Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 14

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 14[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 14, 2019.

Untitled T-Pain and Kesha song[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) 03:00, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There doesn't seem to be neither any untitled songs, nor any songs featuring Kesha in the target article's information. Steel1943 (talk) 21:27, 14 February 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.

Natural elements[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 22#Natural elements

Screw/Bolt[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 Screw#Differentiation between bolt and screw. (non-admin closure) B dash (talk) 06:29, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:XY: Screw versus Bolt (fastener). Steel1943 (talk) 20:03, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have a nagging feeling that we have had this discussion before, but I can't find it. Delete. If I remember correctly, the television programme QI had a round about this, in that technically (according to somebody's definition) a screw has a thread up to the head, whereas a bolt has an unthreaded shank at the head, or something like that. In real life of course it is almost entirely arbitrary whether something is called a screw or a bolt, and seems to depend more on how big it is over whether it has some technical characteristic, fascinating as helical geometry is. 178.164.162.144 (talk) 04:25, 15 February 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.

Tapcon[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) 20:08, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is a brand name and/or company. This redirect existing is akin to a situation where Microsoft redirects to Operating system, which doesn't make sense. In addition, Tapcon makes a lot more than just screws. So, delete per that and WP:REDLINK. Steel1943 (talk) 19:55, 14 February 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.

Sweet milk[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) 03:00, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect's phrase in its entirety is not in the target. Readers attempting to look up some sort of specific subject by this redirect will not find what they are looking for. Steel1943 (talk) 19:44, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment dictionary says it is fresh whole milk as opposed to buttermilk so maybe it should be noted at the target. Legacypac (talk) 22:57, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The term is ambiguous and not mentioned at the target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:37, 16 February 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.

Doi (Curd)[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 Dahi (curd). --BDD (talk) 20:57, 25 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Doi" is not mentioned in the target article, so the connection is unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 19:34, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • The correct target of such a redirect should be Dahi (curd) (where doi is the variant of dahi in several languages of eastern India, common enough to appear in the names of articles like Mishti doi). I don't think the capitalisation in the redirect is helpful (we really shouldn't have redirects for miscapitalisations that are found in the disambiguator), so I'd support moving to Doi (curd), without leaving behind a redirect. Given that this redirect was targeting the wrong article for much of its history, I wouldn't worry about external incoming links. – Uanfala (talk) 23:38, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename to Doi (curd) and retarget to Dahi (curd) as above. That's a fair alternative spelling. but the redirect with the capital C in (Curd) needs to be removed. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:23, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Dahi (curd). I created Dahi (curd) as a redirect to same; it seems useful as a redirect and its value is not predicated on the value of a separate redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 19:25, 25 February 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.

Coagulated milk curd[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 25#Coagulated milk curd

Template:Bitey box[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) 06:29, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was a silly idea that never caught on. It is a redirect not a template Legacypac (talk) 17:42, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

it is not clear to me what is going on here. What exactly was the silly idea? ~Kvng (talk) 22:21, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
the template (redirect) got used just once as far as I can see. Legacypac (talk) 22:31, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So you want to delete both {{UFW}} and this redirect to it? I don't see any proposal to delete {{UFW}}. ~Kvng (talk) 22:35, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No UFW is used quite a few times still. We need to wait until those pages G13 before considering any deletion on that Legacypac (talk) 22:59, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I don't see a reason to delete this while {{UFW}} exists. ~Kvng (talk) 14:26, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Kvng. I'd also probably recommend keeping the target template if it were nominated. Thryduulf (talk) 20:25, 16 February 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.

"Untitled" redirects that now have titles[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 all except Untitled Avengers film. Untitled Armored Car was withdrawn, but I find the argument for Untitled Avengers film (explicitly mentioned at its target) to be convincing, if not applicable to the rest. Untitled Ram Potheneni movie had some history but no text appears to have been used and no sources are there, so we don't need to keep it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:38, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No longer untitled. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:08, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete These redirects are pointless. --Kailash29792 (talk) 15:43, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as housekeeping. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 16:44, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom. Also, I merged Untitle Sonic the Hedgehog film into this nomination as obviously related. Steel1943 (talk) 19:02, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom. It's housekeeping Legacypac (talk) 19:10, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom. - Brojam (talk) 19:14, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as very unlikely search terms Atlantic306 (talk) 22:49, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: If/before these are deleted, all of these redirects should be validated to ensure that they do not have any links in the article-space, especially the {{R from move}} redirects. I found that Untitled Sally Potter project had a good number of article-space links, and I just finished bypassing them all. Steel1943 (talk) 15:18, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Since a number of redirects are bundled together in this nomination, I'll have to extend my concerns about Untitled Avengers film to all of them. In this specific case, the dropping of the previous title (Avengers: Infinity War Pt. 2 or thereabouts) was a notable aspect of the film's development and marketing. Also notable was the amount of fan speculation generated in the months prior to the new title (Avengers: Endgame) being revealed. During these months, the IMDb page for the film referred to it as Untitled Avengers film, and it's perfectly reasonable for unknowing fans to look for it by this title. There are no grounds for deleting the redirect. Airbornemihir (talk) 10:10, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as implausible search terms. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 18:00, 16 February 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.

