Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 November 16

November 16[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 16, 2017.

List of songs performed on American Idol[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 American Idol Hot 100 singles fish&karate 12:17, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

List of songs performed on American Idol → American Idol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
List of songs sung on American Idol → American Idol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The target does not contain a list of this nature. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:16, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this was created as a result of this AfD which was closed as redirect, and since the target is unhelpful, I don't see a reason to keep the redirect. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 09:22, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to List of American Idol Hot 100 singles as this would at least show what songs were notable (i.e. charted/sales) and branded directly as part of American Idol. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:03, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to List of American Idol Hot 100 singles better than nothing. f e minist 15:29, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to List of American Idol Hot 100 singles reasonably relevant. Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:29, 3 December 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.

Alex Burns (journalist)[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) 22:08, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alex Burns (journalist) → The New York Times (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete this redirect because (1) Wrong name; Journalist's actual name in the paper is Alexander Burns; (2) the target article doesn't mention him; (3) hardly anything links here (4) We don't typically redirect otherwise redlinked journalists to their employer; there are numerous more notable journalists that have no Wikipedia article at all, and aren't likely to get one (5) He might not stay at The New York Times or he might become better known for something else (6) Helpful editors trying to provide blue authorlinks are burdened by checking this fake article, or worse yet, carelessly providing a worthless authorlink. Anomalocaris (talk) 05:42, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete not discussed at target or anywhere else in Wikipedia, so we have nowhere useful to send readers who follow this link. But FWIW this is not a wrong name, merely an alternative name (e.g. he goes by "Alex" on Twitter [1]). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 06:10, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as not every employee of a company needs a redirect especially if not even mentioned in the article. Should be removed from Alex Burns dab due to WP:DABMENTION. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 07:15, 16 November 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.

Infobox settlement[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 as a group. With even TfD regulars supporting keeping, it's difficult to imagine how deletion could be supported. Noting that this outcome should not be taken as endorsing the creation of similar redirects, or as preventing the future re-nomination of individual redirects. (non-admin closure) – Uanfala 12:52, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Azerbaijan region → Template:Infobox settlement (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] - no hist apart from redirect

Template:Infobox Cambodian district → Template:Infobox settlement (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] former template: 11:58, 19 March 2014‎ Pigsonthewing (talk | contribs)‎ . . (40 bytes) (-4,371)‎ . . (#REDIRECTTemplate:Infobox settlement)

Template:Infobox Indian Jurisdiction → Template:Infobox settlement (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- 28 February 2014 Plastikspork (talk | contribs) deleted page Template:Infobox Indian Jurisdiction (Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 June 6#Template:Infobox Indian jurisdiction)
- 26 October 2014‎ Xainhe (talk | contribs)‎ . . (2,515 bytes) (+2,515)‎ . . (←Created page with '{{Infobox settlement | name = Malayampadi | native_name = മലയാംപടി | native_name_lang = | other_name...')
- 21:08, 5 February 2015‎ Frietjes (talk | contribs)‎ . . (41 bytes) (-2,474)‎ . . (←Redirected page to Template:Infobox settlement)

Template:Infobox unrecognized state → Template:Infobox settlement (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] - no hist prior to redirect: 14:12, 21 May 2011‎ Obi2canibe (talk | contribs)‎ . . (41 bytes) (+41)‎ . . (redirect)

Template:Infobox aspirational state → Template:Infobox settlement (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] - no hist prior to redirect: 14:25, 21 May 2011‎ Obi2canibe (talk | contribs)‎ . . (41 bytes) (+41)‎ . . (redirect)

Template:Infobox administrative division → Template:Infobox settlement (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] - no hist prior to redirect: 16:46, 18 December 2012‎ Frietjes (talk | contribs)‎ . . (41 bytes) (+41)‎ . . (per Template:Infobox Administrative division)

Template:Infobox populated place → Template:Infobox settlement (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] - no hist prior to redirect: 13:10, 1 July 2014‎ Jenks24 (talk | contribs)‎ . . (41 bytes) (+41)‎ . . (create redirect)

Template:Infobox voivod → Template:Infobox settlement (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] - no hist prior to redirect: 19:45, 21 September 2009‎ Pigsonthewing (talk | contribs)‎ . . (41 bytes) (+41)‎ . . (#REDIRECT Template:Infobox settlement)

