Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 13[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 13, 2017.

Mario (series)[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 both to Mario (franchise). Thryduulf (talk) 14:29, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

...And now, it seems that I have to open this one for discussion as well. (See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 13#The Little Mermaid (series).) Should these redirects target their current target (Super Mario) or Mario (franchise)? I'm opening this up for discussion to form consensus due to slow back-and-forth editing of these redirects for the past 3 years. (For the record, I'm for keep-ing the redirects targeting Super Mario.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:24, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging a few editors I'm aware of being involved in WP:VG with no knowledge of how they will comment in this discussion: Ferret, Salvidrim!, Sergecross73 and The1337gamer. Steel1943 (talk) 18:41, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, pinging Czar since they participated in the aforementioned move discussion, and I've seen them edit video game-related pages from time to time. Steel1943 (talk) 18:43, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget both to Mario (franchise). There's many different Mario series: Super Mario, Mario Kart, Mario Party, Mario & Luigi, Paper Mario, and more. While Super Mario may be the most well known, I'd consider the term "Mario series" to refer to the superset of all these different series. Therefore, I think the franchise article would be the best target for these. --The1337gamer (talk) 18:56, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget both to Mario (franchise), per The1337gamer. -- ferret (talk) 19:03, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retain. The "Mario series" refers to the main series featuring Mario, not the entire franchise. This main series is known as Super Mario. I think the separate notability of a "Super Mario" series apart from the rest of the franchise is dubious based on the current sourcing, but as it stands, I think the current redirect is appropriate. I've written several articles across the franchise, and it would be inappropriate to change the target of those links based on what readers expect on the other side. Editors who want to link to the entire Mario franchise already know to link to it specifically. czar 19:10, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget - per The1337gamer. Sergecross73 msg me 19:13, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The Little Mermaid (series)[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. Thryduulf (talk) 14:32, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Should this be retargeted to The Little Mermaid (franchise)? I would imagine that readers looking up a "(series)" disambiguator are trying to find information for the franchise and not the TV series. Compare this to Mario (series) (redirects to its respective series article) and Mario (franchise); since The Little Mermaid doesn't have separate series and franchise articles, the "series" is probably the "franchise". Steel1943 (talk) 23:20, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget, per nom. Lordtobi (✉) 11:01, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget given the Disney franchise has multiple series: the TV series, the films sort of, but there's also a bunch of book series under the printed adaptations section. Reconsider to dab page if other series become more prominent. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:54, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget as per the above CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 15:34, 19 January 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.

Naomi van Dooren[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Delete. Thryduulf (talk) 14:35, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Also, delete per WP:REDLINK: see de:Van Dooren Sisters. Steel1943 (talk) 23:05, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete She voices Ariel in some of the German dubs, but as an actor and singer is not strongly tied to Ariel. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:58, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per the above CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The Litigators (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 delete. Thryduulf (talk) 14:36, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The target is a novel, not a film. Delete as misleading as someone searching this would be looking for a film. -- Tavix (talk) 22:53, 13 January 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.

In Africa[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) 18:01, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not a likely search term for the target, consider, In Europe, for example, there are exact topics with that title, just as there are with this one, but we don't seem to have articles on any of those. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:41, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It was created by accident; I wasn't aware it still existed. --Orange Mike | Talk 00:09, 14 January 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.

Sebastian (The Little Mermaid[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) 18:00, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely and possibly WP:COSTLY redirect due to the missing ")" at the end of the disambiguator. Also, Sebastian (The Little Mermaid) (with the ")" at the end"), exists. Steel1943 (talk) 22:27, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong delete per nom. Pppery 22:33, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Right now it's attracting the "Sebastian little mermaid" or "Sebastien little mermaid" searches as it is listed ahead of the properly formatted term, but deleting it will make the latter useful right away. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:04, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The Mission (2015 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 delete all. Thryduulf (talk) 14:37, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. None of these films are mentioned at the target article, presumably these are in development hell. -- Tavix (talk) 22:23, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all per nom, especially the ones with years as they were never released. Some could go to books if they have a significant adaptation section, but given that none of these are actually produced, there's no useful information to redirect to. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:00, 17 January 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.

