Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 April 21

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 21[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 21, 2017.

Aortae[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The result of the discussion was Withdrawn as keep by (non-admin closure)

(Eubot list 11). This is a bit nonsense because depending on what language you speak you might take the "ae" at the back as a Latin plural, but in fact it is just a Eubot back-formation. I suppose it is harmless but it WP:SURPRISEd me, especially thinking about the major cardiovascular system, I could see this being easily confused, so perhaps WP:XY. Si Trew (talk) 23:58, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: What else were you thinking it might refer to? PriceDL (talk) 12:54, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I think everyone will expect this to lead to information about aorta, and it is used synonymously with 'aortas' in some peer-reviewed sources. PriceDL (talk) 13:03, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
'Comment. I think I may have missed on this one. I was cross-reffing this from somewhere else as a possible suggestion to where that might at an offchance retarget. I checked just to be on the safe side that we haven't aeortaee or nonsense by Eubot. We don't, it seems (good). I cocked up probably listing this instead of mentioning it. I think now I can close as withdrawn by nom. I probably got confused, The eubot ones do catch you that way, that you forget what language you are in. Gearing meself up for another go! The best thing to do, as I used to say with regular Eubot plodder User:Champion, is to kinda take your eyes off the list after a while, otherwise everything looks the same. Not saying I said it in those exact words, but that is the rough effect. I probably didn't on this one.
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.

Nils Taepp[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 per second opinion by User:Sideways713. A second set of eyes is always best. (non-admin closure) by nom.

(eubot list 11) This is a bit tricky. Consensus is generally to keep Swedish ones, but this is someone's surname, and his surname was not "Taepp". We don't have a surname list at Taepp. I think on the whole this is WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 23:54, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep If anything, I'd say name redirects like this - especially in the case of athletes - are more plausible than most other non-German ä->ae and ö->oe ones, since official sports bodies sometimes use ä->ae and ö->oe even for non-German athletes, and in any case the names of sportspeople who compete or receive attention abroad are often mangled into a wild variety of forms. Täpp, for example, was called "Nils Taepp" in the official 1948 Olympic Report, and that spelling also appeared in many English-language newspapers in the late 1940s and early 1950s, making it a plausible (and harmless) search term on enwiki. Sideways713 (talk) 19:38, 22 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.

Kapteeni Aaeni[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. Deryck C. 17:35, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11). Well they are not called that. Not Germanic but Finnish. I suppose kinda WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. It seems too far out to me. Si Trew (talk) 23:52, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as very, very, very implausible; maybe the worst Eubot no-diacritics redirect we've seen here. Sideways713 (talk) 19:17, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I have no opinion about just how implausible this is, but there is no evidence of use unrelated to this redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 19:39, 25 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.

Roman a fleuve[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 with no prejudice against renominating if there are valid reasons why Roman à fleuve should not redirect to Novel sequence (which was not discussed here). Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:42, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) This is a bit of clutter. The article has as "roman-fleuve" but not "roman-a-fleuve". My guess is this is created by Eubot from a mistaken creation, compare roman a clef for example Si Trew (talk) 23:07, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Created by eubot from Roman à fleuve. That is still a bit puzzling to me. I know roughly it would mean "flowing novel" or whatever, but I can't work this one out. I think many of the great French authors had these things, Victor Hugo and so on, but this right now is WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target. Hmm... Si Trew (talk) 23:10, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I am still not sure about it anyway, and the others, since these refer to kinda specifically French novelists. To redirect it (and the others, not by eubot) to "Novel Sequence" is perhaps a bit odd. I imagine we have a better target. Hesitate to list all the others, I have cluttered RfD enough, but there are of course others. Si Trew (talk) 23:13, 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.

Ciftlikkoey[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) feminist 06:18, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11) Not Germanic but Turkish. Si Trew (talk) 23:05, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. I'm seeing uses in google search results from science/engineering papers but it seems I don't have access to the relevant parts of the papers to verify this. Thryduulf (talk) 08:21, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - If we keep this spelling then we should probably add Ciftlikkoy as another redirect to the same thing. The latter is also found in Google search results. (It's also the form you would get if you stripped off all the diacritical marks from the target). EdJohnston (talk) 22:22, 27 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.

Gyoergy Kosztolanczy[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. Evidence of usage has been found. -- Tavix (talk) 17:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11) not Germanic but Hungarian Si Trew (talk) 23:03, 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.

