Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 8[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 8, 2018.

List of items in Sonic games[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) 00:09, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as fancruft, and as there is no list in target article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 02:36, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:54, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indifferent. There do appear to a few similarly titled articles as well as a modest number of redirects with similar names, so it's conceivable that readers might expect search phrases beginning with "List of items in" to take them somewhere useful. Still, such redirects aren't that common, and this particular one doesn't appear to be used much either: it received a total of 10 views for the whole of last year. – Uanfala (talk) 05:22, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and refine per Amory – the proposed target section seems to contain the content that the reader is likely to be looking for. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:43, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and refine per Amory. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:09, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:INVOLVED relist to close Feb. 20 log page
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 21:09, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I may be going against the grain here, but I still have to support deletion. Keeping the redirect seems to imply that having such gaming-centric, detailed lists is standard and accepted on Wikipedia, which it certainly isn't. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:55, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Except it's well known that we do have many lists (in fact, I'd say enWiki is (in)famous for its lists). As I said above, the material may not be at the "List of X" page, but the material that person would want is on the 'pedia; it'd be silly not to make it easier for them to find given that it costs us nothing. If someone searching for "List of items in Sonic games" would come away empty handed, we should delete this; if they'd be fine with what they find, we should keep it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:18, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete List of items ≠ Common features. And we shouldn't make a list of items either. There's really no good reason to have a redirect with this title. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:07, 10 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.

Wikipedia:SPURIOUS[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. No prejudice against repurposing the shortcut to a more sensible target. -- Tavix (talk) 18:57, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

According to this edit this was created to be “more subtle” than WP:FAKEARTICLE. I can’t see how a word that is defined as false, not authentic, not genuine and also synonymous with fake, false and bogus] is somehow more subtle than FAKEARTICLE just because one user misinterpreted its meaning. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:37, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • 'fake' is quite heavily charged these days (think of Fake news), somehow equated to deliberate misinformation or hoaxes. But spurious normally means "not the real thing, of dubious value" which is softer and less personal. It was a bold introduction. If no-one likes it then getting rid of it would be best. Prince of Thieves (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I'm not sure about this, but the immediate, plain reading of the word "spurious" (to me) is something that's outright wrong. It sounds pejorative. I can also see this redirect referring to other points in terms of using Wikipedia (as in "don't create linkages that aren't clearly there" \ "don't violate WP:OR"). CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:56, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would have expected to see this go to either the target of WP:FAKE or to that of WP:HOAX. – Uanfala (talk) 23:48, 15 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.

Redirects to subpages of Portal:Africa/Featured article[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) 18:56, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects are all subpages of Portal:Africa/Featured article. I'm nominating these for the simple fact that they are redirects that are both blocking the creation of new content at these titles for those who may want to assist this portal in the future who may not be used to how the coding in Wikipedia works, as well as the fact that these redirects cause their targets to be transcluded twice at Portal:Africa/Featured article, possibly confusing those trying to view the list. So, I'm more or less requesting deletion of these redirects for housekeeping purposes. Steel1943 (talk) 19:11, 8 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.

Portal:Abkhazia/elected picture[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. Unopposed. -- Tavix (talk) 18:51, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like unlikely typo. Steel1943 (talk) 18:36, 8 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.

Political Economy of Research & Innovation[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, G7, by RHaworth. -- Tavix (talk) 21:40, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete since the use of consecutive apostrophes in page titles has been restricted by the title creation blacklist for almost three years now due to technical reasons. (Per the creator, I am not opposed to Political Economy of Research & Innovation being created.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:49, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Created as above. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:43, 8 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.

Pohadka máje[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) 19:27, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why would one accent be there and not the other? Non-accented phrase Pohadka maje already exists as redirect. To start making combos of accents is implausible. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

They may or may not help. Best case scenario they help, worst case scenario they don't do anything. Now, could we please move on to more important things? Plenty of more important work to do on Wikipedia than this. Dr. Vogel (talk) 17:04, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per DrVogel's rationale but not their self-righteousness. These are harmless. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:25, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • Apology very sorry, didn't mean to come across as self-righteous. What I meant to say was (and I realise I did so badly), was that unfortunately we all have limited amounts of energy, and I think our energy is better spent on things that are far more useful than worrying about a couple of harmless (at worst) redirects. Sorry. Dr. Vogel (talk) 19:31, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I've been through a couple hundred of his redirects, he accounts for many naming conventions and forms that are likely for people in other countries with other keyboards to use. I understand the nom, but I'd argue it only looks at it from an English language perspective. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 03:50, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Not a massively implausible typo. Doesn't seem implausible enough to delete, at any rate. Thegreatluigi (talk) 13:18, 11 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both, plausible and harmless redirects. Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 10:50, 12 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.

Early reader[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 Learning to read. (non-admin closure) TheSandDoctor (talk) 19:29, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking this should be retargeted to Learning to read. Steel1943 (talk) 13:04, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fair enough to retarget. This redirect was supposed to be about people just learning to read. Reading (process) is a much higher level topic. I would not have objected to a bold change at all. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:11, 8 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.

Rauding[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 15#Rauding

Iblast[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) 18:50, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target, however we do have IBlast Moki - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 03:54, 8 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.

Mind/body exercise[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 Mind–body interventions. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 04:12, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect doesn't make a lot of sense. Mind/body exercise may be part of some alternative medicine, but it's also part of real medicine, as well as various versions that don't claim to be medicine at all. Complicating things, it appears that this was once the title of the article currently called Alternative medicine, so simple deletion is probably not a good idea. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 01:54, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've retargeted Mind-body exercise now. Given that we are fixing both back to the original target I think this is best. Legacypac (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:11, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Legacypac. The nominator is correct in saying the redirect as it stands makes no sense though. SEMMENDINGER (talk) 12:59, 8 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_8&oldid=1036306819"