Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 May 30

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 30[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 30, 2016.

Malthusian Blues[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 7#Malthusian Blues

Salerno Bay[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 Gulf of Salerno. Deryck C. 21:56, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There actually is a Salerno bay in Port Salerno, Florida. Should that town be the target? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep - there's no information about the Salerno Bay in Port Salerno, as far as I can see. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:35, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Gulf of Salerno per all the many Google Books hits calling it "Salerno Bay" (in particular see [1]) and hatnote for the ship. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 04:26, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Gulf per IP. The current "what links here" shows articles where they are discussing other ships who arrived at Salerno, Italy and its bay there. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:59, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per IP and then hatnote. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:24, 4 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.

Bluegreen[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 ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:26, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(neelix) reverse the redirect? Microsoft Corporation lives at Microsoft. The only reason I guess this lives at Bluegreen Corporation is that this "blocks" it and someone wasn't WP:BOLD enough to move it over. There's another similar. Nothing wrong with the article of course (well not per se) Si Trew (talk) 22:36, 30 May 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.

Breast absence[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 withdrawn/keep ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:27, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Declined by User:RHaworth who has deleted quite a few of mine so I probably in my vain attempt at brevity made a cock up of the nom.

A few similar have gone off the Anomie list similarly so I thought this would be a no-brainer, but fair call if there is any doubt. The absense of breasts is not a kinda medical condition. This is a back formation essentially from a medical term to what someone who has a breast obsession might think of someone who hasn't breasts. People who have had a double mastectomy don't have breasts but that doesn't mean they have amastia. Si Trew (talk) 22:08, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, for the same reason I left this when I did my bulk deletion of Neelix's boobery. For once, this is one of Neelix's breast redirects which actually makes sense. Contrary to what Si says, amastia is the correct term for someone without breasts whether it's congenital or the result of mastectomy ("iatrogenically" is just a fancy way of saying "caused by a doctor"), and "breast absence" is an eminently plausible search term for someone who isn't familiar with the technical term. ‑ Iridescent 22:16, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Righty ho Keep as speedily withdrawn by nominator. Thanks to User:Iridescent for the second check. Si Trew (talk) 22:24, 30 May 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.

Armement Air-Sol Modulaire[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 withdrawn/keep ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:28, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Neelix) now this is where I start to doubt myself. This is exactly what it is called in the WP:FIRSTSENTENCE unless I am missing something. What am I missing? Si Trew (talk) 21:58, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm missing that the target is an abbreviation. We don't usually do that. Reverse the redirect? Si Trew (talk) 21:59, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as is. This is one of those cases like NATO or UNICEF where the abbreviation is the WP:COMMONNAME. This isn't a particularly unusual situation when it comes to military hardware; see AMRAAM, TASER or ASALM for a couple of obvious ones which spring to mind. ‑ Iridescent 22:12, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Righty ho thanks for the second check User:Iridescent Speedily keep withdrawn by nominator. Si Trew (talk) 22:26, 30 May 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.

