Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 8[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 8, 2016.

Beaded[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 16#Beaded

Big happens here[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 00:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a tag line for some sort to discontinued promotion for either tourism or incentive to move to New York. Either way, the phrase is not mentioned in the target article and the phrase would not necessarily represent its current target given the aforementioned information. Steel1943 (talk) 22:53, 8 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.

Big elvis[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 16#Big elvis

Big Damn Heroes[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) 01:24, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Big damn heroes" seems to be part of a quote used in an episode of Firefly. Also, this isn't the complete quote: The complete quote seems to be "Big damn heroes, sir." Also, it seems that the "Big damn heroes" phrase eventually became the subject of a meme deriving from this series, so the phrase may be notable enough that these redirects should be deleted per WP:REDLINK, especially considering that the redirects are not mentioned in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 21:49, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think it needs to be more of a catchphrase like Beam me up Scotty with secondary source commentary. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:00, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Found it used in The Honourable Schoolboy by John Le Carre 1977 [1] No idea if that's what inspired the Firefly version. It's used in of course the Firefly critical analysis books. But it should be mentioned in the target somewhere. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:39, 9 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.

Big-headed[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  — Amakuru (talk) 21:45, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Big-headed" isn't exclusive to "Big-headed rice rat", nor does a "big-headed rice rat" seem to be known simply as "big-headed", making the redirect a misleading and ambiguous WP:PTM. Steel1943 (talk) 21:38, 8 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.

Redirects to List of pornographic subgenres[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. -- Tavix (talk) 19:43, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A group of redirects that have the same target which the redirects themselves are ambiguous, and also do not have non-hyphenated variants existing on Wikipedia (Big bust, Big breast, Big boob, Boy girl). For one, Big boobs (currently nominated for WP:RFD itself) targets Breast and the term "boy girl" is ambiguous as a term that could have other meanings. Having these terms redirect to a list of pornographic genres is probably WP:ASTONISHing and would best be served as red links so that the search function on Wikipedia can help readers find what they are looking for. Steel1943 (talk) 21:26, 8 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.

Dennis Yan[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 00:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:XY; see also Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 June 22#Tommy Vannelli Joeykai (talk) 20:58, 8 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.

Big ass table[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 00:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The only reference that I found that connects the term of the redirect with the target is this YouTube video. It seems that this term is a parody of sorts, but is not mentioned in the article and is not an official alternative name for the target. Steel1943 (talk) 14:31, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not a notable nickname. Anything could be "big ass". AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:26, 9 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.

Sporting Club Toulon[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 procedural close. Permission is granted to write article over the redirect, or move draft article over redirect when a draft is written in userspace or draftspace. @Gricehead: Please contact me or any admin when the draft is ready and we'll move it for you. Deryck C. 15:30, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For the 2016–17 football season, Sporting Toulon Var and SC Toulon-Le Las are to merge to form a new club, called Sporting Club Toulon. This redirect, therefore, needs to be a (stub) page in it's own right rather than a redirect to one of the constituent teams in the merger. Suggest the Redirect is Deleted to allow creation of the page. [2] Gricehead (talk) 10:58, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If the merge discussion has already been done, then request technical deletion WP:G6. But I don't see the discussion anywhere? Should the new club have its own article? Sporting Toulon Var has been around since 1944 and SC Toulon-Le Las since 1965. Are they starting over completely with the merge? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:27, 9 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.

Wikipedia:Three month VfD policy[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 16#Wikipedia:Three month VfD policy

Rumbly[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 for now. If someone can find a source then they're welcome to re-create it. Deryck C. 15:18, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Neelix) Has this place ever been called simply Rumbly? If not, it's a WP:PTM, and there's a few other articles that use Rumbly in the title. -- Tavix (talk) 04:30, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • I imagine this town was formed as a result of two towns named Rumbly and Frenchtown merging together. However, that does not seem to be supported by any source I can find. MelanieLamont (talk) 20:37, 9 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.

Etre[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 16#Etre

Stewart Parnell[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 16#Stewart Parnell

Magic Jug[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 00:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I came across this redirect by navigating Template:Outdoor sculptures in Belfast. 'Magic Jug' is a cancelled public art sculpture in Belfast. I think the name is a bit generic and I don't think it's worthy for a redirect on Wikipedia. There are various sources online about the sculpture, but redirecting it to a government department is silly. The redirect should be deleted. st170etalk 02:07, 8 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.

Deletion of television network template redirects[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.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:22, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Below is a list of television network templates (those listed at {{U.S. network show templates}}), and their redirects. The parent templates are bolded, and their redirects are listed in dot point notation below them. I've gone through with AWB and replaced the redirect templates with their parent templates, meaning that the redirects are no longer in use and are no longer necessary. I propose that they be deleted. Alex|The|Whovian? 15:53, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Templates
Template:U.S. network show templates (talk · links · edit)
Template:The CW programming (talk · links · edit)
Template:Univision programming (talk · links · edit)
Template:Adult Swim original programming (talk · links · edit)
Template:Disney Channel Original Series (talk · links · edit)
Template:Disney XD Original Series (talk · links · edit)
Template:Freeform (talk · links · edit)
Template:FX network programming (talk · links · edit)
Template:HBONetwork Shows (talk · links · edit)
Template:History shows (talk · links · edit)
Template:MSNBC programming (talk · links · edit)
Template:MTV Network programs (talk · links · edit)
Template:Nickelodeon original series and Nicktoons (talk · links · edit)
Template:Oprah Winfrey Network programs (talk · links · edit)
Template:Showtime Network programming (talk · links · edit)
Template:Starz Shows (talk · links · edit)
Template:Syfy Shows (talk · links · edit)
Template:Amazon Video original series (talk · links · edit)
Template:Hulu (talk · links · edit)
  • Keep all per WP:CHEAP and since they serve as useful search terms for those trying to find their target templates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Steel1943 (talk • contribs) 16:45, 8 June 2016‎ (UTC)[reply]
Yes, redirects are cheap, but they serve no purpose and are not used anywhere on the site. (Also, signing your post would be mighty handy.) Alex|The|Whovian? 17:17, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(Correcting that with {{Unsigned}} is pretty handy as well.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:29, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Right, they're no longer used anywhere on the site because, at your own admission, you bypassed all of the existing redirects. I know at WP:TFD, orphaning or replacing a template in the same manner to prove it unused is considered "bad form" by some of its participants. (Granted, I'm not a fan of transclusions to incoming redirects to templates either, but replacing them then considering unhelpful due to them "...not [being] used anywhere on the site..." is misleading at best.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:44, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If it's misleading, please point me to where they are currently being used. Alex|The|Whovian? 01:55, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Since you bypassed the redirects, you created a circular argument that can no longer be answered. Steel1943 (talk) 04:17, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral - While I find the replacement of all the redirect templates with their parent templates without consensus disagreeable, I don't necessarily think these should be retained.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 04:10, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So, you believe that they should be deleted? Not sure why a consensus is needed to replace old deprecated templates. Obviously they were moved to the now-parent templates after their own individual discussions and consensuses. Alex|The|Whovian? 12:09, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all. Redirects are cheap, non-mainspace redirects are even cheaper. There's no need to change any template redirect unless the redirect title is misleading or there are competing targets. Deryck C. 15:16, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: These redirects have been used in the past, so they're helpful to those who have used them. There needs to be a reason to delete these redirects (eg: they are harmful, confusing, spam, nonsensical, obscure). Since I haven't seen one (not being used isn't a reason to delete redirects), I'm defaulting to keep here. -- Tavix (talk) 19:22, 15 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_8&oldid=1138581105"