Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 April 17

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 17[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 17, 2018.

Mexican Federal Highway S30D[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:21, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"S30D" is not the official designation. See my comment at commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Carretera federal S30.svg. Raymie (t • c) 23:46, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"S30D" But it is an Autopista its clearly should have a "D" Below the route marker if it has tolls it's an Autopista 67.203.107.72 (talk) 00:01, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: The above IP is now banned as a sock of a regular sockpuppet who created the page. Raymie (t • c) 19:59, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The redirect makes sense to me, even if it's not the "official" designation. It is my understanding that Mexican Federal Highways that are tolled (autopistas) are suffixed with "D", and the official designation for the highway is "S30". Logically, that should make the highway "S30D", even if that didn't happen for whatever reason. It might be wise to mark it {{R from incorrect name}}. -- Tavix (talk) 15:34, 27 April 2018 (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.

File:University of ulster coat of arms.svg[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) TheSandDoctor Talk 15:02, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirect. Since this is a non-free image, it is not going to be widely used, and there is no need for a redirect. Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:34, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. It's an {{R from move}} that does not duplicate the name of a file on Wikimedia Commons. Besides such redirects traditionally being kept, this move happened three years ago, and it's not misleading or causing misleading search results. Steel1943 (talk) 20:35, 17 April 2018 (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.

Tales of the Northern Swords (A Tribute to Heavy Load)[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 restored. I have started a discussion at AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tales of the Northern Swords (A Tribute to Heavy Load) -- Tavix (talk) 01:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear why this non-notable tribute album should redirect to the band. Home Lander (talk) 20:58, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think what ought to happen here is that the last edit [1] which replaced the page content with a redirect, should be reverted, and the page then sent to AfD. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 05:23, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:17, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment can someone dig up some album reviews? I can't tell if this was an officially produced album, a bootleg or someone's playlist. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:09, 18 April 2018 (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.

Еть[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) 01:52, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

According to my research "Еть" translates from Russian to either "to eat" or (forgive my French) "fuck". I highly doubt that either would be a useful redirect to a letter of the Cyrillic alphabet. Еть is also not present within the article. TheSandDoctor Talk 21:57, 8 April 2018 (UTC); edited 18:09, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should note that it was also created by a blocked user. --TheSandDoctor Talk 21:58, 8 April 2018 (UTC) Struck per the below. Thanks Tavix --TheSandDoctor Talk 02:55, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The creator of this redirect is not currently blocked. -- Tavix (talk) 00:47, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep To be clear, I was only blocked for a day. Since then, I have learned from my mistakes in redirects and their purpose. I miğt also add that the suffix -еть is also used for intransitive infinitive forms of Russian verbs. This redirect should be kept because, citing the article itself, it is a legitimate transliteration of «ѣть» into modern Russian orthography. This character has also been used in other non-Russian Cyrillic orthographies and is often transliterated in a similar fashion. These, along with the fact that a redirect of the same name to the same target exists on the Russian Wikipedia with no problems as-of-yet, are reason enouğ that it should be kept. -User:Учхљёная (talk,philosophy,edits). 02:22, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - "Еть" is not mentioned in the Yat article, Also English Wikipedia = English words. –Davey2010Talk 19:42, 9 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 13:13, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I agree with Davey here that we shouldn't keep this redirect because the target page doesn't contain any useful information on this letter sequence for the reader. Also the corresponding Russian redirect was created by the same editor less than a month ago so I doubt its relevance to this debate. Deryck C. 15:59, 25 April 2018 (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.

Geohistory[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 April 29#Geohistory

Consulta[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 unopposed, but feel free to recreate if an appropriate target emerges. -- Tavix (talk) 01:51, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target, so the reader who searches for the term is left none the wiser as to its meaning. It doesn't seem to have been mentioned in the article at the time the redirect was created either. Collins and the Free Dictionary define "consulta" as "an official meeting or consultation," without any specifically religious or specifically Catholic significance. Wiktionary lists various related non-English meanings. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:48, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 13:08, 17 April 2018 (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.

