Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 June 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 12[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 12, 2019.

The Green Bag (magazine)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 June 25#The Green Bag (magazine)

Gamer’s gaze[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) 02:48, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The term is not mentioned at all in the article in question. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 19:18, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • N.b., not mentioned in Gaze or Male gaze either. Seems to be a neologism, though I certainly know what they're getting at. --BDD (talk) 19:26, 12 June 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.

Sexism In Gameing[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) 02:47, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - an obvious typo unlikely to ever be useful as a redirect. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 19:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as unlikely search target. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 06:45, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, the two miscapitalisations in addition to the misspelling makes it too implausible. —Xezbeth (talk) 07:02, 13 June 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 wine[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 Procedural close. Wrote a stub about the subject as an alternative to deletion (non-admin closure) signed, Rosguill talk 23:08, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target. Yes, house wine is wine, but reading the target article will not explain why a certain wine may be called a house wine. signed, Rosguill talk 18:48, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • It seems that we could have an article on the concept of "house wine". There is some decent coverage. [1], [2], [3] bd2412 T 22:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, and am interested enough in this topic that I can volunteer to write this article. I'll put together a draft later today––if there's no disagreement by then, I'll go ahead and close this discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 22:10, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Let me know if there's anything I can do to help. Cheers! bd2412 T 22:25, 12 June 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.

Raza Talish[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) 02:48, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There shouldn't be a redirect to a navigation list especially considering the list is only for subjects which have articles. Praxidicae (talk) 18:44, 12 June 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.

DOAAFKRJJ[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 June 25#DOAAFKRJJ

Wanaque Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation[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 procedural close. Article created to replace redirect. (non-admin closure) signed, Rosguill talk 01:44, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the Wanaque Center is mentioned in the target article, but I can't imagine that people searching for that term were trying to find info about a virus outbreak that started there (there isn't much else about the center in the article). signed, Rosguill talk 18:17, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • As it stands, this is the only article in Wikipedia that mentions the Wanaque Center at all. Perhaps an article can be written on the center as a separate topic. Until that happens, the current redirect references what is likely the most notable event associated with the institution. bd2412 T 21:22, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say that there's little enough information about the center at the target such that this is a case where we're better off with a redlink to encourage article creation (and avoid possible confusion). signed, Rosguill talk 21:25, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. I made the redirect, and am actually in the process of making a page for it. I haven't gone live yet since I'm not sure if it will overlap too much with the outbreak page at this point, but I may just get a version live that doesn't seem unbalanced at least, and then see what the consensus is on whether is should have its own page or not. It might be that the lawsuits, for example, are more appropriate for a facility page than the outbreak page, and there are some other matters too, but most relate to the outbreak. CandyStripes (talk) 01:13, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I am putting a version live now, in a few stages. I think it has too much detail on the outbreak and maybe should be merged in part to the outbreak page itself, but I plan on moving much of the relevant detail to the outbreak page anyways when it reads a bit better from my sandbox, so if you want to help by editing the Wanaque page, no issue if you just chop and don't worry about preserving all the facts. CandyStripes (talk) 01:22, 14 June 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.

Role account[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) 02:48, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unhelpful WP:XNR, unsure if there is an appropriate mainspace target. funplussmart (talk) 17:59, 12 June 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.

Khristie Bandhu[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 June 25#Khristie Bandhu

Drew Scott (reality TV)[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. Consensus is that this is at worst harmless, and an at least somewhat rational redirect from an unnecessary disambiguation. ~ mazca talk 22:36, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing links here and the redirect is poorly named Esprit15d • talk • contribs 05:51, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I'm actually the original creator of this, but the actual reason why I did that is no longer applicable the way things are now. At the time (2013), Drew Scott the Property Brother had no article at all yet, while the undisambiguated Drew Scott was an article about somebody else. So I created this as a redirect to Property Brothers (mainly because somebody else had predabbed him that way as a redlink, not because I thought that "reality TV" was a good choice of disambiguator myself) — but then sometime after that the other Drew Scott got deleted as non-notable, and then the Property Brother finally got his standalone BLP in 2016, and then this was repointed there. It really should have just been deleted at that point, because the fact that he had now gained the primary topic title basically eliminated the need to keep a disambiguated redirect. So there's no need to hang onto this anymore, and it should just be deleted: there was a genuine reason for this at the time I did it, but stuff changed later on to basically make it redundant and unnecessary. Bearcat (talk) 13:35, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep In use, and takes readers where they want to go. I don't see a problem. --BDD (talk) 22:11, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In use where? There's not a single articlespace link using this: it's "in use" only in temporary "article alert" lists, where it appears precisely because it's up for RFD right now, and all of those uses will disappear as soon as this discussion gets closed. Bearcat (talk) 11:33, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's getting page views. See the "stats" link in the nomination. --BDD (talk) 13:14, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that there are no inbound links from any article, I can absolutely, unequivocally guarantee that every single pageview it has worked exactly like this: (1) user types "Drew Scott" into search box; (2) user's searchbar results show "Drew Scott" followed immediately by "Drew Scott (reality TV)"; (3) user thinks "oh, obviously the first one must be a dab page, so I guess I should select the 'reality TV' version instead"; (4) user gets taken to plain title anyway. (Well, okay, except for usages in the past two weeks, which will instead be attributable entirely to the existence of this discussion, and thus aren't relevant to anything at all.) That's not a reason why its usage translates into a need to keep it, if it's not being used in any context where the plain title option would be lost. Bearcat (talk) 14:12, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, feminist (talk) 13:16, 12 June 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.

Draft:Gambit (2020 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 keep. MBisanz talk 20:02, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It will not be released in 2020. In fact, it is cancelled. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:30, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • This page has history so it may be useful to keep. Maybe it could be moved to another title, but since the redirect is in draft space I don't think we need to be too hung up on what it's called. PC78 (talk) 12:15, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It's a {{R with history}} with a substantial amount of edit history, cannot be WP:HISTMERGE-d due to parallel histories, the entire "Draft:" namespace is WP:NOINDEX-ed (meaning that this redirect should not appear on third party search engine results), and the "Draft:" namespace is not for using redirects to reach articles. In other words, this redirect is harmless and its edit history could prove useful in the event Disney decides to take a 180 on their decision to cancel the film. Steel1943 (talk) 21:51, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the draft can be renamed to match the articlespace pagename DRAFT:Gambit (unproduced film), handling the bad title in DRAFTspace and title mismatch between the DRAFT and ARTICLEspace versions. -- 70.51.201.106 (talk) 23:48, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Steel1943. --BDD (talk) 19:25, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move page history to talk-space. See Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2018_October_25#List_of_Final_Fantasy_VII_terms for precedent. Deryck C. 13:24, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I like that. So move to Talk:Gambit (unproduced film)/Draft:Gambit (2020 film)? I think it would still be good to leave "Draft:" in the title for context. --BDD (talk) 13:35, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leave it alone. Moving the redirect obscures the edit history for no benefit. In fact, I'd prefer deletion over moving it because at least then it's "cleaned up" and not pushed under the rug. -- Tavix (talk) 14:09, 26 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tavix; moving the page history somewhere unusual seems obscurative for no particular benefit. This redirect does not appear to be causing any problems that warrant messing with page history attribution for nebulous reasons. ~ mazca talk 22:40, 29 June 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.

Gambit (upcoming 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) 02:49, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is no longer upcoming. In fact, it is cancelled. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:28, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Serves no purpose now this film has been cancelled. PC78 (talk) 12:15, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom. Steel1943 (talk) 21:55, 13 June 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_June_12&oldid=904226048"