Twin Earths (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 delete. Thryduulf (talk) 14:39, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, this is not a film, but a comic strip. There's no mention of any associated films at the target. -- Tavix (talk) 22:16, 13 January 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.

Disney Sing Along Songs: Honor to Us All[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 Disney Sing-Along Songs#Honor to Us All (1998). In other words, I'm withdrawing this as the proposed target is obviously the intended target. Steel1943 (talk) 22:29, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The current target may be the best target for this redirect, but the redirect is not mentioned at the target article and it's a very unlikely search term. Steel1943 (talk) 22:15, 13 January 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.

American Darling[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 American Darling to The Darling (novel). Delete American Darling (film). Thryduulf (talk) 14:41, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not mentioned at the target article. According to IMDb, the film is still stated as in development, so anything about it is WP:CRYSTAL -- Tavix (talk) 22:13, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak retarget American Darling to The Darling (novel), as it seems to be the alternative title as published in France and other countries, and is a key phrase at the end of the novel [1] The article also has an adaptations page that connects it to Villeneuve but as a director, not the producer. Delete American Darling (film) as nothing has been produced. If it makes it to direct-to-video or television movie status then reconsider redirecting to section. Other searches lead to American-Darling brand of fire hydrants or valves, some random paintings and blogs. Note "America's Darling" would have its own dab issues. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:23, 17 January 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.

Loudest noise in recorded history[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 February 2#Loudest noise in recorded history

The Picture of Dorian Gray (chapters)[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) 17:55, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia was a very different place a dozen years ago, so I don't want to disparage the work of the editor who put all of these together, but in hindsight, we can call firmly WP:NOT on this. The pages were essentially annotations to each chapter, including characters named and real-life entities referred to. The article on the novel mentions several chapters by name, but none with the depth of coverage implied by these redirects. Page views confirm they're quite unlikely as search terms too. --BDD (talk) 21:49, 13 January 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.

Outdoor Retreat[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 31#Outdoor Retreat

Loudest man-made sound on Earth[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 February 2#Loudest man-made sound on Earth

Loudest Man in History[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 February 2#Loudest Man in History

Anni Sinnemaeki[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. The relisting did not result in any additional comments so I don't think another week or so will gain any more insight.Thryduulf (talk) 14:44, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) Finnish, not German. ä and ae are not equivalent in Finnish. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 05:31, 4 January 2017 (UTC) &+Paeivi Raesaenen (05:43 UTC) & Neljae Ruusua (05:53 UTC). Combined listings, exact same rationale. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 5:43, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep along the lines of this discussion where we talked about ae being an acceptable expansion of Finnish ä. But I don't feel much sympathy because they're bot-created. Deryck C. 17:19, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 19:41, 13 January 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.

Gentleman's sport[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) 17:53, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Too vague. Search results on and off of Wikipedia labeled golf, cricket, baseball, and even cockfighting (!) a "gentleman's sport". Boxing doesn't seem to have a special claim to the term, and the target article doesn't use it. BDD (talk) 19:40, 13 January 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 most viewed kpop music videos[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 23#List of most viewed kpop music videos

拳闘[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) 17:52, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORRED. Boxing has no inherent connection with Japanese, Galician, or Spanish. --BDD (talk) 19:35, 13 January 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.

Winter of 2010[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 23#Winter of 2010

Winter of 2009-2100 in the United Kingdom[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was speedy deleted, G7. -- Tavix (talk) 17:51, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The misleading typo makes it sound like the UK is in an ice age. -- Tavix (talk) 18:54, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete this typo interferes with searches for "winter of 2009" AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:08, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • It has no incoming links from ordinary articles or their talk pages, so I have deleted it. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:40, 20 January 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.

