Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 14

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 14[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 14, 2018.

List of Nintendogs breeds[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. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 21:23, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Breeds are not listed in the article, misleading. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:31, 14 March 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.

Nintendo N5[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 22#Nintendo N5

Nintendo nplay[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 22#Nintendo nplay

GameCube Revolution[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 22#GameCube Revolution

GameCube 2 (Revolution)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 22#GameCube 2 (Revolution)

Beasts (race)[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. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 21:23, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There are many "races of beasts" in fantasy, overly vague/confusing and unnecessary redirect. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:03, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. as the franchise page doesn't even mention Beasts as a race. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:08, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I could see this being changed to go to 'legendary creature' or some other general concept article in terms of fictional beings, but even that seems inappropriate. A bunch of real-life animals get referred to as "beasts" all throughout world history. Given the vagueness here, deletion seems like the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 09:01, 18 March 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.

Loping[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 Lope (disambiguation). ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:36, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Same word (basically) different targets. Which one is right? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:50, 3 March 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) 20:09, 14 March 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.

American Idol: The Search for a Superstar[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 22#American Idol: The Search for a Superstar

The Best and Worst of American Idol[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. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 21:25, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article. Apparently, per the edit history, the subject of this redirect is a collection of albums based on the series. Steel1943 (talk) 15:53, 14 March 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.

American idol poll[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. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 21:24, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking this may be retargeted/refined to American Idol#Audience voting, but it may be better just to delete this since the word "poll" is nowhere in the content of the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 15:51, 14 March 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.

American idol results[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 American Idol finalists. Killiondude (talk) 06:17, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking this may be retargeted/refined to American Idol#Audience voting, but it may be better just to delete this since the word "results" is somewhat vague. Steel1943 (talk) 15:50, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm surprised there isn't a true List of American Idol winners. The list of finalists can be sorted on the last column to effectively produce one, but that's a very clunky way of getting at it. That's what I'd expect a reader searching this term would be looking for. --BDD (talk) 17:24, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of American Idol finalists as discussed above, but that does have a list of every contestant that got into a placement round. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:19, 14 March 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.

Idolonfox[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 22#Idolonfox

American Idol Magazine[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 22#American Idol Magazine

Busing (disambiguation)[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 Bussing. Killiondude (talk) 06:14, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Following the RfD for Bussing, that page was made into a disambiguation page. I don't think this should end up somewhere else; either this should point to Bussing, or let's put the dab here and redirect Bussing to this. Of note: busing redirects to Desegregation busing. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:06, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to dab page at Bussing, which explicitly includes "Busing" as well as "Bussing" and has several entries for each spelling. I have updated the "redirect" hatnote at Desegregation busing, to which Busing goes, so that it now points to the dab page and not to just one surname-holder as it did previously. PamD 12:56, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per PamD; makes sense to me. --R'n'B (call me Russ) 14:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Bussing as above and previous RFD. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:15, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget - I agree that we should go over to the aforementioned page, and it looks like this will be unanimous. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:50, 17 March 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.

