Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 19[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 19, 2018.

Zafari[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 Unreal engine#Zafari for now. The nominator's rationale that the term wasn't in the target was resolved by adding a mention elsewhere. There was also a suggestion for redlinking that was refuted by pointing out there is already a draft in the page history. -- Tavix (talk) 15:47, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not in target PRehse (talk) 12:02, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Zafari" is also the romanization of an Iranian surname, as well as part of several place names in Iran, but none of these currently necessitate disambiguation. Paradoctor (talk) 14:40, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete to create redlink for the TV series. Create disambiguation page if something else is primarily known as Zafari as the cities only include it as a PTM, and there's a single by Nacht und Nebel (band) called "Zafari". AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:22, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's already a skeleton of an article in the page history that had a run-in with ClueBot. Deleting it in order to encourage creation of the same thing seems a bit counterproductive. —Xezbeth (talk) 16:49, 10 February 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) 22:51, 19 February 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.

Rance Warlock[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. -- Tavix (talk) 15:48, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This re-direction page should be deleted. It was originally meant to target Kasson Crooker, which now has an article that does not mention the re-direction name, but was changed to target the video-game when the person's article was turned into a re-direction page. DaYL (talk) 22:27, 19 February 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.

List of Final Fantasy XI locations[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 no consensus. -- Tavix (talk) 15:42, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Fails WP:GAMECRUFT #7. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:09, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 21:29, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refine to Final_Fantasy_XI#Setting, where the major locations in the game are mentioned.Keep. Misread target section, and I didn't realize there was no text between the section headers. Target section is fine, and part of a feature article, so if there's issues with the content, you should take it to WP:FAR. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:03, 26 February 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.

Hang Tuah State[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 2#Hang Tuah State

List of Tomb Raider characters[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 lowercase, delete upper. With the history of the lowercase redirect in mind, and noting the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 128#List of Tomb Raider characters. Discussion as to restoring the content should be had at WT:VG. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:42, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No such list exists in target article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 07:22, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:40, 19 February 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.

List of recurring Tomb Raider characters[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 list, delete others. With the history of the lowercase redirect in mind, and noting the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 128#List of Tomb Raider characters. Discussion as to restoring the content should be had at WT:VG. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:43, 3 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No such list mentioned in target article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 07:20, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:39, 19 February 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.

Unclean vocals[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) 14:47, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unsure where this phrase should redirect to. From the history, it has switched between redirecting to "death growl" and redirecting to "screaming (music)". It was later made into a disambiguation page, but I'm not sure if any of those results is a good idea. Natg 19 (talk) 06:58, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Screaming (music) may be okay as a synonym since Clean vocals was retargeted there. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:27, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Death growl. As I pointed out in my edit comments, Screaming (music) does not even mention the term "unclean" anywhere in the article, while Death growl lists "unclean vocals" as a bolded alternative title in the section "Terminology". A death growl is different from screaming and I've never encountered "screaming" as an umbrella term for all "ugly" forms of singing (in popular music, especially rock music), so "screaming" cannot be equated with (all) "unclean vocals". In fact, compared to a death growl, some forms listed in the article Screaming (music), such as shouted punk vocals, are considered "clean singing", because they may be gruff but easy enough to understand. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 01:34, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It mentioned clean vocals in the lede after the last discussion, but that got taken out here. I'd support putting it back. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:23, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:27, 19 February 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.

Black wood[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 Blackwood. Problem solved! -- Tavix (talk) 14:41, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The target article is a plant pathogen that causes "black wood of grapevine". This redirect however is far too vague and could describe any black-coloured wood, namely ebony. I don't think a dab page is justified since nothing is actually referred to as "black wood", as far as I can tell. Xezbeth (talk) 13:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • It just occurred to me that I could have redirected to Blackwood and problem solved. Oh well. —Xezbeth (talk) 13:32, 19 February 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.

Pokemon/Pikachu[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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:02, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible search term for someone to type in. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:08, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep There was a discussion seven years ago on this and others which ended no consensus. These are artifacts of very old pages and very old wikipedia (back when we had every pokemon). There's little harm in keeping them per WP:CHEAP and there could be 15 year old external links we're breaking for no reason. Basically, per Rossami and Nyttend. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:15, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:09, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Amorymeltzer. I agree that this isn't a particularly plausible search term, but that on its own is not a reason for deletion. In this case there's a greater than usual risk of breaking incoming links, and no obvious risk of confusion if we keep this. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 18:32, 20 February 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.

