Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 April 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 2[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 2, 2019.

Success and Victory[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 Procedurally closed. Redirect moved to userspace so the rationale no longer applies. Thryduulf (talk) 21:26, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of "Success and Victory" on target page. Another rumoured track? Cannot find a suitable alternative target Richhoncho (talk) 19:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this was the working title of this album, hence my creation of it. I've moved it into my userspace in case in applies to any future (posthumous) project. This can be procedurally closed. Ss112 19:26, 2 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.

Portal:The Republic of Macedonia[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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Recently created redirect that does not match the country's name, instead using the widely disputed name. Redirects to portals are fairly useless at the best of times as they are not used for linking between articles like normal redirects. An Admin spent time categorizing this but it has little or no utility. Legacypac (talk) 18:24, 2 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.

Portal:Organized Labour/July/30/Selected 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 speedy deleted per G6 by Athaenara. Since the same should go for all dates, I deleted the rest of the dates. -- Tavix (talk) 21:01, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No longer in use. Hasn't been edited in over ten years. Goveganfortheanimals (talk) 13:21, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Since it's a portal subpage that is no longer in use, it should be eligible for WP:G6. And that should be the same for the whole set, not just July 30. I see the portal is now using a randomizer in the selected article section. -- Tavix (talk) 13:38, 2 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.

Comment Freely[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) 00:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The redirect was created solely as a means of promotionalism of a non-notable piece of software that has not yet been released. (I have also removed mention of it in the target article, since it was cited only to this [1]). -- Softlavender (talk) 10:10, 2 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.

Fallen (includes 'My Immortal' (Band Version))[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) 00:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is an album ('Fallen') and a hidden track, available on later pressings, 'My Immortal' and, as such, is such a convoluted title it can no use to any searchers. Richhoncho (talk) 06:38, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete no one will type that and no one should link like that Legacypac (talk) 17:34, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Convoluted title and unlikely search term. PC78 (talk) 17:40, 3 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.

Riot (DJs)[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) 00:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

These are all relatively the same redirect as RIOT (DJs), however according to this pageviews result, the all-caps redirect has more incoming hits than the other three, not counting the page hits on the target and a former target, Wake Up (Kayzo and RIOT song), the latter of which was redirected at AfD. Seems the all-caps redirect is the most sensible title in this case, though it should also be moved to the plain text title once the other three are deleted to preserve its edit history, as well as to reflect this consensus regarding mainspace titles. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 04:56, 2 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.

Self ruke[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) 00:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unhelpful typo. Barely any page views. Brycehughes (talk) 01:38, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete hihgly unlikely typo. Ruke and rule don’t sound similat nor are E and K close enough on a computer keyboard to even be plausibly misstyped.--64.229.166.98 (talk) 23:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Redirects are not for every random possible misspelling of a four-letter word. Softlavender (talk) 00:54, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete ruke it as useless Legacypac (talk) 17:36, 3 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete per Wikipedia:R3 and what others have said. Geolodus (talk) 14:50, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently not speediable as R3 only applies to recently created redirects, and this was created in 2006. Still not worth keeping. Geolodus (talk) 05:44, 7 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.

Draughtsman[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) B dash (talk) 02:44, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I turned this page into a redirect in 2016, but that has just been reverted to a dab page. The dab created breaks multiple dab page rules: DICDEF and TWODABS; the first entry is not discussed in any article. The first blue link in that entry (drawing) explicitly refers to the second meaning only. There are multiple bluelinks in both entries contrary to MOS:DABENTRY, so if kept needs some cleanup. SpinningSpark 09:44, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The issue I have here is not that the meaning does not exist. It is that the page you link explicitly states the term relates to the technical drawing meaning. Wikipedia therefore does not presently have any coverage for the claimed meaning and a dab page is not appropriate under those circumstances. Note also that another editor made this a redirect back in 2012. SpinningSpark 12:26, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Whatever the result of this discussion, the target or the DAB page should note that 'draughts man' is a piece in the game of draughts. 'Draughtsman' is a plausible misspelling.
It isn't in any WP article that I can find, but 'draughtsman' is also a British English term for someone who draughts (drafts) a legal document such as an Act of Parliament, a contract, or a patent specification. Examples can be found in British law reports. Narky Blert (talk) 09:41, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Draughtsman is a legitimate spelling for board game piece according to the OED. – Uanfala (talk) 14:13, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B dash (talk) 12:30, 17 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B dash (talk) 10:50, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Really wish I wasn't relisting this again, but this conversation didn't go much of anywhere. It touched briefly on important concepts and mentioned a few relevant pages, but one last chance at assessing this redirect seems worthwhile since there's some interest
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:24, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • disamb with all the meanings suggested. They are all actual meanings or plausible misspellings. DGG ( talk ) 11:38, 2 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.

Conduction block[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 April 10#Conduction block

The Professionals (2011 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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:15, 6 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Alternate title for this Korean film, but not released until 2012. PC78 (talk) 17:20, 25 March 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) 01:21, 2 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.

File:Randum Randum Anju.jpg[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) 02:49, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong name. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:28, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Apparently inaccurate name. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  02:27, 26 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The redirect is a {{R from move}} and its title does not shadow an existing page on Wikimedia Commons. In addition, the target file was located at the title of the nominated redirect for 6 years. No rationale has been presented which qualifies this redirect for deletion per WP:FILEREDIRECT. Steel1943 (talk) 05:22, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B dash (talk) 00:16, 2 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.

Industrial food[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 April 10#Industrial food

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_April_2&oldid=1072177069"