Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 5[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 5, 2016.

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 keep. WP:SNOW at this point in time, no point in keeping it open another day. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 02:39, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have a feeling that this redirect should be retargeted to Hillary Clinton. She is undoubtedly the most likely WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, as far as I can tell. --Neve–selbert 23:55, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete A redirect that consists of only a first name is not going to work. There are so many possible targets and I don't see a disambiguation page for a first name in the future. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:04, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
When there are several people with the same name, it's common practice to create an Anthroponymy index for that name (It's not a disambiguation page, but functions similarly). "So many possible targets" isn't a reason to delete. -- Tavix (talk) 00:16, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Tavix: That's what Hilary (name) (which also serves for those bearing the name "Hillary") is, correct?— Godsy (TALKCONT) 00:32, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. -- Tavix (talk) 00:36, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • For the record, I'm not opposed to keeping it as-is or retargeting to Hilary (name). I am opposed to deletion though. -- Tavix (talk) 00:48, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Hilary and Hillary should go to the dab page, as with Mary. Unless she's going to go by the singular name as with Pele, there's no reason why she should be the primary topic. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:27, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as {{R from alternative spelling}}. The current target directs people to Hilary (name) (which lists Hillary Clinton) and various other targets as it should. Hilary is clearly the primary topic. Strongly oppose retargeting to Hillary Clinton. If a subject is known mononymously by "Hillary", they can be listed at the current target.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 00:28, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Keep as a redirect from an alternative spelling --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:43, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Who would search for anyone simply by a first name, if someone does search for this, chances are that they are looking for a specific person whose last name they have forgotten, retargeting would be of no help. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 03:52, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, as "Hillary" has no primary meaning in a global context. – Fayenatic London 11:55, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, it makes sense to redirect to the Hil(l)ary dab page which has link to the (name) page for given names and surname. PamD 13:14, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. it's basically an alternate spelling, applicable to more than one person. DGG ( talk ) 21:13, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The redirect goes to a reasonable enough disambiguation page, which in turn has information about the name of "Hillary" and other such things. I think it's fine. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:58, 8 September 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.

JAC Capital[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. -- Tavix (talk) 16:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Namedrop redirect" - created to point to one instance of a subsidiary company's name appearing in another article. There's no reason given that anyone would look for this, and even if they did, it wouldn't be beneficial. MSJapan (talk) 18:48, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. In the 90 days ending yesterday, 173 people used this redirect. I can find no evidence that they are independently notable, so a redlink would not be desirable. This redirect takes people to the information we have, albeit limited, so it's serving a useful purpose. Thryduulf (talk) 22:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - and according to yesterday's log, 600 people used the redirect for "sex videos" in Arabic. When you don't know whether it's a web crawler or a person, 1.5 hits per day doesn't say a lot if that's the only rationale. MSJapan (talk) 14:20, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • MSJapan, the new Pageviews Analysis tool is set by default to show users (humans) only; it doesn't include bots or spiders, though the setting can be changed if one wanted to see them. — Gorthian (talk) 21:17, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, absent evidence of another JAC Capital. Mentioned in article and gets views. The high views for the Arabic "sex videos" is bizarre, but there were other reasons to delete it. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 02:43, 11 September 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.

Adult content[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) 16:19, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Could seemingly refer to graphic violence or other things. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 18:28, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - classic WP:XY problem, with no real promary. "Adult content" means far too many different things. MSJapan (talk) 19:37, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per MSJapan. There are too many possible meanings and targets for this. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:05, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Pay television content descriptors#Content ratings which has a definition of Adult Content classification. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:21, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now as a bit vague --Lenticel (talk) 00:26, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate - there aren't that many meanings. It can refer to Pornography, Graphic violence, An American pay TV content descriptor, some more? Also we should probably go ahead and discuss Mature content which has been a redirect for 9 years now. M. A. Bruhn (talk) 08:16, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good idea, disambiguate. – Fayenatic London 11:56, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment also see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 3#Adult themed.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 21:43, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete to encourage article creation. This would not make a good dab page; it would just get tagged as {{dabconcept}}. — Gorthian (talk) 01:02, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Just off of the top of my head, graphic violence and frank discussion of controversial themes such as illegal drug use both qualify as "adult-content" and yet neither of which are (necessarily) sexual. As well, featuring a lot of material not suitable for children is quite a different thing than aiming for titillation or 'gotcha'-type feelings. The last film that I personally saw in theaters is Sully, and it's something that I wouldn't take a nine year old to see (the clear-cut, documentary style display of dozens of people nearly dying is genuinely horrific even if it ends positively). Yet it's, of course, hardly like a pay-per-view 'skin flick'. I can see article creation as possibly a good idea as per Gorthian's comment. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:14, 12 September 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.

