Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 10[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 10, 2017.

AEsthetics[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) 00:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) I think consensus on this is we don't change initial cap "OE" or in this case (pun intended) "AE" to "Oe" or "Ae". WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 23:13, 10 April 2017 (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.

Tl'esqox-t'in[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 replace the rcat to {{R from ASCII-only}}. -- Tavix (talk) 00:41, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) Delete. This is not a {{R from title without diacritics}}. I can't see on my screen, but I guess one apos is different. Stats are 1 in 90 days... guess whom. Si Trew (talk) 23:06, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not sure I see your point, Si Trew. As far as I can tell the redirect is the ASCII-only version of the article title, in which case this would be a trivial keep as an {{R from ASCII-only}}. – Uanfala (talk) 20:49, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep since the (’) key doesn't exist on my keyboard. Steel1943 (talk) 13:09, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The (’) is in ASCII, strangely, on the top left. I think it is ASCII 93 or therabouts, just deliberately not checking. American Standard Code for Interchange had these symbols but didn't bother to put a £ in. I am suggesting that a bit provocatively, because I don't think that it is what most people would think of as "ASCII" i.e. basic letters and numbers and stuff. Si Trew (talk) 08:24, 19 April 2017 (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.

Serdal Kuel[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 as unopposed. -- Tavix (talk) 00:43, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) not germanic but Turkish. The usual Serdal Kul etc exists. Si Trew (talk) 23:04, 10 April 2017 (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.

Von'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 Keep. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 10:06, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) Well, this is the only one to this place, out of the eighteen, that has an apostrophe in it. The only two places in the US to have an apos are Martha's Vineyard and.. er.. somewhere else. This isn't one of 'em. (ahem, neither of em.) Von`s and so forth. Checkhist, Eubot history created from "Von’s. which is redblue to same target. The blue one has back apostrophe. No apos in the name of the place. iffy. Si Trew (talk) 22:50, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There's five according to this article. -- Tavix (talk) 00:38, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – as with other supermarket chains it's easy to get confused whether the s at the end is a plain s or an s with an apostrophe. Also, the precursor of Von's is the "Von's Groceteria", so the redirect might not be just an {{R from mispunctuation}}. – Uanfala (talk) 10:03, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The other supermarket chains is a bad example. Sainsburys took theirs out, Tesco has gone for just Tesco, Asda never had one, Morrison's not sure. Deliberately not linking so that others can find evidence etc. Si Trew (talk) 10:04, 19 April 2017 (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.

Corps (Isere)[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. -- Tavix (talk) 19:27, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) I believe the the consensus is to keep these even though I dislike the fact it disagrees with the target only in the (disambiguation) part. I think we need a clear consensus on that, otherwise I should keep it. Si Trew (talk) 22:46, 10 April 2017 (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.

Ways to Fight Hair Loss[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) 00:44, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Target is WP:NOTHOWTO. Steel1943 (talk) 22:17, 10 April 2017 (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.

Cicatricial due to trauma/injury alopecia[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) 20:24, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The title of this redirect may be too WP:PRECISE to redirect to an existing subject on Wikipedia. For one, the first word in the redirect's title, Cicatricial, redirects to Scar. (Actually, since Alopecia redirects to Hair loss [same target as the nominated redirect], the nominated redirect probably has an WP:XY issue.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:12, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Am I the only one here who actually lists a RfD criterion does everyone else guess? The tissue has an issue because it's WP:XY, but XY is not a deletion criterion, it's a redirect to a "common outcome".. Si Trew (talk) 23:18, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

'Delete it is extremely unlikely anyone will be searching by this term. It's also a slippery slope if we start allowing A/B format redirects. --Tom (LT) (talk) 21:46, 13 April 2017 (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.

Younger peckham boys[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) 20:24, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The word "younger" is nowhere in the target article. Readers who may be looking up the redirect in reference to the redirect's target may not find the information they are attempting to locate. Steel1943 (talk) 22:09, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well that would be WP:RFD#D2 confusing then, not at target. 'Delete. Younger Peckham Boys is red. It could possibly at a long strech refer to the Kray Twins, but I don't think it does. Si Trew (talk) 22:53, 10 April 2017 (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.

