Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 December 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 24[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 24, 2014.

Virginia Aran[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) 14:45, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect's subject is apparently the mother of the redirect's target's subject. However, the redirect is not mentioned in the target article; also, the redirect's subject plays such a minor role in the Metroid series that I (as a person who has essentially played all Metroid titles, with the exception of Metroid: Other M) cannot even recall this character. In fact, upon research, it seems that the redirect's subject was only present in the the manga, which doesn't even have its own article. With this information, I would say delete per WP:NOTWIKIA. Steel1943 (talk) 23:25, 24 December 2014 (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.

Multiple Links Theory[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. Since the topic is out of scope of Wikipedia and likely always will be, I don't think there's any need to retain the attribution history. Contact me with concerns. --BDD (talk) 14:44, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In 2005, this redirect was an article that was merged per a VFD discussion. However, at the present time, there is no information about the subject at its current target or the target it had when the article was merged. And per what the subject is for (a theory that there is more than one version of Link (The Legend of Zelda) in the The Legend of Zelda video game series), trying to recreate this information anywhere on Wikipedia is a violation of WP:NOTFANSITE. Steel1943 (talk) 22:45, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete this pagename. Article history can be kept in a talk page subpage per WP:MAD. There are many theories about multiple linkages. -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 02:28, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure if the attribution needs to be retained due to the redirect's history as an article seeming like a page that would be on a site that is solely for the "Legend of Zelda" subject. Steel1943 (talk) 23:34, 28 December 2014 (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.

Royal Family of Hyrule[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) 14:42, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In the The Legend of Zelda video game series universe, this term refers collectively to a family of royalty in the game that includes more than just the redirect's target, and trying to go into more detail on Wikipedia is essentially against WP:NOTWIKIA. Steel1943 (talk) 22:33, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • There may be some place in a "Legend of Zelda"-related article to add the information as title in the scope of the redirect and not be a WP:NOTWIKIA violation, but the redirect's current target doesn't seem to be the place. Steel1943 (talk) 22:36, 24 December 2014 (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.

Inventory items exclusive to Super Mario Bros. 3[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) 14:41, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A list as described by the redirect's name does not exist in its target article. The only possible retargeting option I see is Super Mario#Items, but the scope of that section is wider than the narrow scope as stated by this redirect's title. Steel1943 (talk) 22:17, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. We have no such list, and nor does it seem likely there will be one. Thryduulf (talk) 12:16, 26 December 2014 (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.

Koopa Clown Car[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) 14:40, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is an in-game item/concept that has a strong connection to its target due to being introduced in Super Mario World, but has since been in several games in the Super Mario series since then, and not being an item exclusive to the redirect's current target in later games in the video game series. At the present time, there is no mention of the redirect's subject in its current target, and I cannot find a suitable option for retargeting. At this point, I'm seeing this redirect's existence being violations of WP:NOTWIKIA and WP:GAMEGUIDE. Steel1943 (talk) 21:49, 24 December 2014 (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.

Kenny W. James[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. Since there have yet to be any statements to contradict Nyttend's thoughts, which I happen to agree with, I'm just going to withdraw this. Steel1943 (talk) 19:58, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per the redirects' subject's IMDb page, their only credited work is voicing Bowser. However, since the redirects' subject is not Bowser, I say delete per WP:REDLINK to promote article creation. Steel1943 (talk) 20:51, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • ...Or maybe restore Kenneth W. James as an article, given that detailed information about the redirects' subject seems to no longer be present in their target article. Steel1943 (talk) 20:56, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Unless I misunderstand you, the guy's done nothing except voicing this character, so any relevant information would go there. As you note, deleting it would promote article creation, so we also ought to keep it to discourage the creation of an inappropriate page. Nyttend (talk) 20:58, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Nyttend: Yep, you understood the purpose behind my nomination fully. However, the main concern I have about retaining the redirect is the lack of biographical information about the redirects' subject at the target, which may be able to be resolved if the previous article version of Kenneth W. James could be expanded somehow. (...But unfortunately, I'm finding very little biographical information about the redirects' subject anywhere with search engines.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:06, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • If all we can find about him is that he's done a voice for Bowser, he shouldn't be on Wikipedia at all, except for a short mention in Bowser's article. Since we have some information about him in that article, it can't hurt to tell searchers "Here's what we have on the guy" by sending them there, in addition to discouraging creation of a content-free or references-free article. Very different from your Eric Newsome nomination, since Newsome has done other things (and might qualify for an article) while James hasn't. Nyttend (talk) 21:11, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Nyttend: Pretty much. I understand your point and was about to reference how Eric Newsome is different than this nomination, but you beat me to it. I have nothing else to add. (But, I am going to leave this discussion open, just in case someone else may mention something that supersedes your point.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:20, 24 December 2014 (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 cheat codes for Super Mario Bros. 3[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) 14:40, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect's subject is not mentioned at its target. Also, converting the redirect to an article (or adding a section at the redirect's target that explains the redirect) would fail WP:NOTWIKIA and WP:GAMEGUIDE. Steel1943 (talk) 18:58, 24 December 2014 (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.