Jay Z Albums Discography[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 01:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This was purposely moved by WP:RM without a redirect because the title was non-conforming. This editor then recreated it anyway. MSJapan (talk) 17:58, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete the lower-case version is sufficient to handle the search. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:22, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • But not people who enter the upper case URL directly, follow links to the upper case version (from within our outside the English Wikipedia), have the upper case version bookmarked or use any other case sensitive methods of searching or browsing articles. Thryduulf (talk) 20:23, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Keep per WP:CHEAP. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:19, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This kind of {{R from alternate capitalization}} gets created all the time and is useful. — Gorthian (talk) 19:18, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - It seems like a helpful redirect that's a clear-cut case of {{R from alternate capitalization}}. I wouldn't delete this. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:59, 8 September 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.

2016 Delta Air Lines power outage[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 12#2016 Delta Air Lines power outage

Solid Gold (Nikki Yanofsky album)[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 Nikki Yanofsky. --BDD (talk) 20:21, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No WP:PRIMARY. This redirect was created as fancruft when the album title was announced, but the album hasn't been released, and there's not a single RS on the album or a single word about the album in the artist's article. The single this currently redirects to fails WP:NMUSIC, and is likely going to be deleted as a result. Therefore, there's nowhere for this redirect to point to that would be useful. MSJapan (talk) 17:50, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. If the target article is deleted then this can be speedy deleted per WP:CSD#G8, there is no benefit in nominating it separately. Thryduulf (talk) 22:24, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete to make way for redlink for album. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:29, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Keep per WP:CHEAP or redirect to Nikki Yanofsky. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:21, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a redirect to Nikki Yanofsky (not the song) per redirects are cheap. Part of the reason this was redirected to her BLP, rather than simply being deleted, was to help forestall its premature recreation as a poorly sourced article about an album that hasn't been released yet. If and when the album is released and reliable source coverage about it starts to show up, then it will qualify for recreation as an article — but given that Nikki Yanovsky is one of those youth-pop artists whose audiences have a special tendency to overdo the fancruft, there's no pressing need for this to be deleted or left as a redlinked open invitation to premature recreation so long as it's still an unreleased album that can be sourced only to her own social media posts. Bearcat (talk) 20:02, 7 September 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.

Han Chinese (唐人)[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 01:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term due to mixed script. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 09:29, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

唐人 does point to Han Chinese, however. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 10:44, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - if each part alone points to the same target, a mixed script version is useless, because you'll never hit it in the search. MSJapan (talk) 19:34, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete awkward scripting as disambiguator. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:30, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per the above comments CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:35, 9 September 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.

爱国主义[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 01:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This literally means "patriotism", and is a general concept, no need to redirect to a more specific topic anyway, so delete. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 09:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nominator. Just means "patriotism". Does not mean "Chinese nationalism". Other countries such as Singapore also use simplified Chinese characters, so this has the same WP:XY problem as the traditional-character version 愛國主義 (which we deleted two years ago). 210.6.254.106 (talk) 10:37, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - it's actually pretty nationalist to think that anything writeen in "your" language is pertinent only to "your" country, but we don't traffic in irony here. Just to pile on, the same word is also the one used in Japan for the same concept. So there's definitely no cultural tie here. MSJapan (talk) 19:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as vague --Lenticel (talk) 00:28, 6 September 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.

With god[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 With God - Part 1.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:03, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:XY: vague description or euphemism for all sorts of stuff (having religion, being dead, etc.), but AFAIK nothing actually called by this name (aside from With God - Part 1, which I don't think is a great target either). 210.6.254.106 (talk) 08:19, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget - the South Korean film link given actually *is* the best alternative, and I could see it as a plausible target if someone was to look for it. MSJapan (talk) 19:28, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget' to With God - Part 1. It's very plausible that someone will expect Wikipedia coverage of both parts in a single article. Thryduulf (talk) 23:34, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to With God - Part 1. Seems to be the best target so far --Lenticel (talk) 00:27, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per IP. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:31, 6 September 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.

Name generator[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 both.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:05, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Both of these are former dicdef stubs which got turned into redirects. They aren't discussed at the targets. As far as I can see they are only trivially mentioned anywhere else (e.g. in articles about games), but I might have missed something. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 06:19, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I don't think people are going to search here for than and get what they're expecting. Not everything needs a redirect. MSJapan (talk) 19:26, 5 September 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.

