (talk) 01:36, 12 June 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.

Painful breast[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Deryck C. 12:15, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

extremely unlikely Neelix redirect DGG ( talk ) 01:05, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as unlikely. Less than 1 hit per day. shoy (reactions) 13:17, 13 June 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_June_12&oldid=1088109521"