Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 May 14

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 14[edit]

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

União do Parque Acari[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 G5. -- Tavix (talk) 14:27, 15 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target, the title refers to a specific samba school (Portuguese wiki here) signed, Rosguill talk 20:56, 14 May 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.

Forever Goop[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) 20:02, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I assume this is intended to be either a nickname for embalming fluid or a brand name, but I can't find mention in the article and failed to find mentions of it searching online. signed, Rosguill talk 19:03, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom I'm seeing quite a few colocations when googling for "Forever goop", but most of those seem to be about financial investment with a handful for a graphic novel and a beauty product (for the living). "Supergoop" seems to be a product by "Forever young" but (a) that seems to be either hand cream or possibly sun tan lotion, definitely not embalming fluid, and (b) almost certainly isn't close enough to "forever goop" to be relevant. Restricting the search to "embalming" brings up only one hit, which seems to be a (probably copyright violating) copy of the Stephen King novel Pet Sematary. Google Groups and even Urban Dictionary come up blank on the phrase. Thryduulf (talk) 21:47, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom WP:NOTNEO. Was expecting to see some kind of product but no such thing. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:32, 21 May 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.

H:A[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) 05:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Similar to the single-letter P: redirects discussed in Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_May_11#P:A, these H: pseudo-namespace redirects are ambiguous and likely to cause confusion. UnitedStatesian (talk) 16:45, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Unlike those Portal shortcuts which make little sense going to seemingly random portals, these are helpful shortcuts and are used similarly to those in the Wikipedia namespace. In particular, it appears H:L and H:S are well used from a glance. -- Tavix (talk) 17:53, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tavix. H:R and H:T have received over 1000 views so far this year. H:H got over 18,000 hits last year (although views plumeted at the end of January this year, so I guess it was unlinked from somewhere, but it remains in use). I haven't looked at all of them, but ambiguity in shortcut redirects is not a problem. Thryduulf (talk) 19:40, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all - These shortcuts are used way more often than the portal shortcuts. What's next, W:A–W:Z (which would be an even worse nomination, incase my sarcasm isn't clear)? - PaulT+/C 19:46, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The H: are not in the same deletion category as the P:. The reasons for deletion of H: would need to exist here, be well researched and articulated, and better than ever before. — Cpiral§Cpiral 20:35, 14 May 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.

Apple products[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. --BDD (talk) 19:45, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Apple products refers to an entirely different thing. Retarget or disambiguate? feminist (talk) 09:07, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Apple#Human consumption with a hatnote. We also have List of apple dishes but there are a small number of non-culinary uses described in the main article. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:06, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dismbig, as the technology company's products are clearly the primary topic, but the fruit products are a very plausible search term. I'm not certain the latter should be restricted to products consumed by humans though so I weakly oppose Ivanvector's suggested retarget. Thryduulf (talk) 07:51, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 13:52, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per TavixThryduulf. There are at least 3 entries that would belong (admitedly, in the "see also" section) on the page: Timeline of Apple Inc. products, Apple#Human consumption, List of apple dishes. A hatnote does not suffice. - PaulT+/C 19:46, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Do you perhaps mean per me? Tavix hasn't opined in this discussion (they just relisted it). Thryduulf (talk) 21:03, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      Gah... Yes. That is what I get for quickly scanning the source instead of properly replying to each section. My apologies to you both. - PaulT+/C 21:24, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate among the 3 options, per the above. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:35, 21 May 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.

Ryoga's Sense of Direction[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) 19:28, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A relic from 2005 when almost every junk article was turned into a redirect instead of being deleted. This is a common character trait that isn't remotely notable in its own right. —Xezbeth (talk) 11:38, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment their sense of direction is very prominently in the section about them (List of Ranma ½ characters#Ryoga Hibiki). Sense of direction is not mentioned in the articles about the other two people listed at the Ryoga disambig. Thryduulf (talk) 12:43, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as not a media title (why is it in caps?), and not needing a redirect for a character attribute AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. As AW just said, the combination of bad capitalization and our not redirecting from attributes (Bart's yellow skin, anyone?) is fatal. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:39, 21 May 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.

Canada International Film Festival[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) 05:35, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think the creation of this redirect is at odds with the outcome of this AfD. Yes the AfD was for an article and not a redirect, but the very strong consensus of that discussion established that it is harmful to give undue publicity to this film festival. signed, Rosguill talk 07:16, 29 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 09:12, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
We could add something about it to the list. Then it would serve both purposes. There are many redlinked and presumably non-notable festivals listed there already. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:01, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The current target would have more information even if it is added due to the way the list is set-up. -- Tavix (talk) 14:05, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 07:48, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment if it stays at the casino, it should have a hatnote to go to the List of film festivals in Canada in case people are looking for Canadian film festivals in general. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:31, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Karl Twist. I just don't see a problem with this, certainly not giving "publicity" to a defunct casino. If the festival is ever revived, different treatment may be appropriate. --BDD (talk) 19:27, 21 May 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.

Ally Parker[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) 19:14, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Minor character (?) that is not mentioned at the target article and has no coverage besides a mention in the article of the actress who plays her. —Xezbeth (talk) 06:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete news searches point to a high school pole vaulter [1] , a mom whose daughter died [2]. Also a wrestler named Allie Parker. Not really close to the two people who went by Alison Parker as they did not go by that nickname. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 04:27, 21 May 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_May_14&oldid=1197902013"