Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 December 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 9[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 9, 2015.

Geniculata[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) 14:59, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:XY. There are at least 30 articles on Wikipedia about organisms with a species/subspecies name of "geniculata". Plantdrew (talk) 22:40, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as vague. This is just the specific epithet --Lenticel (talk) 07:54, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment there are also several 'nerve' articles this could refer to -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 13:08, 10 December 2015 (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.
@BDD: The plant labelled Geniculata in the image is definitely not Thalia geniculata. I've replaced the image and edited the captions to get rid of the links to Geniculata. Plantdrew (talk) 17:32, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Gary 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 keep. (non-admin closure) sst✈(discuss) 13:43, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete the redirect. This is a common name, with a number of notable person candidates who actually have this name. A redirect to a footballer who is not actually called this is not appropriate. Note that more than two thirds of the incoming links at time of creation of this request were not targeted at the footballer. (I have since redirected the two or three that were to the footballer correctly. Better to have no page at all than incorrect pointing for most of the pages that use this link. DanHobley (talk) 22:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. --BDD (talk) 01:05, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could you tell if most of the links were intended mainly for one specific person? I don't see any deleted history at this page, so I don't think we've ever had an article on someone by that exact name. --BDD (talk) 01:07, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Wp:R#D2 (confusing) and Wp:REDLINK. I have no idea about the political candidates, but there are two notable academics by this name (a linguist who studied Quechua, and a geologist who won the G. K. Warren Prize), and we should have articles on both of them. Alternatively we could create a disambiguation page (and put Garry Parker in the "See also" section), but right now it would consist solely of Wp:DABMENTIONs. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 02:27, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and make it into a Disambiguation page that mentions the footballer, the Greenwich politician, and any other agreed-upon notable person of that homonymic name [1]. We definitely can't coopt it for one person only, whose name is not spelled that way, but at the same time it's a likely misspelling so it should remain in the search terms because it is helpful in finding the footballer. Softlavender (talk) 02:41, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep a reasonable search term. If there are any other prominent ones with coverage on wikipedia then disambiguate but do not delete -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:23, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep unless we have any detailed content about other Garys Parker (in which case disambiguate). It is a plausible misspelling to the point of being obvious. At least one of the still-wikilinked Gary Parker wikilinks is about a footballer, one is clearly not (about a novellist who doesn't seem notable) and I haven't checked the others. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 15:34, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - as above, valid disambiguation until such time as articles on other notable Gar(r)y Parkers are created. GiantSnowman 15:10, 12 December 2015 (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.

Service center[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 December 16#Service center

Duneweed[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) 17:47, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, appears to be a Wikipedia neologism. I can't any reliable sources that suggest this is a common name for any particular plant, let along Tetragonia. Google links include mirrors pulling from Wikipedia, use of "dune weed" as a descriptive term for various plants that are weeds on dunes, "sand-dune weed" as a common name for one plant, as well as OCR errors (dane weed read as dune weed). I'm not comfortable keeping these as redirects to Tetragonia. Maybe they could be retargetted to Dune#Ecological_succession_on_coastal_dunes or Sand dune stabilization Plantdrew (talk) 19:56, 9 December 2015 (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.

Yazidi language[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 December 16#Yazidi language

Jk mrowling[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 melete. --BDD (talk) 17:44, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, implausible search term. -- Tavix (talk) 01:22, 9 December 2015 (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.

Future large aircraft[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) 17:40, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The word "future" is ambiguous and the word "large" violates WP:NPOV. Steel1943 (talk) 01:17, 9 December 2015 (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.

Future Aircraft Carrier[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) 17:39, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This does not seem like a former or current official name for this redirect's target. There is a reference listed in its target article called "Future Aircraft Carrier", but in that reference, it does not cite that name as an official name for the subject, but rather the title if a section header in the reference, probably intended to stand out to readers. So, delete as ambiguous and possibly WP:CRYSTAL. Steel1943 (talk) 01:13, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete there are many future carrier projects, this isn't even the most prominent. -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:31, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as vague at best --Lenticel (talk) 06:32, 16 December 2015 (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.

Future 1 Turnpike[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) 17:38, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The target subject looks competed, so it's not "future" anymore. Also, the word "Future" does not seem to be part of any official name for the target subject. Steel1943 (talk) 01:10, 9 December 2015 (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.

Other Christian[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) 17:25, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects are not clear on what Christians they are meant to exclude. The term "nondenominational" is not tied to "other"; for example, a Catholic could say that a Protestant is an "other Christian" due to it being somewhat different then their own beliefs, etc. Steel1943 (talk) 01:04, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • ...Unless the reader goes there, does not find what they are looking for, then try to look up "other Christian..." titles. Then, the reader gets unexpectedly directed to one of these articles. Steel1943 (talk) 05:35, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Both. This "Other" nonsense has got to stop, and has no basis in correct disambiguation or redirect usage. Softlavender (talk) 02:16, 10 December 2015 (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.