Maelstroem (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. -- Tavix (talk) 17:10, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11) Weak delete. This is a canadian film. Eubot has back-formed to "Maelstroem" but that is not what we would call it, is not what the target calls it. The kkinda it is not exactly a metal umlaut ut we might be making nonsense out of this. Si Trew (talk) 22:39, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not suggesting that "Maelstroem" is not a word. I just wonder whether with the disambiguation, this makes a good redirect. I always feel a bit queer about these ones. Probably OK, but for myself I would delete it. Si Trew (talk)
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.

Gyorsoevenyhaz[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. Deryck C. 17:35, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11) not Germanic but Hungarian. WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 22:37, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I am seeing a very small number of uses, but oddly all in Hungarian not English. Thryduulf (talk) 08:25, 26 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.

Koey Hizmetleri Anadolu Lisesi[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. Deryck C. 17:35, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11). Not Germanic but Turkish. Si Trew (talk) 22:36, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The only English results I'm seeing are from Facebook who are known to scrape Wikipedia to automatically create such place pages. Thryduulf (talk) 08:27, 26 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.

Tiszakuert[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) 17:10, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11). Not Germanic, but Hungarian. WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 22:35, 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.

Eletrobras Termonuclear S/A[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) 17:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11) This is probably allright, but is not the name of the company on either side and in any case is a bit iffy. I would put it as {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}, can't put it as {{R from company name}} because it isn't. Not sure on this one Si Trew (talk) 22:34, 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.

Iso-Syoete[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) 17:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11) Not Germanic but Finnish. I think this is too far out, delete WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 21:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Lots and lots of uses. Ok, most of them them seem to be spammish, but there are some that aren't including stock photos. Also there are far, far more (by at least an order of magnitude) hits than I've been seeing for almost any of the many others I've been researching for you over the past few days. Thryduulf (talk) 08:40, 26 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.

Thoekoely Imre[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. Deryck C. 17:36, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11). Now this is really pushing it. Hungarian, not English, and we have it in Hungarian name order with oe oe instead of Hungarian spelling. Speedily delete. I am on Engish keyboard layout but would be Thokoly dots on both Imre no dots on either. This is well too far out, WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 21:46, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If I want to take a bus into town I go to Thököly út. I do not go to Thoekoely Imre út. ("út" = roughly main street, large street: there's no direct translation really.) It's one of the most frequently-travelled bus routes in Budapest. Si Trew (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Hungarians will tell you that their language is "speak-as-you-spell", but the "Th" is an odd example where it is not. Common, but pronounced exactly the same as T. I tend to use that as a talking point. Or should I say thalking point. It is left over from the spelling reforms of the last century. Si Trew (talk) 10:29, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom as very implausible, given the highly unlikely combination of ö->oe and the Hungarian name order. Sideways713 (talk) 19:55, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I am seeing uses for this exact order and spelling, but they relate to a variety of grape not the subject of the article. Thryduulf (talk) 08:43, 26 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.

Societe nationale d'electricite (RDC)[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. Deryck C. 17:36, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11). Just cut it. The target itself has a different (disambiguation). We've no need of it. Si Trew (talk) 21:44, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. "RDC" is the abbreviation for République démocratique du Congo, the official name for the country know in English as the Democratic Republic of the Congo (French is the official language), and I can only find uses of "Societe nationale d'electricite" (with or without diacritics) in combination with "RDC" in French-language sources (e.g. fr:=Societe nationale d'electricite (RDC)) so it is very unlikely that anyone will be looking for this in English. I'd recommend keeping "Societe nationale d'electricite (DRC)" if it existed though. Thryduulf (talk) 08:50, 26 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.

Tuerk Dil Kurumu[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. Deryck C. 17:36, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11) well, considering especially it is not the Tuerkish Language Association, I think this makes it a bit WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Not Germanic but Tuerkish. Si Trew (talk) 21:40, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. It does get a few uses, but almost exclusively in transliterations of Cyrillic or Japanese language texts (which seems quite odd, but there you go). Thryduulf (talk) 08:52, 26 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.

Ski randonnee[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 Procedural close. I'm going to close this discussion and renominate it together with Ski randonnée on today's (26 April) list. Thryduulf (talk) 08:58, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11) I would normally take French ones by consensus, but this is not {{R from title without diacritics}}. It is {{R from other name}}, really, but with the missing accent, is it too far off? Si Trew (talk) 21:33, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We don't have "randon" at all at the target, in any form. I can see where it gets it from, but it mght be a bit WP:RFD#D2 confusing. We're not a tourist guide. Si Trew (talk) 21:35, 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.

