Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 4[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 4, 2017.

Dream Home: The Property Brother's Ultimate Guide to Finding & Fixing Your Perfect House[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 speedily deleted per G7 by Y. (non-admin closure) — Godsy (TALKCONT) 07:41, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I created it in error. Should be deleted. Nothing links here. Esprit15d • talk • contribs 21:15, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Property Brothers at Home[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 speedily deleted per G7 by Y. (non-admin closure) — Godsy (TALKCONT) 07:41, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I created it in error. Should be deleted. Nothing links to it. Esprit15d • talk • contribs 21:12, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Srebrenica Massacre of Children 1993[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 13#Srebrenica Massacre of Children 1993

Wikipedia Ambassador[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 Wikipedia:Ambassador. WJBscribe (talk) 00:01, 15 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Quite an unorthodox redirect. The target is not a traditional Wikimedia sister project. This is also a bit outside of how we generally use soft redirects in the mainspace, especially as this is specifically Wikipedia related. As far as I can tell it hasn't been repeatedly recreated. {{Shortcut}} linking WP:AMBP is also on the page; that link is inappropriate for the mainspace. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 10:52, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure what you're requesting. Do you want to delete the Wikipedia page? Are you planning on creating a whole new page for this? Yes, it's not one of the big sister projects. I still don't see what your point is. Banaticus (talk) 18:31, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the soft redirect target itself or the shortcut box and where it links is appropriate for the mainspace. Topics with a less-than-encyclopedic scope, that are commonly wikified or repeatedly recreated, are what should generally be soft redirected to sister sites from the mainspace. Wikipedia Ambassador fits neither of those bills; it fits the scope of the projectspace. Wikipedia:Ambassador and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Ambassador are appropriate and already exist. So, yes, I think this redirect should be deleted. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 23:16, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Keep it. It's specifically designed to facilitate teachers/professors/instructors who are unfamiliar with Wikipedia being able to find the project where they are working to gain more experience in leading their students through asynchronous verifiable "NOC" content. If it was a regular project, sure then delete it, although I don't really see the rational behind that decision either -- the whole point of redirects is that they help you find things. If there isn't already a redirect there, it's far more system-resource intensive to talk about it then "delete" it (which really just hides it from most users) than to just leave it be. But in this case, it serves a demonstrable purpose in helping these neophyte editors. Banaticus (talk) 01:24, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. One of the occasions when cross-namespace redirects from article to project space have benefits outweighing the potential for harm is when they are at a title that is unlikely to be confused for an encyclopaedia article and the target is something that very new users are likely to be looking for. In this case I think that both of those apply, per Banaticus and so this should be kept. Thryduulf (talk) 09:41, 9 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • My above reasoning still applies, but I now think that the target could be better, see below. Thryduulf (talk) 13:55, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Thryduulf and Banaticus: What about hard redirecting this to Wikipedia:Ambassador or Wikipedia:Wikipedia Ambassador (I'm not sure which one)? If a local target is reasonable, that is preferable instead of a soft redirect to a sister project.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 13:47, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Wikipedia:Ambassador but add a hatnote to the present target. Wikipedia:Wikipedia Ambassador is itself a redirect to Wikipedia:Education program/Ambassadors, a page tagged as historical with the last update being in 2013 (I'm wondering about proposing to retarget the redirect to Wikipedia:Ambassador but need to do a bit more reading first). Thryduulf (talk) 13:54, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf's reasoning; helping those unfamiliar with Wikipedia with a CNR is a good case of WP:IAR, and the current target satisfies that goal. I'm fine with a retarget as long as the new target's at least as useful as the current target. Nyttend (talk) 17:59, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Wikipedia:Ambassador and add a hatnote there to Outreach:Wikipedia Ambassador Program per Thryduulf is preferable to the status quo. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 17:48, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Wikipedia:Ambassador per Godsy. -- Tavix (talk) 21:14, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Anti-Trump[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. --BDD (talk) 20:11, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Vague, does not exclusively refer to the protests. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:52, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So, what's your suggestion? Change it to a disambiguation page? Anti-Trump was created as a redirect page on 23 March 2016‎, redirecting Stop Trump movement (redirected by Anti-Trump movement at that time). Anti-Trump movement and Anti-Trump were changed from redirecting Stop Trump movement to redirecting Protests against Donald Trump by Marxistfounder at 12:11 and 12:12, 16 February 2017. Should Anti-Trump movement also be listed as Redirects for discussion? --Neo-Jay (talk) 23:22, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Neo-Jay: I do not support a dab page because of the WP:PTM issue. I support deletion overall, I have no opinion currently on Anti-Trump movement, but feel free to nominate it. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Champion: But Anti-Trump, like Stop Trump, Dump Trump, and Never Trump, is the main name of the movement. And currently Stop Trump, Dump Trump, and Never Trump all redirect Stop Trump movement. So I think that Anti-Trump at least can be changed back to redirecting Stop Trump movement. Are you suggesting Stop Trump, Dump Trump, and Never Trump be listed as Redirects for discussion? Another solution is to keep Anti-Trump as redirecting Protests against Donald Trump and add a disambiguation hatnote there. --Neo-Jay (talk) 23:40, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Should remove these titles all. Anti-Trump page must be deleted. Marxistfounder (talk) 04:25, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget over to Stop Trump movement since 'Against Trump', 'Dump Trump', 'Trash Trump', and the like are pretty much synonymous. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 12:04, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per CoffeeWithMarkets. Thryduulf (talk) 13:38, 18 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Stop Trump movement per CoffeeWithMarkets.LM2000 (talk) 01:26, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as the broader topic. The Stop Trump movement doesn't have any strong affinity with the phrase, so it should redirect to the general article regarding Anti-Trump protests. -- Tavix (talk) 01:57, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Godsy (TALKCONT) 05:05, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging LM2000, Marxistfounder, CoffeeWithMarkets, Sakura Cartelet, Steel1943, and Tavix about the SIA idea. George Ho (talk) 00:42, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I would oppose a set index. If someone searches "Anti-Trump", the current target would be the most relevant article. Someone isn't going to search "anti-Trump" looking for an attempted assassination, for example. -- Tavix (talk) 00:59, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I could support this. The Stop Trump movement was largely Republican opposition early in the primaries, going forward "Anti-Trump" will obviously refer to a broader group. I also want to note that Anti-Trump movement was originally redirected to Stop Trump movement but has since been redirected to the protests article.LM2000 (talk) 01:42, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Alive (story)[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 Alive (a disambiguation page). Thryduulf (talk) 13:18, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Overly vague title, no reason to point to this specifically. There are lots of books called Alive. Possibly redirect to Alive. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:35, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment is (story) a valid disambiguator? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:51, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very weak retarget to the Alive dab since the films there are technically stories. However I'm also not that comfortable with the "(story)" modifier like User:AngusWOOF mentioned. I'm also okay with a Delete --Lenticel (talk) 09:14, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The disambiguator (story) is hopelessly vague. Does it mean a real event, or a short story, or a novel, or a legend, or a film? (There are other possibilities also.) Narky Blert (talk) 01:15, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Being vague isn't a problem if the destination is a disambiguation page, since it will list all uses. If there are stories (and there are) listed there, then it can be a valid search term for it. -- 70.51.200.162 (talk) 06:19, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Alive dab. Such action can prompt a reader to type just "alive" in the future. --George Ho (talk) 03:28, 12 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Ravi Singh -- Wheat Breeder[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 delete. -- Tavix (talk) 00:14, 10 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's highly unlikely that someone would type this in when looking for Ravi Singh. Also this Ravi is an entrepreneur, author, and former politician and redirecting a wheat breeder to the page would likely mislead or confuse readers. Sakuura Cartelet Talk 00:47, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2017_March_4&oldid=1088106627"