Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 May 11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 11[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 11, 2018.

Holy Empire[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:11, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Holy Roman Empire is not the only Empire that called itself Holy. I think such redirect is misleading. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 23:18, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agree ie =Holy Empire of Reunion.--Moxy (talk) 12:25, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure about this, but I think that we should create a disambiguation page. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 21:20, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The Holy Roman Empire is the primary topic for the term "Holy Empire" but a hatnote (to a disambiguation page listing) other uses should be added. Thryduulf (talk) 20:11, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: The Holy Empire redirects to Warlord (band), where it's mentioned as a canceled album. --BDD (talk) 20:58, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This would definitely be the primary topic. [1], [2]. No opinion on hatnotes or potential DAB pages. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 20:45, 18 May 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:Ironic pages[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. Old, but humorful and unused. An attempt to save a poor page. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:07, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, there does not seem to be a meta-location that lists "ironic pages", so someone coming across this redirect may be surprised or disappointed. WP:IRONIC goes to Wikipedia:Don't call the kettle black, which is a civility essay that has nothing to do with pages.Unless someone wants to compile a list of pages that may be "ironic", it would be best to delete this. -- Tavix (talk) 20:08, 11 May 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:RDRR[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 May 19#Wikipedia:RDRR

Toad the fancy little mushroom from mario[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 others do seem like they should be nominated... ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:08, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Highly unlikely search term. This user created a few more redirects to the same target that are sort of borderline. --BDD (talk) 17:52, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My IP recently changed and I am the same person as above. I noticed several other redirects were created by the same person and they are Mario's friend toad, Toad from mario, and Toad from the video game mario, and Toad from the mario games. Is it possible to add these as well or is it too late? If it’s too late can someone nominate them since I doubt they would be kept? --69.157.253.30 (talk) 01:34, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I saw those as well and considered nominating them. I could see "Toad from mario" having some use, the others probably less so. --BDD (talk) 13:42, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all for recent redirect creations. Older ones like Toad (mario) already exists for good faith attempts to find Toad. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:47, 16 May 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.

Hammm[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:08, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like nonsense, though my understanding is that WP:G1 can be applied pretty strictly. BDD (talk) 17:49, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, no relevant ghits. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 22:04, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. As far as I can tell this is not used to refer to anything encyclopaedic. Thryduulf (talk) 20:18, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete only see this being used as a username in random news articles like a forum poster on Pinkbike.com; no Toad-related articles. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:50, 16 May 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.

Pig ass[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' comments notwithstanding, in the end, we're all just cuts of meat. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:09, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Obscure or unlikely synonym" at best, from an editor who seems to fit WP:NOTHERE. BDD (talk) 17:44, 11 May 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.

Real Economy[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:26, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the use of "real", it is unclear what this redirect is meant to refer. Steel1943 (talk) 16:29, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete not clear whether it's an opposite of a virtual economy or an imaginary or fictional economy. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:48, 11 May 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.

Folk Economics[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 Folk economics as a {{R from other capitalisation}}. Yep, call this a "withdraw". Steel1943 (talk) 19:59, 15 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The word "folk" is not mentioned in the target article. Thus, it is unclear what this redirect is meant to refer to or identify. Steel1943 (talk) 16:24, 11 May 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.

Bachelor in Economics[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 Bachelor of Economics. (In other words, this is being speedy retarget as a result of essentially me, the nominator, withdrawing this.) Steel1943 (talk) 15:40, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The target article's subject is about the concept, not the degree. Thus, this redirect is misleading. Steel1943 (talk) 16:22, 11 May 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.

Career & business[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:26, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:XY; Career is a separate article. Steel1943 (talk) 16:20, 11 May 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.

Business and economics[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 Business economics. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 04:08, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both per WP:XY; Economics is a separate article. Steel1943 (talk) 16:19, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete BusinessAndEconomics There is a Business economics article which could attract the first "and" version, but the camel case is not used in any of that context. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:54, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget both to Business economics as that's a very plausible misnomer/misremembering. Both are {{R with old history}} dating from when Wikipedia used CamelCase article titles. Thryduulf (talk) 20:28, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Thryduulf and Angus. These are old AF, no harm in keeping something so cheap that could have incoming links and has been around since 2001/2002. The Rcats take care of unprintworthy, so no problem at all to keep these around. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:30, 19 May 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.

BusinessAndIndustry[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) 11:16, 22 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:XY. Also, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 August 31#Business and industry. Steel1943 (talk) 16:18, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:55, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or retarget to Outline of business. This is a {{R with old history}}, dating from 19 February 2001 this is one of the oldest pages on the project, so the high liklihood of incomming links very strongly outweighs WP:XY. Thryduulf (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. These are two different topics discussed at different articles. -- Tavix (talk) 20:37, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • My suggested target links to both and serves as a way to avoid link rot, something that is far more helpful to readers than search results that may or may not be relevant and may or may not be easily found. Thryduulf (talk) 14:09, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • If someone searches for "business and industry", the search engine will deliver that are relevant to that string. Check it out. The article for Business and the article for Industry appears prominently, along with organizations and other relevant results that cover both industry and business (which I feel would be closer to what someone might actually want). Giving someone a laundry list specific to business, of which Industry just happens to be one of the links is not helpful. Why not Outline of industry? It's so arbitrary... -- Tavix (talk) 14:46, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gotta agree with Thryduulf on this — this has been around since 2001, so it's WP:CHEAP enough in case there are any incoming external links. The {{R from CamelCase}} will take care of adding unprintworthy, so I don't see any harm. I'm not opposed to the retarget suggestion, but this has been pointed at business for 15 years so I don't see a problem with keeping it, even given the XY name. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:37, 19 May 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.

Eutheism[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 May 19#Eutheism

Parasceve[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 May 18#Parasceve

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2018_May_11&oldid=1138582422"