Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 15

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) 16:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Αργεντινή → Argentina (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Delete. Not Greek. Gorobay (talk) 20:59, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Ultimately Latin via Spanish, approx. "Silver Country". No relation to Greek at all. Si Trew (talk) 00:33, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Greek is not particularly significant to Argentina, and this is not in Spanish, so not a particularly relevant language. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:42, 16 May 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 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) 16:13, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Πολυμαθής → Polymath (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ]
• Polymathēs → Polymath  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Delete. Not especially Greek. Gorobay (talk) 20:57, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per G. The first goes with what I thought we had general consensus for with foreign-language redirects; the second is a bit weird transliteration: although it were common to transliterate Greek with diacritical marks that is out of fashion now. Polymathes without the accent does not exist: if it stays it should be {{R from title without diacritics}}, but tends to indicate that this is unnecessary. Who's going to type that on an English keyboard layout? Si Trew (talk) 00:30, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Polymaths exist outside of Greece, many of whom know no Greek, so this generic topic has no particular affinity to Greece -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:43, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I would probably be regarded as a polymath, if not a particularly good one, and I don't really speak Greek well but can kinda understand/guess a few words from knowing the alphabet etc, if the words are of Greek or Latin origin: and if they are, there's no need for them if they have then been absorbed into English. I've never been to mainland Greece in my life.

<RAMBLE> A friend of mine, at the time one had "occupation" on one's passport, put just "Expert", which I think is unbeatable.</RAMBLE> Si Trew (talk) 08:25, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. -Lenticel ^(talk) 01:24, 19 May 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 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) 16:12, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Πληρόω → Pleroma (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ]
• Πλήρης → Pleroma  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Delete. These words, plēróō and plḗrēs, shares their roots with plērōma, but do not themselves refer to pleroma. Gorobay (talk) 20:50, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Gorobay. 'nuff said. Si Trew (talk) 00:26, 16 May 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 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) 16:11, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Ανομια → Antinomianism (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Delete. Not especially Greek. Gorobay (talk) 20:40, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A quick search brings up on Hellenic Wikipedia EL:eΔομική_ανομία. This term is notpresent in Hellenic WP on its own. That has no Interwiki links that I can see. It's something to do with Robert K .Merton)]] (Ρόμπερτ Κ. Μέρτον) in the first section biography (Βιογραφία), but I haven't read the whole lot. Si Trew (talk) 00:23, 16 May 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 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) 16:05, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Κιρκινέζι → Lesser Kestrel (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Delete. Not especially Greek. Gorobay (talk) 20:32, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Gorobay. Indeed, entirely un-Greek. If anything it should go to Kestrel, but that's not Greek either. Si Trew (talk) 00:17, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per the aboves. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:51, 16 May 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 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) 16:05, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Βαφή → Phlobaphene (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ]
• Baphe → Phlobaphene  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Delete. The morpheme “baphe” does not refer to phlobaphene. Gorobay (talk) 20:28, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both. Βαφή is not helpful at the English Wikipedia, as discussed et cetera ad nauseam; the second is misleading. It's not really a morpheme is it?: it's two morphemes depending on how you pronounce it (I have trouble even pronouncing Hungarian: So) – or at least, two phonemes. Anyway, regardless, bath would seem a more likely target – and I wouldn't even encourage that. Si Trew (talk) 00:03, 16 May 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 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. --BDD (talk) 15:59, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Società Italiana per l'Esercizio Telefonico p.A. → Telecom Italia (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Very unlikely search term. Launchballer 12:29, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per LaunchBaller. Si Trew (talk) 12:34, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This term is bolded in the lede of the article. Per the lede, the company mentioned in the redirect title merged into its target article's subject. Thus, this redirect definitely seems useful. (However, if anyone can make a valid argument proving that this redirect should qualify for WP:REDLINK, I may change my opinion. However, from what I'm seeing, I do not believe that the article will ever be created, nor do I think that this company [redirect] is notable enough to be a standalone article.) Steel1943 (talk) 13:11, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. For goodness sake, bolded in the lede of the redirect target is more thn enough reason. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 15:10, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Società Italiana per l'Esercizio Telefonico (without p.A. initials) already redirects to Telecom Italia. 163.167.121.137 (talk) 15:58, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...which is essentially a good reason to "keep" this redirect. It spells out the full name of the merged company, whereas the alternate example provided here only displays part of the company's name. Steel1943 (talk) 17:21, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

