Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 December 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 2[edit]

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

Pokemon card list[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) 16:57, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Target page is not a list of cards... Steel1943 (talk) 23:58, 2 December 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.

List of Pokémon movies and special episodes[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. I'm WP:INVOLVED but on the other side, so I hope no one will mind. I don't want to hold up what otherwise looks like an uncontroversial decision. --BDD (talk) 16:02, 13 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase "special episodes" would have to refer to Pokémon (anime), leaving these redirects with WP:XY issues. Steel1943 (talk) 21:28, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep The target list also has a List of Pokémon films#TV specials, so I think that covers it. If there are "special episodes" besides those, though, we may have a problem. --BDD (talk) 21:34, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm. Wonder if those two lists should be merged or linked with a {{further}} or something. The description at the head of List of Pokémon films#TV specials sounds a lot like original research. --BDD (talk) 17:13, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and as an implausible search term or typo. An occasional user, following our naming conventions, may type in this redirect's name, but it would be very remote. There appears to be no need to "keep" this redirect for attribution purposes as the page edit history would've been moved when this page was moved back in 2006. Administrator BDD and nom make the case for a potential merging of the two target list articles, which can be done by consensus or boldly outside of this RfD. Doug Mehus T·C 17:21, 3 December 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.

Pokémon Photo Booth[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 December 12#Pokémon Photo Booth

Pokémon Playhouse[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 Pokémon video games#Pokémon Playhouse. Consider this withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 21:41, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Steel1943 (talk) 21:24, 2 December 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.

List of Pokémon/Pocket Monster 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 retarget to List of Pokémon video games. Consensus has developed that this is the best target for actually covering the aspects mentioned in this title. ~ mazca talk 20:04, 19 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing, WP:XY-ish redirects, considering that List of Pokémon exists and that there is no list of Pokémon at the redirect's target. Steel1943 (talk) 21:09, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I think it's reasonably clear that the slash is joining "Pokémon" and "Pocket Monsters". "List of Pokémon and of Pocket Monster games" would indeed be an implausible search term, but so much so that I don't think we even need to consider that reading. --BDD (talk) 21:31, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Retarget to List of Pokémon video games. My rationale still applies, but Tavix's find is clearly the better target. --BDD (talk) 15:10, 16 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per administrator BDD or, alternatively, retarget to Pokémon (video game series)#List of Pokémon main series games where the Pocket Monster series is mentioned, so it's plausible, I think. Preferably, add an Rcat "to section" in a "shell". --Doug Mehus T·C 17:36, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Implausible redirect. Nobody calls them "Pocket Monster games".ZXCVBNM (TALK) 04:13, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of Pokémon video games, which seems to be the main list. -- Tavix (talk) 18:00, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of Pokémon video games is the most logical redirect as Pocket Monsters is both mentioned and the retarget is a list. ~riley (talk) 06:03, 17 December 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.

Glitch City[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 December 12#Glitch City

Pokémon Glitches[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) 16:56, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No such list in target article. Steel1943 (talk) 21:04, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep but potentially add "to section", "misspelling", and "capitalization" Rcats as these are all plausible search terms, typos, etc. on which someone would seek. The Rcats would clarify this. --Doug Mehus T·C 17:49, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • ...Huh? The target section does not exist, and the target page doesn't reference "glitches". Since the information is missing/nonexistent, what could readers possibly find on the target page that would satisfy their search of these terms? Steel1943 (talk) 21:26, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per WP:NOTGAMEGUIDE.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 04:12, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. While these would useful redirects to a list or other content about glitches in Pokemon games, we do not have that content (I have no opinion about whether we should) so the redirects are misleading. Thryduulf (talk) 11:40, 5 December 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.

Pokemon magmared[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) 16:55, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Seems to be a fan-made concept of some sort. Steel1943 (talk) 21:01, 2 December 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.

Pokémon clone[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. Thryduulf (talk) 11:32, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article, and even if it was, there is no evidence that such a phrase is exclusive to the video game series. Steel1943 (talk) 20:59, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Almost inconceivable that a reader using these search terms would not know what Pokémon is, so these are of no help. --BDD (talk) 21:33, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Unlikely search term. Utopes (talk) 04:26, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and administrator BDD. --Doug Mehus T·C 17:37, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Mewtwo as an obvious clone who is a Pokemon. Just kidding, delete per nom.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 04:31, 5 December 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.

Pokémon USA Inc.[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 December 12#Pokémon USA Inc.

