Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 October 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 12[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 12, 2017.

Shit hole[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 Shithole, which is being created as a soft redirect to wikt:shithole. -- Tavix (talk) 16:35, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A 'Shit Hole' is a place you don't want to go too, used to describe your mates smelly flat, the local drug den or other undesirable place. Why does it point to the totally unrelated Asshole?.
The definition is: according to the Oxford Dictionary Shithole - noun vulgar slang. An extremely dirty, shabby, or otherwise unpleasant place. ‘this place is a shithole, I hope you know that’.
It seems to have nothing to do with its current target. Dysklyver 15:24, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Admin note - I added the RfD tags to the redirect per a request at WP:AN. It seems a former page at this title was deleted as an attack page and this redirect was created then protected to prevent further vandalism. The admin who protected the redirect has not edited in nearly 10 years so I did not attempt to discuss with them first. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:47, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Ivan. Dysklyver 15:55, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree it's misleading. "Shithole" is mentioned in the Shit article - "shit hole" is similar enough and should redirect there. There's a song "Shithole" by Weaves and the band's article mentions an award the song was nominated for; Shithole is a protected red link but should redirect to one of these articles. Peter James (talk) 16:04, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Shit, perhaps the "vague noun" section where it is briefly mentioned. I endorse the same for shithole, and suggest continued protection of both redirects (the latter also has a history of vandalism). Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:15, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This term's more widely-used meaning is actually not directly related to "shit", but rather describes a less-than-likable place (like a building, room, city, etc.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:13, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    ...And I stated that without even reading the nomination statement until right now. Steel1943 (talk) 18:15, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Restore Shithole as a redirect to Wiktionary:shithole (added at Steel1943 (talk) 20:27, 12 October 2017 (UTC)) and retarget to Shithole per Black Kite. Steel1943 (talk) 20:16, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    You don't want to restore Shithole, it was an attack page. ;) Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:22, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Since I, a non-admin would not have necessarily known this, I have updated my "vote". Steel1943 (talk) 20:27, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    But Ivanvector, why not just restore this version? It's just a Wiktionary redirect with {{Short pages monitor}}. And Steel1943, yes there's a bunch of vandalism (much of it amusing) in there. One edit summary:

    (←Redirected page to Leeds Metropolitan University)

    Another one: Usually describing a place not worthy of Human Inhabitance, such as South Hetton. And on and on and on :-) Nyttend (talk) 02:47, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, restoring that version ought to be fine, if that's how the discussion goes. I'm sticking with my "retarget" comment above, though. I think it's preferable for an encyclopedia redirect to target an encyclopedia article whenever possible (when there is relevant information at the target), and redirects to wiktionary ought to be saved for cases where we have no relevant information. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 23:44, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    That is essentially the description given at Shit#Vague noun. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:41, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    After I performed my previous edit, I meant to change my "vote", but just did in this edit. Steel1943 (talk) 20:27, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget and create It should redirect to Shithole, which should soft redirect to Wiktionary. If it doesn't exist there ... it should do, it's a common term in the UK. Black Kite (talk) 19:19, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    wikt:shithole does, in fact, exist; Black Kite's suggestion of a soft redirect there seems sensible. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:27, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Slum - the most common reason it will be used in the UK (where it is a common phrase). Or Merthyr Tydfil. Only in death does duty end (talk) 12:55, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget and create - Retarget to shithole and soft redirect to Wiktionary, per Black Kite. If its not already protected, like shithole, it should be.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:59, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Semi protection is probably enough according to protection policy, increasing to extended confirmed if necessary. That would allow additions such as a hatnote to another use or to a disambiguation page. This would avoid situations such as the 2017 Formula One Season redirect, which still needs fixing properly. Peter James (talk) 19:45, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget and create per Black Kite. This is common enough a slang term that it ought to soft redir to the wikt entry. —/Mendaliv/2¢/Δ's/ 10:39, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget and create Shithole per the other votes. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 00:13, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Red Dead 2[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 October 24#Red Dead 2