Weak keep: This nomination is somewhat of an apples and oranges argument. From what I can tell this far, the deleted pages the nominator has linked refer to pages deleted as a result of Wikipedia:Templates for discussion nominations, not Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion nominations. (The linked deleted pages were standalone templates, whereas this nomination pertains to redirects.) At the present time, I'm leaning "keep" since these redirects' purpose is to help editors/readers find the target template. I mean, one cannot expect everyone to know the exact names of every template prior to transcluding or substituting them, and these redirects could serve as navigational assists to reach the target template. Steel1943 (talk) 15:59, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Eh, might as well delete Template:Infobox voivod since the term "voivod" seems to traditionally refer to a political leader/person, not a political region. This redirect could potentially be targeted elsewhere, but at the present time, I have no suggestions to where that may be; worse case scenario, the redirect gets deleted then recreated to point towards a more applicable target. Steel1943 (talk) 16:08, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Disregard. Steel1943 (talk) 15:04, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- User:Steel1943 - Can you explain why you would prefer to keep three country specific redirects out of 50000 possibilities for such redirects? How are editors supposed to know if a transclusion code includes 1) a wrapper for Infobox settlement, 2) an independent template, 3) a redirect to Infobox settlement? 77.179.168.55 (talk) 21:24, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My original response already answered your question. I have no more to add. Steel1943 (talk) 21:36, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

- User:Steel1943, no you didn't refer to 50000 possibilities for redirects, you only referred to some deleted templates. That's apples and oranges. And you may consider using correct prefixing "::*" is not. 77.179.168.55 (talk) 21:48, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  Sure. Steel1943 (talk) 21:55, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all, can't find any reason to delete any of those. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:00, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User:Headbomb they invite editors to use them. Then other editors edit a page and see a transclusion of a template that they don't know. Editors in administrative geography know that there is {{Infobox settlement}} and that there are wrappers (list of templates transcluding Infobox settlement). If they see any unknown call they don't know if it is a wrapper where variables are used differently or if it is a redirect. If all redirects are deleted this problem disappears. The deletion comment can contain a link to {{Infobox settlement}}. There are more than 5000 classes of administrative entities and seeing that there are more than 9 naming variants (Algerian municipality, Algerian District, City in Afghanistan, District CZ, District of Moldova, deelgemeente Belgium, District Cambodia, PLURAL: Nigerian States, Greenlandic divisions, Subdivisions of Malaysia) and more combinations are equally plausible "city BE", "city in Belgium", there are more than 50000 redirect names possible - without considering misspellings and different translations or no translation of foreign language terms. What is the specific reason for having {{Infobox Azerbaijan region}} but not the others? 85.178.245.150 (talk) 18:42, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The ~~first three~~ second and third (Updated. Steel1943 (talk) 19:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)) nominated redirects have transclusions. Steel1943 (talk) 16:11, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User:Steel1943, Not true. 85.178.245.150 (talk) 18:14, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed my comment. Template:Infobox Cambodian district has a transclusion on User:Calliopejen1/templates/Cambodia/district, and Template:Infobox Indian Jurisdiction has a transclusion on User:Mvenkatesh999. Steel1943 (talk) 19:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: all, and make all of the red links listed above into redirects to {{Infobox settlement}}, too. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:54, 16 November 2017 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Pigsonthewig (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this RfD. [reply]
Comment: User:Pigsonthewing (Andy Mabbett) started to implement his solution, creating {{Infobox Montenegro}} [2] and {{Infobox Sri Lankan Administrative District}} [3] in violation of
1. Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_January_4#Template:Infobox_Montenegro - "The result of the discussion was delete. JPG-GR (talk) 03:38, 18 January 2009 (UTC)"[reply]
2. Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_March_12#Infobox_Sri_Lankan_Administrative_District - "The result of the discussion was Delete Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 01:55, 25 March 2011 (UTC)"[reply]
85.178.245.150 (talk) 18:09, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- "in violation"? Don't be absurd. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:35, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Pigsonthewing: Agreed, considering that your redirect creations aren't eligible for WP:G4 since they are redirects, not actual templates. Steel1943 (talk) 19:05, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User:Steel1943 The outcome was delete, not redirect. 77.179.168.55 (talk) 21:24, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Right, so G4 doesn't apply. The pages are currently redirects, not functioning templates. Steel1943 (talk) 21:33, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User:Steel1943 The second and the third have a template history, and should have gone through the same process as the other deletions of country specific templates. 77.179.168.55 (talk) 21:52, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
They are redirects, so your reasoning doesn't apply. As redirects, they would be nominated here. Steel1943 (talk) 21:56, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
keep, redirects are useful for (1) directing the user to the correct template, and (2) viewing old revisions in the cases that templates have been merged. Frietjes (talk) 21:22, 16 November 2017 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Frietjes (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this RfD. [reply]
Disclosure: Frietjes doesn't care about template history here: Template:Tirana District, Template:Taiwan Administrative Divisions both nominated for deletion on 17 November 2017 by that user. 85.181.159.171 (talk) 07:42, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
DISCLOSURE Frietjes and Pigsonthewing are editors that created some of these redirects. 77.179.168.55 (talk) 21:32, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, redirects are generally useful, unless they point to a misleading target. In this case, they point to the correct template for articles about geopolitical regions. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:21, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
User:Plastikspork - "unless they point to a misleading target" - for a starter: Template:Infobox voivod. voivod. Also, could you address the fact that there are thousands of redirects possible, if one allows type specific redirects? Infobox settlement has as equivalent in the article name space something like Administrative division, the type specific titles (e.g. Districts of Belarus) are never redirecting there. Steadily growing list of classes in WD http:// tinyurl.com/y7lggnyj. And for ~20 you want to keep the redirects? 85.181.159.171 (talk) 08:06, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. These all seems like useful redirects to me. See WP:CHEAP. FYI, the one of these that I created, {{Infobox populated place}}, was due to a requested move discussion at Template talk:Infobox settlement/Archive 24#Requested move. Jenks24 (talk) 06:11, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Jenks24 - how is Template:Infobox voivod useful? Do you know what voivod means? Also, could you address the fact that there are thousands of redirects possible, if one allows type specific redirects?Infobox settlement has as equivalent in the article name space something like Administrative division, the type specific titles (e.g. Districts of Belarus) are never redirecting there. Steadily growing list of classes in WD http:// tinyurl.com/y7lggnyj. And for ~20 you want to keep the redirects? 85.181.159.171 (talk) 08:06, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably because someone else found it useful enough to create and it does no harm. See again WP:CHEAP. Also just because it exists it doesn't mean all those other potential redirects have to be created. But if you want to do a separate RFD for that one after this RFD is inevitably closed as keep, go for it. I'm only here because you nominated a perfectly useful redirect I'd created. Jenks24 (talk) 08:51, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. as useful. No reason why they are actually misleading or useless has been given. And as for unfamiliarity, yes, I would expect people interested in location in Russia to either know or soon learn what voivod means — Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs) 00:37, 20 November 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.