Eric Newsome[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) 14:39, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, voicing this character (the redirect's target) is just one of the roles that the biographical subject of the redirect has done per his IMDb entry. So, I say delete per WP:REDLINK to promote article creation. Steel1943 (talk) 18:52, 24 December 2014 (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.

Doomship[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) 14:39, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that the redirect subject is the "airship" that appears in Super Mario Bros. 3, but isn't mentioned in this article, nor is mentioned at its current target. Also, most searches for this term on search engines bring up results relating to Sonic the Hedgehog. So, I'm thinking delete per WP:NOTWIKIA and WP:GAMEGUIDE. Steel1943 (talk) 18:47, 24 December 2014 (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.

Craig Anderson (producer)[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) 14:38, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This should be deleted, as Craig Anderson is a dab and this is not an incomplete disambiguation. It should remain a redlink until an article is created. Nick Number (talk) 18:23, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. The redirect is currently an entry on the disambiguation page, causing a circular reference. Deleting per WP:REDLINK seems like the best option. Steel1943 (talk) 19:32, 24 December 2014 (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.

Anelloni[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 January 2#Anelloni

Wilayat Homs (ISIL)[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. Please see: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wilayat Kirkuk (ISIL) - Nabla (talk) 17:08, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the redirects because the redirects constitute self-promotion. There's no officially recognized province as Wilayat Homs of ISIL. Articles with similar titles are deleted or being discussed for deletion. Mhhossein (talk) 08:20, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fully support deleting the redirects (and I redirected some myself). See group deletion effort now. [1]Legacypac (talk) 20:12, 24 December 2014 (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.

Minister for Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education (Australia)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 January 2#Minister for Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education (Australia)

N. Sanity Island[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) 14:36, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No mention on target article, though several articles in the "Crash Bandicoot"-subject articles mention it, but not in detail enough to describe it. The only other place the redirect's topic is listed (that I can find) is List of fictional islands. Otherwise, I'm swaying towards delete per WP:NOTWIKIA and WP:GAMEGUIDE. Steel1943 (talk) 04:05, 24 December 2014 (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.

Serene Branson[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. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:50, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Bringing this redirect to RFD for User:CapnZapp from his nomination at AfD here. His reason for deletion was "Previous afd resulten in a redirect. This destination no longer mentions Serene Branson. There no longer is any info left on the subject." Natg 19 (talk) 07:50, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak retarget to KCBS-TV (no section). She is not mentioned there but according to the station's website she is still employed there. She made worldwide news in 2011 for an on-air paraphasia incident at the 53rd Grammy Awards which spawned a popular but short-lived internet meme, and the redirect is fairly frequently used (200 hits in November), however her bio didn't seem to quite pass WP:BLP1E despite a few minor award wins. It might be possible to write an article at some point. Ivanvector (talk) 16:33, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget: Kind of a lousy reason to file a RfD. If there was enough info on Branson to sustain an article, there'd be an article. She's an employee of the station, her name appears in G-hits, it's a sensible redirect. Nha Trang Allons! 23:43, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete If she isn't mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia and was previously deleted, it's a no-brainer to me that her name shouldn't be a redirect. --BDD (talk) 18:50, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 03:12, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Ivanvector. I think that's the best way to go about it. I wouldn't be opposed to having a sentence about her somewhere in that article and I don't think that's out of the realm of possibility in the future. Tavix |  Talk  18:35, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per BDD. Steel1943 (talk) 08:42, 26 December 2014 (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.

World's Largest Apple[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, JethroBT drop me a line 13:54, 2 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The subject referenced in this redirect does not exist at the target article. Per the redirect's history, this redirect was previously a short stub article that was redirected to a section in Apple in 2009, but that section has not existed since at the latest 2013. Steel1943 (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note that World's Largest Artificial Apple targets to Colborne. Ivanvector (talk) 21:28, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No objection; I've added it. I prefer to retarget/keep both, as it's a verifiable claim (we can verify that they claim it). And it would be unlikely we'd ever have an article about the world's largest biological apple, so this takes readers to somewhat relevant information. It's at least not generally misleading. Ivanvector (talk) 22:44, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, unless we ever decided not to have a list of such records (as we would with, say, sports topics), I think the largest grown apple would have more encyclopedic value than a roadside attraction/publicity stunt. --BDD (talk) 00:59, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 03:10, 24 December 2014 (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.