Al Lādhiqīyah[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 keep. Withdrawn (non-admin closure) - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:45, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We don't usually bother with strict transliteration redirects do we? Batternut (talk) 09:57, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • We don't bother deleting if the transliteration (or romanisation, to be precise) isn't completely correct, and we certainly don't delete if it is, as in this case. We actually do actively create redirects from standard romanisations, although they probably aren't as useful for contemporary entities as they are for historical stuff, where because of the preponderance of scholarly sources the most common romanisation is likely to be the one with the impeccable set of diacritics. – Uanfala 12:29, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment is the romanization correct? I see al-Lādhiqīyah in the article's lead sentence, so it is probably ok unless one of the macrons is wrong. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:35, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment it seems that WP:MOS-AR#Redirects applies, allowing "all frequently occurring name variants, including transcriptions...". So the test is whether the variant occurs frequently. Googling suggests it does. Batternut (talk) 20:28, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Not an implausible term - 183 uses in the past year. (I looked up WP:MOS-AR because I'd never heard of it - turns out that's because it's proposed rather than actual guidance, and very nearly orphan). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:24, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
WP:MOS-AR ... proposed - interesting - I got there from WP:AT#Foreign names and anglicization via Romanization. Batternut (talk) 23:32, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as proposer, I'm convinced by the above opinions. I think we can close this discussion. Thanks all... Batternut (talk) 23:40, 13 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Child sexual abuse in India[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. -- Tavix (talk) 16:28, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A WP:POVFORK from Rape in India and Child sexual abuse laws in India. Other editors (@Malayy and D4iNa4:)[1] agreed that this should not be an article but a redirect. I would propose deletion, not only because history contains povforking, but there is more.

Since we don't have more potential redirects like Child sexual abuse in the United States, there should be no such redirect like this. And fails the notability criteria, because we don't have any notable convicts or incidents either. We can simply link to Rape in India#Rape of minors if there is any mention. Raymond3023 (talk) 07:27, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete agreed that everything is already mentioned in two other articles, thus redundant. D4iNa4 (talk) 08:06, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Malayy argued that it's not a fork. Either way, we should not be arguing for the deletion of articles based on non-existence of a similar article for a different country. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:48, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, an article about child sexual abuse laws is not the same as one about child sexual abuse in general; we do currently have Child sexual abuse laws in the United States. It was created by a problematic editor who was indefinitely blocked, though. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 21:52, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Marital rape in India[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) - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:44, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Useless redirect, originally a POVFORK article and editors agreed that this should not be an article but remain a redirect.[2] Given the lack of legal existence or that there are no incidents but also because we don't have any other marital rape article or redirects by country. Also given the history of this redirect, which contains WP:POVFORK, I would propose deletion. Raymond3023 (talk) 07:19, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as redundant. No possibility that the article will be ever created. D4iNa4 (talk) 08:06, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    That seems more like rationale to "keep" the redirect since WP:REDLINK doesn't apply. Steel1943 (talk) 18:52, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as both redirect to the proper location in the article, as well as the redirect being a {{R from merge}}. Steel1943 (talk) 18:51, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Perfectly appropriate section redirect. bd2412 T 16:15, 13 October 2017 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Little Rocket Man[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. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:28, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_May_30#Crooked_Hillary, same rationale basically. I suggest deletion for it is potentially disparaging to a BLP, if the nickname is actually discussed somewhere, I'm happy to consider retargeting it. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 03:14, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per NOTNEWS. Wikipedia's RECENTISM gives rise to a group of editors who waste time creating redirects of questionable search terms when they could be adding sources to extant articles or doing their part to delete the refuse we already have. Chris Troutman (talk) 08:16, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Searches not related to Trump and Kim refer to a Half-Life 2 Episode 2 achievement related to the Garden Gnome. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:52, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Minecraft foobar[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 split decision: redirect Blocklauncher to Minecraft mods, delete Hexxit. -- Tavix (talk) 16:31, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target. Possible WP:WIKIA material. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 01:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Universe Sandbox 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. Anarchyte (work | talk) 11:28, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target. Wikipedia is WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 01:36, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Skyrim memes[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 October 23#Skyrim memes

Jungle armor tereria[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. -- Tavix (talk) 16:26, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target. See also WP:WWIN; this looks like in-game jargon. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 01:31, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom and WP:NOTWIKIA It's incorrectly spelled, and the Jungle Armor is not mentioned in the game's article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:43, 12 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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/2017_October_12&oldid=1138582010"