Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 September 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 9[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 9, 2017.

Ukrainian model[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) 18:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous unused redirect. What type of model does this refer to? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 23:25, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It could refer to that but it is unused so we don't know if it is for fashion models. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:13, 11 September 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.

Fideo[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 September 18#Fideo

Dave Oren Ward[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) 18:17, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Articles on the subject and on the murder of the subject have both been deleted. The ONLY mention of the subject in the target article (Pariah (1998 film) is in the cast list and first sentence ("...and starring Damon Jones, Dave Oren Ward, and Angela Jones."): no mention of or reference to the character, the actor, the role, the performance, etc, in the article. Essentially a pointless redirect. Calton | Talk 14:54, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. the movie doesn't even discuss the death of the actor. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:39, 11 September 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.

🙏[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 all. Ruslik_Zero 20:31, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as ambiguous. This emoji is used, according to the Unicode names list, for sorrow, pleading, praying, bowing, or thanking. Appropriate targets include Namaste, Gadaw, Thai greeting, Prayer, Gratitude, and High five. There is no article or disambiguation page that corresponds to the generic concept of two hands with their palms together, so the redirect should be deleted. Gorobay (talk) 14:43, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I have added all of the 5 additional coloration variations to this nomination. Steel1943 (talk) 15:14, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Too ambiguous a meaning. The emoji couldn't be made into a disambiguation page because it would need to pick one of the skin colors to use, so best to get rid of it.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 15:19, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Zxcvbnm: In the world of emoji, the emoji 🙏 would be considered the best title for a possible disambiguation page since the emoji is the "base title" for the rest. 🙏 consists of technically one character, while the rest consist of two (🙏 and a character representing the emoji's color.) Steel1943 (talk) 15:23, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Steel1943: Okay, in light of that, I'm not opposed to the idea if more people also believe it's the right course of action.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 15:27, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Convert 🙏 to a disambiguation page per the ambiguity stated above, and the lack of any current options for refining the emoji to one specific target. Also, redirect the rest to 🙏 per my comment above; the rest of the emojis are the equivalent of {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}} redirects. Steel1943 (talk) 15:29, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of gestures, where the varied uses are listed. (I originally thought List of gestures#Two handed would be better, but high five is listed under List of gestures#one handed.) -- Tavix (talk) 20:08, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Tavix: I was about to debate this point by claiming that all emoji with two hands can be assumed to belong to the same person ... but then, I found 🤝 ... which has to be hands from two different people. Steel1943 (talk) 20:20, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • ...But, then again, 🤝 does not have color variations, whereas 🙏 does. Color variation options hints that the hands belong to the same person, whereas lack of color variations hints that the hands do not belong to the same person. Steel1943 (talk) 20:26, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of gestures or create Folded hands, as per the Emojipedia. [1] At least List of gestures has a description but the images can be added to the Folded hands page and it can also be connected to Praying Hands. You can then add stuff like high five or those other targets. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:33, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and if thats not the outcome, at all costs don't create a disambiguation page. I typically prefer deletion of ambiguous emoji redirects, which in my opinion virtually every emoji is regardless of the official definition. I wouldn't oppose retargeting if other people can agree on one, but for goodness sake let's not throw out the credibility Wikipedia has worked hard to build by starting to disambiguate emojis. Yes, this is an WP:IDONTLIKEIT vote in terms of the disambiguation page, but I think it is a fair point here because at some point you have to take into account commonsense, even if it isn't written in policy. If you want a policy, call it a natural extension of Wikipedia is not a dictionary, which is effectively what a dab page would be in this case. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:11, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • @TonyBallioni: To your point: Lately, I've been pondering the need for a guideline for emoji to be created that is more detailed than WP:EMOJI ... since that is all we seem to have, and it is not even a guideline but rather a redirect to a section of an essay about common RfD outcomes. I know we are not Emojipedia, but users of all languages are beginning to use emoji regularly; many will want to figure out what these emojis are supposed to mean. (Now that I'm thinking of it, I wonder if this is more of a Wiktionary concern, but if the emoji represents a phrase that is more than one word, and since the whole world does not speak English ... yeah, I'm a bit confused on where or who should handle this.) Steel1943 (talk) 01:54, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks for the ping. I don't like emoji redirects in general, but I begrudgingly accept they are a thing (and I rarely participate in RfD so my voice rarely matters anyway). If there were an RfC or draft policy my argument would be something along the lines of this: unless it is unambiguous what the visual meaning of an emoji is, we should not have a redirect or page for it. The official unicode definition is useless because so few people actually know that those exist. I think your point about it being a Wiktionary concern also might have some merit. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:02, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as ambiguous. Oppose a disambiguation page per WP:EMOJI, which advocates only keeping (as redirects to a disambiguation pages) emojis with clear definitions. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 11:34, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per my longstanding opposition to emoji redirects. We are not "emoji-pedia." If we continue down the path of creating redirects for emojis, then it is only a matter of time before readers will be able to use reverse image searches to find articles that correspond to the image. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 14:38, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Notecardforfree: Why is that a bad thing? Would it not be good that they would find the article corresponding to the image? Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:06, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Emir of Wikipedia, I know that my perspective may be in the minority, but I think that allowing readers to search for content with emojis and images strays too far from the purpose of this encyclopedia, which is to provide factual information about a subject that can be described in the written form. I also think there is too much room for subjective interpretation with emojis and images, and it should not be our job to refine or resolve the inherent ambiguity in emojis and images. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 18:52, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The subjectivity is a good reason to delete, but in your original reason it just sounded like you didn't want articles to be easily found. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 21:09, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • It seems to me that there definitely ought to be a general article about the gesture (that would bring together the myriad of its uses in various cultures). Such an article would be an obvious target, but until one is created, it would really be odd to have a dedicated dab page, and retargeting to a list of gestures, albeit helpful, is likely to confuse readers. – Uanfala 19:16, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Totally ambiguous; in fact, it could even be clapping! ToThAc (talk) 17:42, 21 September 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.