Younger brothers[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 28#Younger brothers

Younger family[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 28#Younger family

Pastoralis praeminentiae[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 28#Pastoralis praeminentiae

Trepied[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. -- Tavix (talk) 00:47, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Because the consensus below is not to clutter the index and try to make a good index. Otherwise it is just WP:RFD#D5 nonsense, because it is tagged as {{R from title without diacritics}} and confuse my poor old eyes but there are no diacritics in this title, nor in its target. Si Trew (talk) 21:32, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: A related redirect, Trépied, also targets Cucq. Steel1943 (talk) 21:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Comment I haven't checked that one yet, but if I listed that, please withdraw it here as keep, I wanted to list specifically without the accent. Si Trew (talk) 21:44, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That has never been listed here, and is not a Eubot redirect. Trepéid is mentioned in the lede. Si Trew (talk) 21:45, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's my fault, I thought Steely had listed it here and checked at the time, but he hadn't. All in good faith on both parts. The stymie is that consensus is leading towards removing these unnessary search terms, something I have been arguing for months. Consensus at the moment is to keep them, just about, but WP:CCC]. I obviously want the whole damned lot deleted so that is not in question, but other editors may have other wrong opinions. Si Trew (talk) 23:00, 10 April 2017 (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.

Older peter[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) 19:37, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is apparently connected to the fictional character the target article's subject portrayed in The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe. However, since the redirect represents a fictional character and its target is the role's actor, the current situation is unclear and vague, especially considering the ambiguity of the redirect's title itself. Steel1943 (talk) 21:27, 10 April 2017 (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.

Hugo Gunckel Lueer[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 Thryduulf (talk) 18:24, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) Not Germanic, but Chilean Spanish. Si Trew (talk) 21:25, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as per precedence for deleting redirects created by Eubot which contain additional letters as compared to differences exclusive to diacritics. Steel1943 (talk) 21:48, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Withdrawing my comment per statements below that the redirect's variation may have affinity to its appropriate language. Steel1943 (talk) 14:17, 12 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I'm not convinced the redirect is needed, but regardless of the man's nationality, both he and his name are clearly of German origin, not Spanish. --Hegvald (talk) 00:46, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Like Hegvald, I'm not convinced the redirect is needed, but his name is clearly of German origin, and so a "ue" redirect for a "ü" original is appropriate. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:09, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have been going through the eubot lists. This was created by eubot. Champion list 15. Say I don't do research that is easy research. Si Trew (talk) 09:26, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would have thought an easy thing to do was say "what links here". Oh well, it's User:Eubot. Si Trew (talk) 09:28, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There are a few more weirder as I find it and go through the lists. Si Trew (talk) 09:30, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. A Google web and book search turned up nothing with this spelling. -- Tavix (talk) 20:49, 21 April 2017 (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.

Wikipedia:BUNFIGHT[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) 20:50, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so as an American I've been rather confused by the apparent sudden proliferation of this term on Wikipedia. Luckily Wiktionary has an entry that explains its meaning. I wondered if maybe there wasn't some way to clarify this term for the rest of us non-Brits and found this redirect. I think it is obvious it shouldn't point where it does now, why pick just one of the many places where contentious discussions take place? From the edit summaries it seems like this was a long-departed editor's idea of a joke.

So the question is: retarget somewhere that might actually be helpful, or just delete? Beeblebrox (talk) 20:59, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. In my slang, any little argument is a bunfight, like the Bunfight at the OK Corral and so on. So that is the question really. I don't contribute much to Wiktionary, and checked to make sure, but it is certainly not one of mine. WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target and I should say more. A newbie editor would expect to be told what a bunfight is, does not understand it, the policy rationale or how-you=-please does not explain it, this is WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. 21:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Now, Bugsy Malone that was a good bunfight. Si Trew (talk) 21:59, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[[User::Beeblebrox]] the nom put it clearly, as an American he didn't get it; WP:WORLDWIDE. Even before it proliferated (and I have seen no evidence of that) I assumed it was just schoolboy slang, because it is nowhere in any dictionary I have, and I checked about five years ago on this, not just yesterday, because I log new words as a bit of a sideline in lexicography. As far as I have from my logging, it has always just been British English slang to mean a no-harm-done fight, could nom User:Beeblebrox give me the links, which edit summaries are you talking of? Were they mine, I am not long-departed, but I will tell you if they are mine or not. Si Trew (talk) 22:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It could be something nigel molesworth sed, chiz, it could be a chiz, sir, as any fule kno. Si Trew (talk) 22:06, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@SimonTrew: I'm not sure what it is you are asking for. I've seen this term used in a few discussions lately, I don't recall any of them involving you specifically. The "long-departed" comment was in reference to the user who created this redirect back in 2008, they made a few edits in 2015 but otherwise have been inactive since 2011. All of that is really neither here nor there as the point is determining if we should retain this redirect, and if so where it should point. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:14, 11 April 2017 (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.

