Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 March 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 27[edit]

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

Аллаһ[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. Just Chilling (talk) 22:58, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target; WP:RFOREIGN, no special affinity to Bakshir or any other language (save the language from which the English word is derived, i.e. Arabic). No incoming links, stats below noise level. Si Trew (talk) 20:57, 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.

Paul Miller (American journalist)[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) SSTflyer 10:15, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Former article about a non-notable tech journalist, now incorrectly redirects to another unrelated article. No articles link to this redirect anymore. Chris Ssk talk 19:06, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as an {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}. Not incorrect. Si Trew (talk) 20:25, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep harmless, useful search term. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 02:41, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but I'm not so sure this is harmless, since the former article was about a different person than the current target, and they are both American journalists. When the former subject was deemed not notable it was redirected to The Verge. Let's keep it but add a hatnote to The Verge at the target. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:37, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was about to add the hatnote, but on second thought, there's really not that much info on Paul Miller in the Verge article. Let's just leave it as is then. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:43, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I thought about that – whether external links might end up at the "wrong" article. But taking that line would imply that we could never retarget any redirect, nor move or delete any page, nor substantially alter its content. The remedy is for external sites to cultivate their own gardens, or use permalinks. Si Trew (talk) 15:13, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate between the two guys, unless one's considered the primary topic. I don't see a reason to delete this. Nyttend (talk) 04:19, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Paul Miller (journalist) was president/chairman of the Associated Press for 14 years, he's clearly the primary topic. The other Paul Miller warrants only the briefest of mentions in the article for a paper he worked on. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 18:07, 31 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You're right; I misread the situation. As there's a clear primary topic, keep because Paul Miller the journalist is definitely Paul Miller the American journalist. I don't see the existence of the prior history being a problem, but if it is, a G6 selective deletion to clean out the history (i.e. delete the page and then restore the revisions that aren't a separate article) would be reasonable. Nyttend (talk) 03:27, 2 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.

Tesla Electric Car[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 Tesla Motors per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:46, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This target should redirect to Tesla Motors (just like Tesla electric car is now) as that is clearly a primary topic, not Mr. Tesla's hoax. <<< SOME GADGET GEEK >>> (talk) 17:45, 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.

List of space programs[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've closed the other discussion as such. --BDD (talk) 17:16, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_March_21#Space_program. I'd combine these if it weren't for the five-day separation in dates. Do whatever we do for Space program'. Si Trew (talk) 08:25, 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.

Ben-Ami Kadish[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 moved by Ricky81682; procedural close. (non-admin closure) Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:40, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Ben-ami Kadish needs to move to Ben-Ami Kadish because that is the name (capitalization) used consistently in the article. Anomalocaris (talk) 08:23, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've proposed CSD WP:G6 for this. No significant history. Si Trew (talk) 17:10, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing note: @Anomalocaris: in future, you can request this sort of move using the {{db-move}} speedy deletion template. Add this to the top of the redirect: {{db-move|1=PAGE TO BE MOVED HERE|2=REASON FOR MOVE}}. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:40, 29 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.

Miss february 1990[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) 19:14, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete! Playboy has featured its centerfold since the first issue in February 1953, but of over 800 possible "Miss (month year)" Wikipedia articles or redirects, this is the only one; if undeleted this redirect could prompt a well-meaning editor to create the entire series starting Miss February 1953, and I don't believe we want that; the capitalization is wrong; nothing links here; even the target article does not use the term "Miss February"; created in error; Delete! —Anomalocaris (talk) 08:12, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • No opinion - I WP:DEPRODded because WP:PROD is only supposed to be used for articles, not because I oppose deletion. ~Kvng (talk) 14:45, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as WP:RFD#D2 confusing, WP:XY. Could be Miss Feb of any number of publications. In any case isn't it "Playmate of the Month"? So WP:RFD#D5 nonsense, too. Si Trew (talk) 20:15, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per Si Trew --Lenticel (talk) 00:11, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This unused redirect under consideration here is misspelled, and it could refer to a variety of things, since I don't know how many Miss February 1990s there are out there. Guy1890 (talk) 21:04, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per above - Useless redirect which fails D2 anyway. –Davey2010Talk 22:08, 31 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.

Bubixaqle[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 Speedily deleted by User:Shirt58 as WP:G7 author requests deletion. (non-admin closure) by Si Trew (talk) 06:23, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I can't figure out what this is from my searches. Whatever it is, I believe either WP:R#D5 (nonsense) or WP:RFOREIGN is sufficient. -- Tavix (talk) 00:02, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator, I can't recall why I made this redirect. Delete per nom and sorry for any inconvenience.– Gilliam (talk) 00:04, 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_March_27&oldid=1138581152"