....but who is ever going to type it in full, with those puncs and that caps? That's my point. Good to have you back Steel1943. Si Trew (talk) 23:39, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No idea, but full names are always useful in one form or another, considering that it is the official name if the entity.Hello Si Trew!! Steel1943 (talk) 02:04, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you've got no idea, why comment? (S.)p.A. is the Italian equivalent of Plc, which we do not use in article titles. Even Telecom Italia S.p.A. does not re-direct to Telecom Italia and, by the time you have typed Società Italiana per l'Esercizio Telefonico into the search box, the article will come up without needing to type the p.A. initials (with full stops). 163.167.121.137 (talk) 09:38, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I give some examples like 163.167 has suggested that I just plucked at random without searching: British Aerospace plc, British Aerospace (Guided Weapons) Limited, Arab British Dynamics, HSBC plc, Greene King plc, Morrisons Ltd, Morrisons Limited, Boots plc, London Country Bus Services Ltd, Samuel Windsor Ltd. WHSmith plc, W. H. Smith plc. The blues are all redirects. I guess if the "and co" is actually used in the brand's name (M&Co for example) then that is acceptable – is there a policy guideline on this? WP:COMPANY or something? Si Trew (talk) 10:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IP editor, what you just said completely strays from the helpfulness of Wikipedia. Wikipedia includes helpful redirects to their topics, shorthand or longhand alike. If it's the target's longer name, it serves a helpful purpose, and will be helpful to someone, especially if the full name is linked to in an article. All and all, having to type less keystrokes in the search box is not a valid reason to delete a redirect; in this case, WP:RFD#DELETE reasons #2 and #5 do not apply (The redirect does not cause confusion, and it makes sense), and WP:RFD#KEEP reason #5 does apply (the redirect was created, and matches the company name letter for letter, so it is definitely useful). So, would you like to nominate most of the redirects to When the Pawn... for deletion as well??? (Talk about long redirect names!) Steel1943 (talk) 10:29, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) @163.167.121.137:: When Steel1943 says he has no idea who would search that way, it does not mean Steel1943 is clueless: it means (at least I think it does) that when discussing redirects we have to kinda second-guess how other users of wikipedia – and most users are readers, not editors – actually search. Unfortunately that involves a certain amount of second-guessing about how best those readers can find the information they are looking for. We have tools for saying how many readers found an article: there is no tool for saying how many didn't, and I thought our job was to try to help people to find information. I'm still not convinced we need this R – it seems rather patchy – but "no idea" does not mean "I am an idiot". Now, I am an idiot and I still manage to contribute something useful occasionally. Si Trew (talk) 10:40, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's also confusing with Telefonica, which redirects to Telefónica (and is marked as {{R from title without diacritics}}, correctly), but is not the same outfit as this Italian one, I assume: certainly it is not mentioned at that page. Si Trew (talk) 14:11, 16 May 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 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) 15:57, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:WPR → Template:WikiProject Religion (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ]
• Template:Wpr → Template:WikiProject Rock music  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Conflicting redirects. SHORTCUTs should be in ALLCAPS. These should both point to the same place, and the lowercase form should not exist. However, they point to two different locations. Neither matches WP:R or WP:WPR , and WP:WikiProject Redirects exists complementing "WP:R", adding more confusion. {{WPROCK}} already exists and is already very short. 65.94.171.126 (talk) 07:58, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to "Template:WikiProject Rock music" - There is an active discussion about this issue at WT:SHC#Template_shortcuts. Barring a change to something more suitable, this redirect does no harm now that it has been created. Though consensus may state otherwise at this time, I feel that in most cases, that we do not want a lower case redirect to point to a different location than its upper case counterpart. Additionally, we have redirects such as {{albums}} and {{songs}}. Whoever nominates these should be obligated to correct them manually. Furthermore, Template:wpr was already discussed and kept to redirect to its current location. Template:WPR redirected to the same location until it was changed. If nothing new has happened since then, nominating Template:wpr constitutes an abuse of process. --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:10, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • That doesn't make a whole lot of sense. When does "R" mean "rock music"? On Wikipedia, "R" means "redirect" We have a tonne of redirect templates called "R from X" -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:38, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Well we have R&B. So if anything as a musical term it means "rhythm", not "Rock". It's also a musical abbreviation on a musical score for rallentando, if I remember correctly (I can't tell a soft pedal from a clutch). But it seems unlikely to mean rock music. Si Trew (talk) 14:14, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"R" is not separable from "R&B" as an independent entity. In the real world we would find "R" meaning rail as well... and lo {{WikiProject Trains}} -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both. Options are endless. Deletion history shows they've existed before and have been deleted. I realize Jax only wants the most simplest redirects possible, but there are just more obvious redirects to use for the project. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 21:06, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. — Scott • talk 21:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Why have the RfD templates not been placed at {{wpr}} and {{WPR}}? Unless they have are placed there, and this discussion relisted following their placement, I declare yet another abuse of process. --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:19, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:50, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - There is a similar discussion taking place at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 10. --Jax 0677 (talk) 03:23, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no similar discussion there. They do no involve confusion with multiple different wikiprojects, nor do they concern conflicting redirects -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:53, 20 May 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 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) 15:50, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Wco → Template:WikiProject Companies (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