64 Oozumo[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 keep. Note that the nominator is currently blocked. (non-admin closure) - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:08, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11) Well it isn't, is it? Back-formed from Japanese by eubot. Might be all right, but pushing it, with the two "Oo"s at the front. Si Trew (talk) 21:29, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think it was unwise to list this at the WP:ANI discussion of my behaviour, of one of your two examples. User:Thryduulf. Now you are WP:INVOLVED. Si Trew (talk) 11:09, 26 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.

Ass fiber[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. There is consensus that this redirect is simply wrong. An implication of this discussion is that "Aß fiber", which it derived from, is also wrong. So, off the back of this, I'm nominating "Aß fiber" for deletion as well. Deryck C. 17:46, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11) Eubot has got this by way of Aß fiber. Amusing, but wrong. Not at target in either case. The lede starts "Type II sensory fiber (group Aβ)"... Shall I suggest toilet paper or a straight WP:RFD#D5 as nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 21:24, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry this is the most amusing one I have seen today. I had a little laugh to myself. Sorry. WP:RFD#D5 nonsence. I better check whether there is in the British English "fibre". Si Trew (talk) 21:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No, there are sensible links in the British spelling, but not Ass fibre... sorrry... still laughing... Si Trew (talk) 21:38, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have heard of lying out of ones ass before but not this.--64.229.167.158 (talk) 21:42, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — case of bot mistaking symbol intention PriceDL (talk) 13:01, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Nice to have some unintentional bot vandalism to mix things up a bit. --Tom (LT) (talk) 23:21, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unlikely synonym at best --Lenticel (talk) 06:36, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete that part of the body doesn't have fiber named like that. If someone's looking for fiber to help their bowel movements they'd look up Dietary fiber. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:56, 23 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.

Buessue[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. Deryck C. 17:37, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11). Not Germanic but Hungarian. WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 21:23, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The only coherent actual use of this I can find independent of Wikipedia is a single use as a surname. As I can find no other information about this person, Yvonne Buessue is a redlink and so not a candidate for retargetting. Thryduulf (talk) 09:22, 26 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.

Berrogueetto[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. Evidence of usage has been found. -- Tavix (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11) not Germanic, but Galician. Si Trew (talk) 21:21, 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.

B+ decay[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 May 3#B+ decay

Robert AEOLUS Myers[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) feminist 06:18, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot, list 11) I can see that this is straight R from dias and against my own opinion we keep the AE. But since this middle name is well a bit iffy anyway per WP:TITLE I think this is pushing it. Not sure. We should probably move over. I will do that (as non admin) if I can. Si Trew (talk) 21:06, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ach, we do have Robert Myers, which is a name DAB. I presume an editor has then created this title (not the redirect) to disambiguate in this way, which is an odd way to do it by WP standards... eubbot then created the not particularly odd (by its standards) redirect from it. We don't usually disambiguate people by putting their middle name in capitals in the first place. What to do? Si Trew (talk) 21:08, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per that diacritics or similar. The caps can be debatable as it's stylization to all caps the AEOLUS, but that's more for a RM rather than RFD. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:53, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:DIACRITICS. As long as Robert ÆOLUS Myers exists as an article or redirect this should too. Thryduulf (talk) 09:30, 26 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.

Siemien[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) feminist 06:18, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot list 11). I can see that this is perfectly fine as a straight R from dias, but I was thinking people might be searching for Siemens etc, not a small village in Poland. Not sure. Si Trew (talk) 20:58, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, perfectly fine as a redirect without diacritics. -- Tavix (talk) 21:08, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is. But do you thibink people searching for "Siemien" might be looking for simian or Siemens or semen and suchlike? That is why I brought to RfD. I doubt they would be looking for a small village in Poland. I agree, it is a straiht {{R from title without diacritics}}, but I am not sure it is useful. Si Trew (talk) 21:13, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose what I am saying is, had Eubot not created these, what would they have found. WP:SURPRISEish, but I don't think that they would want to find a small village in Poland )too an English-speaking audience). Si Trew (talk)
There's nothing else notable with the name "Siemien", so I don't see the problem. Close spellings that someone can reasonably be confused with can be dealt with via a {{confused}} hatnote at Siemień. Again, Eubot is not a reason for deletion. -- Tavix (talk) 21:20, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
True, but you're kinda going a different way from me. I am assuming people do not pick out exactly and their tablets and stuff just will whack in any old thing that happens to match. On that ground I would say the probability that someone wants to find a small village in Poland instead of a large multinational corporation, etc, is a bit iffy, were I a bookmaker. However, You're kinda right, Wikipedia should be exact and then that would be fine. The problem really is that it's not "Siemien" but "Siemień" if you sie what I mień. It kinda lies in between. Si Trew (talk) 08:40, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'll repeat: I appreciate that eubot is not a reason for deletion, that is just a swift shorthand that many regulars understand to save them time checking where it came from, like we did with (neelix); it is essentially a courtesy note. I totally agree with you that is not in itself a reason to delete, keep, retarget or anything else. Si Trew (talk) 08:47, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'll bet you they wouldn't have. I bet you they would say "I must have mistyped that". I am not pushingfor {{R from typo}}, I suppose more towards WP:XY. Si Trew (talk) 13:06, 25 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.

