Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 September 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 9[edit]

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

Outlook Club[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) 13:27, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is just the club that the target first performed at. Doesn't justify a redirect. Mr. Guye (talk) 23:38, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per Steely. I found that too, but was having KB trouble earlier. Si Trew (talk) 09:06, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Steel1943's points, including WP:XY. Rubbish computer 13:16, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:XY and lack of notability as the AfD indicates. It took some effort to find information about the club on Google, but it seems to be better known for hosting punk acts like Siouxsie and the Banshees and the Sex Pistols; I didn't find anything about the Rolling Stones there. It also doesn't seem to have been notable in music history other than for hosting a few notable bands, unlike say The Cavern Club or CBGB or Montreux Casino or the Horseshoe Tavern. We wouldn't write about it (per the AfD) and there are too many potential targets. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 19:17, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per nom CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:30, 11 September 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.

Deer bologna[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) 13:26, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Readers trying to locate the subject if the redirect will not find any specific information about the redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 23:37, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Retaret to Venison. It seems that deer meat or venison can be prepared as a bologna. However, I can't find a ref stating exactly as such. Most of the hits that I got were for bologna recipes. --Lenticel (talk) 01:42, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. We don't have Beef bologna nor Lamb bologna norr Mutton bologna, I don't see why this is very special. It's harmless, but I think retargeting it to Venison would be wrong, cos it's unlikely that an adult deer would end up in a sausage, what with the price of the stuff. Maybe as roadkill, I think Homer Simpson managed to hit one ("D'Oh"): Marge "A deer, a female deer!"). Si Trew (talk) 06:17, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per SimonTrew. Rubbish computer 13:17, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - although I also find it unlikely that venison would be made into bologna when there are so many better things you could do with it, and considering its cost, it is listed at the target as one of the meats commonly made into bologna, so in fact this points to the right location. Also, it was Lisa who said "a deer!" before Marge continued with "a female deer." Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 19:09, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete due to the fact that "deer bologna" isn't mentioned at the target. We need redirects to be helpful, and this one isn't. -- Tavix (talk) 19:12, 10 September 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.

Beetals[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 Beetal per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 04:31, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Usually I'd accept this understandable misspelling, but what if the reader was intending to learn about literal beetles? WP:SURPRISE. Mr. Guye (talk) 23:32, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Beetle ... and wait for the WP:SNOW. (I'm thinking about just doing the edit WP:BOLD-ly since it seems so obvious, but I will refrain.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:39, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - it could be a plausible misspelling for either one of these targets, and stats show it's not in use. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 01:46, 10 September 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.

Die Beatles[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) -- Tavix (talk) 01:48, 12 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Creation summary says that the title is their name as marketed in Germany. Does not justify a redirect because The Beatles have no special affinity for Germany. Mr. Guye (talk) 23:30, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Struck, see below - the Beatles are not known as "Die Beatles" but as "die Beatles" in Germany. The article is not part of the name but is required under Germa grammar rules when talking about them. I've never seen any records or posters or other printed media refering to them as "Die Beatles", it's "The Beatles" or "Beatles". It's also not a plausible search item, anybody looking for The Beatles would type in just "Beatles. Kraxler (talk) 00:06, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The Beatles do have special affinity for Germany, having started early in their careers playing alternating stints in Liverpool and Hamburg, and having especially courted the German audience with their only foreign-language recording. They were certainly billed as "die Beatles", but we can't have a lowercase letter to start an article title. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 01:59, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per their billing in Komm, gib mir deine Hand/Sie liebt dich. -- Tavix (talk) 03:54, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The distinction Kraxler mentions between "die" and "Die" is impossible here, because all titles start with an initial cap (I think there is a cunning way around that to make them display without the initial cap, but the software doesn't distinguish, and this goes back to the very early days of WP). Si Trew (talk) 05:45, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – The Beatles are billed as such on German releases, some of which were imported to English-speaking countries. Anyone who knows about them knows that they do have a special affinity for Germany – their first recording contract was German. As others have pointed out, Kraxler's argument about the distinction between case is invalid. McLerristarr | Mclay1 10:25, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above points. Rubbish computer 13:20, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's not about lower case or capitals, its about being part of the name or not. Writing "Die Beatles" would be a two-word proper name, saying "die Beatles" would be using the determinate article with a one-word proper name. Apparently there is at least one German-version record that shows "DIE BEATLES", so, I'll withdraw my !vote. Kraxler (talk) 17:00, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - It makes sense given the unique historical connection between the band and Germany. And, as stated above as well, there's an issue with 'die Beatles' because of software restrictions. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 19:52, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Withdrawl I withdraw my nomination upon proof of affinity for Germany. --Mr. Guye (talk) 00:07, 12 September 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.