recently created redirect by Jax 0677 (talk · contribs) which is a SHORTCUT to a wikiproject banner, but which does not indicate it by using "WP" or "WPP" and which is not in the expected ALLCAPS forms that shortcuts should use. {{WPCO}} already exists 65.94.171.126 (talk) 07:50, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - There is an active discussion about this issue at WT:SHC#Template_shortcuts. Barring a change to something more suitable, this redirect does no harm now that it has been created. Though consensus may state otherwise at this time, I feel that in most cases, that we do not want a lower case redirect to point to a different location than its upper case counterpart. Additionally, we have redirects such as {{albums}} and {{songs}}. Whoever nominates these should be obligated to correct them manually. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:52, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • That discussion seems to be going against your opinion as lodged here. Further "wco" is your invention, it isn't a real word, unlike "albums" or "songs" -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:40, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 21:02, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. — Scott • talk 21:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - There is a similar discussion taking place at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 10. --Jax 0677 (talk) 03:23, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no similar discussion there. Nothing there is "W-x" -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:51, 20 May 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 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. After two and a half weeks of discussion, I think any reasonable admin would make this call. Contact me with concerns. --BDD (talk) 16:26, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Wpin → Template:WikiProject Industrial (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

recently created redirect by Jax 0677 (talk · contribs) for an unrecognized abbreviation of "Industrial", and having no relation to wikiproject redirects WP:IN or WP:WPIN and not recognized abbreviations in (disambiguation); not logical, invented on Wikipedia neologism abbreviation for Industrial, when this is in the real world commonly used for Indiana and India. {{WikiProject United States|IN=yes}} ; {{WikiProject India}} 65.94.171.126 (talk) 07:38, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - There is an active discussion about this issue at WT:SHC#Template_shortcuts. Barring a change to something more suitable, this redirect does no harm now that it has been created. Though consensus may state otherwise at this time, I feel that in most cases, that we do not want a lower case redirect to point to a different location than its upper case counterpart. Additionally, we have redirects such as {{albums}} and {{songs}}. Whoever nominates these should be obligated to correct them manually. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:52, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • That discussion seems to be going against your opinion as lodged here. And further, your creative invention of a term not found in the real world, confusing it with real world terms, is a very bad idea. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:40, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. — Scott • talk 21:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - There is a similar discussion taking place at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 10. --Jax 0677 (talk) 03:23, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no similar discussion there, they do not involve multiple different wikiprojects that can be confused with the redirect -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:55, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. The neologistic abbreviation is likely to cause confusion. --BDD (talk) 15:48, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• delete per nom, too many meanings for "in". Frietjes (talk) 20:40, 28 May 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 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. After two and a half weeks of discussion, I think any reasonable admin would make this call. Contact me with concerns. --BDD (talk) 16:25, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:WPIN → Template:WikiProject Industrial (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