Liveable[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 Liveable to Quality of life, with the rest being kept as is. -- Tavix (talk) 03:14, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many things are "liveable". World's most liveable cities doesn't seem like a good redirect to me. E.g. "It's not a luxurious apartment by any means but it's liveable." or "fatherhood makes life more liveable". The more American spelling "livable" redirects differently, to Quality of life. Per WP:NOTDICT, both should just be deleted. MB 04:05, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quality of Life doesn't cover all meanings of livable. For example, in real estate, "livable space" is space that is insulated/heated/cooled as opposed to non-livable space like a garage - pretty much covered in habitability. Since there are different potential targets for different uses, just delete. MB 01:30, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget all to quality of life per Train2104. A large majority of the mainspace links to the nominated redirects use the term to refer to quality of life. WP:NOTDIC covers articles, not redirects, and is not relevant here. - Eureka Lott 04:34, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I just checked two incoming links. Feather pecking refers to coexistence of poultry, and USS Cutlass (SS-478) refers to color schemes on submarines - neither of which are a good fit for the overall Quality of Life, which is about the "general well-being of individuals and societies". These redirects still don't seem to cover it well.MB 16:52, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I know you said a "majority", not all. I was not trying to disprove what you said, but rather to point out when redirecting to quality of life would not help the reader. The purpose of redirects is not to send the reader to a place that "might" provide more information or "might" be erroneous. Since are are different meanings, and unless a page is created on "livable" that handles these four redirects better (while not just providing a dictionary definition), I just think they should be deleted so as not to mislead. The redlinks in those articles that do use the term for quality of life could then be edited to directly link there. If the consensus is to redirect all to quality of life, then every incoming link to all four should still be checked for possible unlinking if they mean something else. But even if everything is fixed up, as long as we have redirects of a generic term "liveable" to a specific usage "quality of life", more bad links will be introduced in the future by editors who don't sufficiently check targets before linking. MB 18:35, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 20:19, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment MB What about a dab for these versions. That might help the reader. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:50, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure this meets the criteria for a DAB page. See WP:BROAD since the possible targets are related as described here. MB 16:42, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is needed is indeed a broad-concept article on the Liveability, with the other senses redirecting there. Compare Habitability. bd2412 T 01:41, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
Yes, but then for example Le Corbusier said, I think, "Une maison est une machine-á-habiter", a house is a machine for living in. We could add that to that concept article, and although I like architecture, I think whatever we put at that broad concept article might be quite, um, subjective? Orwell I think in A nice cup of tea is it describes father round the father, Mother cooking lamb with potatoes under the roast, and so on, in a way which is very "liveable", I think it is such a vague concept that I am not sure that even a broad concept article could cover it. In an architectural sense it probably could do. Throwing out suggestions, homely, des. res., probably neither of those quite goes to where I should expect. Homely would in the mid 20thC. be a euphemism for "fat", essentially. Very homely womam. But perhaps again that is just me thinking of Orwell, I think he described women in many of his essays thus. Si Trew (talk) 10:42, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but then for example Le Corbusier said, I think, "Une maison est une machine-á-habiter", a house is a machine for living in. We could add that to that concept article, and although I like architecture, I think whatever we put at that broad concept article might be quite, um, subjective? Orwell I think in A Nice Cup of Tea (no, must be another one: Decline of the English Murder is where it is, describes Father with feet up by the fireplace, Mother cooking lamb with potatoes under the roast, couple of children playing around and so on (a life he never had of course), in a way which is very "liveable", I think it is such a vague concept that I am not sure that even a broad concept article could cover it. In an architectural sense it probably could do. Throwing out suggestions, homely, des. res., probably neither of those quite goes to where I should expect. Homely would in the mid 20thC. be a euphemism for "fat", essentially. Very homely womam. But perhaps again that is just me thinking of Orwell, I think he described women in many of his essays thus. When someone asks for a broad concept article, I don't think it is down to checking links, I think it is what it means to you. Si Trew (talk) 10:44, 25 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.

