Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 May 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 4
May 6 >

May 5[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 5, 2017.

Hillcats[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 Lynchburg Hillcats. (non-admin closure) feminist 09:30, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are multiple teams called the Hillcats. The Lynchburg Hillcats might be a more plausible search term than a Division II College, or we could disambiguate it. Smartyllama (talk) 18:47, 5 May 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.

Romanov[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 retargeted. long-standing redirect to House of Romanov. wbm1058 (talk) 23:57, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to House of Romanov. This redirect was a long-standing redirect to House of Romanov until a couple of days ago, when it was retargeted to the disambiguation page without explanation. I reverted that edit, with an explanation that it was based on WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, but was then reverted by a second editor, again with no explanation. I believe that there is a primary topic for the title "Romanov," and that this redirect should take readers to the primary topic. R'n'B (call me Russ) 15:45, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget. House of Romanov is obviously the primary topic. — Kpalion(talk) 17:40, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget. There're a lot of meanings for Romanov. A lot of the more notable ones are in the House of Romanov though. And the family is very notable. My guess is that the family is the main meaning. I'm surprised, with how famous that family is, that there aren't more targets -- no towns, no craters on the moon, no automobiles, etc. But I guess there aren't. Herostratus (talk) 21:49, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget. The Russian imperial family that ruled the empire for 300 years is obviously the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 23:56, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to House of Romanov, per the above, unless and until there is a clear consensus to change the nature of the page. bd2412 T 03:37, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
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.

Civil service of China[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 09:30, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Per RM at Talk:Civil Service of the People's Republic of China, I propose that the redirect page be retargeted to Civil service#In China to avoid confusion and to make distinctions. George Ho (talk) 18:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. The current country is almost certainly the primary topic here, for historical usage a hatnote will sufficice. We don't have an article about the civil service in the Republic of China (Taiwan), but if we did then disambiguation between that and the current target would likely be primary. Thryduulf (talk) 12:51, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, since the redirect title contains "of China" and not "in China"; note that if we had an article on the Civil service in the ROC, this would still be the primary topic, for the same reasons that China is the primary topic of China. bd2412 T 03:41, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
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.

Foreign language redirects to Portugal[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) 16:40, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These are all redirects to [[Portugal from the name of that country in various languages. Based on a combination of article titles (as listed at Wikidata), Google translate, Google searches and general knowledge I've identified the language as best I can, but may have erred. I have not nominated those redirects I believe to be Portuguese, Mirandese (a recognised regional language in Portugal) or Tetum (co-official with Portuguese in East Timor) or other redirects I consider useful. Most redirects were created at the same time (September 2006) by the same user (Saoshyant), those marked "(without diacritics)" were created by eubot based on the associated redirect - I recommend that these pairs should be treated identically, whatever the outcome. I have organised the redirects into three groups based on my research, I am recommending deletion for groups 1 and 2 and am neutral or weakly leaning delete for group 3.

I will alert Wikipedia:WikiProject Portugal to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 03:13, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign language redirects to Portugal (Group 1)[edit]

For the redirects in this group, I haven't been able to identify any reason for affinity between Portugal/Brazil/the Portuguese language and the various languages/countries in which they are spoken.

(Note also Southern Min Phû-tô-gâ/Phu-to-ga nominated yesterday).
I recommend delete for the redirects in this set. Thryduulf (talk) 03:13, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign language redirects to Portugal (Group 2)[edit]

For these redirects, I have determined possible reasons why there might be affinity between Portugal/Brazil/the Portuguese language and the various languages/countries in which they are spoken, but I do not think hey are sufficient to keep the redirect.

  • Haitian Creole - Pòtigal / Potigal (without diacritics). Haitian Creole is Fench-based "Its vocabulary is 90% derived from French, but its grammar resembles that of some West African languages. It also has influences from Taino, Spanish, and Portuguese."
  • Tahitian - Potiti - The Portguese may have been the first Europeans to sight Tahiti, but they did not settle.
  • Cornish - Portyngal (see Welsh)
  • Irish - An Phortaingéil / An Phortaingeil (without diacritics) (see Welsh)
  • Welsh - Portiwgal - There were possible (possibly strong) ties between Cornwall, Ireland, Wales (and other places in the British Isles) and Portugal in pre-Roman times as part of Atlantic Bronze Age approximately 1300–700 BC)

I recommend delete for the redirects in this set. Thryduulf (talk) 03:13, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign language redirects to Portugal (Group 3)[edit]

These are the name of "Portugal" in various languages. I have determined some reasons why there might be affinity between Portugal/Brazil/the Portuguese language and the various languages/countries in which they are spoken, but I am unsure if they are strong enough. My best guess at the language, and resulting findings are:

  • Corsican - Portugallu - 22.7% of imigrants are Portuguese, second largest immigrant group in the most recent sentence.
  • Finnish - Portugali - There is a "notable Finnish-speaking mnority in Brazil". This redirect was tagged as {{R from misspelling}} by Topbanana in 2015 but I consider that this is less likely than it being a {{R from other language}}.
  • Normaund - Portûnga / Portunga (without diacritics) - Portuguese are third largest ethnic group in Jersey (8.2%) as of the most recent census.
  • Venetian - Portogało / Portogalo (without diacritics)- "In 2009, the Brazilian city of Serafina Corrêa, in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, gave Talian [a dialect of Venetian] a joint official status alongside Portuguese."

I am neutral at present regarding this set but believe them worth discussing. Thryduulf (talk) 03:13, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Portugali is getting hits fairly consistently, at 10-15/month. That surprised me, since I can't see any reason why it should be getting so many hits; the only explanation I could come up with is the obvious one, viz. it's used by Finnish speakers. As a redirect from Finnish it's not just WP:FORRED but also WP:XY (it could point to either Portugal or the Portuguese language), but at least it's getting hits.
    Portugallu is the next most used of this group, at 76 hits in the new tool's DB, including a spike this March; but there was also a 11-month period when it only received 1 hit. Portogało is at a somewhat respectable 54 hits, and all six seem to be above noise level (~10 hits in the new tool's DB, give or take a few, seems to be typical of noise), though Portûnga at 16 hits has seen minimal use. I have no strong opinion about keeping or deleting any of these. Sideways713 (talk) 16:13, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete all. No relation with those languages an Portugal. Except the obvious, more or less ubiquitous fact that people from XXX live in country with language YYY and vice versa; Unless we aim to be a all-languages-redirect this is not needed (these would be good full entries for wiktionary, but not needed here) (disclaimer: I am Portuguese) - Nabla (talk) 10:53, 13 May 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.

Michael Gilgan[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) 16:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected to a hospital which mentions a Peter Gilgan but no Michael Gilgan I can find either in the article or elsewhere. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:10, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I can find no evidence of there being a notable person with this name. Thryduulf (talk) 13:53, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I just see a YouTuber [1] although there is a patron named Peter Gilgan. [2] Seems like an WP:XY to me. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:54, 9 May 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.

Erich kaehler[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. (non-admin closure) feminist 09:40, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) this would normally be keep but the surname is lower "k". WP:RFD#D5 nonsense, not helpful. Si Trew (talk) 09:31, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:08, 5 May 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.

Duezguen TV[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) 16:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This was not a TV channel in Germany Si Trew (talk) 08:26, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep the target was a German TV channel and this is a standard transliteration of it's German name. Thryduulf (talk) 19:33, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:07, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep was too a Tv channel in Germany. Siuenti (씨유엔티) 09:19, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It might have been based in Germany but this is a Turkish-language name. —Xezbeth (talk) 10:08, 7 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • When researching the various Turkish-language redirects nominated here recently I've found that Turkish names in Germany are very frequently transliterated as if they were German, including in this case. Thryduulf (talk) 11:29, 8 May 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.

Orlacs Haende[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 The Hands of Orlac (1924 film). (non-admin closure) feminist 09:32, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) redirect to disambiguation page. With nothing at the page that says "Haende". that's about as much use as a snake in an arse kicking competition. WP:RFD#D5 nonsense (yes, I did check the target. I did some WP:BEFORE). Si Trew (talk) 08:28, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to The Hands of Orlac (1924 film) where the first sentence notes that Orlacs Hände is the original, German, name for this film and where Orlacs Hände has redirected since The Anome retargetted it there in 2015. None of the other entries on the dab page have any affinity to the German language. Thryduulf (talk) 19:31, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:07, 5 May 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.

Teemu Maeki[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) 16:35, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) WP:RFD#D5. Not Germanic but Finnish. Si Trew (talk) 08:14, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as this does get use. More noticeable however are the thousands (literally) of results for a footballer with the same name about who we don't have an article but would likely be the primary topic if we did (I have no idea if they are notable). If this is kept I recommend leaving a note at talk:Teemu Mäki about the existence of this redirect so that editors are aware of it if articles move about. Thryduulf (talk) 19:51, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:07, 5 May 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.

Esko Jaervinen[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. (non-admin closure) feminist 09:40, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) WP:RFD#D5 nonsense, not Germanic but Finnish Si Trew (talk) 08:12, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:07, 5 May 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.

