Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 April 17

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 17[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 17, 2019.

Tropical Storm Toraji(2007)[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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:36, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some more tropical storm related redirects with a spacing error before the disambiguator. -- Tavix (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2019 (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.

Unexpected Love (2016 film)[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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 03:36, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This film appears to have been struggling for a release since 2016 and the article just gets moved every year. Since it wasn't actually released in any of these years the redirects are misleading. PC78 (talk) 16:27, 17 April 2019 (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.

Australian Royal[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. I do think we have consensus for a hatnote, though, so I've added one. --BDD (talk) 15:46, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

May be confused with Monarchy of Australia B dash (talk) 09:00, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 18:00, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but potentially hatnote to alleviate potential confusion. If someone is searching "Australian Royal", the most likely usage of that exact phrase would be the currency. I don't think they would be looking for the Monarchy or Monarch itself. To demonstrate, I think it's telling that similar redirects like British Royal and Canadian Royal, etc. don't exist. -- Tavix (talk) 15:09, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:18, 17 April 2019 (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.

Iran Football's 1nd Division[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) 18:58, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Created by a relatively inactive user, over 3 years ago. Had one unnecessary inlink as a pipelink that named the target article, which I fixed to point at the target, so it is now no longer used. 1nd appears to be an unlikely misnomer for 1st (i.e. it should show the editor a redlink so they fix it). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 13:14, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. No one is going to use "1nd" as a search term. JIP | Talk 13:32, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 11:08, 18 April 2019 (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.

1nd Libyan Division Sibelle[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) 18:57, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Created 6 years ago, apparently by mistake. Has no inlinks. 1nd appears to be an unlikely misnomer for 1st (i.e. it should show the editor a redlink so they fix it). —[AlanM1(talk)]— 13:10, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. No one is going to use "1nd" as a search term. JIP | Talk 13:32, 17 April 2019 (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.

Assassin[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 Assassination. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 03:00, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Assassin currently redirects to Assassins, an Islamic sect. However, pretty much every single incoming link (of which there are loads upon loads) is instead intended to mean assassination, the murder of a target for political, ideological or monetary reason. Therefore I propose changing the redirect to assassination. The page Assassins could perhaps also be moved to use the original Islamic spelling. JIP | Talk 11:50, 17 April 2019 (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 Norwegian Civilian Marksmanship Association[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 April 25#The Norwegian Civilian Marksmanship Association

Interior solution[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 April 25#Interior solution

Portal:Education in Nepal[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) 18:32, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as misleading cross-namespace redirect. Per WP:SURPRISE, when you click on a Portal, you expect to land on a portal. UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:31, 17 April 2019 (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.

Mouse Genome[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. [Additional comments.] Citing (talk) 01:47, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Users are unlikely to be searching for an academic journal with an entirely different name. Other genome redirects (chimpanzee genome, cow genome) go to more relevant pages. The search results on their own are more useful. Citing (talk) 04:07, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per "In 1998 the journal Mouse Genome was merged into Mammalian Genome." Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 05:29, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yeesh, don't know how I missed that.... Maybe I'll cobble together a stub for the article and toss a disambiguation link on top sometime.Citing (talk) 14:34, 17 April 2019 (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:Three Men in a Boat[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) B dash (talk) 07:09, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that this redirect should be deleted. The result of Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2019_March_16#Template:Three_Men_in_a_Boat was merge. However, when templates that I have created for similar subject areas have been up for discussion, the result has generally been to merge the content and delete the page. There is obviously a trivial edit history involved as an artifact, but that has not been an issue in similar TFD and CSD outcomes. N. B. Three Men in a Boat (1920 film) is the only article space use of this redirect and it should just be replaced by the target like all other uses have been.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:14, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B dash (talk) 03:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep I'm not familiar with the history here, and BHG's comment made me cartoonishly widen my eyes—I'm not sure I want to. Looking at this with uninvolved eyes, then, I see, I guess, a frequently adapted work as the redirect title. That makes me think it could have some usefulness. --BDD (talk) 18:40, 24 April 2019 (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.

Hara (film)[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 move Hara (2014 film) over the redirect. (This accomplishes what Thryduulf suggested, and there was no article history.) --BDD (talk) 18:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can gather, Hara was an early title for Dheera which is a now-shelved film by this director. Given that this abandoned project isn't mentioned at all in the target article, I don't see how this redirect is useful, especially as it has no significant history. PC78 (talk) 14:54, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B dash (talk) 03:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good call, I hadn't seen that article. PC78 (talk) 15:51, 17 April 2019 (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/2019_April_17&oldid=894090366"