First Sino-Indian War[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) feminist 06:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This incident is referred to as Sino-indian war not the first sino-indian war. There were minor skirmishes which happened later but are wrongly termed as the second sino-indian war. Adamgerber80 (talk) 23:06, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Widely used in reliable source, even if not as a term of art [1], it's a capitzliation difference, which are normally kept. Since this is the first Sino-Indian War, this seems like a reasonable search term. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 03:59, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Very well indicated by Patar Knight! Several reliable sources use the term "First Sino-Indian War". - coconut1002 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coconut1002 (talk • contribs) 22:13, 9 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no doubt Patar Knight is correct on this one, but we still have to sort out the second etc... then we can tidy the both up together. 13:29, 10 April 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonTrew (talk • contribs)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: relisting so the First and Second Sino-Indian War redirects are next to each other
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 19:40, 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.

Second Sino-Indian War[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 May 8#Second Sino-Indian War

Girl Moment[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. Deryck C. 17:38, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, so this is apparently a term used by pedophiles. Check the history if you'd like—could be much worse. It's not mentioned at the target article and probably never would be. --BDD (talk) 17:16, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Isn't this a bit of slang that women use against themselves, "I had a girl moment"? I don't know why I am thinking of that. Just throwing it out for discussion. It might just be a British phrase and not very WP:WORLDWIDE. I am trogging trough the eyubot ones so haven't time to check. Si Trew (talk) 21:02, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Agree with @SimonTrew: about the common use of this word. Would never expect this to redirect to pedophilia. PriceDL (talk) 13:53, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, but if it is a British phrase, it should go to paedophilia (were it to go anywhere) with the British spelling. I ain't worried about the WP:ENGVAR. Just this does seem like a rather odd place to put it. Si Trew (talk) 14:31, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just checking for comparisons, Girl Power (or rather Girl power) is an article. We have Girl Power (disambiguation) at which the Spice Girls are/is not listed, slightly to my surprise. Trying to think of other likely candidates. Girly moment is red. Best I can think of at the moment. Just bunging in for others' consideration. Si Trew (talk) 14:35, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Almost all uses of this are as part of a larger phrase, usually "fan girl moment" (variously hyphenated) but also "mean girl moment" and "black girl moment". Anyone looking for those would use the full term not this substring. The one clear use on it's own I did find had the meaning "a private moment to myself" in the context of a rapidly-progressing date. If we have any article about that sort of thing on Wikipedia I don't know where to find it (my first two thoughts private moment and alone time are both red), and I'm not sure this would make a good redirect there anyway. Thryduulf (talk) 09:52, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Thryduulf's reasoning. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:43, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This Redirect makes no sense. The Mysterious El Willstro (talk) 03:40, 29 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.

Sinsinwar[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 May 5#Sinsinwar

Ichirō Itano[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 May 4#Ichirō Itano

African Philosophy (1369-6823)[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) 13:38, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, these aren't the same journals. From the page history, the disambiguator is an ISSN. The article, however, gives two numbers, and neither of them are this one. -- Tavix (talk) 21:07, 6 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. The ISSN makes it a bit of a surprise like it's a year range. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 09:42, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I'd love to read a journal on African Philosophy from the years 1369–6823. It'll kick off during the height of the Mali Empire and finish more than 4,800 years in the future. -- Tavix (talk) 13:35, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the ISSN evidence shows that this is an incorrect pointer.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:12, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This was redirected with an edit summary indicating that PA is the successor journal of AP. ISSNs often change if a journal changes publishers or gets a new title, so that the ISSNs differ doesn't mean much. The homepage of PA is singularly uninformative, so I cannot determine whether these journals are indeed somehow related. It's weird to have the ISSN in the title, though. --Randykitty (talk) 09:29, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The ISSN is the correct one for African philosophy, which is the predecessor to the Philosophia Africana covered at the target [2]. A separate question is whether a disambiguator is necessary at all, I don't have an opinion on the general case, but here it appears to be needed as there exists another journal with the same title [3]. – Uanfala (talk) 12:16, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: We don't usually use ISSNs to disambiguate. Is this acceptable since "African philosophy" would refer to the subject?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 16:57, 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.

