Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 8[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 8, 2017.

List of borders[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 Lists of borders, which I've gone ahead and created. --BDD (talk) 16:11, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of similarly titled articles about international borders:

I think some sort of disambiguation is warranted here, but at what title (Lists of borders, currently red is my first thought)? Should disambiguation be primary or will hatnotes suffice? Do all the above articles belong in such a dab? Are there any others? Thryduulf (talk) 23:08, 8 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.

Taka-Toolo[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 17#Taka-Toolo

List of platforms Linux is ported for[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 17#List of platforms Linux is ported for

Deyrkubé[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. With no one having any firm opinion on these redirects, they will remain as is. -- Tavix (talk) 15:59, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure. The target gives this as Deyrqube for Syriac, but not quite this. It's perhaps unlikely for an English reader to type with the diacritical mark, and the other was just created from it. Search results (for "Deyrkube") are mostly German. Si Trew (talk) 03:50, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment A difference of "k" and "q" makes this look to me like different transliteration schemes, if so then it seems plausible enough. Google results indicate that this name is of Chaldean or n origin, but I don't know enough about the languages involved nor how they are transliterated to form a reliable judgement. Thryduulf (talk) 13:02, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala (talk) 21:43, 8 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.

Johnny Rhodes (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 delete. -- Tavix (talk) 20:43, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unnecessary duplication. Naturally enough it was being used (it no longer is), and DPL bot had found it. Narky Blert (talk) 15:31, 8 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.

Visa Maekinen[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete, unopposed. -- Tavix (talk) 20:46, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) Finnish, not Germanic, meaning 'ae' is not a valid substitution of 'ä' here. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 15:20, 8 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.

Tvihoefdi[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) 20:43, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) Although two out of three diacritic-substitutions used here are reasonable (i for í, d for ð), the remaining one, 'oe' for 'ö', is not, because (as the ð already strongly suggested) this is Icelandic, not German, in which ö is a distinct phoneme, not an o-with-umlaut. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 15:16, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Regardless of whether ö → oe is reasonable in Icelandic generally, the use of different substitution methods in a single redirect is not. Thryduulf (talk) 23:25, 8 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.

Goelhisar[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 17#Goelhisar

"paul heroux"[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) 20:40, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not actually a quote, just a non-capitalized name in quote marks. Implausible; per precedent at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_April_7#.22Richard_Rossiter.22. Similar to the "andrea cera" redirect I listed a few hours ago. (Not merging the two discussions because there's already been responses there) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 14:59, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will copy this timeline to Talk:Paul Heroux to assist anyone in future. As there is no article history at the title with quotes, and the only history between 05:07 18 November 2012 and the nomination here is tagging of the redirect on 5 and 6 January 2015, I don't see a need to retain it. Thryduulf (talk) 00:01, 9 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.

C==[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) 20:36, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Suggest retargeting to Relational operator where == points to as the C language is discussed there, does not seem to refer to C++. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:38, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment this could be construed as a lowercase version of C++ given that + and = share a key with the former requiring a shift (at least on UK QWERTY layouts). I'm completely undecided at the moment whether this is a reason to keep or not so present it simply as an observation. Thryduulf (talk) 02:36, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure "=" can sensibly be construed as a lowercase version of "+". A typo for it, possibly, but it makes no sense to consider them as having lowercase and uppercase (they would not be so even in a physical case of movable type, for example, and a case folding algorithm would not, as such, consider them the same character). Si Trew (talk) 03:45, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was not suggesting it is actually a lowercase/uppercase (either physical or computational) but failing to convey the difference on a keyboard between = and + is the same as between a and A. Sorry I wasn't clear. Thryduulf (talk) 11:49, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've seen this typo made a handful of times, but nowhere near often enough that it justifies an {{R from misspelling}}. Retargeting to relational operator is no more appropriate than any other letter or language name followed by ==. Commodore International, as for C=, is a more plausible alternative, but on the whole I think it should be deleted. —Cryptic 04:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala (talk) 13:53, 8 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.

А (Cyrillic)[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) 20:39, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Same as the target Flow 234 (Nina) talk 13:41, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. They might look identical in most fonts, but the А of the redirect is Cyrillic, while the A of the target is Latin, and these are different characters. Also, this was the article's title for the first 8 yeas of its existence before it was moved in 2012 by Gorobay Coroboy, so WP:RFD#KEEP #4 is relevant. – Uanfala (talk) 13:51, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Uanfala and the 291 page views in 2016. Thryduulf (talk) 20:27, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I moved the page in 2012 because the letter "A" in its name was a Cyrillic "А" instead of a Latin "A". All the other English articles about Cyrillic letters give the name of the Cyrillic letter in Latin letters, as mentioned by Uanfala above. The redirect is from the old title with a Cyrillic "А" to the current title with a Latin "A". —Coroboy (talk) 12:20, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per all the above. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 02:58, 11 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.