Jaervenpaeae railway station[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. (non-admin closure) feminist 09:40, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot). Not Germanic but Finnish. WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 05:30, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Meh. We've previously established that it is okay to expand Finnish letters as if they were Swedish, but this is Eubot... Deryck C. 12:49, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. There are some uses of Jaervenpaeae referring to the town rather than specifically for the railway station, but I don't think that makes this implausible. Thryduulf (talk) 14:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:06, 5 May 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.

Pumped[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 Pumping. -- Tavix (talk) 18:31, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "pumped" in the target article. I can't find much online that uses this term in the same context, and I'm more familiar with it being a synonym for excitement. Anarchyte (work | talk) 13:01, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is an excellent point. I did a quick web search to research the topic and it seems being "pumped up" is a particularly temporary form of muscle hypertrophy. (There are multiple meanings of this term, and I think the sense of "being excited" is derived from the bodybuilding meaning.) I added a section to the article which mentions the term and explains the phenomenon. Thanks for pointing this out! -- Beland (talk) 16:50, 5 May 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.

Category:UK MPs 2015-2020[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 May 14#Category:UK MPs 2015-2020

Sinsinwar[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 as most plausible outcome Deryck C. 14:14, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a non-notable clan of Jats. There's no discussion at the target article, so a redirect makes no sense. -- Tavix (talk) 21:13, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Can always be recreated if the group is notable or listed. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:43, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, no mention in article. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:14, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target. No etymology for this and I can't find it in any source I have on wars, Chinese presumably (Sino-) or otherwise. WP:NOTENGLISH bordering WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 20:11, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Exact term gets me 0 hits from searching beyond unreliable wikis. Si Trew (talk) 20:13, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 17:08, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To attract further discussion on the proposed retarget.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 11:05, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment anyone feel like adding Notecardforfree's info to Sinsin? then a redirect there would be ideal IMO. 09:26, 7 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siuenti (talk • contribs)
  • Would Sitush have an opinion? – Uanfala (talk) 21:00, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I vaguely recall looking into the subject matter but wasn't aware of this discussion and am here because of the ping. If I can have a day or two to review my notes and revisit sources etc then, yes, I'll give an opinion. - Sitush (talk) 23:36, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I missed the original AfD because Boleyn was absolutely swamping the India project with caste-related deletion nominations at that time, so much so that I eventually walked away because the "workload" was distressing me. In this instance, I would have opted to delete because there really don't seem to be any decent sources. I realise that Notecardforfree thinks they have found some but they seem to be engaging in synthesis (that Sinsinwar is a synonym of Sansanwal) and certainly three of their sources are useless - one is Jat pseudo-history and the last two are as good as - they're Raj sources and notoriously unreliable. I've never heard of the other author (V. S. Bhargava) and although I note that they have written some other books, they all look to be of the glorifying variety and published by obscure presses. There is an awful lot of constructed history about the Jats, the Rajputs and similar castes, much of it originating from sanskritisation and other forms of invented tradition. Alas, far too often, unsourced and fundamentally unsourcable AfDs and PRODs of caste stuff end up as redirects instead of deletions, which just perpetuates the situation. - Sitush (talk) 21:00, 10 May 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.

1a neurones[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. (non-admin closure) feminist 09:40, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot). They may be, but they are not in the article WP:RFD#D5 confusing, "1a neurones". They may be but the article does not say so. What am I supposed to do? Oh, I remember, look it up. Then what is the point of having an online encylopaedia you can't look things up in? If we have nothing to say, we should say so. Si Trew (talk) 08:11, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep while 1α neurones exists as a redirect to the same target. I don't know whether it should be, as indeed neurones aren't mentioned in the article, but the ascii and Greek should be discussed together if anyone wants. Thryduulf (talk) 00:01, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 11:03, 5 May 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.