Botte[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 disambiguate. N.b., this was an edit conflict; the discussion was relisted as I was disambiguating the title. --BDD (talk) 16:43, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a likely misspelling, we have Theodorico de Sacadura Botte, Mount Pieter Botte, Rocca di Botte, Rocco Botte and Botte Donato, but these are all partial title matches so there is no need to disambiguate. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:49, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to The Bottom as {{R from former name}}. Optionally add a hatnote to Rocco Botte, as the only person with this surname we have an article about. Thryduulf (talk) 11:03, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget as above. This is more useful. If this means bottle in another language, then a hatnote might be okay, but given there is an actual place called Botte, this takes precedence. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:48, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Botte in Italian is barrel: it:Botte AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:49, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Per wikt:botte It also means "boot", "bunch"/"bundle"/"bale", "barrel", "ton" (used when measuring ship capacity) (among other meanings, including some metaphorical ones) in French and "boot" in Jersey Norman. Botte means "bale" or "bundle" in Luxembourgish and botté is an adjective meaning "booted"/"wearing boots" in French. bøtte is Norwegian for "bucket". The variety of meanings here I think is a good illustration of why WP:FORRED is a thing. According to The Bottom#History "De Botte" is Old Dutch for "the bowl". I can't find any language in which this means "bottle". Thryduulf (talk) 19:45, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate between The Bottom and Rocco Botte, and I'd support any of the rest being included in the see also. Both topics are relatively obscure and I think it'd be useful to have a convenient link to Wiktionary per Thryduulf's analysis that it's a word in so many different languages. Failing that, I'm fine with a retarget as suggested. -- Tavix (talk) 18:00, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per Tavix, as I'm not convinced the little town of The Bottom is the primary topic. To the disambiguation page I'd add an {{intitle}} link to the see also that would produce the PTM's listed in the nomination. – Uanfala (talk) 17:00, 13 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 16:41, 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.

P2008[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 May 8#P2008

Category:Musical families[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 procedural close. --BDD (talk) 16:36, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working a bit in the area of Category:Show business families and we do have subcategories such as Category:Acting families, as well as Category:Family musical groups, for families that perform together. I do not believe the nominated category should be a soft redirect to Category:Show business families, but a bona fide category on its own, for there are good number of such families and I don't think they should be lumped in with the too-general "show business." Do I need to have support at Rfd before replacing the redirect? The current redirect didn't seem to come out of any previous discussion. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:22, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't think there's even been an official word on whether category redirects belong here or at CFD. I tend to think CFD is more appropriate, since they're not true redirects, but I'd especially recommend it in this case since you want to really do something with the category. When it's just a typo you want deleted, that's more of a tossup. --BDD (talk) 16:29, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • That makes sense. Would someone mind closing this, when they have a chance? I'll take it to CFD. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:31, 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.