多[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) 22:10, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

多 → Radical 36 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Duo or 多 is different than 夕. Duo has a different meaning than 夕 does. No sense in this redirecting to a page with a different meaning. Goveganplease (talk) 02:03, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:FORRED, no appropriate target. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 21:54, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's mentioned in the table but with no information. Its meaning can be found on its Wiktionary page, but search provides a more direct link to it than the article currently does. Peter James (talk) 01:11, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Peter James. We have no encyclopedic content about anything by this name. Readers are best served by the search results page, which has a Wiktionary excerpt & link. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 01:43, 24 November 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.

Racist Bassist[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) 22:09, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Racist Bassist → Game Grumps (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in the target. Most likely another bit of in-universe lore from the YouTube channel. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk • contribs) 02:01, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and unsourced BLP concerns. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:23, 29 November 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.

Phil. Transac.: Biol. Soc.[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) 22:09, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Phil. Transac.: Biol. Soc. → Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely redirect/typo, all abbreviated forms would have "Trans." or (rarely) "Transact.", never "Transac". Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:04, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can't see this being useful as a shortcut in a citation here, even if it might have been used in old books. It differs from the ISO 4 abbreviation Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. B AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:32, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Yes, it's an incorrect abbreviation. But we keep redirects from incorrect abbreviation that might be reasonable errors, and this is one of them. I see no reason why this is confusing. "If we expect somebody to look it up they should type..." is a reason for keeping, not deleting. If library experience is any guide, people may wel luse every possible mis-abbreviation for journal names, and dealing with them is the purpose of redirects or cross references. . DGG ( talk ) 00:32, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as implausible. Noting that the target already has about two dozen of redirects for variations on the abbreviation. – Uanfala 13:11, 27 November 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.