L calculus[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) 17:50, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) Weak delete. I would have thought this spelling was quite common, but actually a Gsearch gives me pretty much 0 results for this being used in any sources to mean this (in fact, the first source I get has it meaning something completely different), and it's had only three hits in ninety days. Yet unlike #Th (set theory), below, at least this makes some kind of sense, in not transliterating a Greek letter into a digraph. Si Trew (talk) 04:52, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep as a {{R from ASCII}}. I don't find it difficult to imagine that a user seeing the phrase λ calculus might want to search for l calculus. – Uanfala (talk) 11:29, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's not difficult to imagine, but in practice it doesn't seem to happen much, if at all. Si Trew (talk) 12:21, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Godsy (TALKCONT) 18:51, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Confusing. I've never seen anyone shorten lambda calculus to L calculus. There may potentially be something called L calculus, that isn't a lambda calculus. —Ruud 17:47, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 18:17, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. {{R from ASCII}}. I'm finding naive PDF decoders making a bad call and doing normalization here. Also unsure of who is expected to be confused by the redirect; this is not a proposal for a move or a page rewrite on the lambda calculus article. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 21:21, 21 January 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.

Unsourced Titanic passengers[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 Eliza Gladys Milvina Dean to Millvina Dean and John van Billard to Passengers of the RMS Titanic. -- Tavix (talk) 20:29, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Both unmentioned at target and not sourced anywhere on Wikipedia. --Nevé–selbert 18:45, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment both of these originated as articles and were redirected without apparent discussion. The first was unsourced in it's most recent non-redirect revision, the second had two book references: "Judith Geller (1998) Titanic: Women and Children First. Haynes. ISBN 1 85260 594 4" and "Brian Ticehurst (1996) Titanic's Memorials World wide: Where they are Located. ISBN 1 871733 05 7". Thryduulf (talk) 19:16, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bold retarget Eliza Gladys Milvina Dean to Millvina Dean which is a fully developed article, and Retarget John van Billiard to Passengers of the RMS Titanic. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:23, 5 January 2017 (UTC) update 19:25, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget the first redirect to the Millvina Dean page while I've no opinion on the other one. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 06:35, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 18:17, 13 January 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.

3909 04[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 Legends and myths regarding RMS Titanic#The Titanic curse. -- Tavix (talk) 20:15, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per Snopes: "the first element fails the veracity test because the number 3909 04 was not assigned to the Titanic as a hull number or as any other type of number: her official Board of Trade designation was 131,428, and the yard number assigned to her by Harland & Wolff was 401." --Nevé–selbert 18:40, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Good find! striking vote. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:21, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@AngusWOOF: When a Titanic-related redirect gets nominated here it's always worth checking to see if the relevant content is (now) in one of the many (many) sub- and related articles. I'm not sure there is any other single event with quite so many different articles! Thryduulf (talk) 00:13, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 18:17, 13 January 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.

WorldEdit[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. -- Tavix (talk) 20:11, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article. Per the redirect's history as an article, the redirect's subject would probably fail WP:NOTWIKIA as an article. Steel1943 (talk) 17:45, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Revert and send to AfD (or Prod). The content was not speediable and so should be subject to article deletion processes. Thryduulf (talk) 18:24, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 18:17, 13 January 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.

Mortal Kombat Ninjas[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. -- Tavix (talk) 20:11, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per the history of the redirect, it seems that this term was meant to refer to the ninja characters in the Mortal Kombat series such as Sub-Zero, Scorpion and Smoke. However, I'm not finding a specific article or a section in an article which this term would be helpful targeting, especially considering that the redirect is already a borderline WP:NOTWIKIA violation. The best target I can find is List of Mortal Kombat characters, but not even that page has a good section to refine this term. Steel1943 (talk) 22:39, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it went to the characters article, it doesn't explain which of the characters are ninjas, especially if they're looking for the more prominent ninja characters like Sub-Zero, Scorpion, Kitana, Mileena, who immediately have their own article. Although I suppose once the user gets there, they can look through the entire list to further search for the ninja they want. I'll strike it for having some sort of use. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:01, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:43, 13 January 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.