Pokemon miniseries[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) 16:54, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of a "miniseries" in the target article. Also, Pokémon (anime) is not a miniseries. Steel1943 (talk) 20:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Too vague of a title, and could refer to a plethora of things. Utopes (talk) 04:27, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. There's a single sentence that may have contributed to the target article, but not likely enough worth preserving attribution history. --Doug Mehus T·C 17:42, 3 December 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.

Poké Flute[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) 16:54, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:INUNIVERSE concept not mentioned in target article. Steel1943 (talk) 20:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Neutral in that I will support the prevailing consensus at RfD close, with the usual caveat that since consensus can change, this potentially deleted redirect could be worthy of an article in future. --Doug Mehus T·C 17:46, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Minor ingame item, would be too crufty to redirect anywhere.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 04:08, 5 December 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.

Various settings in Pokémon[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 December 13#Various settings in Pokémon

მია მალკოვა[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) 16:53, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Malkova appears to be American, and there's no mention of Georgia anywhere in the article, which would make this subject to deletion per WP:FORRED. signed, Rosguill talk 18:36, 2 December 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.

Dell Financial Services[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. Not mentioned in target, so the consensus seems to be that it's an inappropriate redirect at this time. This is expressly not a consensus that (a) this couldn't theoretically be a stand-alone article itself, or (b) this couldn't be mentioned in a reasonable way in Dell or elsewhere - but after a month of inconclusive discussion that is not currently the case. ~ mazca talk 21:12, 22 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned anywhere in the target article. Searched for "Dell Financial Services," "Financial services," and "DFS." At some point, the Dell article may be updated to include a Financial Services section; however, as of right now, seems to be too soon. Redirect was created less than a year ago, possibly by a single editor who tired of typing in "/wiki/Dell_Financial_Services" and coming up with the no page exists page. Doug Mehus (talk) 00:33, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Those aren't mentioned in the target article. I'm not making an argument on notability. I'm saying there's no mention in the next of the text of the Dell article to Dell Financial Services. That's a key criterion. If we're going to start keeping redirects because of a word or two in the URL of a cited reference/footnote, then why the heck do we bother deleting any redirects? Note, too, this redirect was added in a bold move, less than a year ago. We somehow managed to get by without it for 20 years or so. As well, there's no indication it's widely used. S Marshall, care to weigh in here? Doug Mehus (talk) 23:45, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
AnUnnamedUser You had me curious if I missed the citation, but I just checked and there was no reference to "financial-services" in a footnote. I searched the article and the page source for the article; found nothing. So, for now, it remains a delete. Doug Mehus (talk) 23:50, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I retain my opinion per criterion 5 of WP:RFD#KEEP, which says that usefulness of a redirect is a valid reason for keeping it. I believe that if Dell Financial Services exists, someone is bound to search for its article. From AnUnnamedUser (open talk page) 23:58, 9 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
AnUnnamedUser Okay, fair enough. Thanks for your reply and clarifying your keep reason. Doug Mehus (talk) 00:11, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are two possible solutions here: (1) Delete the redirect; or (2) Add a discussion of Dell Financial Services to the target article. In this case the reason why I'd prefer (2) is because I feel that this is a plausible search term. Someone buys a Dell computer, they're offered finance via Dell Financial Services, and they want to know more about it; they might very well look it up in their favourite online encyclopaedia.—S Marshall T/C 00:01, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
S Marshall True, and I did think about #2, but also thought that this redirect wasn't especially useful so whenever an editor decided to add a brief paragraph or so in a section of Dell, we could easily re-create the previously deleted Dell Financial Services redirect. I also contemplated creating a separate article for Dell Financial Services, but couldn't find any reliable sources which met both WP:SIGCOV and WP:CORPDEPTH. I guess I'll stick with my original proposal to delete, for now, without prejudice to re-creating it in the future when a future section arises. Doug Mehus (talk) 00:11, 10 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Snow Keep (creator, I find it useful WP:RFD#KEEP#5). Curious nom - WP:Too soon is about notability which is not directly applicable here, as it's a redirect. In fact, arguing too soon per the nom is a reason to keep per failing WP:R#DELETE#10 (ie not plausible to expand into an article) or alternatively if plausible then WP:RFD#KEEP#7 applies. I was reading a news article and came across the Dell subsid so there's some coverage and can be added to the article but maybe not enough for notability WP:NCORP (According to [1] there's 10,000+ employees but it says the same for Dell itself). Nom is bad attempting to delete a redirect in use by 2 articles and a dab MicroVentures, DFS (dab), Jeffrey S. Lyons WP:RFD#KEEP#4. (tagged as R with possibilities) Widefox; talk 20:10, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless someone actually adds content about this topic to the target. Redirects should not just point to things which are associated with their titles, they should point to places where readers can actually find information about what they clicked or typed into the search bar. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 04:42, 16 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
59.149.124.29, well said. Very nicely and concisely put.Doug Mehus T·C 00:55, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:40, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Jeffrey S. Lyons, where it is mentioned. I'm adding a second !vote, as an alternative to deletion post-relist because it's not mentioned in the current target. Pinging Headbomb here to consider weighing in one way or the other. If and when Dell is updated to mention Dell Financial Services, we could retarget back there outside of RfD. Doug Mehus T·C 20:52, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure why my opinion is special here, but I'd say keep. Sure it might not be mentioned specifically, but it's pretty damned obvious that Dell is involved. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 20:57, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
But it's not mentioned in the target article, and it's an unlikely search term (someone is just going to search for "dell"). I'm surprised delete isn't stronger here, since consensus can change and we can already create a new article if and Dell Financial Services has standalone notability (it doesn't), or it's mentioned in the target article. --Doug Mehus T·C 21:05, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Dell Financial Services is a real thing. That makes it a likely search term. Unlike the Dell Department of Deranged Despots. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:13, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Dell"ete We have the cart before the horse here. Yes, I totally agree a reader may search Wikipedia for information on Dell Financial Services... but they won't find it. Not unless they wanted to find out about a scandal a Toronto lobbyist was involved in. This can be put to bed by adding some substantial discussion of the Dell offering to the article. It's misleading as it stands. I'll grant that it mostly tells readers that Dell Financial Services is indeed affiliated with the computer company, which might not otherwise be obvious, but (broken record) without discussion of DFS or the relationship, even that is something we leave readers to conjecture. --BDD (talk) 16:08, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 17:52, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment to BDD at first I thought that was a typo/wikiformatting issue in your !vote, but I see now it's a "delete," with a solid added rationale/commentary, except that you made a funny pun out of it. Well played. ;-) Doug Mehus T·C 14:38, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks! I realized after the fact it looks like I used the wrong number of '. --BDD (talk) 17:18, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dellete per BDD, with a sprinkle of WP:REDLINK should someone want to create an article on the subject. -- Tavix (talk) 17:57, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per BDD (for those who would like to see an explicit reference to a codified rule, that's WP:RFD#DELETE #10). Jeffrey S. Lyons has a mention, but the connection to the topic is too circumstantial for this to be a suitable target (and after deletion it will come up prominently in the search results anyway). Obviously, if at any point Dell is expanded with relevant content, then the redirect could be speedily recreated. – Uanfala (talk) 00:27, 22 December 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.