Soldiers' Oath[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/Withdrawn. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:19, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Term does not appear in target article: no indication that this is a useful redirect. Creator's edit summary noted, but the term "Soldier's oath" does not occur in the article: if it should be there, then please include it with a source showing use of this term in English. PamD 14:46, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: I combined these two into one section ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:09, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Rename Article, Disambiguate and/or Keep Redirect Wikipedia is the first place where I've seen this called "the Hitler Oath"; I've always seen it referred to as the Soldiers' (or Soldier's) Oath. [For example, an early chapter of Peter Calvocoressi's and Guy Wint's well-known Total War (Pantheon & Penguin, 1972) is entitled "From Versailles to the Soldiers' Oath: 1919-34".] So my own prejudice would be towards renaming the article itself as either the Soldier's or the Soldiers' Oath (with a redirect from "Hitler Oath"). But, although I share BDD's scepticism, it's plausible that this might confuse those seeking other military oaths, so a disambiguation page might also be a good solution. What would not be reasonable is to just delete the whole redirect, which would leave others who (like me) have only known this as the Soldiers' Oath without a clue. —— Shakescene (talk) 05:50, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Shakescene: Thanks. Could you for now add a mention of this term to the article, citing your sources? Then the redirect would be unproblematic and I'd be happy to withdraw nomination and add a "redirect" hatnote to point to the film. You could then open a "Requested move" discussion to get the article renamed though anything in this area is probably likely to be contentious and take some time! PamD 06:47, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Additional comment: I only now clicked through the link of User:BDD to find that A Soldier's Oath was the name of a silent film and a (currently-stub) Wikipedia article about it. To my mind this would be just as legitimate a target as Hitler Oath, so a disambiguation page would be justified save for the rule that eschews disambiguation pages where the alternatives number only two (in which case, editors are supposed to magically choose the more primary one with a hatnote directing those seeking the other article; something I resisted in the case of Greater New York and Greater New York City where I think the two targets are equally valid). Perhaps as BDD suggests, a disambiguation page could also include other soldiers' oaths. ¶ This also raises the question of how to distinguish the two articles, e.g. "A Soldier's Oath (film)" vs "Soldiers' Oath (ceremony)". —— Shakescene (talk) 05:32, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  1. you seem to misunderstand the position about dab pages: if neither use of a term is considered "Primary" then a dab page at a term with two meanings is perfectly OK - see Margaret Cookesley as an example. (The pages which get jumped on for deletion are those where there is a primary topic "Jane Bloggs" and a single disambiguated topic "Jane Bloggs (astronaut)", where a dab page is not needed as a hatnote on the primary topic article does the job.
  2. Creating a dab page doesn't solve the problem: if "Soldier's Oath" is not mentioned in the Hitler Oath article, then a dab page entry is likely to be ruled out as inappropriate. If the term is used, and you have sources to show so, then add it to the article.
  3. You can draw someone's attention to a post by using {{ping}} (also known as "Reply to", "Yo", and various other names). Just put {{ping|PamD|BDD}}, for example, in a post which you then sign, and we will be notified. No need to run around to different user talk pages. Makes life easier all round! PamD 08:58, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate - I'm not exactly sure what the page would include, but it seems clear that we should create one. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:53, 9 March 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) 11:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw, as nominator, now that that term has been added, sourced, to the target article (thanks, @Shakescene:); I've added a hatnote there to point to the film. All is now well. PamD 11:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@BDD: That work? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 12:11, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. --BDD (talk) 13:56, 14 March 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.

Quiero Dinero[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. --BDD (talk) 20:32, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Term not found in target article: no indication that this is a useful redirect. PamD 14:07, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 03:27, 14 March 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.

Rehbar-e-Muzam[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. --BDD (talk) 20:30, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Term does not appear in target article: no indication that this is a useful redirect. PamD 15:45, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 03:27, 14 March 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.

Bonghead[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. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 21:26, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Uncommon slang term not used anywhere on the encyclopedia. Sounds like a novel or obscure synonym for a cannabis user. BDD (talk) 20:56, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 03:27, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I wouldn't be surprised if some people, somewhere in the world, call their friends this or something, but Wikipedia is seriously not the place to add novel slang terms. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 09:03, 18 March 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.

Cytopyge[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. --BDD (talk) 20:28, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Term not present in target article; no indication that this is a useful redirect. PamD 22:07, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Target is a stub so hardly anything is present there; I've just expanded it based on .pl and .de versions (also stubs, hardly longer). It looks like there are three synonymous or nearly synonymous terms: "anal pore", cytoproct and cytopyge; I'm not qualified to discuss their relative importance. Cytopyge is used eg. in 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica, and plenty of other places. -KiloByte (talk) 22:56, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 03:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdraw, as nominator, now that term has been added to article (though unsourced there). Thanks, @KiloByte:. PamD 23:05, 14 March 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.

LS3D engine[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. Killiondude (talk) 06:14, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not in target article, not in sources. Lordtobi (✉) 11:43, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Isn't [4] this indicating they are related via Illusion Works being the former name of 2K Czech? Not a lot of info out there to parse. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 15:12, 25 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) 23:59, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 03:26, 14 March 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.

7-1[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 30#7-1

Carstairs family[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 Carstairs (disambiguation). Killiondude (talk) 06:15, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Which is unsurprising given, as far as I can tell, only one "Carstairs" ever appeared, and he only made one or two extremely brief cameos... Thegreatluigi (talk) 15:39, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 03:25, 14 March 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.

30th Century Fox Television[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 Futurama. --BDD (talk) 20:23, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bad redirect. I don't see any point of leaving this redirect alone. Waste of redirect of a company. No need to be there. 2A02:C7F:963F:BA00:DC5D:E112:460F:5FF0 (talk) 18:40, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Restore redirect to Futurama. That's where this was intentionally created, and is mentioned in the infobox. It's a joke in the cartoon, and really exists nowhere else, so I have a hard time finding it useful anywhere else. Pointing to the company without explanation would imply a typo, I guess? ~ Amory (u • t • c) 19:47, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Futurama and add {{R from fictional element}} AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:22, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Futurama per The Hypnotoad. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:00, 20 March 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_March_14&oldid=1036305652"