List of important opera terminology[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. The rough consensus is that the combination of subjective "important" and redirecting "terminology" to "list of topics" makes this a bit far-fetched to be a helpful redirect. Deryck C. 17:40, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The word "important" is subjective. Steel1943 (talk) 22:27, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per WP:RNEUTRAL. The information sought can be found at the target, even though it is organised as concepts rather than terms there is large overlap. Thryduulf (talk) 15:24, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Additional comment from nominator: The use of the word "important" on this redirect could be seen by readers having the same problem as most redirects starting with the word "other". The reader may go to the list page without the word "important" present in its title, and in most cases (like the one of this redirect,) that page is the target of this nominated redirect. So, of the reader doesn't consider any of the items listed at the list page "important", they may look up the title with the word "important" (this redirect), and be redirected here. With this being said, this causes a similar problem as the redirects that start with the word "other", and that it ... it is unclear what the word "important" as defined in this redirect is meant to exclude. Steel1943 (talk) 16:22, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It's the former title of the article, and it's been around since 2008 in the current form, not to mention however long the article was at this title. Including "important" isn't actively harmful, and we shouldn't delete old redirects unless they no longer work or unless they're actively harmful. Nyttend (talk) 18:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Nyttend: The article resided at List of important opera terminology for about half a day (i.e. 12 hours) on June 22, 2008. See here. I would agree with you per WP:R#K4 if it had been at this title for a substantial amount of time. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 10:06, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So? The title has been a blue link for nearly nine years, making it likely to have gotten links in all that time. Nyttend (talk) 13:04, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You stated "not to mention however long the article was at this title", so I thought I'd check the page history and see how long it was there. I didn't know how much of a factor that was in your !vote. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 14:17, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 23:06, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf and Nyttend. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:01, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:R#K4 and the first sentence of Nyttend's rationale. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 05:44, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - No more affinity for "important" than any other similar adjectives, for example, "significant" (e.g. List of significant opera terminology). — Godsy (TALKCONT) 10:06, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • If that redirect existed I would argue that it should be kept for exactly the same reasons as this one - namely the information sought can be found at the target. Thryduulf (talk) 13:41, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • If that redirect existed I would argue that it should be deleted for exactly the same reasons as this one - namely that important and synonyms have no more affinity for this list title than any other. By it existing and especially being retained here, credence is given to this type of redirect, and one could argue for countless adjective redirects for every list. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 14:02, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 04:06, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The "important" modifier is confusing and undefined. What makes a certain opera terminology important? -- Tavix (talk) 18:02, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I was about to close this as no consensus, but upon further reflection, I think it's misleading and thus doing more harm than good. The target page is meant like an index, listing topics, not terminology. If we had a Glossary of opera terms (compare to, for example, Glossary of musical terminology or Glossary of operating systems terms), this could point there harmlessly enough, but as is, this feels somewhat arbitrary. Opera itself might be just as good a place to get "important opera terminology" as the current target. --BDD (talk) 20:38, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The modifier "important" is potentially confusing, and the target isn't a glossary of terms anyway. My second preference would be retarget to Glossary of musical terminology. WJBscribe (talk) 16:11, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:INVOLVED relist to allow Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 15 to be closed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 16:15, 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.

Pure3D[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) 03:10, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Pure3D" does not occur in the target article once. Lordtobi (✉) 10:52, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That makes it a bit WP:RFD#D2 confusing, by RFD's usual lights (well mine) but I would have said more that this might be WP:XY. I have seen so many productsm,, graphics cards and tellies and stuff, marked "Pure3D" that I don't think we can pin it on any one of them. Trying to rack my brains here. Perhaps Delete for that reason. Others will have other opinions. Si Trew (talk) 23:39, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the gsearch results I get are for graphics cards from various manufacturers. Perhaps it's a bit WP:XY. I don't think it is a trademark. Si Trew (talk) 23:42, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There are dozens of products and brands called or marketed as "Pure3D"/"Pure 3D" or which include that in their title, in such diverse areas as graphic design, printing, makeup, false eyelashes, and something to do with petroleum. WP:XY indeed. Thryduulf (talk) 10:01, 26 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.

Vietnamwar[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) feminist 06:15, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely typo. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 09:47, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete no notable use as a hashtag or website that would combine the words. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:30, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This redirect was created in 2002, most likely back before the Wikipedia software recognized spaces. This redirect is probably a {{R from old history}}, even if the "W" in "War" isn't capitalized. Steel1943 (talk) 19:54, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That would then be when it should have been InterCapped. I guess an early editor ([User:Mav]] in fact) just missed the cap on the "w", but it has been around so long I agree with Steely, Keep. It has done no harm in fifteen years. I'll rcat as {{R from incorrect name}} if not already done, without prejudice of course. Si Trew (talk) 12:04, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's {{R from misspelling}}, but I am not going to split hairs. Si Trew (talk) 12:06, 25 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.

Jezza Corbyn[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) – Uanfala (talk) 12:34, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pure slang, and a nickname which is never used for Jeremy Corbyn. Don't think this redirect is at all necessary Class455 (talk|stand clear of the doors!) 09:40, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • keep— or am I missing something here? Googling shows that this nickname is widely used, even in the press. Mangoe (talk) 14:01, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep — he is not infrequently referred to as Jezza including in the press, although usually only once his full name has been mentioned and not at the same time as his surname. Still, if someone were to look at this page, it's clear they want to reach Jeremy Corbyn PriceDL (talk) 14:51, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah, you Brits. I thought you only did this with "footballers". --BDD (talk) 16:27, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Mangoe. Thryduulf (talk) 10:03, 26 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.

