Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 December 3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 3[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 3, 2018.

File:SCOTUS oral arguments oral arguments.mp3[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 deleted per WP:G7. -- Tavix (talk) 21:42, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is no longer needed in the template it was designed for. It is not being used in Template:SCOTUS oral arguments. I am the creator of this redirect. - tucoxn\talk 21:04, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Bendee-Boo, Where Are You![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 delete. Deryck C. 22:28, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The actual name of the Scooby-Doo spoof in this Futurama episode is "Bendee-Boo and the Mystery Crew", and I can only assume the original author created this redirect to that episode's page in 2015 because they initially only remembered the first part of the title. 109.148.110.217 (talk) 20:20, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Friends of[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. Deryck C. 22:28, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Steel1943 (talk) 18:35, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nominator. WP:PTM for a bunch of things, but not the actual name of a topic which could be discussed at the target, and judging from the stats not a likely search term as a result. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 07:02, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Nonagenarian[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 delete. Deryck C. 22:28, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Both redirects are {{R with history}}. Steel1943 (talk) 18:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete These are both acting as redirects to nowhere and I cannot think of a suitable place to shift the redirects to where their former data is meaningfully present. Newshunter12 (talk) 13:09, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Template:Uw-consensus4[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. Deryck C. 22:28, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a very helpful redirect because we don't have Template:Uw-consensus so there is no point having this redirect. Also, I don't understand what the creator of this redirect intends to do by redirecting this to Template:Uw-generic4. Pkbwcgs (talk) 17:30, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Sportsball[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. Deryck C. 22:29, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The primary sense of this term seems to be[1] a non-neutral name for any of the number of sports which involve a ball (primarily american football), not the Wii game. Nowak Kowalski (talk) 15:56, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/sportsball
  • Delete or disambiguate it's the name of a few non-notable things that are trivially mentioned throughout Wikipedia, including a podcast co-hosted by Mia Khalifa, an event organised by SportsAid, and the Wii game as mentioned. I suppose we could use those three entries to make a "WP:COATRACK disambiguation" (i.e. a place to hang a link to wikt:sportsball and List of ball games), but the search engine functions perfectly well for finding that stuff too. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 07:39, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Hum Hain Na[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 restore article without prejudice against AFD.. Ping User:Ponyo who redirected the page previously. Deryck C. 22:47, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why are they redirected to article(s) about a television channel, rather than having an article dedicated to the TV series? JSH-alive/talk/cont/mail 12:41, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Hum Hain Na and retarget Hum Hai Na to point there. I've restored the article that was previously at the former as a draft underneath the RFD tag, and added some sources to it. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 07:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Fuck you very much.[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. Deryck C. 22:25, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adding a dot at the end of Fuck you very much does not help search and is not a widely-used stylisation. In addition, no page links to the dotted version. — JFG talk 08:38, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The Strait[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 December 11#The Strait

Maegami[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 delete. Deryck C. 22:29, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Also, WP:FORRED since the target article's subject does not have affinity with the Japanese language. Steel1943 (talk) 03:19, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

EB-2[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. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 05:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Judging from a google search EB-2 visa seems to be much more likely than a model of a guitar. MB 02:17, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is fine to change to point to the visa category; I created it by analogy with EB-1 which points to the guitar. Maybe both should be changed? CapitalSasha ~ talk 03:06, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Jamesium[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. Deryck C. 17:29, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Before Unbitrium was redirected to Extended periodic table as a result of an AfD, there was a trivial mention that Element 123 is "jamesium" in the Star Trek universe. A redirect was probably justified back then, but now that there is no mention anywhere, this should be deleted. -- Tavix (talk) 02:11, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Double sharp (talk) 03:14, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination, as it only appears as a fictional reference that is not even relevant to any Star Trek storyline, much less to real chemical elements. ComplexRational (talk) 23:10, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Septunbiiun[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. Deryck C. 17:29, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of implausible misspellings for implausible elements. -- Tavix (talk) 01:46, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Bugsonium[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. Deryck C. 17:29, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a systematic element name, and there is nowhere on Wikipedia where this name is mentioned. -- Tavix (talk) 01:39, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Triunoctium[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. Deryck C. 17:29, 10 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects for undiscovered elements 318 and 362 appear arbitrary, and we are nowhere near reaching these elements anytime soon. There are virtually no links to these redirects anywhere in Wikipedia, and neither page had more than 40 views in the last year. These redirects thus appear useless, and I am nominating them for deletion. ComplexRational (talk) 23:27, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I think 362 was included because by a strict extrapolation of the Aufbau principle, it is the noble gas closing the eleventh period (not that this is much of a claim of significance, as there is universal agreement that the Aufbau principle is simply not going to work well past Z = 120 due to relativistic effects). Double sharp (talk) 05:02, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete we have no articles which cover element 362; even Aufbau principle doesn't explicitly mention the number. As far as I can tell we have nothing about Triunoctium either. Since we don't have any encyclopedic information to show to readers, the links should be red. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 11:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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_December_3&oldid=1036306877"