Unified memory architecture[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) 03:01, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A GPU uses a Von Neumann architecture (as opposed to a Harvard architecture). I can imagine the article once said so, but it doesn't now,. so Delete as WP:RFD#D2 confusing. The section does not exist. 178.164.162.144 (talk) 15:06, 14 February 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.

Find sperm donor[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 22#Find sperm donor

Architecture of lebanon[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. by nominator (non-admin closure) UnitedStatesian (talk) 14:59, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Untargeted redirect (not an R to section), miscaps on "lebanon". We have lots of "architecure of" redirects to the countries, but there is no mention at the target of its architects or architecture. We have Category:Lebanese architects, but not a List of Lebanese architects or similar, so I suggest Delete. 178.164.162.144 (talk) 11:07, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my ears and whiskers. We actually have an article on Architecture of Lebanon, but before I turned this into not-a-redirect by listing it here, that wasn't showing up for me. Seems like that is a pretty obvious retarget then, sorry to waste your time. Consider this withdrawn I shall boldly retarget it. 178.164.162.144 (talk) 11:11, 14 February 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.

Romantic (architecture)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 25#Romantic (architecture)

Unitedworld Institite of Design[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) 16:15, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible typo. Muhandes (talk) 09:20, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I created this automatically by moving the page from its original typo title. Happy to see it deleted. PamD 09:28, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose so, but PamD was the only contributor to the redirect. But... we can slowly delete it. 178.164.162.144 (talk) 04:59, 15 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
G7 explicitly notes: "For redirects created as a result of a page move, the mover must also have been the only substantive contributor to the pages prior to the move.". Thryduulf (talk) 20:32, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:37, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; implausible, and as it was moved less than an hour after it was created, the chance that someone would have found it and linked to it in that time is really miniscule. Nyttend (talk) 20:36, 16 February 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.

Domicile (architecture)[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) 03:01, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure. The DAB page at Domicile describes it as "a general term for a place of residence or permanent residence in legal terms". Well, that is what Domicile (law) is about. If we're attempting to make a distinction, it should probably target House, not Home. But perhaps just delete it. 178.164.162.144 (talk) 08:57, 14 February 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.

Renaissance art and architecture[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) 03:01, 22 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:AND (WP:XY). We have both Renaissance art and Renaissance architecture as articles. 178.164.162.144 (talk) 08:26, 14 February 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.

House (architecture)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 February 22#House (architecture)

Racist state song[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) 16:14, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This may not be an inaccurate description of the target, but does seem to be a "novel or very obscure" one, and so falls foul of WP:RDEL #8. Virginia's is also not the only state song that has been characterised as racist: "Maryland, My Maryland" (see [2]) and "Old Folks at Home" ([3]) have been criticised on the same grounds. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 00:33, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As has been pointed out by Billy Connolly and George Orwell, for example, the UK anthem "God Save the Queen" (King in Orwell's time) has a whole verse about the English crushing the rebellious Scots. It is in the nature of anthems to say "We are good, the rest of you aren't", or "we are better than you" (Deutschland Über Alles for example), so this could apply to almost any of them. 178.164.162.144 (talk) 09:16, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Don't forget the third and fourth verses of The Star Spangled Banner. UnitedStatesian (talk) 15:28, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no primary target Legacypac (talk) 18:43, 14 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 18:03, 16 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete While I think we should ignore national anthems (as they aren't state songs) this still could also refer to Old Folks at Home or Maryland, My Maryland. If there were some article that discussed these collectively and other racist folk songs, I might be open to retargeting but I can't find any such thing. Smartyllama (talk) 16:16, 17 February 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.

State racism[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 Institutional racism. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:13, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase is not mentioned in the target and is most frequently used in contexts that have nothing to do with Foucault. Institutional racism is one possible target; Racism#State-sponsored racism would be another. Alternatively, we might delete this per WP:RDEL #10 to encourage the creation of an article at this title, or restore the article previously at this location to the same end. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 00:23, 14 February 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_February_14&oldid=885398557"