Hoed[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 disambiguate. I was going to close as retarget, per Thryduulf, when I came across De Hoed ("de" just being "the" in Dutch). So I could've done that and converted to a disambiguation page via normal editorial action, but I don't expect this to be controversial. See also WP:NOTBURO. --BDD (talk) 16:21, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) I just found this by way of drafting the dab for hodd. Si Trew (talk) 08:32, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I can't find any evidence that "Hoed" is the name of the norse god etc. This is a back-formation by ((eubot). I think it is a long way out. I was going to add it to the draft DAB which we are doing for the one below, but then realised this is a bit of WP:RFD#D5 nonsense really. At best it would be WP:XY. This is why Goed does not exist. Si Trew (talk) 08:39, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. That's odd. It used to turn over the page at UTC, one hour behind me depending on where I am but now it turned it over on a different time zone? (I am UTC+3 right now) Si Trew (talk) 08:52, 21 April 2017 (UTC). I would have expected to be able to backlink to the discussion. Si Trew (talk) 08:54, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Which is at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2017_April_20#Hodd... I can understand it turning over, am I losing my mind, because I was listing this morning at the 20th page and now we are on the 21st page. Has someone changed the settings for when it turns over? I was just in the middle of drafting the DAB when it turned over. Si Trew (talk) 08:56, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Probably am losing my mind. I was just catching up on yesterday's. Si Trew (talk) 08:59, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete "Hoed", being the past tense of "to hoe", isn't going to send me to a Norse god, especially since the real name rhymes with "loathe", not with "load". Mangoe (talk) 20:38, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I never thought of the past tense of hoe... was trying to think in a very Scrabble like manner but that never occured to me. How odd. Or should I say hoe ed. Anyway, it would be WP:NOUN wouldn't it. Si Trew (talk) 23:16, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak retarget to Pat Hoed as {{R from surname}} (he's the only person I can find with an article who has this surname). Høed is a (presumably small) place on the island of Funen, Denmark (linked only at Ingrid Marie) but there is no article about this place in English or Danish. Thryduulf (talk) 10:10, 26 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.

Johals[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 Johal. (non-admin closure) feminist 11:05, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The term is not used in the article, so the connection is unclear. -- Tavix (talk) 20:57, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • This used to redirect to Johal, for a long time an article about a Jat clan. Now it's a surname index, but even so I think there's nothing wrong with retargeting there as an {{R from plural}}. – Uanfala (talk) 10:56, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 04:35, 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.

Musically[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. I'm not sure there's consensus for feminist and Thryduulf's suggestion for adding a hatnote at the target, so I'm leaving this to editor discretion. (non-admin closure) – Uanfala (talk) 12:27, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

R3 doesn't quite apply as this is a plausible redirect, even though unlikely, while Music, Musical theatre or Musical all have legitimate claims to be the primary usage. My inclination would be to redirect this to the dab page at Musical rather than try to second-guess the reader, but I can also see a legitimate case for a soft redirect to wikt:Musically.  ‑ Iridescent 21:10, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and hatnote to Musical. It's very likely for someone searching for the software to miss the dot, especially given the target demographic. feminist 04:59, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is ambiguous. It could refer to the service musical.ly, but it can also relate to other music-related things. Convert it to a disambiguation page. UpsandDowns1234 (Talk to me) (My Contribs) 05:59, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • ...What other articles would be on such a disambiguation page? Besides the current target, everything else that I can think of/find would be a WP:DICDEF association. Steel1943 (talk) 06:47, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It could be kept for {{R from stylization}}, but the trademark searches are ambiguous. It is not clear they own the word without the period in it. But linking to "music" would be more of a dictionary definition and to a common word "music" that would be considered overlinking. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 13:42, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 04:35, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It seems quite reasonable to refer to the website as "Musically". Since we're not a dictionary, what else would be called such? Do users really need an additional push to get to Music? --BDD (talk) 16:26, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

.*Delete. WP:NOT an advertisement for a band or musical group. I think we should at the very best redirect to Music, but it is best off deleted. We are not an advertisement for other people's websites. Si Trew (talk) 23:22, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't see how redirecting it construes an advertisement, any more than having an article on the site. "Musical.ly" is the name of the site; it's not like we're redirecting "Best video sharing site" there. --BDD (talk) 18:05, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and hatnote per Feminist. Thryduulf (talk) 10:12, 26 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.

Category:Cannabis by American presidential admministration[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 deleted by RHaworth. --BDD (talk) 16:20, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

misspelling; category has been recreated --Another Believer (Talk) 01:53, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Right, taking to CSD as a simple error. Si Trew (talk) 08:46, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Listed at CSD. Si Trew (talk) 08:49, 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2017_April_21&oldid=1142586917"