Template:Tooltip[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 April 29#Template:Tooltip

OTWC[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 disambiguate. Deryck C. 16:01, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Far too vague and ambiguous of a search term to be useful for this one particular album, especially in light of the fact there is also a film with this name too now. —Torchiest talkedits 05:49, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  1. "Unless a WikiProject [or anyone else, for that matter] has actually expressed interest in usurping [these redirects], I don't see [them] doing any harm." To date, no other use for OTWC has been suggested at all. Per WP:R#KEEP, "If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do".
  2. "Alleged confusion is not very plausible at all. So absent evidence of any harm there is no reason to delete."
  3. "There seems to be no evidence of confusion, just conjecture on the part of nominator, and no argument grounded in WP:R. Laziness is the exact purpose of redirects, to be perfectly honest, and the creator of a useful redirect that saves one or two characters should be commended. We don't delete redirects based merely on conjecture. Someone obviously found these useful given they were created."
  4. "One of the lowest things one can do is steal another mans tools. So you have no use for it. That it's being used is good enough, and there is zero reason to take away something that has no higher use. Such Nominators should be required to be the one to hand edit and remove any deleted tags."

--Jax 0677 (talk) 13:24, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • ...Yet another copy/paste of this WP:TLDR statement. If a valid disambiguation page cannot be drafted, then the redirect in its current form is useless. This acronym is not used in any references to refer to its target, so it's misleading in its current form anyways. That, and since I did read this, the 4th statement in it is improper for an encyclopedia and the article namespace anyways since in the article namespace, there needs to be some sort of established utility for the redirect and its target, and in this case, there is none; this redirect in its current state is WP:NEO at best. Since there is no establish user of this as an acronym in reference to its target, this redirect existing blocks Wikipedia's search function from assisting readers in finding more relevant results. Steel1943 (talk) 13:34, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, the only othee place where "OTWC" appears in Wikipedia is 2013–14 New Orleans Privateers men's basketball team. Per the aforementioned article, seems that "OTWC" may be an acronym for a time zone; if such an article or subject exists on Wikipedia, this redirect should be retargeted there. Steel1943 (talk) 13:37, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    In that context, OTWC stands for Oceanic Time Warner Cable (a Time Warner service in Hawaii etc.) Certes (talk) 13:56, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Certes: Ah, thanks for clarifying that. (To the closer: For the record though, Oceanic Time Warner Cable is a redirect towards Spectrum (cable service), so retargeting the nominated redirect there, IMO, would not be helpful.) Steel1943 (talk) 14:01, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - One can put
    "OTWC" redirects here. For the company, see Oceanic Time Warner Cable.
    at Our Time Will Come, and that should solve the problem. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:25, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, that doesn't solve the issue with the "OTWC" acronym in my statement above in the least. In fact, per my comment regarding where Oceanic Time Warner Cable redirects, this suggestion actually makes the confusion/issue worse. Steel1943 (talk) 17:53, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The album is not primary topic. Neither is the film. I don't even see cases where they should get dabs. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:56, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify It's also an acronym for OldTown White Coffee [2] But yes OTWC is used for Oceanic Time Warner Cable [3] I don't see any general search results for the acronym as applied to an album, but it could have an entry for Our Time Will Come in the See Also section for now. I don't see the album as primary topic. The cable company would be the most likely primary topic but redoing it to the dab would be fine. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:03, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with dabify. OTWC may stand for multiple things but Our Time Will Come is not one of them and the phrase should not be included on the dab page unless a source can back up such usage. The copy-and-paste response is getting tiresome in that it never even addresses the issue and the defense itself doesn't hold water. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 17:31, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment — OTWC now seems to have both a redirect and a dab. I have tidied the dab portion, though think we're jumping the gun slightly by creating it during the RfD. I also plan to retarget Oceanic Time Warner Cable to Time Warner Cable unless anyone objects, as that page actually mentions Oceanic. Certes (talk) 21:41, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It's relatively common at RfD to draft a disambiguation page under the redirect when a dab is proposed. That way, it's easy to see what the disambiguation would look like, it can be tweaked during the discussion (like what you just did), and it makes closing the discussion easier (all I would need to do is remove the redirect and tag). -- Tavix (talk) 22:38, 19 April 2018 (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.

Genau (The German in You)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 April 25#Genau (The German in You)

New York Baseball team[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 Sports in New York (state). -- Tavix (talk) 01:48, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Yankees are not New York's only baseball team. There are also the New York Mets in the MLB, plus a multitude of minor league teams §pur§y§ituation§ (talk) 07:21, 8 April 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:49, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Power~enwiki. It's a plausible search term, and that's the target that will best get readers the information they want. Smartyllama (talk) 17:45, 26 April 2018 (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/2018_April_17&oldid=1036307118"