Ditzy[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 soft redirect. --BDD (talk) 13:24, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ditzy does mean "stupid" but it might also mean "disorganized" (google definition) and "tending to forget things".[1] I believe this redirect should be turned into a disambiguation page. Also, I object to dedicating an entire article to it per WP:DICDEF. Mr. Guye (talk) 23:16, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Soft redirect to wikt:ditzy since I am unable to find any suitable topics for a disambiguation page. Steel1943 (talk) 01:39, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft redirect per Steel1943. Kookie was my first idea, but that itself is an R to 77 Sunset Strip, so that is about as much use as a snake in an arse-kicking competition. , I dislike redirects to Wiktionary, because WP:NOTDIC, but we can do no better, I think. Si Trew (talk) 06:24, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft retarget per Steel1943. Rubbish computer 13:20, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft retarget per the comments made by Steel1943, since that seems to be the most helpful option to readers CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:31, 12 September 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.

Vancouver: Social Media Riots.[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) 13:22, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The Vancouver riot was due to hockey, not social media. -- Tavix (talk) 21:12, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per that unlikely period and per nom. Steel1943 (talk) 21:54, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, or weak retarget to section #Social media where it is explained that social media was an unusual component of this particular riot, both in inciting and encouraging the rioters, and in subsequent investigations when angry residents flooded police with an "unprecedented" amount of evidence pulled from social media. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 22:02, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Did you notice there's a period?? -- Tavix (talk) 22:28, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I did. So what? Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 00:34, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Ha, sorry about that. I just assumed you didn't. I didn't think you liked keeping redirects like that. -- Tavix (talk) 01:24, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Normally yeah, I don't like periods, not because they're implausible but because they fuddle search results. This is a sort of misspelling of a relevant related topic, though. Readers aren't likely to search for this phrase exactly, but if you type "vancouver social media riots" into the search bar, this redirect is the first result. So although it's odd, it does help navigation. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:13, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So ... if Vancouver: Social Media Riots existed as a redirect towards the same topic, would your opinion change? Steel1943 (talk) 20:05, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Well, the colon is also problematic. I suppose I would prefer to keep the most correct one if there were several. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:14, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What I mean is that if 2011 Vancouver: Stanley Cup riots. existed, then it would fuddle search results by making it more difficult to find the target article. But the redirect we're discussing doesn't have the same problem. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 21:16, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, but only per the period making this an implausible typo (WP:RFD#D8): otherwise I would vote to retarget per Ivanvector. Rubbish computer 13:22, 10 September 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.

