Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 February 5

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) 14:39, 12 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• 25 (Adele album) → Adele  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Article has been deleted at AFD and was later recreated as a redirect. While I understand admin Kww's rationale in fully protecting the redirect, it really shouldn't even be a redirect at all as the album's title hasn't even officially been announced. Pure WP:CRYSTAL, and should probably be salted. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:23, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep viable search term, the "25" title is addressed in the section the redirect targets -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 06:37, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per above. There are also several media reports of this being the title of her third album. This is Paul (talk) 13:03, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• The problem is that none of these reports have officially confirmed it to be the title. Only speculation. Snuggums (talk / edits) 14:51, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I think that's a problem for the article, not the redirect. Ref 126, the Daily Mail, does not say it will be called 25; Ref 127, Capital FM, says it is "Rumoured to be" and assuming that is RS, it's OK to report that an RS reports a rumour (that's the S in RS). If it has coverage as such in an RS then it should stay. If Capital FM is not RS, and since there are not multiple RS, it would be weak to argue for a keep, though. Si Trew (talk) 21:00, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Capital FM is a reliable source, Daily Mail is not. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:22, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• It's a redirect, not an article name. It is a viable search term. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 04:37, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I am aware that it is a redirect, but it actually is not (yet) a plausible redirect since there so far is no official confirmation that it will even be the album's title. We can't simply go by speculation when it comes to search terms. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:40, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirects are not restricted to official names. Indeed redirects exist because there are names that aren't official that should be available to access information -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 05:19, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• The problem in this case is that it is only based on rumors and speculation, therefore rendering it implausible. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:20, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• No, that is why it is a plausible search term. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 07:00, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - rumour is discussed at the target, and media speculation of the rumoured title is reliably sourced (weakly but enough for this). The rumoured title passes WP:CRYSTAL but the album itself doesn't at this point, and the redirect treatment is appropriate in this case. Also support per Kww's rationale of protecting the redirect to prevent article creation - it's better than salting in this case. Ivanvector (talk) 22:32, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. What matters for redirects like this is that they are plausible search terms, and if there are rumours and speculation that this will be an album title then it is very plausible that people will search for information about it using this title. Thryduulf (talk) 13:16, 7 February 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.

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 Steve Forrest. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 17:59, 11 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Steven Forrest → Placebo (band)  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/delete ] 

Suggest Delete redirect as the band member is not named Steven Forrest. His name is Steve Forrest (musician).OpenMind 14:02, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

• Delete - current redirect is simply to a band, not a person. Onel5969 (talk) 15:39, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:RFD#DELETE #2: may be confusing. There is a marginally notable astrologer and author named Steven Forrest ([1]) about whom we don't have an article, and I think he would fail WP:GNG if we did. However, I don't see any evidence that the Steve Forrest of Placebo ever went by Steven. Alternatively, retarget to Steve Forrest (musician) as {{R from alternate name}}, possibly. Ivanvector (talk) 20:46, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• 'Retarget to the DAB page at Steve Forrest, which lists the musician and Steve Forrest (actor). Presumably neither is considered WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Whether or not Steve the musician ever was called Steven, it's a likely search term.

Stephen Forrest is red, as you see. Si Trew (talk) 21:03, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment a WP search for "Steve Forest" (one "R") brings up a couple of music articles After the Love and Twilight (Cover Drive song) but neither, I think, refers to the same musician. Si Trew (talk) 21:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per Si Trew, whose research is again better than mine. Steve Forest (one R) is indeed a different musician, an apparently non-notable DJ and remix artist. Ivanvector (talk) 15:19, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to the dab page. It is quite likely that one or both of the people there are sometimes (even if mistakenly) referred to as "Steven". Thryduulf (talk) 13:19, 7 February 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.