Heteropurpura polymorpha[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 ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:30, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Neelix) Not sure. The pic cap has it with exactly these words but it is not in the article text or taxobox otherwise. Si Trew (talk) 21:19, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy keep Taxonomy of extinct organisms can be inexact, but the way the article is now, it looks to be a monotypic taxon. So the genus and the species are synonymous. --BDD (talk) 14:22, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Valid fossil species. It was listed in the "Species" section of the article, and I've now added it to the taxobox. Plantdrew (talk) 14:23, 31 May 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:You can see Hell from 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. Been there too, can confirm it's not that hellish. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:31, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just made it back from WP:RFA, and I'm pleased to report that I was not able to see Hell from there, which was nice. This redirect is WP:R#D5, nonsense, and it looks like a strange attempt at humor. I believe that is is a bad idea to "officially" advertise that RFA is a "hellish" place, especially since many people are trying to improve the process (eg: WP:RFA2015). I could think of a couple of better targets if we choose to keep it in some form, WP:SNOW being the first thing that comes to my mind. Since it is virtually unused, however, my preference is to delete it. -- Tavix (talk) 19:11, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:Tavix, I have been deliberately staying off of RFA because I did not want it to seem in any way that you WP:CANVASSed which I thought it might seem by my accident. Did you get it? Si Trew (talk) 21:08, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@SimonTrew: not at all unexpectedly, your attempt to avoid drama led to the most drama out of any comment at Tavix's RfA, spawning its own thread there, a thread on the talk page, a thread on the Bureaucrats noticeboard, and I think some commentary on your own talk page, which is well done even for RfA. And yes, Tavix is now among the mop-endowed. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:36, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Because I am trowling through these Neelix redirects nineteen to the dozen I seem to get a lot of attention at the moment whatever I do so I was trying to stay out of the way, that would not be fair on Tavix. Well done User:Tavix! Thanks User:Ivanvector for letting me know. Si Trew (talk) 22:39, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I didn't mean "did you get the joke" I meant "did you get the admin". Did I not make that clear? The joke's on me as always. Si Trew (talk) 22:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I got that, yeah, by "joke" I'm referring to the "strange attempt at humor" i.e. the redirect. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:42, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that one (I think I know which one you mean). And another editor created eighty thousand of them and I created one and got the blarney for it. I thought we'd moved on from that one. I realise this is irrelevant to the discussion of this particular redirect but I wanted to congratulate Tavix on getting the RfA, truly deserved. I must admit I truly missed your point User:Ivanvector because I didn't see the "strange attempt at humor" in the nomination, which wasn't mine, I just get told off if I put CSD's in doggerel or something so I assumed (not from you) it was another potshot at me. I get about four or five a day, usually. But I get about a hundred very silly redirects deleted a day. Si Trew (talk) 22:45, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • i'm wondering if some months into their new role, Tavix might not change their mind about the relevance of this redirect. 23:36, 30 May 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Uanfala (talk • contribs) [reply]
  • Hey, I said the redirect would be gone in less than six months, and it's survived almost five years! I don't really care what happens to this redirect. Harej (talk) 07:10, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:R#DELETE #3 and #5, makes no sense and abusive.
(@Tavix: Congrats for your adminship!)
Excerpt

:So ripple and wave like the bright dawning sky, oh thou glorious puzzle ball,

So that our every last article written may finally be blessed and worthy!
Neither you nor my kin shall ever be extinguished!
For co-operation is the absolute right of my ever-free emblem,
For verifiability is the absolute right of my courageous community,
For neutrality is the absolute right of my good-faithed nation!
— User:Champion, Wikipedia:Songs about Wikipedia/March of Wikipedia
(@SimonTrew::Remember this?)
- Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 07:58, 31 May 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.

Al-Farsi[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 7#Al-Farsi

Wattling[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 Wattle (construction). Deryck C. 21:57, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Neelix) hmm would this be a reasonable misspelling for Watling (a DAB)? Si Trew (talk) 14:09, 30 May 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.

Backcrest[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 7#Backcrest

Sothos[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 withdrawn/keep ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:21, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This one's on the edge (Neelix). We tend to have Germans, New Zealanders and so on but not every language you can form this way (I've taken some Lesotho ones to CSD), I am not sure if this makes sense. You could'nt have Irishes or Englands or Spains for example to mean the people from those places. Si Trew (talk) 12:02, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Plural term is used a lot in news articles as with Zulus. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:03, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay Speedily keep withdrawn by nominator. I took a few to CSD because the target lists the singular and plural in Bantu language but if you say it's fine, it's fine. (I mis guessed as thinking it was kiswahili with another). Si Trew (talk) 22:29, 30 May 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.

Sir Robert Catesby[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 without prejudice against recreation if evidence of his knighting can be found. -- Tavix (talk) 02:41, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm this is probably all right. He certainly was knighted, eventually, but we don't tend to stand on titles at Wikipedia. Is this OK it probably is. (Forgot to say Neelix redirect) Si Trew (talk) 18:48, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Title redirects seem to be fairly common (Sir Winston Churchill, Lady Thatcher, Sir Anthony Eden, Sir Alan Sugar, Baron Prescott...), so I'd allow it on those grounds. On the other hand, I'm not sure Catesby ever was knighted: our article doesn't say that he was, and nor does the Concise Dictionary of National Biography (which does list titles: a few entries above "Catesby, Robert" is "Catesby, Sir John"). Nor does the fuller online version of the ONDB mention it. So I'd suggest delete as incorrect title. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 09:13, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The question here seems to be, is he actually "Sir" Robert Catesby?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 11:50, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My Chambers Biographical Dictionary (ISBN 0-550-16040-X, ed. Magnus Magnusson, 1996 reprint) at p. 275 doesn't say that he was, either. Considering that he was "the chief instigator of the Gunpowder Plot and was "shot dead while resisting arrest" according to that, seems unlikely they'd give him a K, even posthumously. Delete as WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. When I said "he certainly was knighted" I was no doubt thinking of someone else (Sir Walter Raleigh or The Great Gatsby or someone, that's nonsense on my part). Now I should be taken out and shot for that howler. Si Trew (talk) 12:07, 30 May 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.

