Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 March 21

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 21[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 21, 2016.

بیماری کرون[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) 21:12, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

per Wikipedia:RFOREIGN as its a common concept Igotrekt (talk) 22:12, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete WP:NOT a translation dictionary, no affinity for any particular language. --- Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 22:35, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete WP:NOTDIC Wikipedia is not a translation dictionary. General topic with no particular affinity for any language -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 04:09, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:28, 23 March 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.

Samsung(Name)[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) 21:11, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While the target does mention the etymology of the name Samsung, the "(name)" disambiguator is usually reserved for anthroponymy articles. There doesn't seem to be any notable people with the name, and it's got a couple formatting errors. It's best to delete this. -- Tavix (talk) 21:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. The formatting issues alone are reason enough to delete. - Eureka Lott 14:28, 25 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:G8, pages dependent on a nonexistent page.
Samsung (disambiguation) was deleted on 18 March 2016 by User:Graeme Bartlett as WP:G6, since it was a redirect to something other than a DAB. This title was originally moved to that target (in 2007), at that time this was a {{R from page move}}. In 2008, I think, the disambiguation page was changed to a redirect (I have asked for undeletion to check the history to be sure, but clues for bot-fixed double redirects tend to indicate so), and the target was moved in 2011 from Samsung Group. So with the bot fixes to avoid double redirects, it escapes the speedy deletion criterion of being a redirect dependent on a nonexistent page (WP:G8, was WP:R1), but that is essentially what it is. Si Trew (talk) 07:10, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Warning: Audit trail follows; not very interesting. A deletion discussion of April 2007, here, recommended this be moved to Samsung (disambiguation) (presumably without leaving a redirect; one !vote says "delete the redirect from Samsung(Name)"). The page Samsung(Name) does appear to have been moved to Samsung (disambiguation) on 4 May 2007; this page redirected there until 7 July 2008 when a bot fixed the double redirect so it went to Samsung Group: I presume that at that time, Samsung (disambiguation) was converted from a DAB into a redirect (I have asked for an undelete to check this for sure, but the bot-fixes give strong circumstantial evidence i.e. clues that it is the case).
At that time, Samsung Group was the article that is now at Samsung, it being moved there on 12 May 2011 by User:David Levy, who changed the target for this at the same time (rather than leave it to a bot: nothing wrong with that).
Samsung (disambiguation) was deleted on 18 March 2016 by User:Graeme Bartlett with the deletion remark "G6: This page has a "(disambiguation)" qualifier that's not redirecting to a disambiguation". Nothing should have linked to it by that time; certainly right now it has no links beyond this discussion.
In all this time Samsung(Name) has been following the target around like a stalker, just because nobody acted on the (implied and express) consensus to delete the d—d thing in 2007 after moving it. I presume the aim was to disambiguate uses such as Samsung Town, but that in the end it was felt that these were evident enough in the target article not to warrant disambiguation (Samsung Town being a company town.) Si Trew (talk) 07:32, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
16:50, 17 March 2016 . . Tavix (146 bytes) (Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G6). (TW))
15:45, 22 October 2011 . . 171.4.132.109 (38 bytes) ({{R from merge}})
20:49, 12 May 2011 . . David Levy m (21 bytes) (←Redirected page to Samsung)
18:40, 30 June 2008 . . Propaniac (27 bytes) (fixing double-redirect)
18:39, 30 June 2008 . . Propaniac (21 bytes) (redirect to Samsung; there do not appear to be any articles about any other meaning of Samsung and thus a disambig page is not necessary)
This seems to confirm that indeed it was converted to a redirect (by User:Propaniac) as unnecessary; I do think therefore this falls under the same hammer. Si Trew (talk) 09:29, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as there never was useful content to make any kind of article, and it does sound like a useless redirect. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:24, 27 March 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.