Shit Happens in Gaza[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) 16:52, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Based on a web search, the phrase "Shit Happens in Gaza" is not used off-wiki specifically to refer to civilian casualties of Israeli operations in the Gaza Strip. At best, this is an editor's personal shortcut, which is not appropriate in mainspace (article space) and can be replaced with a personal bookmark. (Courtesy pinging the redirect's creator, User:Huldra) -- Black Falcon (talk) 04:50, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Implausible search term and could refer to many events around the Gaza Strip anyway. Geolodus (talk) 07:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Even though I agree with the redirect's creator that the current title of the article is quite long and not too easy to remember, "Shit Happens in Gaza" is a vague term, and might refer to several other bad things which have happened in Gaza. Not a very active user (talk) 09:35, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. While it is undoubtedly true, the target is only one thing that could plausibly be described in this manner and it is not the common name of any specific thing. Thryduulf (talk) 15:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I made this redir, as the creator of the article Mass civilian casualties of Israeli bombing, shelling and rocket attacks on the Gaza Strip started it with the edit-line: "Start page. Long descriptive title because I don't think 'Shit Happens in Gaza' would pass NPOV muster". It was a redir along the lines of other redirs, such as Wikipedia:Dramaboard, Wikipedia:CESSPIT, Wikipedia:Great Dismal Swamp, Wikipedia:POPCORN and Wikipedia:Slough of Despond (<- I made none of those redirs!), ie, not to be taken too seriously. Alas, the only one, AFAIK, who has taken it seriously, is my "shadow", User:Here come the Suns, who has referred to it half a dozen times in the last 24 hours or so, Huldra (talk) 20:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Huldra: the key difference is that those other redirects are in project-space, where there is more latitude for informality and in jokes. Thryduulf (talk) 00:26, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Echoing Thryduulf. Readers browsing the site for encyclopedic information are unlikely to want to see jokes like this. On the other hand, editors who spend substantial amounts of time in the project namespace are less likely to care about them. Glades12 (talk) 06:32, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per WP:SLANG. If it wouldn't be suitable to be in the article itself, it shouldn't be suitable for a redirect either.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 04:21, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's not true. Redirects from terms not mentioned in the redirects' target articles are allowed in some circumstances (misspellings, for example). Granted, this is not one of those circumstances. Glades12 (talk) 16:09, 5 December 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.