Other Chilean Regions[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) 17:24, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing circular reference to its target article. "Other than what?" Steel1943 (talk) 00:59, 9 December 2015 (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.

Other Soccer Clubs in Ghana[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) 17:23, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing circular reference to its target article. "Other than what?" Steel1943 (talk) 00:58, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment whatever the meaning of "other" is, all others to whatever club, if notable, will be on the list, so will get where you're going -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:33, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • ...Not if the reader is already there, and does not find what they are looking for, and tries to look up something "other" than what they found there. This is where the unhelpful circular reference comes into play. Steel1943 (talk) 05:40, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Nonsense. Softlavender (talk) 06:02, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. --BDD (talk) 03:39, 14 December 2015 (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.

Other alphabets in Morse code[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 December 16#Other alphabets in Morse code

Other national sororities[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) 17:22, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Simply put, the redirect is incredibly misleading. The reasons are as follows: Sororities are not exclusive to North America, "other" doesn't mean "defunct", and there is a bit of an ambiguous issue with what it should target since it could refer to "other" subjects. Steel1943 (talk) 00:51, 9 December 2015 (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.

Countries less affected by the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake[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) 17:21, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect is an odd circular reference to its target. The redirect leaves the reader asking "Less than what?" Steel1943 (talk) 00:44, 9 December 2015 (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.

Beating the Bludgers - A Study of Defensive Strategies in Quidditch[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. Deryck C. 15:02, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Uh oh. Looks like the target article is another one of those pages full of fancrufty redirects. This fictional book, to start, isn't mentioned there. See also WP:NOTWIKIA. BDD (talk) 00:43, 9 December 2015 (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.

Other countries affected by the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake[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) 17:20, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect is a confusing circular reference to its target, and is thus not helpful. Steel1943 (talk) 00:43, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete only 1 country was affected by the earthquake, Indonesia, the other countries were affected by the tsunami, not the quake itself -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:39, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as "other" is too vague --Lenticel (talk) 00:06, 13 December 2015 (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.

Other incarnations of Rodimus[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) 17:14, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects are unclear on what "incarnations of Rodimus" they are meant to exclude, and are thus confusing circular redirects to their current target. Steel1943 (talk) 00:37, 9 December 2015 (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.

Other concepts in the Ender's Game series[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) 17:13, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect's title is not clear on what concepts it is meant to exclude. Also, this redirect was leftover from a page move of its previous contents to Concepts in the Ender's Game series, which deleted as a result of an AfD discussion in 2013. Steel1943 (talk) 00:33, 9 December 2015 (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.

Other herbal liqueurs[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) 17:12, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is a circular reference it itself as a functional redirect. This redirect was previously hidden in a eponymous section header in List of cocktails. See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 26#Other liqueurs for a similar discussion regarding this. Steel1943 (talk) 00:30, 9 December 2015 (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.

Other characters in Sonic the Hedgehog[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) 17:01, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The title of the redirects are unclear on what "characters in Sonic the Hedgehog" they are meant to exclude. Delete as unclear circular references to their current target. Steel1943 (talk) 00:16, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete and nice find for a string of stupid redirects. Legacypac (talk) 17:14, 9 December 2015 (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.

Rode terror[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. Deryck C. 15:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RFOREIGN. The Red Terror wasn't German Dutch nor does it have any affinity with the German Dutch language. -- Tavix (talk) 00:14, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as nonsense. Softlavender (talk) 03:42, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget the current a topic of Russia, not Prussia; however, we have Red Terror (Hungary) which was once part of Austria-Hungary (very recently at the time of this event) so would have some affinity for German -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:46, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Update Delete as this isn't German at all, it is Dutch; per the below -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:29, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tavix, you're probably thinking of rote. Rode is a German word, but it would make no sense in this context. And anyway, "terror" is still given in English. --BDD (talk) 01:02, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@BDD: Yeah, you're right, it's not German, and that's the exact mistake I made too. I glanced at the history of the page, which was a foreign language article, and it looked like German to me. So I checked the German version, seeing "Rote terror," thinking it said "Rode terror" and I went with it. Actually putting it through a translator gives me Dutch, which is actually a stronger WP:RFOREIGN case due to 70's comment. (It wouldn't be the first time a redirect has been mistaken for German). -- Tavix (talk) 02:09, 10 December 2015 (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.

Other millennia[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) 17:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect's title is not clear what millennia it is meant to exclude. Steel1943 (talk) 00:01, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete the target isn't even a list of millennia, it is a list of millennia using the Christian calendar. Taking that into account, "other millennia" might be considered to be those in other calendar systems, which the target does not include -- 70.51.44.60 (talk) 05:47, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete wow that is useless. Legacypac (talk) 17:15, 9 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as vague at best --Lenticel (talk) 03:18, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - It's 'other' than... what? Nonsense. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 09:09, 15 December 2015 (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/2015_December_9&oldid=1037882241"