Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 August 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 4[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 4, 2018.

Toast to Our Differences[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 Procedural close. The nomination has been withdrawn as not an RfD matter. Thryduulf (talk) 15:06, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Should be fairly simple; we have two articles with different capitalizations of the same title. The one with the correct capitalization, Toast to Our Differences, was an early redirect to the band's discography to prevent the creation of a useless "future album" article. Now that the album is closer to reality, a different user has created an entirely new article with incorrect capitalization, Toast to our Differences. Can't do a simple move for the newer and more robust article because the old redirect is in the way. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 21:39, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Now BOTH have been redirected and we actually have a dispute over whether this near-future album is notable. For the team here, do what you will with the fact that Toast to our Differences AND Toast to Our Differences both exist and are both redirecting to the band's discog article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 22:06, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. This doesn't seem to be a situation that can or should be resolved at RfD. If the album is not (yet) notable then both redirects are appropriate. If an article is created at the wrong title (e.g. the incorrectly-capitalised version Toast to our Differences) and the correct title is a redirect preventing a move, the right venue would be Wikipedia:Requested moves. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:00, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, the team here can go ahead and close this discussion. That album will be released in 5-6 weeks so the issue of two different articles is bound to come up then. I will keep an eye on that situation when the time comes. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 17:25, 5 August 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.

Allopathic and osteopathic medicine[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 (talk) 10:12, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No evidence that this specific term is in common use, and redirect (Alternative medicine#Allopathic medicine) doesn't make any sense. Osteopathy, "allopathic medicine" and alternative medicine all have their own articles. Bangalamania (talk) 19:03, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Google brings up for me 11,700 results for the phrase "allopathic and osteopathic medicine", so I can't agree that there's no evidence that the term is used. The target mentions and defines both terms (though it could perhaps define osteopathy more clearly), so the reader who searches for this is taken to information that we can expect they'll find useful. This isn't a case of "delete per WP:XY"; in fact, it's an example of the sort of redirect that section suggests keeping: "It may be possible, however, for such redirects to point to a location in which both topics are discussed." – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:30, 29 July 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) 20:08, 4 August 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.

Sambalpuri dictionary[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. Thryduulf (talk) 08:58, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading as there is no dictionary at the target, nor will there ever be one. It was the article's title for two months over nine years ago, so the usual considerations for linkrot don't really apply anymore. – Uanfala (talk) 17:54, 4 August 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.

Kunchong[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. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:35, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORRED, chinese for insect, but Insect has no relation to chinese Galobtter (pingó mió) 15:11, 4 August 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.

Wikipedia:Newsletter[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 August 14#Wikipedia:Newsletter

Captain Omen[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 Hulk supporting characters#Villains. Thryduulf (talk) 09:00, 13 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A redirect to nonexistent section with no other mention in article, and creates an unhelpful bluelink rather than a redlink at List of Hulk supporting characters#Foes of lesser renown. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:22, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --1l2l3k (talk) 13:40, 4 August 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.

Fooled[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. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 06:36, 12 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This mean other things, like Deception. XY, SURPRISE.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  05:57, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --1l2l3k (talk) 13:38, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. First off, I don't think a redirect like "Fooled" is really ambiguous: completely on its own, the word evokes the sense of "being fooled" rather than something like "having fooled around" for example, and definitely not anything to do with Stupidity. However, I definitely don't like the idea of retargeting to Deception (or any related aricle): "fooled" is one of several inflectional forms of a verb among dozens of verbs that could refer to the same concept – this is several steps away from the kinds of terms that make for useful redirects. And I don't see the point of redirect to the dab page Fool as none of the entries listed there are relevant to "fool" as a verb. It's conceivable that "fooled" might be a misspelling of Fuld or FOLED or something similar, but these, if plausible at all, drive us squarely into WP:XY territory. – Uanfala (talk) 19:43, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Uanfala. There is no obvious appropriate target for this, and no use in having a Wiktionary redirect for such a common word. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:45, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Searches on Spotify show non-notable music artists. Agreed about it being a MOS:OVERLINK "Everyday words understood by most readers in context." AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:47, 8 August 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_August_4&oldid=1036308272"