Genocide in Gujarat[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. -- Tavix (talk) 18:16, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is a matter of opinion and is discussed in the article. The riots have not been termed genocide or not even called so popularly. Redirecting this name to the article hold little ground where the name itself is contentious and up for debate. Adamgerber80 (talk) 13:29, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep This is a valid redirect and search term, and one that is discussed within the target article. Several reliable sources have described or discussed the events which took place as a type of genocide. The issue of whether there is full consensus over describing it as such is a separate (academic) issue, and hence that is why this redirect exists in the first place (the article is titled 2002 Gujarat riots). It is clearly notable and contentious enough as a matter of debate and study to be deemed a terminology. WP:RNEUTRAL is pretty clear that redirects don't have to conform to neutrality. Mar4d (talk) 14:18, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The phrase looks a bit too generically worded: it raises the expectation of a general article on genocides in Gujarat, rather than one on a particular instance. However, I don't think there's anything that even remotely resembles the scale of the 2002 events, and these do seem to have been referred to with this precise phrase [2] [3]. – Uanfala 18:57, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - per above arguments. - Mfarazbaig (talk) 14:40, 14 September 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.

VF-4 Lightning 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 all except VF-4 Lightning III, which is to be re-targeted to VF-1 Valkyrie. Ruslik_Zero 20:37, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominating:

