Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 October 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 26[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 26, 2016.

어둠의 왼손[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 November 4#어둠의 왼손

松尾早人 (artist)[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 as useless foreign-language redirects with superfluous English disambiguators. Deryck C. 15:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

One Japanese and two Chinese redirects whose targets are the correct nationalities, but the fact that their titles are mixed-language is problematic. Delete. — Gorthian (talk) 21:21, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete the Japanese one at least. Even on the Japanese Wikipedia there is only one Hayato Matsuo, so the disambiguation is unnecessary. I agree with the nominator that the mixed languages means the Chinese ones should be deleted too. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 00:17, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete 松尾早人 (artist). A redirect already exists for "松尾早人", that this disambiguation is not necessary. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:04, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • AngusWOOF, the same applies to the other two; do you want to include those as well? — Gorthian (talk) 19:05, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Gorthian, yeah, delete those other two. Same reason. The Chinese wikipedia doesn't have multiple entries to disambiguate. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:54, 1 November 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.

김광석 (artist)[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 as useless foreign-language redirects with superfluous English disambiguators. Deryck C. 15:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, these are all Korean targets, and the redirects are the Korean names. But these redirects all have mixed-language titles, and I don't think they're of much use to anyone, so they should be deleted. — Gorthian (talk) 20:51, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've realized that the first three in this list should have been included above, but I'm not going to change the listings now; it would be too disruptive. But note that the first three do have corresponding redirects without the parenthetical English disambiguator, which makes these even more superfluous.
The digital-single redirects have no corresponding Korean-only redirects. But they should all be deleted, not only because of their mixed languages but because they are all very unlikely search terms—long and lots of parentheses. — Gorthian (talk) 19:20, 31 October 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.

Red Reamer[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) 21:44, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The current target's alternate name and fictional race is called "Red Arremer". This redirect's spelling seems like too much of a misspelling to even be useful. Searches for "Red reamer" on search engines turn up mostly with results for the Detroit Red Wings for an unclear reason. Steel1943 (talk) 22:26, 17 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete typing in this term may make "Arremer" show up, but there's no evidence that Reamer is an official nickname. It would just take some published video game reviewers to indicate otherwise. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:29, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Give me roughly a week or so and I should be able to track down some sources that have this as a name that, at least in the past, was used in reliable sources. 71.203.65.214 (talk) 12:18, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: At the least, this gives 71.203.65.214 ample the time that they requested for their endeavor.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Godsy (TALKCONT) 18:35, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I could see this being a mispronunciation or mis-hearing of Red Arremer, but since nobody uses it, let's just get rid of it. — Gorthian (talk) 21:45, 27 October 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.

Grab'm by the Pussy[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 Donald Trump and Billy Bush recording controversy. -- Tavix (talk) 02:11, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This should be retargeted to Donald Trump and Billy Bush recording controversy, as Grab them by the pussy does. Will.i.am recorded the anti-Trump video, pertaining to the outrage, around a week after the lewd tape leaked, according to a quick Google search (see Grab'm by the Pussy). --Nevé–selbert 19:00, 26 October 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.

Independents in House of Lords[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) 02:09, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects are only used in infobox for House of Lords and stuck within piped links each time, which generally negates the purpose of a redirect. Farolif (talk) 15:56, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References to pages that did not exist were created originally by yourself Farolif and these pages were then created because of your disruptive editing. The talk page is here House_of_Lords#Jamming_independents_into_unaffiliated Domdeparis (talk) 16:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Delete - These may be helpful, I suppose, but they're awkward and clumsy. I think I'd prefer to get rid of all of these. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:54, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment To try and put a stop to Farolif's need for drama and what seems to be disruptive editing just to try and prove a point I have done away with the link to the different pages and directly made a piped link to the page that deals with these cases Non-affiliated members of the House of Lords. Could CoffeeWithMarkets give me his opinion on this? Farofil had originally created links to pages that don't exist to try and hammer his point home by creating these links and editing out the colour boxes for the 4 groups of members.

I don't understand why he did it unless he was trying to make the infobox look as messy as possible to create controversy and/or canvass support which I find hard to believe...I hope now he will get over this and move onto something else as he must understand that he doesn't own this page or the very tedious templates that he has created to administer the page. Every time there is a multiple change in the members instead of just changing the infobox it is now necessary to change each template by adding in a ton of unnecessary information each time that is only visible when editing the template. The one positive point from all this drama is that I have acquired new editing skills! Domdeparis (talk) 07:06, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep harmless. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 21:42, 27 October 2016 (UTC).[reply]
  • Meh, leaning delete. "Independent Labour" etc are genuine designations used by the House of Lords, mainly for renowned individuals with former party affiliations who were appointed to the Lords as an independent, or who were expelled by their former parties. So the current targets are correct, so to say. But the parenthetical designation makes me think these redirects aren't useful to anybody in any way... Deryck C. 15:24, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per CoffeeWithMarkets. My main two concerns here are the clumsy "(Lords)" disambiguation, and that with only one member each for "Independent Social Democrat" and "Independent Ulster Unionist", those become misleading once those members go. --BDD (talk) 21:42, 3 November 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.

地震[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) 21:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is the English Wikipedia and we don't need redirect in another language — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:DA8:201:3512:9D96:FC75:9EFB:1EA4 (talk) 14:42, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete this natural calamity has no special affinity with the Chinese language --Lenticel (talk) 00:47, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Harmless. Useful. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 18:49, 28 October 2016 (UTC).[reply]
  • Delete per nom. WP:RFFL common word. This isn't typhoon or tsunami. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 05:34, 29 October 2016 (UTC) updated 15:07, 31 October 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.

Thillu Mullu (2011 film)[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. 15:11, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This was never the title of the film. Kailash29792 (talk) 12:03, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep According to the article it redirect to, "The film's title was changed from Thillu Mullu to Mirattal in November 2011.[1]"

References

  1. ^ Thillu Mullu Is Now Mirattal - R Madesh - Thillu Mullu - Vinay - Santhanam - Ganja Karuppu - - Tamil Movie News - Behindwoods.com. Mirattal is touted to release on August 2nd, 2012.
  • Keep, since it's explained in the article. — Gorthian (talk) 01:59, 27 October 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_October_26&oldid=1088108566"