Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 August 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 28[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 28, 2017.

List of games that Data Design Interactive published[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 close. Contesting a close of a discussion that happened a week or so ago (see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 August 20#List of games that Data Design Interactive published) should be made at Wikipedia:Deletion review. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 21:33, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unlikely to ever be searched for, also since DDI was primarily a developer (and they only published their own game's, not others'). Lordtobi (✉) 21:27, 28 August 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.

A Moment Like This (disambiguation)[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 move without leaving a redirect. Personally, I don't think the history is substantial enough to need preservation, but with the most obvious {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}} open, this solution would seem to leave everyone happy. --BDD (talk) 17:53, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Target is not a disambiguation page. (Note: This redirect is a {{R with history}}.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:26, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Move without redirect to A Moment Like This (song) (almost every other version exists, but that one doesn't). I can't find that this title is ambiguous at all and it didn't spend any significant time as a dab page. I've added hatnotes between the target and In A Moment Like This (Denmark's 2010 Eurovision Song Contest entry), but that wouldn't want more than a see-also on a dab page if one existed. Thryduulf (talk) 22:45, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Thryduulf: I'm going to assume that you saw that the redirect is at its current title since I moved its edit history away from one of those "version 2" titles. The reason why I moved the history to its current title is because not counting all of the edits where the page was redirected, the only time the page in the edit history was not a redirect was when it was a disambiguation page. So, I matched the history at the page with what the page was when it was not a redirect. In a nutshell, moving the history to a title that ends with something other than "(disambiguation)" misrepresents the edit history hiding under the redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 04:23, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • I saw that, but disagree that being at a non-(disambiguation) title misrepresents anything. We routinely change redirects to disambiguation pages to sex indicies to articles without worrying about whether we are misrepresenting the edit history. Thryduulf (talk) 09:07, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Thryduulf: Ironically, while I was making my previous statement to you, I attempted to put in a thought about WP:SIAs as you did (I assume you meant "set" indicies), but could not find a way to do so without distracting from the statement I was trying to make. I can see the validity for moving the edit history to the title you propose based on the idea of the title later being populated by a WP:SIA ... but IMO, the "article" in the edit history was not necessarily one. (I mean obviously, the title you suggest can be created regardless of the outcome of this nomination since as a {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}, the title you suggest is definitely a helpful redirect.) Steel1943 (talk) 14:17, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The target is not a disambiguation page. -- Tavix (talk) 23:53, 10 September 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.

Aegon Targaryen[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. @AlisonW and TAnthony: the usual approach for proposing a disambiguation page at a currently discussed redirect is to draft the disambiguation page below the redirect page's existing content. (non-admin closure) feminist 11:36, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Jon Snow. After the revelation of the birth name of Jon Snow this could be a more appropriate target rather than of the more obscure minor characters. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:07, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Update Retarget to Aegon Targaryen (disambiguation). -- Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 14:02, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I say convert to a Disambiguation page which notes Jon Snow and the other (comparatively minor) characters by this name, at least for now. Jon's birth name is a recent revelation which at this point is not really more notable than the previous Aegons.— TAnthonyTalk 17:29, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have started a disambiguation at Aegon Targaryen (disambiguation). Should we redirect to that? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:42, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The dab looks good! Yeah I'm okay to retargetting there--Lenticel (talk) 00:48, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify as there are multiple Aegons listed (Aegon V and VI have writeups, Aegon I is mentioned), even if most of the characters are pointing to List of A Song of Ice and Fire characters. That Jon Snow is also an Aegon but has a separate article. Otherwise this would be very confusing. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:47, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now a disambig. If you have better links for the others (1 to 4?) please add! --AlisonW (talk) 13:24, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I reverted you; though a disambiguation page is the likely outcome, this RfD is not closed,— TAnthonyTalk 13:39, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I chose to close it by creating an overdue-since-episode-was-broadcast disambig page as it should have been done immediately not brought here (imho, obv). I'll leave it to someone else to re-do, but don't see any reason for delay. WP:BOLD --AlisonW (talk) 13:29, 3 September 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.