For deletion as non-notable individual mecha models and implausible search targets. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 13:22, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: The first nominated redirect, VF-4 Lightning III, is a {{R with history}}. Steel1943 (talk) 14:05, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment There is no apparent reason why its former content needs preservation, as it's entirely WP:FANCRUFT and is also on Wikia for all to see. The only thing different about the Wikia page is that it lacks sources, and nobody has bothered to migrate them in 4 years so I doubt it will happen. They're pretty much all just instruction booklets and artbooks. However, it would not be too large a task to migrate the sources too before deleting the redirect.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 15:22, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Variable fighter was recently boldly redirected to Variable-sweep wing so the VF stuff no longer applies, and should redirect to VF-1 Valkyrie. The problem is that there aren't really any notable Variable fighters besides VF-1 Valkyrie, so apply WP:TNT and hope if someone wants to make a list of the other VF mecha and aircraft that they do so with reliable sources. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:43, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget VF-4 Lightning III to VF-1 Valkyrie where it's mentioned. This also has the benefit of preserving the history in case someone is interesting in migrating the sources to Wikia, for example. Delete the rest per the above. -- Tavix (talk) 18:15, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Tavix:I'd say it's pretty much impossible that someone will bother moving the sources if they don't do so prior to the redirect. So if no one wants to volunteer, I don't see a reason for keeping it. If someone does volunteer to do it in the future then it would be warranted.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 19:40, 17 September 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.

Sacking and Sack Manufacture[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) 18:08, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The subject of this redirect is not in the target article. Also, Sack is a disambiguation page. Steel1943 (talk) 05:48, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: The weird commingling of multiple phrases and insertion of capital letters make this an implausible search term.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  01:19, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 05:44, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and SMcCandlish. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 21:09, 11 September 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.

Breakfast milk[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) 18:08, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Though is used traditionally in many cultures for breakfast, there is no mention of a variation of milk specifically called "breakfast milk" in the target article ... since there is no such subject as "breakfast milk". Well ... there is a trademarked product in the United Kingdom called "Breakfast Milk" apparently, but this subject seems to not be mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia. Steel1943 (talk) 05:46, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I do see a branding of Breakfast Milk that could go to Channel Island milk as with Gold top milk but given that the redirect isn't in caps, it's not clear it is for the brand, and there isn't anything at the Channel Island milk article that discusses the brand. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:43, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral - it's probably harmless. Milk is consumed at breakfast. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:49, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This book explains that "breakfast milk" is a product that "has a similar nutrient content to a bowl of breakfast cereal and milk, in other words milk plus fibre ...." Because there is no information about this product in any article (at least none that I could find), I think deletion is the best option here. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 21:14, 11 September 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.

Dudh[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. Ruslik_Zero 20:55, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORRED. Milk does not have affinity to Hindi. Steel1943 (talk) 05:42, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Milk being the de facto national drink of India, I wouldn't be surprised if the common word for it in almost all major north Indian languages had seeped into Indian English. At the very least, it's found as a component of the names of dishes, so that's at least marginally keepworthy. But there's also an ethnic group with the name, so this makes for a dab page. I've drafted one below the redirect. – Uanfala 19:15, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; no DAB page is needed, per WP:TWODABS. Native speakers of Indian English are perfectly aware when they're using a non-English word from their non-English language, so there is no potential for an "Oh no, Wikipedia has no article about a basic human staple!" reaction.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  01:21, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't think it's safe to presume that all speakers of Indian English will happen to also be speakers of one of the languages of the north that have the word. But this entry isn't mainly for them, it's for the readers who don't know Indian English but do encounter the word in the wild. Still, I do understand that the inclusion of such an entry can be contentious, so if there's consensus against it then the outcome should be not deletion but rather retargeting to the other meaning (at Kharia people) as a standard {{R from subtopic}}). – Uanfala 19:35, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no List of Japanese ingredients equivalent for Indian cuisine, and not listed in List of Indian dishes. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:46, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Kharia people per Uanfala. -- Tavix (talk) 18:07, 17 September 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.

Horn light[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) 18:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is no evidence in the article, nor could I find any evidence via third party search engines, that this term is exclusive to Fire alarm system. In fact, this term seems to not be exclusive to any topics at all; third party search engines return results for purchasing lights shaped like horns. Steel1943 (talk) 05:37, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 21:20, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. No use in news articles. General internet search mentions a light that is shaped like a horn. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:38, 11 September 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.

