Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 July 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 7[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 7, 2017.

Branch Davidian views of the Lord's Supper[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. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:35, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This was on the Neelix list, but as a former article it needs to be handled here. I can't find anywhere Branch Davidian views on the Lord's Supper are discussed. It's not in Branch Davidians, nor at The Lord's Supper. -- Tavix (talk) 22:41, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. both. The views of a small cult don't belong at The Lord's Supper. Legacypac (talk) 22:51, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Too much on the WP:FRINGE to be in The Lord's Supper article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:44, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; as noted at AFD, this appears to be rather unremarkable (plenty of Protestants hold the same ideas), an ordinary memorialist form of Eucharistic theology. If this were a larger group, redirecting to Memorialism might make sense, but the Branch Davidians being a tiny group of rather minimal theological interest (if you're looking into them for reasons unrelated to Waco, you're probably already familiar with places where you could find their beliefs), this target isn't likely to be sought. Nyttend backup (talk) 16:58, 11 July 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.

Nintendo not-in-article redirects[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 August 1#Nintendo not-in-article redirects

Nintendo unlikely search 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 trainwreck. The discussion has shown so far that these redirects differ in level of plausibility and for completely different reasons. So I'm closing this as WP:TRAINWRECK. Bold retargeting and individual renomination are encouraged as anyone sees fit. Deryck C. 15:37, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Lordtobi, Tavix, Nyttend, and CoffeeWithMarkets: Please go ahead with your proposed changes and split nominations. I've also retagged "Nintendoh" and "Nintendou" as correct alternative transcriptions (without prejudice against another RfD). Deryck C. 09:50, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unlikely searches, most of which also seem to be vandalism. Lordtobi (✉) 21:25, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Nintendo Co. Ltd. - 任天堂株式会社, mixed script redirects are implausible. Retarget Nintendon't to Sega Genesis, it's a notable advertising campaign discussed therein. Keep Nintendoes as {{R from plural}}. Nintendo's consoles, especially their early ones, can simply be referred to as "Nintendoes". Most of the rest seem like harmless typos. A couple of these I could see as implausible, such as Nintendon and Nintendou, but these seem pretty WP:CHEAP to me. No opinion on the subsidiaries. -- Tavix (talk) 23:11, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Nimtendo; the keys are adjacent on a QWERTY keyboard, so the typo's easy. Also, as the letters are of similar shape, when you look over something you've typed, you might not notice it as easily as if you typed "Nibtendo" or "Nijtendo". Nyttend backup (talk) 16:51, 11 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep "Nimtendo" since it's a plausible mispelling, with "Nintendoh" and "Nintendou" being reasonably helpful since both are phonetically the same as the actual name. I've no preference for the other ones. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 21:52, 12 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It might be a good idea to split these up given the differences in plausibility. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:26, 19 July 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.

Richard Chang[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 ASE Group. (non-admin closure) Legacypac (talk) 11:02, 18 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

delete redirect - redirect may be target's brother, who had an article deleted after AfD - but no mention on target page and no reason to have this confusing redirect SesameballTalk 21:13, 7 July 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.

Shots On The Hood Of My Car[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Deryck C. 15:32, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target article, nor at List of songs recorded by Kesha. From what I can tell, it's an unreleased song, but we've got no information on it. -- Tavix (talk) 18:55, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete if it's not mentioned, but should these be added to the list if they can be verified? There's a featured list consisting entirely of unreleased songs. Peter James (talk) 19:05, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete was a potential song, got leaked in 2011, then not released. Not in main Kesha article. Revisit if it makes some unreleased album material. This goes the way of Fancy Pants (Lady Gaga song) AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:15, 7 July 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.

Abdul Rehman Chaudhry[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 delete by Nick. -- Tavix (talk) 21:29, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This seems unlikely as names are in a different order and they are different people. What I think happened here is that an editor wanted to create an article about Abdul Rehman Chaudhry, searched and found the Chaudhry Abdul Rehman Khan page (probably at the top of search results), then instead of creating it from a red link, put the new content in that page and moved it to the new title. Peter James (talk) 18:34, 7 July 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.

Modi government[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 July 25#Modi government

Not Obsessed[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. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:40, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not mentioned at the target article, nor at List of songs recorded by Kesha. From what I can tell, it's an unreleased song, but there's not any information on it. -- Tavix (talk) 18:18, 7 July 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.