Mortal Kimbat[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 Mortal Kombat. -- Tavix (talk) 20:06, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely spelling error. In fact, it's so unlikely that apparently, no one has fixed it since it started targeting the disambiguation page over 8 years ago. Steel1943 (talk) 22:26, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I would have assumed that this is an unlikely spelling error, but it got 58 page views last year - rather larger than many clearly plausible spelling errors, so I checked on google and it gets a lot of hits. Some of the hits are likely typos, but others seem deliberate so I'm wondering if there is some reason I don't understand for this. I say to keep pointing to the disambig page as there are many uses where it doesn't seem tied to one version of the game. Thryduulf (talk) 23:14, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Mortal Kombat, people looking for something else are easily lead to the disambiguation page, no reason to prefer the disambiguation page over the primary target. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:51, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Champion as likely typo, i being next to o, and just one letter off. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:07, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:43, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, per nom. Lordtobi (✉) 10:57, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget - I agree that this is a pretty plausible typo, and we should just go to 'Mortal Combat'. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 15:38, 19 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nominator comment: Though I still believe "delete" is the best option over all presented this far, I support "retarget to Mortal Kombat" over "keep" for the reasons already presented. Steel1943 (talk) 18:55, 19 January 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.

Template:Vgrelease tbl[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) 20:03, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirect template, should be deleted. Lordtobi (✉) 11:14, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Very weak keep. The redirect was a former name of its target page. However, I am "very weak keep" since the template existed at that name for less than a month in September 2008. Steel1943 (talk) 14:17, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:43, 13 January 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.

Template:Vgrtbl-nolink[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) 20:03, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirect template, should be deleted. Lordtobi (✉) 11:13, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep. The redirect was the original name of its target page. However, I am "weak" since the template existed at that name for only about 2 months: July 2008–September 2008. Steel1943 (talk) 14:15, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:43, 13 January 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.

Template:Video game release new[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) 20:03, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirect template, former template was merged into {{Video game release}}, should be deleted to unify the usage of {{Video game release}} or its short form {{Vgrelease}}. Lordtobi (✉) 10:59, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This is an {{R from merge}}. If the nominator feels that the content at this title should be deleted, then the template should probably be restored and then nominated for either WP:T3 speedy deletion or WP:TFD. Steel1943 (talk) 12:22, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    The idea behind deleting the old template is post-merge clean-up. As discussed at Template talk:Video game release#Merge Effort, we considered the deletion of it to be logical, as it is to no longer be confused with the merged Video game release template, so restoring the page would not be very logical. All occurences of this template have been remove by me on over 2,000 pages, wherefore it can now safely be deleted. Lordtobi (✉) 12:27, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    This discussion should probably happen at WP:TFD, not here. More or less, RFD is for accessing its value as a redirect, and I see that it has value due to its edit history ({{R from merge}}) and that the edit history may need to be retained due to WP:CWW. If the template is really of no use anymore and WP:TFD is not an option, consider restoring the template and marking it with {{Historical template}}. Steel1943 (talk) 12:31, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:43, 13 January 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.