ROH's Untitled PPVs[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) 21:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as outdated. Since these PPV's all have titles, the redirects are incorrect and misleading. -- Tavix (talk) 20:56, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete these are like 9-10 years old and were only untitled for a short amount of time, no one would search for them on Wikipedia - Maybe on Google as trivia.  MPJ-US  11:27, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Not hurting anything, and old redirects shouldn't be deleted if they're not causing problems: see WP:RFD#KEEP point four, which in particular says that redirects created by pagemoves (including the ones in this discussion that I checked) shouldn't be deleted without good reason, which the statements given above aren't. Nyttend (talk) 15:32, 30 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete because "these PPV's all have titles, the redirects are incorrect and misleading" per nom. WP:R#D2.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 20:05, 30 March 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.

Yaoo[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) 21:08, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:XY, this could equally likely be a typo for a few things. Since the typo would involve someone leaving out an "h," why not a "z" for Yazoo? Or perhaps someone was looking for Yao and held the "o" key a little too long? -- Tavix (talk) 18:04, 21 March 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.

Cherophobia (phobia)[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) 17:18, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary disambiguation in title (we already have a redirect to the same page at cherophobia). This title was created due to a misguided page move. Gnome de plume (talk) 15:29, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I think this can be deleted under WP:G6 or WP:G7. For future, there is a section for requesting that undiscussed moves be reverted at WP:RM. An admin can move the page back without leaving a redirect. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 17:47, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. "Cherophobia" in the target's lede is tagged as {{cn}}; searching around there seems little RS for it, and I'm not the only one to think so. I don't know how much that comes under WP:RFD#D8 "a novel or very obscure synonym" since we can reliably say that it is used unreliably. this says that "The origin of the word chero is Greek (meaning to rejoice; gaiety or happiness) and phobia is Greek (meaning fear)"; Wiktionary has its etymology as "probably" from Ancient Greek χαρά (chará) 'joy, pleasure', and -phobia, and notes that it "mainly appears in novelty word lists". Si Trew (talk) 10:25, 27 March 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.

Space program[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. I suspect this could remain deadlocked until someone does something WP:BOLD. --BDD (talk) 17:15, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

retarget, not every space program is run by a government Prisencolin (talk) 04:58, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Spaceflight. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. If we don't have an article entitled "X", it makes sense for "X" to redirect to "List of X", but in this case List of space programs redirects to the list of government space agencies, so we redirect Space program to that list because we'd have a double redirect otherwise. Unless you want to bring List of space programs to RFD also, it looks like the best choice is to suggest renaming the target list and expanding its scope to include non-governmental space programs. Nyttend (talk) 11:41, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It is a bad name, which implies there is one, single monolithic space program. There is no such thing, and I can't think of an appropriate target to redirect it to. Plus, it omits private space programs. If this were the 1950s or 1960s, and Wikipedia were only concerned with the United States, the name would be appropriate (but then the target list would not exist.) I don't think anything worthwhile is lost by deleting it. JustinTime55 (talk) 13:50, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget at suggested above. My first choice is Spaceflight, second is Space policy. Gnome de plume (talk) 15:31, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:REDLINK. Odd to have a redirect target an article about a subject that doesn't even accurately describe the subject of the list article. (Yes, I believe that List of space programs should be deleted as well.) In my opinion, there is currently no subject that has either been recommended thus far or that I can find that accurately describes this subject, especially given that space isn't exclusive to humans. Steel1943 (talk) 23:52, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I've Listed List of space programs at 27 March's log. I think we should do for that whatever we do for this. No objection if they are combined, but the listings are six days apart. Si Trew (talk) 08:27, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I agree with Steel1943; neither one makes any sense and they both should be deleted. A "List of space programs" does not seem in fact to exist, and "Space program" would only make sense if it described generically what a space program is. My only concern is, will combining them into one RfD make it harder to get them both deleted? JustinTime55 (talk) 13:04, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and turn it into a disambiguation page. (I said at the RfD for List of space programs that I didn't care if Space programs went away, but I've changed my mind. I was young in the Sputnik era when space programs were a big deal. It is still a current term in books and articles.) We should have a search term that goes somewhere. Currently:
StarryGrandma (talk) 06:27, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate - Space programs aren't limited to government anymore, and as such, the current target doesn't cover everything this general term needs to cover. Spaceflight and Space policy are suggested above, but they don't list all space programs this encyclopedia has information about, hence they aren't good targets either.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 08:16, 4 April 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.

