Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 June 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 20[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 20, 2017.

Aristotelo[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. While some editors proposed plausible reasons for keeping a subset of these redirects, the rough consensus is to delete them all. Deryck C. 17:56, 14 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is a continuation of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 June 7#Katolikismo. All these Esperanto redirects were created because they are headwords in the Enciklopedio Kalblanda, but the subjects themselves are not related to Esperanto. Gorobay (talk) 17:26, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - I would keep all because they do no harm, and there is only one possible target. In fact to be consistent, create Ĉilio -> Chile. Lutero is also Italian and Spanish, and it might have some legitimacy outside of Esperanto as a reference to Martin Luther (who worked in Latin). Keplero is also Italian. - Richard Cavell (talk) 21:49, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – Using redirects to implement dictionary translations is abusive and potentially confusing. Besides the English WP:common name, we should only have redirects from variants of a person's name in their own language or in a language they used (e.g. Kopernikus and Koppernigk are fine, even though the second one hasn't even been created; Koperniko is not, because Esperanto didn't exist in his time, and the astronomer is not connected to this language in any plausible way). — JFG talk 06:57, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:FORRED and per JFG. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:28, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Thank you for following up on that, Gorobay. I got to a couple redirects that I wanted to look up to see if they were useful, and then it slipped my mind to complete the nomination. For example, I thought it was possible for Italy to be "Italio" in at least one of the regional languages of Italy, but I haven't been able to find evidence of that. Unless someone finds a compelling connection between any of these, I'm going to default to delete all. -- Tavix (talk) 17:26, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per JFG. —WLM / ? 14:17, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete most. Follows a list of (likely) exceptions:
    • Kalvino should have the same target as Calvino as a misspelling.
    • Korano could target List of translations of the Quran#Esperanto.
    • I'd abstain on Keplero as it's also the name in Italian.
    • Judismo apparently can be a name for either Judeo-Arabic [1] or Ladino [2].
    • There are places named Italio in Alaska, but none are with mentions on wikipedia, so that leaves its next (erroneous?) use as a variant of the prefix Italo-, but I don't think this is enough grounds for retageting to Italy or Italian. The same goes for Brazilo.
    • Hegelo is used as a prefix in compounds of the type "Hegelo-Marxism", and given that a name like "Hegel" isn't so readily recognisable as "Italy" or "Brazil" it's likely there are people who upon seeing it will look it up on wikipedia, so there's a reason for keeping. Ditto for Aristotelo. – Uanfala 23:22, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per above. "Hegelo" seems to be also a village in New Zealand or a misspelling of Hengelo according to Google; not sure we should keep this pointing to Hegel. —Kusma (t·c) 10:24, 4 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.

Serious sam (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. Deryck C. 16:32, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or retarget, no sufficient information at given target, Serious Sam (video game) would be a more likely target, but ultimately I think deleting is better in this case. Lordtobi (✉) 15:40, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete a single line saying there's a character named Serious Sam doesn't help anyone. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:38, 20 June 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.

Serious Sam (game engine)[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) 23:53, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, there is no engine by this name. Lordtobi (✉) 15:39, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Right, this could have the tag R from incorrect name. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:14, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I have no idea why I created this, it is weird. Maybe it was a redlink or something at the time, but I don't see much use for it now. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 03:31, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. – Uanfala 13:01, 2 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.

Ugh Zan III[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. 16:32, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, WP:GAMECRUFT/WP:GAMEGUIDE. Lordtobi (✉) 15:39, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. No character list or setting section that could provide any useful information for this. Ugh Zan III is mentioned briefly in the video game article, but hardly worth a redirect as there is no development or character description. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:36, 20 June 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.

