Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 February 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 28[edit]

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

Jagaimo[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 List of Japanese ingredients#Vegetables. -- Tavix (talk) 22:07, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No affinity for Japanese. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:05, 28 February 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.

All your edits so far[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) 22:30, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A rather peculiar redirect that meets WP:R#D6. -- Tavix (talk) 18:46, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per WP:R#K5, that it's proven useful, and reason I gave for creating it: 'I think others dealing with user conduct in this area might find this a useful redirect when filling in the "which article" bit in Twinkle when the behaviour is from a SPA'. - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 19:31, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete since I'm pretty sure my account is not a single-purpose account. Steel1943 (talk) 19:38, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Huh? - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 19:42, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. It's a WP:SURPRISE since this redirect is telling me that all my edits belong to a single-purpose account, and as far as I can tell, I'm not a single-purpose account. Steel1943 (talk) 19:48, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it was made for filling in warning templates when SPAs are doing the same spam or COI disruption on a bunch of interconnected articles, not to be thrown at people who aren't misbehaving. Like WP:BEANS isn't about offering someone a snack :) . - CorbieV ☊ ☼ 20:13, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - "Well, it was made for filling in warning templates..." and "Like WP:BEANS"; links can be piped and WP:BEANS is prefaced by "Wikipedia:" (i.e. in a different namespace) respectively. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 20:52, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per the above. I contemplated suggesting a move to Wikipedia space, but I'd actually expect the title to link to Special:Mycontributions rather than the present target. Thryduulf (talk) 21:44, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This doesn't appear to be really useful, and I don't see a solid justification for keeping it. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 01:06, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete a bit confusing even for our editors as discussed above. I think it wouldn't be helpful for our readers as well since I don't think they are familiar with SPA's like we do --Lenticel (talk) 09:33, 5 March 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.

Chowz[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) 22:30, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A WP:SPA created an article at this title back in 2011, but it was quickly tagged for original research and redirected. However, I don't see evidence of a connection between the nickname(?) and the target. -- Tavix (talk) 18:26, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. There is no clear primary topic for this search term on google, with various different non-notable people with this surname/nickname and more than one local fast food outlet among other miscellaneous uses, none in the first four pages obviously related to the current target. Thryduulf (talk) 21:48, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I don't see any notables for this in searches. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:15, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I can't find good targets for this term in google. I'm going for useless/ confusing redirect --Lenticel (talk) 00:56, 2 March 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.

Ulf Bergman[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) 22:29, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No obvious connection Peter Rehse (talk) 18:20, 28 February 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.

Different snakes[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) 22:29, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The use of the word "different" is vague. It could be also be used to refer to different snakes of the same species. Steel1943 (talk) 17:05, 28 February 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 every... redirects[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 11#List of every... redirects

The greatest album in the world[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) 22:29, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it. That, and the redirect has even been retargeted during its existence. (Also, an additional note: Best album is a redirect that targets Best#Albums.) Steel1943 (talk) 16:39, 28 February 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.

Domestic violence in Ghana[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 resolved. The target article has been moved to this title. --BDD (talk) 15:55, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think Wife beating in Ghana should either be re-titled Domestic violence in Ghana or merged as they about the same subject — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwanyewest (talk • contribs) 12:39, 28 February 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.

Argyll Ferries LTD[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) 19:28, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No-one (well, almost no-one) would ever write LTD rather than Ltd. PamD 13:40, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as superfluous: the common name is Argyle Ferries, generally used in its branding. On the few occasions where the full title is used, it appears as Argyll Ferries Limited.[1] . dave souza, talk 15:18, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Argyll Ferries Ltd already exists and is how the phrase is used in news articles. No such usage of all caps in any logos or literature. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:57, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I believe that, officially, limited companies in the United Kingdom may use any of "LTD", "L.T.D." or "Limited" in any of all caps, all lower case or first letter capitalised (and similarly for PLC). Thryduulf (talk) 00:49, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This redirect came into being from an inappropriate page move which I reverted. While retaining the redirect probably isn't strictly necessary, given that Argyll Ferries Ltd also exists, it also isn't doing any harm by being there. The initial move and comment above suggest that some people might use the unusual "LTD" format. Jellyman (talk) 08:03, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Doesn't look unusual to me as an American. If all caps here are especially rare in British usage, I could see a weak MOS:TIES argument, but Thryduulf's comment suggests that that's not the case. No harm here. --BDD (talk) 22:24, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • @BDD: in modern usage an all-caps LTD is uncommon when the main part of the name is not also in all caps, but I wouldn't say it's rare enough to be a reason for deletion. Absent evidence of usage, I would argue for deletion of "LIMITED" in all caps when the rest of the company name is not presented that way, but LTD (in any capitalisation) is significantly more common than "Limited" (in any capitalisation) in contemporary usage. Thryduulf (talk) 18:44, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a valid alternative form. -- Tavix (talk) 00:55, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Meh keep. It's a weak, but plausible and harmless redirect. The fact that the page once resided there gives a small amount of extra weight to keeping this particular variant. There's a non-zero chance that some link outside Wikipedia points here. Alsee (talk) 00:16, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 15:11, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as alternative capitalization. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:25, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as alternative capitalisation. I don't think "LTD" is a particularly uncommon capitalisation. WJBscribe (talk) 00:56, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per BDD. Steel1943 (talk) 20:18, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I'm not sure if this is useful or not, but it seems harmless, as stated above, and I'm inclined to leave it alone as well. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 02:54, 13 March 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.

Robert Brown (botanist)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 9#Robert Brown (botanist)

Robert Charles Dallas[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; converted to article. --BDD (talk) 15:56, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Currently redirects to Robert Dallas, (1756-1824) a different person. This title should refer to Robert Charles Dallas, 1754-1824, who is in the ODNB and the of "The Morlands", and others. DuncanHill (talk) 01:08, 28 February 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_February_28&oldid=1088107514"