Koese[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 Köse (surname). -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:05, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) not germanic but turkish. WP:RFD#D5 nonsense Si Trew (talk) 09:38, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Köse (surname). This is a very odd one, as while there is no clear primary topic (in English) for "Köse", the primary topic for "Koese" is very clearly its use as a surname. If this is retargetted then a hatnote to the current target should be added. Thryduulf (talk) 16:42, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 11:02, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • If this redirect is to be kept, it should match Köse. I could see moving the surname to the primary topic, keeping the town at the primary topic, or disambiguating, but this redirect should follow. -- Tavix (talk) 16:28, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In line with others comments, I believe the surname page should be moved to the primary topic. -- Tavix (talk) 00:47, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Just for the avoidance of incidental doubt, my comment isn't among the ones that this is in line with. – Uanfala (talk) 23:28, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it does, in that our recommendations aren't necessarily in conflict with each other. You, Thryduulf, and Deryck Chan want Koese to target the surname article, and I want Köse and Koese to match. By moving Köse (surname) to Köse, I am satisfied since they'll match and you all will be satisfied since Koese would target the surname. That's what I mean by being "in line with" others comments. -- Tavix (talk) 00:01, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, yes, this is not inconsistent with what has been explicitly said, but I would have to object to the proposed move: I don't think there normally is a good reason to choose an obscure surname article as the primary topic over a major populated place. – Uanfala (talk) 00:35, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Köse (surname) per Thryduulf. In this case it makes sense to have Köse and Koese target different pages because the oe expansion implies a different proximal word origin and, as Thryduulf has shown, implies a different primary topic. Deryck C. 14:12, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Köse (surname) per Thryduulf and Deryck C. The reasoning behind WP:SMALLDIFFS applies here, as a web search for "Koese" returns overwhelmingly results for various people with the name (and things named after the people). – Uanfala (talk) 10:47, 20 May 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.

Wall of text[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 soft redirect to Wikt:wall of text. -- Tavix (talk) 21:29, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose retarget to Information design. The term refers to the presentation of text. I'm open to other targets. – Train2104 (t • c) 01:16, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WWell certainly I would agree we must retarget it somewhere, if someone has such a short attention span they regard a paragraph as a wall of text. I think this might be more, though a term used in typography, to mean in a column of text, in a newspaper column (a wall) you have a "wall" of text i.e. not any pictures and fills. I have a hard time finding these old typographical things since the advent of digital typography. I am just throwing it out it could be an old printographers term, it is easy copy, a wall of text, as opposed to penalty copy (the fiddly bits like mathematics and stuff). Si Trew (talk) 05:19, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So if you have five walls over the sheet five columns, you can have two that are walls of text, the second and third need pic cap and infill on the second on a shrdlu, and then fill up with liners. It may be just printer's slang. Si Trew (talk) 05:22, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think that Information Design is too general. It is more about Print design, but nice first find, User:Train2104. Si Trew (talk) 05:23, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Typesetting as possibility. Si Trew (talk) 05:24, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I do think that if the concept as explained at wiktionary:wall of text were to be described anywhere here, it would be on the article about paragraphs, since a wall of text is exactly the lack of the use of paragraphs. Although maybe the target could just as well be Section (typography).... -- Kendrick7talk 05:55, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 10:58, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft redirect to wikt:wall of text. I do not think the meaning of this term is ambiguous and we do not seem to cover its meaning locally. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 06:01, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft redirect to Wiktionary as Godsy has proposed. Deryck C. 14:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Although, I guess, I'm not opposed to setting up a soft redirect. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:49, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft redirect to wiktionary as there isn't a relevant target on wikipedia at the moment. No objections to someone creating an article, but a disambiguation page isn't warranted as the term isn't really ambiguous. – Uanfala (talk) 10:59, 20 May 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.

USVIT[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 09:33, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) Marginal. In Slovak the lede has it as "Úsvit", but this is completely different caps. I can't or perhaps should go {{R from other language|sk}} AND {{R from other capitalisation}}, but for the absence the article never puts it in caps, which you'd expect from a political party. I MUST GO ON INTERNAL EVIDENCE. I DON'T CARE ON WHETHER SOMETHING ELSE SAYS IT. WIKIPEDIA DOESNT SAY IT SO IT IS WP:RFD#D2 confusing, WPRFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 05:54, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 10:57, 5 May 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.

Ooegonia[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) 16:25, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) This is probably all right, and my suspicion is only raised by the fact that eubot made it. It seems all right to me. I am wondering about the extra "e" after "oo" (which is because of the germanic umlaut) but I think this is ok, although unnecesary, Back-formed from Oögonia. I can see this as plausible, but then we haven't Ooegonium so... hmmm... Si Trew (talk) 05:59, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well it is not a germanic umlaut it is Latin rather, diaphrasis in modern writing. So the german umlaut is obviously a mistake. But it comes down to whether people would search for this. I think this would impair people's search, especially as we haven't the singular form, this is a bit WP:MADEUP. Si Trew (talk) 06:02, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 10:57, 5 May 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.

Goell[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 List of valkyrie names. (non-admin closure) Anarchyte (work | talk) 23:46, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot). And I'm a dutchman. WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. No English-speaker is going to search for "Goell". Various other names as you would expect are at target and on redirects already Si Trew (talk) 07:41, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 10:29, 5 May 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_May_5&oldid=1143743502"