Lego Island 3[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) feminist 16:39, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that this is official, most people don't even consider Island Xtreme Stunts as "Lego Island 3", but rather a spin-off, as it focused on producing an action movie over anything else. Lordtobi (✉) 14:37, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep until a Lego Island 3 is made, this is assumed to be the next one in the Lego Island series. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 07:27, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, feminist 15:24, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Redirects don't need to be official, they are supposed to make the article easier to find. This is the 3rd game to be set on Lego Island, featuring the same characters, etc. What is gained by deleting the redirect? You shouldn't need to research it before searching for the game you want to read about. Somebody spent the time to try to make someone's day a little easier by creating that redirect. If a person could reasonably think this 3rd game, following Lego Island 1 & 2, was called "Lego Island 3", why on Earth would we need to delete that? ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 15:14, 23 June 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 Brickster[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) Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:48, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Brickster is the antagonist in all three Lego Island titles, not just the first; the second game (Lego Island 2: The Brickster's Revenge) bears his name in the title, so maybe redirect it there? Lordtobi (✉) 14:20, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Brickster is plastered all over this video game title. Unless there's a more generic target? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 07:28, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    @AngusWOOF: How do you mean "plastered all over this title"? If you mean that his is in the game's focus, that would apply to all three Lego Island games (state above also); if we were to chose to which entry in the series it should link to, the second would be the most generic as it includes that term in its title. Lordtobi (✉) 07:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Brickster is present as a character throughout the Plot section, and it is the first of the series. If you go to the Lego Island 2 article, you get practically no information about The Brickster. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:56, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, feminist 15:24, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Without a series page, the article for the first entry would be the expected landing page for any elements introduced in that game. The sequel is linked right there at the top, so the current links seems best. ▫ JohnnyMrNinja 15:00, 23 June 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.

Infomainiac[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 Infomaniac. (non-admin closure) feminist 16:43, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unlikely typo of "Infomaniac", not to mention that he appears in all Lego Island, not just the first. Lordtobi (✉) 14:18, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, feminist 15:24, 20 June 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.

Gdanzisk[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) 23:51, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, this is not the current or former name for the city in any language. The edit summary on creation was "REDIRECT heh heh" which makes me think it wasn't an entirely serious addition, combined with the only link being from Wikipedia talk:Lamest edit wars/Archive 3#The Memory hole, which references this 2004 edit by Pakaran which used the format [[Gdansk|Gdan]][[Danzig|zisk]] and the (hopefully tongue in cheek) edit summary "The correct name is Gdanzisk - you must be a communist nazi terrorist edit warrior! I should list you on VFDA or maybe just on here!". Thryduulf (talk) 11:40, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody's ephemeral joke; just eliminate it.Wetman (talk) 22:09, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, feminist 15:23, 20 June 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.

Dànzica[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 June 28#Dànzica

Template:Riley family tree[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 June 28#Template:Riley family tree

Iceland–Switzerland relations[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. Opinions are evenly split (two editors arguing for keeping and two for deleting) and now that relevant content has been added to the target article the redirect is no longer (as) problematic as when nominated. I suggest that any possible further discussions about the relevance of the newly added content take place on the target's talk page. (non-admin closure) – Uanfala 11:32, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect to an article which doesn't mention -- at all -- any relation. Calton | Talk 03:42, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Added an mention of Switzerland in this edit.--Snaevar (talk) 14:32, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It's still worthless, since according to the paragraph you ginned up to save this redirect, there's no significant relationship between the countries nor do they even have actual embassies in each other's capitals. --Calton | Talk 15:59, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That argument is clearly bogus. Many countries lacking embassies have significant relations. I wouldn't go around deleting all the international relations redirects for Taiwan, for example, which doesn't have official embassies with countries in the world for reasons that have nothing to do with, for example, Uganda. And I consider their common membership in European trade organizations as a significant relation. Keep as redirected. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 12:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That argument is clearly bogus. Many countries lacking embassies have significant relations.' [citation needed], especially your misleading use of the adjectives "clearly" and "many": Taiwan is a unique case, given its delicate political status -- it and others countries maintain the figleaf of mutual "associations" and "trade offices" because to have official diplomatic recognition would upset China -- as I'm sure you very well know. So how about listing those "many" countries -- and no, North Korea doesn't count for similar reasons -- why these are "significant relations" despite the absence of direct diplomatic interaction, and how that applies to Iceland and Switzerland. --Calton | Talk 13:10, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Calton is correct. Gaming the Wikiedia system has always appealed to a small minority.Wetman (talk) 22:26, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Wetman & Calton: "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones" (engish proverb). For others happening to look at this discussion please note that EFTA, which Switzerland and Iceland are a part of is a four nation association.--Snaevar (talk) 22:16, 14 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Does that "english proverb" have some radically different meaning in Icelandic that it doesn't in English? Or do you believe that making random meaningless connections -- like your EFTA reference -- is somehow meaningful?
And speaking of random meaningless connections, please note this. --Calton | Talk 05:08, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and I'm still waiting for you to back up your claim that "Many countries lacking embassies have significant relations". --Calton | Talk 05:09, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, feminist 15:23, 20 June 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.