Viridian City[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. --BDD (talk) 16:51, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article, nor is this subject of this redirect exclusive to its target, considering that the subject is also present in Pokémon (anime) (though this redirect is not mentioned there either.) Also note that similar titles, such as Pallet Town and Cinnabar Island, do not exist. Steel1943 (talk) 01:35, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Viridian City is not mentioned at the target page, making the redirect unhelpful and confusing for readers. Not a very active user (talk) 09:40, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WhisperToMe's insertion. Utopes (talk) 04:11, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep A mention at the article could simply be added, with maybe an anchor link, to prevent this. ~ Dissident93 (talk) 19:32, 3 December 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.

Pokémon High Voltage[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) 16:49, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article, and no evidence that this is an alternative name for the target. Also, third party search engines seem to return results for some sort of meme related to Pokémon, but not specifically related to the target. Steel1943 (talk) 01:19, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete As obscure synonym at best. I can't find a primary target for this redirect --Lenticel (talk) 01:35, 4 December 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.

Ashley Grace[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 disambiguate. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 03:36, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what to do here. After an article merge, this currently redirects to Ha*Ash, as one of the band members is named Ashley Grace. However, actress Ashley Hinshaw has lately been credited by her married name, which is also "Ashley Grace". IMO, either Ashley Hinshaw should be moved to Ashley Grace, or Ashley Grace should be converted into a WP:DABPAGE... Thoughts? --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it would depend on how many people would use "Ashley Grace" to search for "Ha*Ash", @Pulisic Endler: any thoughts? Would "Ashley Grace" be a common search term? If not, I'm fine with Ashley Hinshaw being merged over, with a hatnote to Ha*Ash - ChrisWar666 (talk) 01:49, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ashley Grace for Ha*Ash is by far the more common stage name for the musician compared to Ashley Grace Perez AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:31, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak disambiguate, as neither person appears to be the primary topic. Either way, this should not be deleted because it's required for attribution. Geolodus (talk) 10:39, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig per Geolodus. If one or other becomes more notable by this name in the future and becomes primary topic then this can be revisited, but for now disambiguation is best. Thryduulf (talk) 15:45, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate as above. I'm creating Ashley Grace (musician) and Ashley Grace (actress) I also found a swimmer named Ashley Grace Twichell but she goes mainly by Ashley Twichell. If you want to move Hinshaw's article to Grace (actress), that would be okay too. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:26, 4 December 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.

RBY[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 disambiguate. From AngusWOOF's list, I've excluded RBY-1 and the Kingdom of Araba only because I wasn't sure how to include them. --BDD (talk) 16:48, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not an alternative name for the target, especially given the absence of the word "Pokémon". In addition, if this is assumed to be an acronym for "red blue yellow", this redirect could also refer to RYB color model. Steel1943 (talk) 01:13, 2 December 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.

Non-American[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 December 11#Non-American

Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow Versions[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 Pokémon (video game series)#First generation (1996–1999). (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 03:39, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:XY, considering that Pokémon Yellow is a separate article. Steel1943 (talk) 00:41, 2 December 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.

Yellow 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. --BDD (talk) 16:39, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase "yellow version" is vague and could refer to other topics, such as color versions of various video game platforms or almost any other object. Steel1943 (talk) 00:34, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom, could refer to millions of things. —Xezbeth (talk) 12:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Practically a partial title match, but the creator was gracious enough to provide "version" to clarify(?). Utopes (talk) 04:15, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, much too vague.--Alexandra IDVtalk 13:03, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as vague --Lenticel (talk) 01:35, 4 December 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_December_2&oldid=932011417"