Template:Vgreleasenew[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) 20:03, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirect template, former target was merged into {{Video game release}}, should be deleted to unify the usage of {{Video game release}} or its short form {{Vgrelease}}. Lordtobi (✉) 10:58, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The nominated redirect formerly targeted Template:Video game release new, which now redirects to the same target as the nominated redirect. Makes sense to keep this redirect in place in the meantime. (However, if somehow before this discussion ends, if Template:Video game release new is restored as a template, I'd say retarget the nominated redirect there.) Steel1943 (talk) 14:12, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've bundled these two. Each had identical nomination statements and keep votes from Steel1943, down to the timestamps. --BDD (talk) 21:28, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - While I'm not too sure, I'd rather we leave these redirects be. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 14:50, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:43, 13 January 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 Non Playable Characters in the Street Fighter series[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. -- Tavix (talk) 19:54, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No such list exists at neither the target article nor at List of Street Fighter characters. Also, such a list's existence would probably fail WP:NOTWIKIA as WP:GAMECRUFT. Steel1943 (talk) 14:33, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That was from years ago and it's now redirect.Lg16spears (talk) 18:06, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak redirect to List of Street Fighter characters#Main series, which is sortable and may give the reader an idea of who is not playable after clicking sorting on the first column. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:42, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I find it hard to believe anyone would look up that particular title, just to be redirected. Also, "in the series" wouldn't allow for a character that was only playable once, because they did appear playable. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 09:45, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, your instinct is probably correct, because that's not how the page got started. It started as an actual list, with content that someone boldly decided was unwanted. See the old version. Has anyone thoroughly checked that old content to make sure that we don't need to keep it for licensing reasons? If even a sentence got copied to another article – even if it's not in the most recent revision of the article – then we probably need to keep this for licensing (aka "legal") reasons. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:59, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Merge with Street Fighter - per Steel1943 ! KoshVorlon} 17:48, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 17:22, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Unlikely to redirect to anything in the long-term - "non-playable characters" are typically going to be a WP:GAMECRUFT violation. They generally considered trivial in fighting games. Sergecross73 msg me 16:22, 23 January 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.

Gergely Sarkoezy[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. A relisting hasn't generated any additional input at all, so relisting again doesn't seem likely to be productive. Thryduulf (talk) 18:23, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a follow-up to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 24#Sarkoez, closed as delete. If Sarkoez isn't a good redirect, then I would imagine that Sarkoezy would follow as they're both Hungarian. -- Tavix (talk) 21:44, 4 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep the redirect for 'Sarkoezi (surname)'. If someone has no idea how to spell "Sarkozy", then typing in "Sarkoezi" appears to me plausible enough in terms of phonetics. An Anglosphere reader who knows little about European languages would be taking the "oe" from a word like "Oboe" and the "zi" from a word like "Nazi". I'm not sure about these redirects in total, though. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 15:01, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 17:12, 13 January 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.

Kavirat Rural District (dismabiguation)[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) 17:49, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Misspelled qualifier. NB Kavirat Rural District (disambiguation) exists. Narky Blert (talk) 16:41, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete. I fully expected this to be the result of a move after creating the proper page with a typo, but there have been no moves involved here and it post-dates the correctly spelled version. I've left a note on the creator's talk page (which the nominator should have done), but absent any explanation for why this exists I don't see a use for it. Thryduulf (talk) 18:19, 13 January 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.

Niyog[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. I'll let Uanfala's disambiguation stand. -- Tavix (talk) 19:50, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible retarget to Niyoga and remove the hatnote there per WP:NOTDIC because from what I can gather, this is a synonym for Niyoga [2], not sure exactly if it is the case, though, we don't have an expert on these matters who is a regular at RFD, AFAIK. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 03:30, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Niyoga per nom and tag with either {{R from alternative spelling}} or {{R from alternative transliteration}}. In Sanskrit words, final short a (but not long ā) is generally dropped in most languages of northern India. As for the coconut, this appears to be a foreign name in some language of Philippines, but it's not mentioned at Coconut, while the possibly related niniyogan (which is mentioned there) and niyog-niyogan (mentioned at Combretum indicum) are too distinct to warrant linking from a hatnote. – Uanfala (talk) 14:34, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I've added a cited mention about the term where it is hypothesized that the plant came from the Malay-Indonesian region and that said similar local names are evidence for such claim. --Lenticel (talk) 00:38, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate after Lenticel's additions to Coconut. Although I still the think the Hindu ritual is vaguely more likely as a primary topic, I don't think a hatnote pointing to Coconut could be worded in a way that is sensible. I've drafted a dab page below the redirect, which also includes two "see also" entries. – Uanfala (talk) 00:37, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 15:25, 13 January 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.