Ashley Cheng[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 July 4#Ashley Cheng

Isteve.com[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. 16:32, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was unable to verify if this is Sailer's website as it appears to be down. The article cites unz.com/isteve. -- Tavix (talk) 16:32, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment It appears that this used to be Saier's website, but the registration on it has expired. I looked on the way back machine and randomly picked a snapshot from February 2011 which says "For technical reasons, I'm no longer blogging at this iSteve.com website. I am now blogging at: iSteve.blogspot.com" which was still current in May 2014 [3]. I'm uncertain whether this means we should delete the redirect, but I'm leaning towards saying we should. Thryduulf (talk) 11:52, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and consider creating iSteve (blog) or iSteve Blog instead, which would be more useful for dab purposes. But yes, it was his website briefly, but he doesn't use the .com in his personal branding, at least not anymore. [4] Also the blogspot one has not been updated since 2014 except for a single archive reposted article in May 2017, but it has a ton of his writings. UNZ seems to be his latest blogging site, and there he calls it "iSteve Blog" [5] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:28, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: involved relist in order to close the June 4th log
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 15:10, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I agree with the above arguments. This doesn't seem particularly right. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:04, 25 June 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:American Heritage Dictionary representation[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 Wikipedia:American Heritage Dictionary representation. Retarget the other two to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Pronunciation. The last one is a toss up, but I went with the option that hasn't been objected to, along with a desire to keep redirects local if we can. -- Tavix (talk) 17:11, 10 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Project-to-mainspace redirects are not useful. The target article was moved from project space per an MfD. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:36, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 14:57, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Tavix: Do you think you could close this now? All participants except the OP agree that the redirects should at least not be deleted, and two of them agree where to retarget the latter two, which can be changed boldly anyway should there be a disagreement. Nardog (talk) 18:12, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep #1 as a redirect from move; redirect #2 and #3 to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Pronunciation per Nardog's second comment (because the Help:Pronunciation respelling key proposed by Thryduulf is not the only English phonemic representation used, it's not even the major one). More specifically about #3: a wiktionary user typing up this shortcut on wikipedia is probably looking for wikipedia's guidelines on pronunciation (rather than wiktionary's) so I don't think getting thrown back to wiktionary is what they would have expected. – Uanfala 11:16, 2 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]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 July 7#Evil Bob

Saraiki history[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 June 23#Saraiki history

Buddhānussaṭi[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) 23:49, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

deletion, name is a misspelling with an incorrect diacritic dot. The term is spelled without that diacritic, following standard Pali dictionaries such as the PED. Since people are unlikely to use this as a search term, it should be deleted. Farang Rak Tham (talk) 08:33, 20 June 2017 (UTC) See this link for the Pali-English Dictionary's entry on Anussati and Buddhānussati, to check the correct spelling.--Farang Rak Tham (talk) 21:15, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as an apparent typo that is quite unlikely as a search term. – Uanfala 11:32, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per your reasoning. —WLM / ? 14:18, 29 June 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_June_20&oldid=1138581757"