Dev Madan[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.  Salvidrim! · ✉ 06:22, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or retarget, having worked for Taito, Humongous Entertainment, DC Comics, Sucker Punch Productions, PopCap AND Amazon Game Studios, Loose Cannon Studios might just be his least notable venture, as it comprised one game only and shut down after just five years. Sucker Punch at seven years of employment as art director would be the most plausible redirect, however, I don't see a good target in any of the articles. Lordtobi (✉) 16:12, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete not a resume website. Needs notability from secondary RS. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:56, 7 July 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:Raymond E. Feist 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. Deryck C. 09:46, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a follow-up to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 June 28#Wikipedia:RAY. Raymond E. Feist isn't mentioned at the target, and the WikiProject has no specific focus on this series (unlike, for example, several series that have specific task forces). As the bluelinks might give an impression that there is a WikiProject or task force by this name, these should be deleted as potentially misleading. -- Tavix (talk) 15:39, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete not a task force. Seems like it might have been a template for a navbox. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:22, 7 July 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.

Specillin[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 Benzylpenicillin. -- Tavix (talk) 02:15, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not appear in the target article, and is not listed as one of the trade names for amoxicillin. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:55, 7 July 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 Tornado Outbreak characters[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) 02:14, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as there is no such list. Lordtobi (✉) 14:21, 7 July 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.

Captain Nimbus (character)[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.  Salvidrim! · ✉ 06:22, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as there is no sufficient information on the character. Lordtobi (✉) 14:21, 7 July 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.

Zephyr (character)[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 Zephyr#Fictional characters. (non-admin closure) feminist 16:58, 17 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as there is no sufficient information on the character. Lordtobi (✉) 14:21, 7 July 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.

R6TEA4[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) 02:12, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as Wikipedia not a manual. R6TEA4 is apparently the file version of the NTSC Wii version, but should not be a redirect. Lordtobi (✉) 14:20, 7 July 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.

Evil Bob[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 "Wondercat"; retarget "Evil Bob" as proposed.. Deryck C. 09:45, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target page. --BDD (talk) 19:52, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 14:51, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:12, 7 July 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.

Toby fox (artist)[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.  Salvidrim! · ✉ 06:21, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Misleading, as I don't think someone would type artist if they were looking for the game developer. They are probably looking for this instead. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:08, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The Undertale musician is primary topic for now as the illustrator and others aren't notable yet. Also he is listed as Artist in Undertale. I've tagged as R from unnecessary dab. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:51, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Toby Fox is indeed an artist (among other things), and this is just a simple case of avoiding a double redirect. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:31, 19 July 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.

Staten Island route[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 East River route and South Brooklyn route; delete others. Deryck C. 18:28, 20 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence that the ferry is the primary topic, "Foo route" could refer to any of a wide variety of subjects (rail lines, roadways, bus routes, etc). Thus, these redirects are confusing. – Train2104 (t • c) 17:05, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Bay Ridge route. As the google results (excluding Wikipedia) for this are all over the map. Keep the rest as it's abundantly clear from Google (excluding Wikipedia) that the New York ferries are the primary topic for these search terms, even if some are theoretically ambiguous. Thryduulf (talk) 18:04, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Thryduulf: There is likely recentism here with the Google results as the ferries launched yesterday. Rockaway route returns subway information as the third link, "Astoria route" is all over the map, . – Train2104 (t • c)
I don't see that with the Astoria route. And it doesn't really matter if it's recentism or not - what matters is that currently these are the targets people using these search terms are looking for. If that changes down the line then they can be reconsidered, but based on the information currently available to me (searching from the UK) only one of these redirects is pointing to the right place. Thryduulf (talk) 19:10, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 18:10, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relist again as the original nomination was made when these ferry routes were still in media spotlight. Did the primary topic situations change since then?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:06, 7 July 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.

Overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq[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 & redirect : Move to Overthrow of Saddam Hussein and retarget to Saddam Hussein#Invasion of Iraq in 2003  Ben – Salvidrim! · ✉ 00:17, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As a procedural note, Legacypac created the redirect Overthrow of Saddam Hussein during the discussion. Since the redirect to be moved already existed, the discussion should have been closed as delete. As such, I've reverted the move and deleted the redirect directly. -- Tavix (talk) 01:09, 24 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Worth considering a retarget to Firdos Square statue destruction, which "marked the symbolic end" of Saddam. --Nevé–selbert 13:49, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as unlikely search term. I could see "Overthrow of Saddam Hussein" or "Overthrow of Iraq", but "Overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq" seems overly specific for a redirect. Kaldari (talk) 17:39, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to Overthrow of Saddam Hussein and Retarget to Saddam_Hussein#Invasion_of_Iraq_in_2003, which keeps it focused on Hussein's article and has information concerning his trial and execution. Delete the "in Iraq" version as redundant and not helpful. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:45, 25 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, it's better to target an article that discusses the actual end of Saddam rather than the symbolic end. I don't see this as being an unlikely search term, so I do not support deletion at this time. -- Tavix (talk) 14:10, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tavix. Thryduulf (talk) 08:32, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • It doesn't seem like a plausible search term, so I'd support moving to Overthrow of Saddam Hussein. I also agree with AngusWOOF that Saddam_Hussein#Invasion_of_Iraq_in_2003 is a more appropriate target. – Uanfala 14:31, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but create Overthrow of Saddam Hussein. This is an entirely plausible search term that would come up in natural English (e.g. "After the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, the country became destabilized," which is neither too unwieldy or convoluted a sentence). ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 05:21, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move and Retarget in the way suggested by AngusWOOF. "In Iraq" is utterly redundant, few people have been overthrown in several countries. Place Clichy (talk) 13:43, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:05, 7 July 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.