Japanese China[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 dabify. --BDD (talk) 20:12, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous, could refer to other regimes like Manchukuo, Taiwan under Japanese rule etc. as well as Japanese people in China, Sino-Japanese War etc. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 05:05, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This phrase doesn't mean anything at all. In Google Books, all I can find are coincidental collocations, e.g. "Japanese China policy" (i.e. "Japan's policy towards China") or "Japanese China scholar" (i.e. "a China scholar who is Japanese"), aside from the occasional use as a misnomer for Japanese pottery and porcelain. In Wikipedia it's only found as WP:PTMs for some other title. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 06:19, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment On a side note I just found Chinese_Japanese_Korean, not sure if that is even appropriate for a DAB, retargeting there may be worth it, just saying. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 06:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - There's clearly no primary here without stretching. Just because a redirect was created does not mean we need to kill ourselves to "pretzel logic" deduce a minimally plausible reason to keep it by default. Since when does "it exists and must be saved !!!1111one one one" trump policies and procedures? MSJapan (talk) 19:23, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • That there is no primary is exactly why I'm recommending disambiguation. There is no stretching or pretzel logic involved. Thryduulf (talk) 23:48, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Thryduulf, I'm sorry, but the term "Japanese China" is not present in any of the articles you suggested, so they could not be included per WP:DABRELATED and WP:DABMENTION. The only time I see this term in articles, it's referring to either the Japanese China Garrison Army or the Japanese China Area Fleet. The one article that links to it pipes it to the adjective "Japanese-allied". It's too non-specific and meaningless to keep. — Gorthian (talk) 02:53, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Obvious keep. With respect, the editors above posting that the phrase "means nothing" or might refer to "Japanese people in China" or lower-case "china" obviously have a poor grasp on the English language or so little understanding of the topic that their comments, while appreciated, should carry little weight. None of the initial complaints suggested alternate meanings, while better reasoned, are actual synonyms or fit the scope of the term. The namespace is a perfectly clear and TERSE synonym for China under Japanese rule or Japanese-held China. While a dab with Taiwan or Manchukuo might be wanted, I'd argue they don't meet SCOPE. They are parts of China by most accounts but not actual synonyms for China. (Any dab would also need Japanese-held Manchuria prior to Manchukuo and Japanese-occupied Tsingtao, which would more legitimately be considered "Japanese China".)
    Regardless of how uncommon it might be, some marker needs to remain because the namespace for the actual article is highly obscure and overlong. I was certainly looking for it and had enough difficulty that I created the dab in the first place. — LlywelynII 12:03, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Llywelyn. Phrases of the construction [National adjective] + [Region] are typically expected to refer to polities in that region controlled/heavily influenced by the adjectival country (e.g. Belgian Congo, Russian America, Japanese Korea). It does get usage like this in reliable sources [1] and was the subject of substansial interest during the 70th anniversary of the end of the Pacific Theatre of WWII. People are using this term, and the current target is the best we have. Would not mind hatnotes to any relevant articles such as Manchuria, Taiwan, or Japanese pottery. My second choice would be disambiguating per Thryduulf, but I would not include Japanese people in China. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:52, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate to include the current target, Manchukuo, and Taiwan under Japanese rule. I don't think we need strictly apply WP:DABMENTION here since (per Llywelyn) it's clear this is referring to (parts of) China under Japanese rule, and that's what's being mentioned at those articles. Perhaps include a see also to Japanese China Garrison Army and other plausible PTM's mentioned above. I'd be ambivalent about including Japanese people in China in the see also though... -- Tavix (talk) 16:58, 12 September 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.

Techinc metal[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 speedy deleted by Maile66. -- Tavix (talk) 23:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing on google to indicate this is a defined genre of music ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 01:44, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This should be speedily deleted since the user, Mil6678, was evading the block placed on Special:Contributions/190.203.136.154. At the dark metal article, Mil6678 picked up where the 190 IP left off to edit war over genre.[2][3]. Note that another 190 IP has also made the same edit,[4] getting blocked in the process. Binksternet (talk) 16:36, 5 September 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.

Techinc rock[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 speedy deleted by Maile66. -- Tavix (talk) 23:33, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing on google to indicate this is a defined genre of music ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 01:44, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This should be speedily deleted since the user, Mil6678, was evading the block placed on Special:Contributions/190.203.136.154. At the dark metal article, Mil6678 picked up where the 190 IP left off to edit war over genre.[5][6]. Note that another 190 IP has also made the same edit,[7] getting blocked in the process. Binksternet (talk) 16:36, 5 September 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.

Wang Jingwei régime[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 12#Wang Jingwei régime

China (Nanking)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 12#China (Nanking)

Minguo[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 September 12#Minguo

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_September_5&oldid=1088108257"