August 9 1974[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 August 9. A retarget seems to be the best action here. There is no consensus on how dates like this are normally treated, but as there is another event that happened on that date, it should be retargeted to the article of that day. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 22:31, 27 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This date redirects to one specific even that happened that day. It would probably be best to either delete the redirect due to being ambiguous, or convert it into an article with a list of events that happened that day. Steel1943 (talk) 14:48, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The date may be important regarding Nixon but I doubt that it's the only important event that happened on that date.--69.157.253.160 (talk) 20:55, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep It appears that it is by far the primary topic for encyclopaedic events that happened on that day, and the only one that Wikipedia has an article about. If we have other articles in future then hatnotes or disambiguation can be implemented as appropriate. Thryduulf (talk) 23:45, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to August 9, treating this like incomplete disambiguation. Do we have any similar cases? --BDD (talk) 14:38, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment do you mean specifically that it hasn't the comma to make it a well-formed MDY date? The only other I've found so far is:
The target mentions a fact about the Clementine mission, a redirect to Clementine (spacecraft), but not to section #Mission which mentions it. Si Trew (talk) 02:57, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I meant any single-date redirects. Thanks for all the legwork you're doing compiling those. In some cases, there may be a logical target—September 11, 2001 is an obvious case that easily springs to mind—but I do think the general day article is the best way to go when there are multiple notable events that occurred on a particular day. --BDD (talk) 15:03, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to August 9 per BDD. A lot of things happened during that day. --Lenticel (talk) 00:53, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. @BDD: your wish is my command. I went through searching:
    • For 2002, January has the form January ''nn'', 2002 redirecting to January 2002 for 0 < nn < 6 but not to section. The form ''nn'' January 2002 is always redlink.
    • For 2003, January has the form January ''nn'', 2003 redirecting to January 2003 for 0 < nn < 32 but not to section. The form ''nn'' January 2003 is always redlink. Other months seem to follow this form, but I haven't checked their targets specifically, only that they exist.
    • For 2004, January has the similar form as for 2003.
    • For 2003 and 2004, all other dates seem to follow those for January, but I haven't checked their targets only their existence.
    • Other dates (with no other description) are generally redlink, but:
All dubious full-date redirects
That's as far as I've got, saving before I lose this (lots of power cuts here). Si Trew (talk) 01:10, 3 December 2014 (UTC) Updated for April Si Trew (talk) 02:48, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Si Trew (talk) 02:57, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 03:09, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment If we retain the Nixon connection, we ought to retarget it slightly, sending it to Richard Nixon#Resignation; if you don't know anything about his life, you won't immediately understand the reason for the redirect, but sending it to the Resignation section should prevent confusion. Nyttend (talk) 20:00, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Nyttend: The issue I see with retaining the connection of this redirect solely to Richard Nixon is the connection that National Peacekeepers' Day, a holiday in Canada, has with the date August 9, 1974. Basically, I see retaining the connection solely to Richard Nixon as a violation of WP:WORLDWIDE. Steel1943 (talk) 20:26, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I understand, and I don't really have an opinion on your idea. I'm just saying if we end up deciding to keep it at Nixon, send it to the section instead of sending it to the top of the article. My opinion shouldn't matter as far as considering whether to delete it or whether to send it to a completely different target. Nyttend (talk) 20:32, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete without retargeting. An absurd link, which will help nobody. DGG ( talk ) 23:38, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would also be fine with that. --BDD (talk) 14:02, 30 December 2014 (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.

Pop no 1s[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 January 2#Pop no 1s

Ching Chang Chong[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. --BDD (talk) 14:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the main article has no mention of "Ching Chang Chong" being another name for rock paper scissors. Therefore I believe these should be deleted retargeted to Ching chong. --AmaryllisGardener talk 00:33, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The relation is not clear, and search engines provide results that have nothing to do with the target's subject or anything notable enough to be included in an encyclopedia. Steel1943 (talk) 01:50, 24 December 2014 (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.

The Knight of the Wind[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) 14:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is a "nickname" for the target used in only in one video game, Sonic and the Black Knight. The redirect's name is not mentioned in the target article, and due to lack of a notable connection to the target, fails WP:NOTWIKIA. However, it seems that a song by the name of "Knight of the Wind" was made for the formerly-mentioned video game and composed by Crush 40 (a group formed by Jun Senoue specifically for Sonic the Hedgehog video games) so there may be a retargeting option with this redirect, but I'm leaning more towards delete due to the lack of coverage of the redirect in any of the aforementioned articles. Steel1943 (talk) 00:11, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong delete there are many "wind knights" or "knights of the wind" in fiction, especially Japanese fiction (such as the origin of Sonic, being a Japanese videogame) -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 06:30, 24 December 2014 (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/2014_December_24&oldid=1138579508"