Coronary[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 1#Coronary

Wikipedia:MYSTERYSOURCE[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. WP:MYSTERY could perhaps refer to Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Crime task force, but for now, I'll just delete it along with the other. --BDD (talk) 13:18, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at its target article's history, it looks like this redirected to a section that only existed for a few minutes before it was removed. I'm not sure of there is a clear retargeting option; also, this shortcut has no incoming links. Steel1943 (talk) 14:40, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - created as a redirect to this section, which was reverted six minutes later. It's fairly cryptic and I don't think there is a better target. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 17:58, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. THe "Mystery Voice" is a parody on I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue, to introduce the members of the audience (and usually they are extremely punny or just extremely obvious, where the teams pretend not to know what it could possibly be, to the quotation suggested by the title (it is, in fact, just held up by on a piece of cardboard by the producer, Jon Naismith. but it's still a mystery to me who actually provides the "mystery voice"). That is a possible retarget, but not as a WP:CNR from WP namespace, I think. Si Trew (talk) 09:09, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment When that dodgy archiving website was up for discussion I was flirting with the guidelines, however, there was something covering it, I haven't got it to hand but yes delete I think, ~ R.T.G 12:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Rubbish computer 13:24, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment WP:MYSTERY also redirects to the section in question so that should be deleted as well unless someone had a better target for it.--174.91.187.135 (talk) 04:28, 11 September 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.

Kharkіv[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) 13:16, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To all appearance this is a redirect to itself. : Noyster (talk), 11:37, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Apparently, that's a Cyrillic dotted i (U+0456). I don't know how someone might manage to write all of "Khark" in Latin, but switch to the Cyrillic keyboard for the "i", and then back to Latin for the final "v". Alakzi (talk) 11:47, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It looks as if someone did achieve this recently in Kharkov Governorate, which now links to this redirect: Noyster (talk), 13:29, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Kharkiv was named after a Ukrainian kozak called Kharko. In Ukrainian the city is known as Kharkiv. In Russian it is known as Kharkov or Khar'kov. When Eastern Ukraine was part of the Russian Empire it was usually spelled Kharkov. Now that Ukraine is an independent state City names are derived (transcribed) from their Ukrainian forms, thus we now usually use Kharkiv. The same is true in other European Languages such as German which now uses the spelling Charkiw.
In Western Ukraine the city of Lviv before WWII under Polish administration was known as Lwow. Under Russian jurisdiction it became Lvov. Under Austro-Hungary (before WWI it was known as Lemberg and in Latin scripts Leopolis. It is in Ukraine and currently the spelling is transcribed from the Ukrainian - thus Lviv.
There are many trolls who expound the Russian imperialist ideal who will be very adamant regarding using the Russian spelling of Kharkov. Kharkiv however is not located in Russia.Banduryst (talk) 12:30, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Kharkov, Ukraine already redirects to Kharkiv. That is not under discussion here. We are talking about two character strings which appear identically as "Kharkiv": Noyster (talk), 13:27, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I believe it is. A glyph and a character (or code point) are not the same thing, if I felt like it I could design a character set where every single character looked like the Latin letter A, that would not make them the same thing. One must distinguish between appearance and meaning (unless one is a woman of course). Si Trew (talk) 10:59, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Lookit, I and O are distinct sounds, both in Ukrainian and occasionally in English even in my sloppy pronunciation (and at least I pronounce and spell "pronunciation" properly. though the absence of the O there in the middle is just a bit of a remnant really). I cannot see any reason that someone would search for Kharkiv or Karkiv by searching for Kharkov or Karkov. I will add Karkoff or Karkiff or Kack off if we have them. Si Trew (talk) 11:06, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Where do you think by the way Kharkov orKarkov redirects? Actually to my ears I was guessing more Khaki but this must then be genuinely ambiguous, and delete as just not helpful. Si Trew (talk) 11:04, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
And kh- is a transliteration for starters and I probably pronounce it differently in my basic Arabic, as a kinda middle voiced labial fricative, than a Ukrainian would pronounce it, I guess (I don't know anyone Ukrainian). So this is just really misleading in English. Si Trew (talk) 11:15, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a highly unlikely misspelling. There was similar consensus recently for a redirect that looked like "Wikipedia" but was not for the same reason, but I am currently unable to find that discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 14:57, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as implausible misspelling --Lenticel (talk) 00:15, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking of Boris Karloff actually. His wife, Eva Karloff, lived in England for many years and had bricks thrown through her window, according to Alan Bennett, on the grounds that if he scared me I shall scare her. Si Trew (talk) 09:17, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can source this. Si Trew (talk) 09:18, 10 September 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.