IPod touch hacks[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. -- Tavix (talk) 00:12, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No reason to have this redirect Creeperparty568 - It and all! 22:04, 8 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep – Plausible search term. — JFG talk 08:26, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 11:04, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per JFG. The target does have information about hacks to the iPod touch. Thryduulf (talk) 09:14, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete Too vague for my liking. Even in the traditional sense, "hacking" is more broad than jailbreaking, and the phrase is also commonly used to mean general tips and tricks. --BDD (talk) 20:13, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:50, 28 August 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.

Rockapella Voiceovers on Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego?[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 Rockapella#Where in the World Is Carmen Sandiego? (1991–1996). (non-admin closure) feminist 15:35, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The target is not clear on where information about "Rockapella Voiceovers" can be found. Steel1943 (talk) 07:13, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:50, 28 August 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.

2006 Louisville vs. West Virginia football game[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 September 18#2006 Louisville vs. West Virginia football game

Written in the Scars (song)[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 note there was a bit of discussion on whether a couple of these should be retargeted to a disambiguation (and I see that Divided States of America (song) already has been). If any of these are ambiguous, feel free to retarget them WP:BOLDLY, no need to start another discussion. -- Tavix (talk) 17:42, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a mass-nomination from one user, which I hate doing but I feel is necessary because, well, the redirects are unnecessary. I completely agree that (for example) Written in the Scars should exist, but we don't need three different variations on that theme (i.e. one is fine). Primefac (talk) 01:51, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all for the fact they were all created today, and none of the redirects are {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}s since the target is the album which these songs are found. Steel1943 (talk) 02:07, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Withdrawing my entire comment since the nominator withdrew some of the nominated redirects, possibly making some of the comments before the withdraw misleading. Steel1943 (talk) 20:31, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all. Readers might type out the disambiguator to get to the album page. Since the album hasn't been released yet, there could be potential articles from the song titles, which would be reasonable targets for these redirects. Besides, redirects are cheap. I don't see why they're made a big deal. — TheMagnificentist 16:56, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Other than the fact that there are already 13 redirects, so it's not like we need 12 more of the same stuff. Primefac (talk) 17:34, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all song track redirects shouldn't be created en masse like this. They should only be done for notable songs that aren't going to have a chance to be singles articles. Also a pile of unnecessary dabs like with Written in the Scars. WP:TNT AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:37, 18 August 2017 (UTC) updated AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:44, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
AngusWOOF, for what it's worth, I didn't nominate all of the redirects, just the ones that were duplicates. You're welcome to hit the rest, though. Primefac (talk) 14:42, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I don't see anything wrong with these. --BDD (talk) 19:50, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    BDD, in addition to the link I posted to Angus, you see nothing wrong? There are three redirects in various flavours of Written in the Scars, Love Not Lovers, and Arms Open. That seems incredibly excessive. Primefac (talk) 19:59, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't, no. None seem misleading or ambiguous. Redirecting song titles to albums is common practice. Does it mean we need redirects like this for every song? No, but we can only discuss the ones in front of us. --BDD (talk) 20:00, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I definitely don't disagree with you on everything you just said. I'm just curious why we need Written in the Scars, Written in the Scars (song), and Written in the Scars (The Script song). There are no other songs with that title, so the two nominated here are unnecessary disambiguation. Primefac (talk) 20:08, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I just don't think "need" is a very useful metric for redirects. Do we "need" redirects at all? I don't think so, though we'd have a weaker encyclopedia without them, to be sure. And despite having the word "unnecessary", {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}} explains why such redirects can still be useful. (We wouldn't have the template if such redirects were routinely deleted.) --BDD (talk) 20:17, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    According to Steel above, that template is only used if we had something like Written in the Scars (song) pointing to Written in the Scars and the latter actually was an article. This is just creating three redirects where one would suffice. Primefac (talk) 20:26, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per BDD. Assuming these are all correct, these all point to the correct place. The only issue is actually the redirects without a disambiguator, since there might be other uses, or the redirects with just "(song)" since there might be other songs by that name. Since neither of those have been brought up, I'm leaning towards keeping these. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:25, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I know I'm probably getting close to beating a DEADHORSE, but Patar knight, you see no issues with three redirects with the same base name? Primefac (talk) 14:38, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    If X only refers to song X on an album by Y, there's no issue with X, X (song) and X (Y song) all redirecting to the album page, as long as the search terms do not refer to other topics covered by Wikipedia. We should not expect readers to know every song in existence and correctly determine what level of specification to use in their searches. Someone seeing who knows that X is a song by Y can very easily be uncertain if there are other topics named X or if there are other songs named X. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 15:19, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all per Patar knight. Before you ask, Primefac, I genuinely do not see a problem with any of these redirects, including those with the same base name. Thryduulf (talk) 17:37, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Wasn't going to, but thanks ;) Primefac (talk) 17:38, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:50, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay some more analysis:
    • Keep No Man Is an Island (The Script song) as there are other songs titled No Man Is an Island so this is properly titled.
    • Dabify Written in the Scars and (song). Keep (The Script song). There is a song by Gary Chapman (musician) of the same title, and there's Written in Scars by Jack Pavoretti
    • KeepArms Open (song) and its variants. I don't see other songs or books of the same title.
    • Dabify Divided States of America. I made this a dab as there is another song by Mark Bryan that is titled "The Divided States of America" and then numerous non-notable artists. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:19, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep Love Not Lovers (song). No other songs or books of the same title.
    • Keep Make Up (The Script song) as there are multiple Make Up songs under Make-up (disambiguation)
    • Keep Rock the World (The Script song) as there are multiple albums of that title and a Pantera song at Rock the World disambiguation
  • So based on this they can all be kept except Written in the Scars which should be dabified. I'll work on that right away.  Done AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:44, 29 August 2017 (UTC) updated AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:51, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I've withdrawn the first two and the last three based on your newest thoughts, AngusWOOF. Surprised you want to keep three variants of "Love not Lovers" and "Arms Open", though. Primefac (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I may lean towards delete on those, so striking those votes for Arms Open and Love Not Lovers AngusWOOF (bark • sniff)
Divided States of America is now a dab. I found another book with the title and a Frontline two-part episode. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:55, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Boleyn is having Written in the Scars to redirect to the album as the other article does not mention the individual song, so the dab page is completely undone. Any suggestions? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:35, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I guess Written in the Scars (song) and (The Script song) are now unnecessary disambiguations. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:21, 30 August 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 "songs with questionable lyrics" following the September 11, 2001 attacks[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 17:50, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect could be considered misleading, considering hat the phrase "Clear Channel" is not in its title ... unlike all other redirects targeting 2001 Clear Channel memorandum. Steel1943 (talk) 15:43, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, unless there are other notable lists that the search term could refer to, in which case disambiguation would be the answer (either a dab page or a hatnote). I don't see why we should require users to remember which organisation was responsible for the list before we let them see the article about it. Thryduulf (talk) 09:08, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala 11:08, 28 August 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 american words[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. --BDD (talk) 17:48, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"American" is not a language; the redirect does not make it clear that it refers exclusively to English. Steel1943 (talk) 23:57, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to the existing disambiguation page at Languages of America where they can follow links to find articles, including vocabulary, for whichever meaning of "American" they are using. Thryduulf (talk) 11:10, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • That will be sending readers on a wild-goose chase: it will take quite a bit of time to navigate to whatever article exists listing the words they have in mind, and in most cases, such lists won't exist at all. – Uanfala 13:51, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as vague and possibly ambiguous. Or maybe move (without leaving behind a redirect) to List of American English words, retaining the current target (which lists at its top all the articles where relevant content can be found). – Uanfala 13:51, 23 August 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) 05:46, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - since "American" is not a distinct language of its own but merely a set of styles of English, it should be assumed that a person searching for such a list is searching for a list of American English styles which differ from other styles of English, British being the other widely-known dominant style. The target is close enough to this to be useful. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:48, 30 August 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_August_28&oldid=1143889537"