Pokemon/Charmander[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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:02, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible search term. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:20, 9 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep There was a discussion seven years ago on this and others which ended no consensus. These are artifacts of very old pages and very old wikipedia (back when we had every pokemon). There's little harm in keeping them per WP:CHEAP and there could be 15 year old external links we're breaking for no reason. Basically, per Rossami and Nyttend. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:15, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:09, 19 February 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.

Hastuon[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) 14:40, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Term not found in target article: no indication why this is a useful redirect. PamD 09:14, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I think this is probably a typo of hatsuon, but I don't know whether the redirect would be useful even if it were spelled correctly. As it's mispelled it's both an unlikely search term and potentially confusing. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:26, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the correct term in Japanese 撥音 might be a useful redirect if it were explained at the target, but an incorrect spelling of a romanisation of either of two homophones (only one of which is related to the target) is a bridge too far. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 02:57, 21 February 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.

L'Affaire Russe[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 1#L'Affaire Russe

Pork with garlic sauce[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 keep. Nomination withdrawn by nominator (speedy keep criterion #1) (non-admin closure) TheSandDoctor (talk) 01:01, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Too general a term to redirect to one specific dish. PamD 08:44, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This two terms are exactly the same. I am a Chinese-born-Chinese and we eat this dish from elementary school. Lugiamale (talk) 10:05, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But it's not the only dish involving pork with garlic sauce. Readers may be looking for another such dish and be SURPRISEd to find this specific one. --BDD (talk) 18:08, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Theoretically, there may be other pork dishes that have a garlic sauce, but does anyone have an example? I wasn't able to find anything else matching that description. Unless Wikipeida covers other dish(es) that can be described that way, I'm inclined to keep. -- Tavix (talk) 18:26, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Umm... OK I should make myself clearer. Sorry for the short response earlier. The reason why I make this item and make the redirect is that almost all of the Chinese restaurants in the US, especially in the Midwest area, translated Yuxiangrousi into Pork with Garlic Sauce. It doesn't make any sense, but a lot people would refer to the dish by this term as a consequence. So it would be pitiful if these people come to wiki but could not find anything about the dish, so I was trying to inform them the correct information. Lugiamale (talk) 22:04, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per Tavix: there may be other pork dishes involving garlic sauce, but if they're not notable and we don't have any discussion of them in the encylopaedia then this redirect does no harm. I have no way of verifying Lugiamale's point above, but it sounds entirely plausible and provides another good reason to keep this. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:02, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep for now, without prejudice against WP:SETINDEXification or something in the future (I see cookbooks using this as a translation of 蒜泥白肉 too), or immediately if anyone finds other dishes currently in Wikipedia which are described this way. Added a sourced mention of this translation at the target. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 03:31, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK, Withdraw - still not convinced this is at all reasonable but I seem to be in a minority of one here, no point in battling it out. (Though the article says it's called "Shredded pork with garlic"!) PamD 09:12, 22 February 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.

Howard Hinton[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. Nothing needs deletion - converted to DAB and article has been created at Howard Hilton (art patron), and if so desired for the article to be at Howard Hilton would be through an WP:RM (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:09, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is more than one person known as Howard Hinton. This redirect is to an article about Howard Everest Hinton. I wish to publish an article about Howard Hinton (no other given names, see Draft:Howard_Hinton) with target = Howard_Hinton. I have updated Hinton_(name) to reflect this. I do not think disambiguation is necessary in this case , and the redirect should be deleted. Perhaps the existing target article could be renamed Howard_Everest_Hinton. — Preceding unsigned comment added by StedmanTriples (talk • contribs) 01:17, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't think anything needs to be deleted here. If you want the draft currently at Draft:Howard Hinton to be at Howard Hinton, then just overwrite the redirect with the content from the draft. There is still the question of which of the Hintons is the primary topic for the name, but that isn't really a matter for RfD. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 18:41, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I wasn't sure of the protocol. StedmanTriples (talk) 21:57, 20 February 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_February_19&oldid=1037876644"