Chocolate crust[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 complicated. There's clear consensus to retarget Raspberry pie to Raspberry Pi (with a hatnote) and Peach pie to list of pies, tarts and flans (I'll add an {{anchor}} to the list so it'll redirect directly to the correct entry). I find WP:ROUGHCONSENSUS to delete Chocolate crust. A retargeting proposal to the list of pies was thoroughly objected to as a chocolate crust can be used for other types of desserts and a late suggestion to crust (baking) didn't receive any favor from anyone else. That leaves deletion, which was explicitly argued by two participants, and perhaps implied by another. That being said, I'll allow recreation of the redirect if the term can be discussed somewhere in a general sense. -- Tavix (talk) 19:37, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target, except Raspberry_pie in a hatnote, so WP:R#DELETE 10, as it will not be helpful to a reader. These are far from implausible search terms, but the current situation is misleading. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 03:37, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 15:24, 13 January 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.

Next Conservative Party (UK) leadership election[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) 17:48, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Leadership elections for the Conservative Party in the UK do not happen to any schedule, and sometimes occur on very little notice. The 2016 election has been and gone, there are no others planned and I am not aware of any encyclopaedic content currently speculating on a next election to retarget it to. There is no content about leadership elections generally at Conservative Party (UK) or Leader of the Conservative Party (UK) - it might be possible to write something at one or the other, but given that I have strong views about UK politics I am not comfortable with writing significant content in this subject area for NPOV and COI reasons. So unless someone else writes such content, my recommendation is delete. Thryduulf (talk) 12:52, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I'm wary about this as well. Particularly having something that starts with the term "Next" when British politics is notoriously subject to radical shifts... deletion seems like the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 14:02, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. The date and circumstances of the next leadership election are beyond all prediction. Narky Blert (talk) 16:52, 13 January 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.

Tylenol[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 20#Tylenol

Wikipedia:WINING[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 20#Wikipedia:WINING

Talkpage redirects[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 Talk:James Mattis and Talk:Queen Elizabeth, respectively. Adding {{Old RfD}} tags to these pages would be confusing since thise templates are meant to represent a talk page's parent page, so syncing the talk pages with their parent pages' current target. However, I'm also closing this with the following statement, in case it needs to be said: If there is consensus to change the targets of Mad Dog Matis or Queen Liz in the future, there should be no controversy with syncing the two redirects nominated here by retargeting them to their parent page's new target. Also, it seems that Paine Ellsworth already synced Talk:Mad Dog Matis. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 19:15, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:G7. --Nevé–selbert 00:53, 13 January 2017 (UTC) Housekeeping, I think. --Nevé–selbert 23:05, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Overwrite with WikiProject tags and the {{Old rfd}} template (and anything else useful). Thryduulf (talk) 02:25, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Neve-selbert: If you want something deleted via WP:G7, just tag it as such. There's no need to bring it here. -- Tavix (talk) 15:22, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Tavix: Except that G7 isn't possible since this is a redirect from a move to a title that Neve didn't create. Pppery 22:36, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I routinely delete such redirects under G6, figuring them housekeeping since you don't want a talk page out of sync with its article. Alternatively, and especially for those without admin powers, retarget them, e.g., Talk:Mad Dog Matis to Talk:James Mattis. --BDD (talk) 22:38, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Whenever I come across talk pages of article-space redirects that are themselves redirects I replace it with relevant WikiProject tags, unless a WP:TALKCENT setup has been created. Thryduulf (talk) 00:03, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Talk:James Mattis and Talk:Queen Elizabeth, respectively. I still don't think it necessary to bring these here. If someone ever finds a talk page out of sync, resync it! -- Tavix (talk) 20:00, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The first U.S President[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) Steel1943 (talk) 04:27, 20 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:RTYPO. It's also mostly unused with its daily average rendering only 1. --Nevé–selbert 00:30, 13 January 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.

1000000000000000[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 Orders of magnitude (numbers)#1015. -- Tavix (talk) 19:39, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

delete or retarget. not names of large numbers. Voortle (talk) 00:17, 13 January 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_January_13&oldid=1146664598"