Khash (dish[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Deryck C. 13:20, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Mis-formatted parenthetical disambiguations. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:02, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete housekeeping. The properly formatted ones will do its job. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:48, 7 July 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:Obituary[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) 02:09, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This was previously redirected to Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a blog, web hosting service, social networking service, or memorial site (WP:NOTMEMORIAL). However, it was changed to WP:Deceased Wikipedians in 2008; the last edit prior to the nomination was... 2008. I used the "What links here" tool and found that many user talk pages use the "WP:Obituary" to refer to the previous target, WP:NOTMEMORIAL. No other pages refer it to the current target, deceased Wikipedians. Also, I notice that Wikipedia:OBITUARY was created in 2014, yet it was used just once to refer it to WP:NOTMEMORIAL (implicitly). Therefore, I propose either retargeting both to WP:NOTMEMORIAL, or disambiguate one with at least two individual pages and retarget two others to the dabpage. George Ho (talk) 15:58, 18 June 2017 (UTC); amended, 06:45, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I added just "WP:OBIT", which is used in different pages to refer to either one, usually the NOTMEMORIAL. All others look too different, and they are not named either "Obituary" or "OBIT". Better to treat them individually, Piotrus, than to bundle all others into here, especially when each of them may have different meanings but somewhat different from "OBIT(UARY)". George Ho (talk) 06:32, 19 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 04:30, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala 09:56, 7 July 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.

Haitian Standard French[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) 02:08, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Resulted from a controversial page move without discussion (Dinglebat500, 319 edits; currently blocked) to a term that is "nonexistent" describing "Haitian French"; unlike the "standard Haitian Creole (which does). This move was swiftly overturned by editors. "Standard French" (from France) is taught in school as well as spoken in Haiti. A variety while spoken, there is no official standard to be able to bare such a title. There are no sources to provide evidence for this claim. According to History, Society and Variation: In Honor of Albert Valdman (Valdman Albert, J; Clements Clancy), there is even a divided consensus on whether or not Haitian French even exists in Haiti. (It does however) and it ranges differently among its speakers. So a Haitian "Standard" French is impossible to determine and such terminology is unfounded. Opposing parties please provide where this term is in usage. For the sake of WP:CONSISTENCY, we do not have a: Swiss Standard French, Belgian Standard French, Quebec Standard French, Louisiana Standard French, Aostan Standard French, and Meridional Standard French as redirects either. Thank you for your consideration. Savvyjack23 (talk) 19:47, 17 June 2017 (UTC) To add: A side-by-side comparison between "Haitian French" and "Haitian Standard French" from 1 July 2015 - present virtually shows no hits for the latter, except during the time of creation and redirect activity (from edits and views from cached). [6] Savvyjack23 (talk) 20:38, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I could say "no harm done" but, besides being, as the nominator points out, an inappropriate move to begin with, there is no reason to expect anyone ever to search on this term. Based on a Google search for "haitian standard french", the only place where this term appears in coherent text, besides Wikipedia mirrors, is https://books.google.com/books?id=dXd6zOtliZsC&pg=PA45&lpg=PA45&dq=%22haitian+standard+french%22+-%22is+the+variety+of+french+spoken+in+haiti%22&source=bl&ots=kXC3982aHp&sig=VJ0FzlxZiyQ6PKRuRZlzB2OeUfI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi49Jfp1sXUAhVOET4KHQBEDZ0Q6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=%22haitian%20standard%20french%22%20-%22is%20the%20variety%20of%20french%20spoken%20in%20haiti%22&f=false a single book] (and a couple of sources quoting from that source) that uses it a single time, in passing, in a manner that suggests that the author was merely trying to emphasize that French in Haiti is distinct from Creole without digressing from the main point of the sentence. Beside, if a term to this effect were in use, it would more likely be "standard Haitian French" (for which Google shows virtually no evidence anyway). Largoplazo (talk) 20:15, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I see it as an analogue to "X Standard English" where X would be the country, which is a commonly used kind of phrase (e.g. [7]). As far as I can see, it does get use in academic texts, [8][9][10] and is distinct from Creole. This redirect doesn't mean that Haitian French is Standard French as spoken in France, but that Haitian French is a French language which has some level of standardization in Haiti.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:40, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It is a virtually unsearched term (0 results before creation), so what purpose would it serve? Purpose of a redirect is to aid in searched terms, not necessarily create correct ones. Source [4] states "Haitian Standard French and Creole." --pertaining to both Standard French and Standard Creole that is "Haitian." It is in list form and preceding it describes 'Greek" and "Arabic" varieties. In source [5], albeit found in 2 pages, there is not a preview; we do not know of the context it is written. This term is neither searched nor correct. Savvyjack23 (talk) 22:17, 17 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well if page views before creation was a criteria for having redirects, then all of them would have to be deleted. It's impossible (at least without looking at server logs) to see what people are searching for when the page that would track that doesn't exist. Since source 4 refers to as you say, "Standard French...that is Haitian", it seems reasonable to have a redirect from the naturally constructed "Haitian Standard French" which the source uses. You can find the text in a Google Books search without navigating to the page [11], but it says "ln the second place — perhaps exemplified by Haitian Standard French and Haitian creole", which is even more unambiguous than Source 4's phrasing that "Haitian Standard French" is a thing. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 22:56, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Patar Knight, whose sources have shown that this term gets used by linguisticians in discussions of the Haitian French dialect continuum to refer to the standard French taught in Haitian schools. This redirect might raise eyebrows to a Haitian reader but makes sense to a linguistician coming from an English point of view, as an analogy to Scottish Standard English, Standard Singaporean Mandarin etc. Deryck C. 10:35, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Patar knigts's findings. Regardless of whether the term applies to some hypothetical standard Haitian French, or the Haitian variety of Standard French, it takes readers to the one article where they'll find what they're looking for. – Uanfala 13:14, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Both delete and keep bring up good arguments. One more week will allow consensus to settle entirely.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:36, 7 July 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.