Narendra Malla[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. At a glance, only those with individual articles seem to be bluelinked at the list of kings. --BDD (talk) 13:15, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

deletion, these are two different people. Xx236 (talk) 05:29, 9 September 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.

India proper[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 September 24#India proper

Citibank australia[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 Citibank Australia. I don't think we need a full RFD to figure this one out. (non-admin closure) -- Tavix (talk) 13:35, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Australia is not mentioned at target. - TheChampionMan1234 02:45, 9 September 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.

American-airlines.co.kr[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. JohnCD (talk) 11:59, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Website not mentioned at target. - TheChampionMan1234 02:21, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong delete. This is not the official website of American Airlines: the official website is "aa.com" (and official variants such as americanairlines.com) and that's the website that appears in the article. Since this is not the official website, it isn't mentioned at the the target, making it confusing at best. These are extremely implausible search terms. This would make sense if we had American Airlines in South Korea, for example, but that's not the case here. Even if someone types this in, they'll just end up disappointed due to the fact that we are a general encyclopedia and not a travel site. WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:RFD#D8 also applies. -- Tavix (talk) 04:06, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as not mentioned at target. Rubbish computer 13:34, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. These are just redirects for the sake of creating redirects. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:39, 15 September 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.

Koreanair.eu.com[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. JohnCD (talk) 11:58, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Website not mentioned at target. - TheChampionMan1234 02:19, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong delete. This is not the official website of Korean Air: the official website is "koreanair.com" and that's the website that appears in the article. Since this is not the official website, it isn't mentioned at the the target, making it confusing at best. This is an extremely implausible search term. This would make sense if we had Korean Air in Europe, for example, but that's not the case here. Even if someone types this in, they'll just end up disappointed due to the fact that we are a general encyclopedia and not a travel site. WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:RFD#D8 also applies. -- Tavix (talk) 04:09, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and Tavix. Rubbish computer 13:34, 10 September 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.

Self-Payment[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, which doesn't preclude someone creating a dab. --BDD (talk) 13:10, 16 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think these things are the same thing. My research shows this can also refer to ATMs, vending machines, and payment terminals. I'm open for a retarget, but couldn't find a good match. -- Tavix (talk) 02:33, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The first thing which comes to my mind with "Self-Payment" is that I have to pay myself (with or without) an ATM, can also be cash. So therefore Self-checkout could be part of this process ("Self-payment"). But of course there are other uses of this term, which might be included in the "Self-Payment" article itself (as it's even not related to an offline action, it can also be "Self-Payment" on a website:

Sample banking systems/software for "Self-Payment"

So might be worth doing some real work with this article - my 2cents, have fun! --huggi - never stop exploring (talk) 02:58, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should DAB it, with Huggi's suggestions. I'd add self-abuse (disambiguation) there, too. Latin: mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa, "My fault, my fault, my most greivous fault", in the Catechism (I am not a Roman Catholic, I'm C of E if anything). So I've created a Draft:Self-payment for your consideration, but we should add there and I can't think of the word, self-flaggelation. Well I just thought of it but we haven't it. Si Trew (talk) 05:02, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
If anything, it should be an article, not a disambiguation. These are forms of self-payment, but you wouldn't actually call any of these terms "self-payment". -- Tavix (talk) 13:33, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless a good retargeting option can be found. This antonymic situation is quite confusing, but then again, if they weren't antonyms, I wouldn't mind getting paid while spending ... it evens out. Steel1943 (talk) 02:37, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment, yeah, I always thought that ATMs should have a "gamble" button, double or nothing. Unfortunately the missus worked for a well-known bank for many years, and would not hear of such a thing. Si Trew (talk) 06:07, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per above points in favour of this. Rubbish computer 13:36, 10 September 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_September_9&oldid=1037880655"