newly created redirect by Jax 0677 (talk · contribs) for an unrecognized abbreviation of "Industrial", and having no relation to wikiproject redirects WP:IN or WP:WPIN and not recognized abbreviations In (disambiguation); not logical, invented on Wikipedia neologism abbreviation for Industrial, when this is in the real world commonly used for Indiana and India. {{WikiProject United States|IN=yes}} ; {{WikiProject India}} 65.94.171.126 (talk) 07:34, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - There is an active discussion about this issue at WT:SHC#Template_shortcuts. Barring a change to something more suitable, this redirect does no harm now that it has been created. Though consensus may state otherwise at this time, I feel that in most cases, that we do not want a lower case redirect to point to a different location than its upper case counterpart. Additionally, we have redirects such as {{albums}} and {{songs}}. Whoever nominates these should be obligated to correct them manually. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:52, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • That discussion seems to be going against your opinion as lodged here. And further, your creative invention of a term not found in the real world, confusing it with real world terms, is a very bad idea. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:40, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. — Scott • talk 21:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - There is a similar discussion taking place at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2014 May 10. --Jax 0677 (talk) 03:23, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no similar discussion there. All those are lowercase. Further, they don't involve confusion with multiple other wikiprojects. -- 65.94.171.126 (talk) 04:52, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. The neologistic abbreviation is likely to cause confusion. --BDD (talk) 15:48, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• delete per nom, too many meanings for "IN" Frietjes (talk) 20:40, 28 May 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 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 no consensus. The deleters consider that the inclusion of the word 'artificial' makes this an unlikely search term. However this, alone, is not a ground for deletion. Except for those that have been recently created, redirects are only deleted when they are harmful, typically meeting one of the WP:RFD#DELETE criteria. Such a criteria has not been specified. The keepers argue that this is a reasonable redirect. There is also the semantic point that the use of 'artifical' may not be as ridiculous as it may seem. It may be considered that the Vegreville egg is not actually a pysanka but as the article says "is a giant sculpture of a pysanka". Consequently, describing it as an 'artifical pysanka' is not totally devoid of merit. Balancing it all out I do not see a definitive consensus nor is a further relist likely to produce consensus. NAC. The Whispering Wind (talk) 23:04, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• World's Largest Artificial Pysanka → Vegreville egg (links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

It's the "artificial" that makes this an unlikely search term. Si Trew (talk) 10:29, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete We don't have a naturally-occurring Pysanka. In addition, this looks like a mean of disseminating unreferenced information and getting away with giving the source. Best regards, Codename Lisa (talk) 23:44, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep it is sourced in the target, and IMO 'artificial' is an possible/reasonable search term, but I agree it is not a likely search term. John Vandenberg ^(chat) 12:19, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• n.b. I created World's largest pysanka the other day, probably figuring that if a pysanka isn't artificial, you'd just call it an egg. --BDD (talk) 16:18, 12 April 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) 16:59, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Well I was wondering whether pysanka was at all a likely search term for an English-speaking audience in the first place. I don't want to pat myself on the back but I have a fairly good vocabulary and I had never heard of it. You might as well have Hungarian: tojas or French: oeuf or whatever. There is an article at pysanka but wouldn't this maybe be better targeted from World's largest Easter egg? What about Fabergé egg or Ostrich egg? What is someone likely to want to find, I don't know. Si Trew (talk) 22:49, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unlikely search term. The alternative I created serves the purpose. "Artificial pysanka" is an absurd phrase. Pysankas are not natural or organic. --BDD (talk) 19:01, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Relisting comment: The consensus may be clear; this relist's purpose is to shrink the backlog.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 00:25, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Steely and BDD but I don't think consensus is clear: and I am not sure what either of you were proposing to do with it.

This one is a bugger. The lede at the target says it is a Ukrainain style of easter egg and links it there in the first sentence. I tend to take "Trew's Law of Global Fame" which states that anything that says it is the world's largest patently isn't. (We don't have an article on the World-Famous Comfort Café on the A11 road (England)) for example, for miles and miles with tourist signage, but it is just a a greasy spoon – and a very good one. Cadbury I think made an enormous easter egg just for publicity, there is the Big Nickel and so on. the article is fine but the redirect is a bit iffy. But then, 'if "if"s and "and"s were "pots and pans" rock and roll would be skiffle'. Si Trew (talk) 13:06, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@SimonTrew: Right, I don't believe that consensus is clear either, but due to the very small amount of input in regards to this RfD, the lack of consensus ("no consensus") may be clearer with even the slightest amount of additional input. Steel1943 (talk) 13:17, 15 May 2014 (UTC) [reply]

World's Largest Pysanka doesn't currently exist. Perhaps moving World's Largest Artificial Pysanka there would solve our problem?--Launchballer 13:22, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. We don't have World Famous Eiffel Tower, World's Largest Turd, World's Largest Penis etc etc ad nauseaum. Take out the "largest" and it would be decent. Move it, per Launchbauller; not perfect but better. Si Trew (talk) 23:45, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep a reasonable redirect for what is the world's largest artificial pysanka. Candleabracadabra (talk) 19:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's a real pysanka. It is an artificial egg. Si Trew (talk) 23:47, 15 May 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.