Airpot[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) 02:05, 25 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is an actual word, unrelated to the target topic, Bizarrely there is no Wiktionary entry, nor could I find an article to retarget it to, I assume most people searching for this would not look for the current target. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:43, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Added Taking a look at the page history this redirect was created because it was used as a misspelling in one source, so the editor thought that was appropriate to create a redirect, so this is a classic example of criterion #2 of WP:R#DELETE, a short stub entry was created later, but it was quickly reverted to a redirect. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:45, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Is there a beverage-related article that uses airpot? The Wikipedia searches all refer to it and related terms as a typo. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:03, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Obvious typo to page not even with the same meaning. 2.28.253.182 (talk) 15:02, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:XY as it can refer to (a type of?) vacuum flask, or to a trademarked kind of flower pot. – Uanfala 16:18, 22 July 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.

Airpoprt[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. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:39, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely typo, little page views. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:39, 7 July 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.

Villagate[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Deryck C. 13:21, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This was mentioned there, with a reference (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/election-2015-32462250/david-cameron-s-west-ham-football-brain-fade) but has been removed, and is probably not significant enough to be mentioned in the article. Peter James (talk) 23:53, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 05:53, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete searches show mostly results for gates used for villas and houses. This isn't potatoe-notable enough for Cameron. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:07, 12 July 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.

Ltd. Matsushita Electric Industrial Company[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 July 15#Ltd. Matsushita Electric Industrial Company

Pre-order status[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) 19:45, 19 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vague term, not exclusive to iTunes, maybe retarget to Pre-order but not a likely search term, so I would prefer deletion. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 03:35, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Pre-ordering is not specific to iTunes, and there is no article for the status. Status is just status. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 05:17, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. A retarget to pre-order wouldn't make sense. A pre-order isn't a status, it's a way to buy something before release. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:33, 15 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per the above CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:32, 19 July 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.

Ual.de[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. Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:51, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Obscure websites not mentioned in target. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 03:28, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete not useful for English Wikipedia and is not the official main website or official English website for the company. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:46, 7 July 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.

Inc. American Airlines[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. Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:44, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All of these are unlikely terms to search because the "Inc." part is never used before the company name (American Airlines Inc. etc are fine.) - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 03:23, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, they've been added. For future reference, the template is {{subst:rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectName2|target=TargetArticle2}}, substituting the redirect name and target name (found at WP:RFD#HOWTO, Step II). -- Tavix (talk) 14:53, 7 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Got it, thanks. UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:57, 7 July 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.

Battle Royale (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. Deryck C. 13:21, 21 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion[edit]

Here is the next batch of "faulty crystal ball" film redirects. As these years have already passed, it's impossible for these films to be released that year. It's also implausible that someone would type these redirects in the search bar due to the incorrect year disambiguation. (raw list available on talk page) -- Tavix (talk) 00:06, 7 July 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_July_7&oldid=1136082977"