Audio Evacuation System[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) 18:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects not mentioned at target. Also, other alarms besides fire alarms can sound to inform people to evacuate an area/building including a security alarm. Steel1943 (talk) 05:29, 9 September 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 TACO - History and General Info[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) 18:06, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the long dash and the caps, these redirects do not seem like plausible search terms. Steel1943 (talk) 05:22, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. bd2412 T 19:31, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Not a title of any particular notable media, so it doesn't have any other use. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as implausible. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 21:21, 11 September 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.

👨‍🏭 and 👩‍🏭[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 Withdrawn, mainly since the current setup does indeed seem correct upon review. Steel1943 (talk) 23:40, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This pair of emojis is a bit odd. Though their description on multiple sites describes them as "factory worker" (Factory worker redirects to Factory), all versions of these emojis looks like welders. For that reason, should these redirects be retargeted to Welder? Steel1943 (talk) 05:15, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support current redirect. Calling it a welder would be WP:OR due to it being described as a factory worker everywhere. It's used as a metaphor for factory workers, not welders specifically.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 13:26, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as is Per Zxcvbnm. The Unicode Consortium definition is what's relevant--how exactly it looks is going to be contingent on makers of typefaces and operating systems. ―Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 15:14, 9 September 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.

Rebirth (video game)[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 Rebirth#Video games. (non-admin closure) feminist 08:36, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Steel1943 (talk) 00:14, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Rebirth#Video games as {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. I'm weakly concerned about one or two of those entries being WP:PTMs, but as long as there are multiple entries there, I think the redirect would be helpful. -- Tavix (talk) 20:03, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Rebirth#Video games. There isn't any particular title that is just Rebirth by itself though, but as a subtitle yes. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:59, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete R from incomplete disambiguation implies a total title match with an incomplete disambig. This only a partial title match. Doesn't seem necessary.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 23:56, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget as above. There are multiple games by this name, making the title ambiguous, so forward to the related disambiguation page. czar 20:08, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment this was originally a demo program for the Gamecube, but it wasn't a real game. [4] [5] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:31, 14 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Rebirth#Video games, as one of the entries there is almost certainly what someone using this search term is looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 22:00, 14 September 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.

⛹️[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. There appears to be no definite target for it. Ruslik_Zero 20:58, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This emoji translates as "person with ball". This redirect formerly targeted Basketball as Basketball player does, and I think it should be retargeted there. Steel1943 (talk) 00:02, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to ball game - It only looks like a basketball in some operating systems, and its base description is a person playing a ball game of indeterminate type.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 15:38, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Emojipedia is showing a basketball player on every operating system they list. Are there others that show something else? -- Tavix (talk) 20:14, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The Microsoft one is debatable whether it has a basketball, as it's based off the original one, which is also unclear whether it's a basketball.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 20:26, 9 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to basketball, because this is one of the few emojis where on every operating system it is absolutely clear what it is referring to. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:16, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per my longstanding opposition to emoji redirects. We are not "emoji-pedia." If we continue down the path of creating redirects for emojis, then it is only a matter of time before readers will be able to use reverse image searches to find articles that correspond to the image. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 14:39, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as ambiguous with no definite target. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 15:01, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to basketball as I am still unconvinced that this ever represents anything other than a basketball player. Otherwise, I'm fine with ball game. -- Tavix (talk) 15:26, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It could be someone playing with a yo-yo, or displaying a severed head. Narky Blert (talk) 18:53, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Narky Blert: How on earth would this emoji be either of those things? -- Tavix (talk) 18:58, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This character is not only an emoji but a map symbol. As a symbol, it is much more stylized, and looks like a Helvetica man extending an arm with a circle below it, which I supposed could be interpreted as a yo-yo or head. Really though, this character represents (as an emoji) a person with a ball, often depicted as a basketball, or (as a symbol) a sports gymnasium. Gorobay (talk) 19:29, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Ball game because that is where ball player redirects and that is what matches this emjoi's definition. It might look like a basketball player on some systems, but this is not guaranteed. Thryduulf (talk) 21:58, 14 September 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_September_9&oldid=1138582205"