@POTUS[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 don't know what will happen a few days from now, but as it stands, the target article is the only place that mentions the term, and there's no agreement as to where else to point it. --BDD (talk) 15:16, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per [1] this twitter handle will be transferred to Trump on Jan 20 2017, and surprisingly, we don't have Donald Trump on social media considering he has had an active presence on the Twitter scene, I'm fine with a keep until inauguration, but there has to be a better target following that. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:33, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Godsy's idea to mention @POTUS in a more general article and then target that article and section is the best improvement. I targeted the more specific article because according to the Reuters and White House sources, the Twitter name originated with Obama, which may also be worth a mention.  Paine Ellsworth  u/c 09:25, 25 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: article should be a redirect to general "Presidents of the United States on social media" and have sections per period with appropriate links for use per period. — billinghurst sDrewth 02:42, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Maybe if this discussion lingered on for long enough, someone will get inspired to write that new section/article for the redirect to be retargeted to.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala (talk) 13:38, 8 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.

C/c++[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 to delete. This will be retargeted to Compatibility of C and C++ as the alternative to deletion. -- Tavix (talk) 20:29, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rather WP:XY. Despite frequently being used by recruitment agents, there really is no such thing as "C/C++" and never has been, the two languages are quite distinct. We do have "Compatibility of C and C++" (but not "Comparison"), which is where C/C++ goes, so it probably could go there, but letter case for computer languages is rather important so I'm not sure that makes sense to call it "c++" in lowercase (its absence will cause the same target to be reached via C/C++, anyway). Si Trew (talk) 03:07, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala (talk) 13:14, 8 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.

Truck attack[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 Snow retarget (non-admin closure) Pppery 20:10, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There have been more then 1 truck attacks Flow 234 (Nina) talk 13:04, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just going to fix this now cause I didn't know Vehicle-ramming attack was a thing that previously had a page. BTW, this is why talk pages exist.Sturmovik (talk) 23:26, 8 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.

Preßburg/Pressburg[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) 20:25, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible combination of two names, someone typing one of them will get where they want to go. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 09:11, 8 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.

Self-leveling paint[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) 20:22, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:R#DELETE 10. Not mentioned in target, we have Self-levelling as a dab page, but as not mentioned in target, this won't help readers. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 09:03, 8 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.

"andrea cera"[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) 20:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Between absent capitals and present quotation marks, this looks quite implausible to me. Excepting actual wikilinks (which neither do nor should exist), all use of it would be covered by the target pagename anyway. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 05:22, 8 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.

Wooden wire[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) 20:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsensical redirect created as a silly idea by a user who was later banned for disruption (among other problems). It's gotten all of 11 page views over the past year and a half; nothing links to it; and it's highly unlikely as a search term. — Gorthian (talk) 04:07, 8 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:LISD[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 17#Template:LISD

Hostage work[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. Multiple relisting later, and the only people interested in the discussion have been the nominator and the creator. -- Tavix (talk) 20:14, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target article. "Hostage work" is indeed an alternative term for orphan works. It isn't especially common, though has enough use that it could be incorporated into the article. But I'm not sure how to do so without it feeling like POV pushing. Delete unless someone else can pull that off. --BDD (talk) 21:37, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The source for the formerly existing section about criticism of naming was a proposal (about which you cited an article) of the term: Abandoning the Orphans: An Open Access Approach to Hostage Works. Maybe it was used for linking to the article from elsewhere. --AVRS (talk) 07:48, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think a redirect is POV-pushing when it has no other meanings (the meaning "work with hostages" is hard to find among Google results; the rest are non-phrases). If there is no other place to direct it, it's invisible to those who are not trying to find that only (non-dictionary and not insulting to the subject) meaning. --AVRS (talk) 10:55, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My concern—and I'm open to being proven wrong—is that anyone familiar with the term "hostage work" would already know that it's an alternative to the more standard "orphan work". So someone not familiar with the term, who queries Wikipedia for information, is going to be left to try to figure it out on their own, because the rationale for redirection will not be clear to them. This type of {{R without mention}} can work if the terms are simply one-to-one synonyms. Compare, perhaps, to Death tax, which really gives readers context. --BDD (talk) 19:17, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 01:08, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • By the way, even though I nominated this and know what it's about, I keep glancing at "hostage work" and thinking it refers to Hostage negotiation or something. --BDD (talk) 17:24, 27 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala (talk) 01:04, 8 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.

Wikipedia:Discussion forums[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 January 17#Wikipedia:Discussion forums

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2017_January_8&oldid=1088107223"