IBM Canada Ltd[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) 21:05, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All not mentioned. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 04:55, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In mainspace, IBM Canada Ltd is used only in Santanu Paul, piped as "IBM Canada Fellowship", and Corruption in Canada, piped as plain "IBM"; IBM Canada Limited is not used at all. IBM Canada is used in five biographies. All these uses are better served by redlinks. Si Trew (talk) 11:00, 27 March 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.

Acer India[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 Acer Inc.#India. --BDD (talk) 21:04, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target (Gee, there are a whole bunch of these!) - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 04:51, 21 March 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.

Nokia Pakistan[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) 21:03, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 04:49, 21 March 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.

G00gl3[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) 21:02, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at satiric misspelling, and not official. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 04:47, 21 March 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.

Microsoft Pakistan[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) 21:02, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of this at the target page. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 04:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep a Google search of this suggests that Microsoft has operations in Pakistan. This info should be added somewhere. --Prisencolin (talk) 05:01, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Someone searching for information on Microsoft's operations in Pakistan or Canada will not be helped by the target, making the redirect misleading. -- Tavix (talk) 16:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Tavix. Steel1943 (talk) 23:44, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both per WP:REDLINK, per Tavix and previous RfD discussions about country-specific redirects to targets that don't mention them. Plenty of other articles mention these specific entities, so to send to a target that doesn't mention them is WP:RFD#D2 confusing and harmfully inhibits a reader's casual search (e.g. I searched for "microsoft in canada" and "microsoft in pakistan" to avoid the automatic redirects). Si Trew (talk) 09:55, 27 March 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.

Apple's[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) 21:00, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Vague search term, not sure if apple will do. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 04:40, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment this does not make sense to me. If kept, retarget to apple (disambiguation) -- 70.51.46.39 (talk) 06:11, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Ambiguous: It could used in regard to the fruit (e.g. "the apple's stem was broken") as well as the the company (e.g. "Apple's new IPhone was released yesterday"). There is no capitalization distinction as the first letter of a page title is always capitalized. The fruit would be the primary topic if it comes down to a keep/retarget consensus (WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT), though it's probably more commonly used in the other sense present day.—Godsy(TALKCONT) 21:03, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Redirects with 's are usually a piping shortcut. Instead of typing [[Apple Inc.|Apple's]], it's easier and more convenient to use the redirect. There's 10 mainspace incoming links, and it appears they all take advantage of this shortcut. As far as the word "apple's" (think about it separately from the word "apple"), I do think Apple Inc. is the primary topic. The fruit is rarely used in the possessive, although it's possible (eg: the apple's stem is broken). It's much more likely for the company to use this form (example from SpringBoard: "Apple's release of iPhone OS..."). -- Tavix (talk) 22:04, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Godsy. An expectation cannot be set for the reader that an "Apple" subject with the 's at the end always refers to the company when that is not what the article at the base name Apple is about. Steel1943 (talk) 23:57, 21 March 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.

File:Photo.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. --BDD (talk) 20:59, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think that doing what File:Map.jpg or alike redirects do, is better than having it as a soft redirect. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 00:24, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong delete Will be harmful if there is eventually a file uploaded by that name. --- Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 04:42, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is what's done at Commons with generic names: instead of having lots of generic filenames with the same "pick a more descriptive name" image, we have one with the "pick a more descriptive name" image and redirect the rest to it. See Commons:File:Untitled.JPG or Commons:File:Me.jpg for a couple of examples. Could you explain why you think this is a bad idea? Among other things, it makes it seem as if there are lots of files with identical content, because we're using the same image as the warning for each of them. Champion, how do you propose that someone would be uploading a file by this name, anyway? After creating the redirect, I protected it fully. Are admins going to override the protection and upload a file by this name? Nyttend (talk) 11:38, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and salt per recent FFD outcomes. - Eureka Lott 19:50, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and salt per nom. Steel1943 (talk) 23:46, 21 March 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_March_21&oldid=1142901234"