Arrow cresting[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 6#Arrow cresting

Battle of the Bastards[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 21:33, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As with No One (Game of Thrones) below, this episode name is at best unsourced, at worst made up; it's not immediately clear which. Moved from speedy. —Cryptic 09:21, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. These were announced by some German news agency and propagated through multiple news articles: [2] and [3]. It could be translated to "Battle of Bastards" though so I recommend WP:CRYSTALHAMMER on this one. When the English title is officially known, the article will be created proper. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:25, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Also if the episode were to fit this title scheme, you might as well call the show "Game of the Thrones". Let's wait it out. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:03, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Should not exist until the episode title is reliably sourced. Alex|The|Whovian? 22:26, 30 May 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.

No One (Game of Thrones)[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 kept per newly-introduced reliable source. Alex|The|Whovian? 14:50, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As with Battle of the Bastards above, this episode name is at best unsourced, at worst made up; it's not immediately clear which. Moved from speedy. (For both of these, this revert of the target article is enlightening.) —Cryptic 09:25, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Holding. These were announced by Sky Germany and propagated through multiple news articles: [4] and [5]. They could be wrong after which they can be deleted. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:11, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This one's still showing at their Sky Germany website: [6] open up the schedule (SENDETERMINE) and you'll start seeing entries at June 13. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:34, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Should not exist until the episode title is reliably sourced. Alex|The|Whovian? 22:26, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • No opinion per AngusWOOF. The target claims the episode will be broadcast on 12 June, and the title of the preceding episode was confirmed over a week ago, meaning we're very likely to get confirmation of the real title of this one while this RFD is ongoing. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 01:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The likelihood of this actually being the title diminished after this week's episode, seems like someone just making up names based on storylines that were already in swing. Can be re-created if officially confirmed. Calibrador (talk) 08:34, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
True that. Here's the HBO link to confirm the title in English. Nothing yet as of this time stamp. Let's get it deleted and add it later when it is announced. [7] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:52, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Maryam, mother of Isa[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 6#Maryam, mother of Isa

Maryam (mother of Isa)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 6#Maryam (mother of Isa)

Crooked Hillary[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 21:24, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Little Marco (discussion) and Lyin' Ted (discussion) were both deleted. I didn't express an opinion on those, and I don't plan to on this one. —Godsy(TALKCONT) 05:15, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see Trump using those nicknames beyond the campaign like The_Rush_Limbaugh_Show#Jargon where he's been using those nicknames for years. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:28, 30 May 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.

Millerisms[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) 02:36, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Neelix) This is in the hatnote but I am not sure quite why is it OK? There are loads more absured like joemillerizes that I have taken straight to CSD Si Trew (talk) 00:17, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Retarget to Miller (surname) This term is used in news articles for Johnny Miller, Reggie Miller, Frank Miller, Arthur Miller, and so forth. There is also a movement called Millerism but it doesn't have a bunch of quotes like how Millerisms is used now. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:46, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not a a real word or notable enough to have its own redirect. --Tom (LT) (talk) 00:32, 1 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.

Millerette[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 7#Millerette

Shelf of Russia[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) 21:49, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Neelix) Not sure. Yes it is {{R from short name}} but surely without the "Contintental" it doesn't really make much sense? I mean "Continental shelf" is a compound word you can't kinda just split it like that can you? I have taken others like Shelves of Russia (presumably some kind of Soviet bookshop?) straight to CSD. Si Trew (talk) 23:59, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - This just invites confusion. It's not like huge geological formations are the very first thing that come to mind when one reads the word "shelf". CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:14, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh there were plenty worse than this. A load on the Arctic shelves too, redirecting to the Continental Shelf of Russia. Now I am no expert on plate tectonics but since the frozen bit of the Arctic is, in a very broad sense, one massive iceberg or ice shelf it is a bit rich to take it to Russia when bits of it tends to bump into Canada, Greenland, Iceland etc too. It is not as if it is like the Antarctic as a solid landmass. It's essentially a vast ice cube. Total nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 11:55, 30 May 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_May_30&oldid=1088108990"