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B.[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 as G7. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:50, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. → Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely redirect/typo. All abbreviated forms would not have the stray dot after the B. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I created it. Presumably there was a source link at the time. There are no longer any links. welsh (talk) 08:27, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm trying to get it speedied. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:38, 16 November 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.

Phil.Trans. A[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) 22:08, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Phil.Trans. A → Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely search term / with typo, already covered by Phil. Trans. A Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 01:00, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:39, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Yes, it's an incorrect abbreviation. But we keep redirects from incorrect abbreviation that might be reasonable errors, and this is one of them. I see no reason why this is confusing. "If we expect somebody to look it up they should type..." is a reason for keeping, not deleting. DGG ( talk ) 00:32, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a likely typo. (most of those 6 views in 2017 come from me doing cleanup maintenance). If someone, for some reason types "Phil.Trans. A", the suggestions for the "did you meant..." will suggest the thing they were looking for. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:33, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an unlikely typo. The target already has almost 20 redirects for various variations of the abbreviated title. – Uanfala 13:12, 27 November 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.

Phil. Trans. Proc. Royal Soc. A[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) 22:08, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Phil. Trans. Proc. Royal Soc. A → Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely and extremely confusing redirect. This would stand for Philosophical Transactions of the Proceedings of the Royal Society A. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:58, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The ISO 4 abbreviation is Philos. Trans. Royal Soc. A which already has a redirect and if someone was going to try to type it up or link to it they should use that. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:37, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Yes, it's an incorrect abbreviation. But we keep redirects from incorrect abbreviation that might be reasonable errors, and this is one of them. I see no reason why this is confusing. "If we expect somebody to look it up they should type..." is a reason for keeping, not deleting. DGG ( talk ) 00:32, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So DGG (talk · contribs), should this be targeted to Philosophical Transactions A, or Proceedings of the Royal Society A, and why that target over the other? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:30, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

probably a dab page listing hte laternatives--it;s the only mechanism we have for cases like this. DGG ( talk ) 18:50, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete doesn't seem like a good idea to create disambiguation pages consisting solely of erroneous names, and IIRC we've rejected that option in previous RFD debates. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 06:21, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as an WP:XY situation in which two different abbreviations are implausibly mixed up. – Uanfala 12:58, 27 November 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.

Regressive eating[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 Regression (psychology). There's no support for the current target and not much discussion—this seems to be the better option put forward. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:33, 4 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regressive eating → Paleolithic diet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I can't find any usages of "regressive eating" in reliable sources to mean "Paleolithic diet". In reality "regressive eating" appears to be a term for some kind of eating disorder, but I don't know enough about this topic area to tell whether it's covered in Wikipedia under another name or something. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 14:41, 6 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I'm seeing this term being used by several reliable-looking publications in terms of eating disorders, such as this among other examples. There's probably a good place to redirect it over to, some exact section or the like, but I'm not quite sure. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 18:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 00:45, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

After a bit more reading, it seems like usages of "regressive eating" in published sources are in the Freudian sense, though I'm not 100% confident in this because I'm way out of my depth in this topic area. Anyway, unless someone has any better ideas (or a case for deletion), I guess this could be closed as retarget to regression (psychology), since this redirect is seven years old and that article does mention "eating" briefly even if it doesn't have the exact phrase "regressive eating". 59.149.124.29 (talk) 02:24, 23 November 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.

Chem. Biol.[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 WP:CSD#G7. ansh 666 06:42, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Chem. Biol. → European Heart Journal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is the abbreviation for Chemistry & Biology [4], not European Heart Journal. I created this by mistake in 2009. Could be speedy'd, but there's no suitable criteria except "common sense". Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:32, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:REDLINK. Also could be speediable as {{db-g7}} (author requests deletion). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 01:05, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per anon --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:03, 16 November 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.

November 16[edit]

List of songs performed on American Idol[edit]

Alex Burns (journalist)[edit]

Infobox settlement[edit]

多[edit]

Racist Bassist[edit]

Phil. Transac.: Biol. Soc.[edit]

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B.[edit]

Phil.Trans. A[edit]

Phil. Trans. Proc. Royal Soc. A[edit]

Regressive eating[edit]

Wikipedia:Not menu[edit]

List of Pop culture news media events[edit]

🏣[edit]

Chem. Biol.[edit]