The Legend of Zelda HD Experience[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 , unopposed. -- Tavix (talk) 19:31, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

According to several wiki-like sources ([1], [2], [3], [4]), the subject of this redirect and the target article are not one-and-the-same. Apparently, the "HD experience" subject is a playable demo which uses graphics similar to Twilight Princess, and the subject would probably fail WP:NOTWIKIA as a standalone subject on Wikipedia, but maybe would be okay as a section of another article. Steel1943 (talk) 19:56, 10 April 2017 (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.

HTTP 0401[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) 19:29, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No clear rationale for this redirect. It is not mentioned at the target article. Maybe the creation of this redirect was itself intended as a joke. Peacock (talk) 17:35, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Redirects at supposed to help people find content they are looking for, and I don't see this doing that. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there are well-known April Fools' Day Request for Comments on April Fools Day, some of which have sourced articles of their own. I don't think 0401 is one of then. Si Trew (talk) 22:22, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I did a web search of this term before commenting here and found no exact matches to this term. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:15, 11 April 2017 (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.

The Anti-Gravity Freedom Machine[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 delete. Deleted per criterion R3 by Lectonar. Steel1943 (talk) 19:57, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a spam link being inserted to various articles to link to a business. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:53, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have speedy deleted this redirect for now, as it was used for spamming. If recreated as a redirect to Aaron Fechter, it should be protected. Lectonar (talk) 17:22, 10 April 2017 (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.
Reopening. No reasonale R criterion has been given for deletion or otherwise. No evidence has ben provided that this was used as a spamming account. Si Trew (talk) 22:34, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@SimonTrew: I have restored my close since my close was technical in nature, given that the redirect has already been deleted and the deletion wasn't performed by me. If you wish for this redirect to be restored, please contact the deleting administrator Lectonar. (I'm not pinging them myself since I'm obviously neutral on that redirect being restored.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:44, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I did give an R criterion (R3); it was redirected recently, and, as far as I can see, implausible. Lectonar (talk) 06:55, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All well and good then. Let's carry on. I haven't seen the ANI discussion, can't find it. Si Trew (talk) 10:24, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion Regarding The AGFM can be found on Talk:Email -Patrick Boots CEC (talk) 23:15, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Lectonar: can you define "implausible" in your assessment here? A thing called an "Anti-Gravity Freedom Machine" is indeed verifiably associated with Aaron Fechter, and it seems to me a plausible search term. Its deletion seems a blunt tool for addressing the behavioral problem of inappropriate insertion of the wikilink. VQuakr (talk) 04:00, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As you asked for how I define implausible: I go by the meaning "failing to convince". And typing in "Anti-Gravity Freedom Machine" by itself seems rather more improbable than just knowing and searching for Aaron Fechter. Regards. Lectonar (talk) 07:44, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No Teasing[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) 19:25, 19 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These are all redirects from Simpsons Butterfinger commercials to articles that don't mention them. Maggie's Party, a similar Butterfinger ad redirect, was deleted after a discussion in December, and the same basic arguments apply to all of these.

The Butterfinger Group might plausibly be worth noting somewhere as the first appearance of Milhouse; but while the Milhouse article notes he was designed for a Butterfinger ad, that ad isn't mentioned by name. Butterfinger (where The Butterfinger Group currently redirects) has some content about these ads in general, but not about any specific ad. Sideways713 (talk) 11:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all as implausible and unhelpful. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:17, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Thanks for following up on this. - Eureka Lott 04:23, 11 April 2017 (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.

Mark (singer)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 28#Mark (singer)

Agie[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. but I'll let the disambiguation stay. -- Tavix (talk) 00:56, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Agie" and "Agha" are not the same word. Agha is a disambiguation page, so the current setup could be considered misleading/confusing. Steel1943 (talk) 21:54, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Probably unrelated, but I just created Popo Agie.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 18:59, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Comment. I!m wondering, without any evidence at all, whether this is a likely typo or OCR error for "agile" (a DAB). Si Trew (talk) 20:16, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • retarget to Aggie] per CoffeeWithMarkets. Thryduulf (talk) 08:31, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate. A draft dab page (admittedly thin) with two red-linked entries and a prominent "see also" link to Aggie is available below the redirect. – Uanfala (talk) 14:51, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why isn't Agha also on there? Hyperbolick (talk) 21:13, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • It doesn't seem to be covered in any article. But if you think there should be an entry, you're welcome to add it. – Uanfala (talk) 21:15, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: to allow time to discuss the drafted disambiguation page. Is that enough to disambiguate or should it be retargeted to Aggie?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 00:16, 10 April 2017 (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.

Confederate States Air Force[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 28#Confederate States Air Force

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2017_April_10&oldid=1037915454"