Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 May 22

May 22

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 22, 2015.

Wrecking Ball

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 move article over redirect (see WP:MALPLACED). --BDD (talk) 14:58, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unsure of the strength of the WP:DIFFCAPS argument with the fact that this redirect targets the disambiguation page Wrecking Ball (disambiguation). Should this actually be retargetted to Wrecking ball? Steel1943 (talk) 20:37, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, it seems unlikely that someone would type "Ball" with a capital B if they were looking for wrecking ball. Also accurate searching should be rewarded. Siuenti (talk) 21:28, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Siuenti. There's a hatnote to wrecking ball at the top of the page anyways--Lenticel (talk) 02:38, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the reasons mentioned by Siuenti. Dimadick (talk) 09:33, 29 May 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.

El Metro 4

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 Metro 4 as ambiguous; keep El Metro 4 as correct nickname. Deryck C. 19:18, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There are plenty of underground railways called Metro 4. I have travelled on two of them, one in Spain and one in Hungary, in the last two weeks ("El" is just the Spanish masculine of "The"). So to redirect it thus is therefore misleading. The term metro by the way was used by the Parisians and named after the Metropolitan Railway, which ran through Metro-Land, so it is a bit of a back-formation. (Don't tell the French, will you? Edward Watkin will have your guts for garters if you do, and I lose my divvy) Si Trew (talk) 06:43, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As a non-admin, I still sucessfully moved the target to Héctor David Delgado Santiago, with the reason that bios should exist at the name of the chap not a nickname. I'd create the {{R from title without diacritics}} but dislike doing that while things are under discussion, that's no work at all to do that once we have consensus here. Si Trew (talk) 07:14, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Plenty of biographies are at nicknames, which is entirely appropriate per WP:COMMONNAME. Many stage names, for example. But I'm not sure about this guy and won't revert you on it. --BDD (talk) 13:19, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment if "Metro 4" is kept, then "El Metro 4" should point to "Metro 4" and "Metro 4" should become a set index of all metro lines called number 4 -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 03:48, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep We could turn the latter into a dab, but if it doesn't have Spanish-language usages, I see no problem redirecting the former to the drug trafficker. Draft a dab, maybe. --BDD (talk) 13:19, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. BDD (talk) 13:30, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep "El Metro 4" which was the nickname of the criminal. Delete Metro 4 which seems generic. Dimadick (talk) 09:32, 29 May 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.

Teething troubles

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 Teething. --BDD (talk) 14:56, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Teething troubles → Dentist  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't think it's helpful to have this phrase redirected to a general article on the dentist. Tavix | Talk  22:21, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete. The closest target that I got is the Treatment section of Teething. It also seems to be an idiom so Weak Soft Retarget to wikt:teething troubles --Lenticel (talk) 00:54, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • REtarget to teething ; though a hatnote could be added for Lenticel's finding of a wiktionary entry -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 06:02, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Retarget to teething and add hat, as above. Si Trew (talk) 06:45, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete the creation comment mentions API production debugging. It must have been some test/diagnostic I was conducting on the Wikimedia cluster and as such should probably be deleted. In July 2013 I was involved in the maintenance of MediaWiki for Wikimedia (see mw:User:Hashar). Hashar (talk) 12:42, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Hashar: so good of you to say so, we all make mistakes, and thank you for all your hard work. However, I still think this is a useful search term at Wikipedia, so some good comes of it, after all! Si Trew (talk) 16:02, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I don't think I've seen many hatnotes to Wiktionary before, if any. Is that a very good idea, per WP:NOTDIC?
Please add new comments below this notice. BDD (talk) 13:29, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • per wiktionary I don't see why not, we're not providing the definition, wiktionary is. We just indicate that a sisterlink exists for this or similar topic -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:27, 24 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Retarget to teething, seems more relevant. Dimadick (talk) 09:25, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Teething, which is more specifically relevant. The idiom might be mentioned in the article (as "in popular culture"?) if anyone thinks it is important, but redirecting plausible searches for information about a topic to Wiktionary whenever the term happens also to be used as a metaphorical idiom would be a recipe for confusion. ~ Ningauble (talk) 18:14, 30 May 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.

Islamic Stater

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. While I'm sort of involved, having voted on the first item, it seems clear that the others were created by a sock of the same user. I think any reasonable admin would make the same decision here. --BDD (talk) 14:53, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another bit of nonsense from vandalism-only-account User:Freidnless lnoner. Nonexistent national demonym. Sammy1339 (talk) 19:04, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per Sammy. The Islamic State (ISIS) is not even a nation state (yet) so it's a bit premature, and also simply wrong and serves no useful purpose. Si Trew (talk) 06:47, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment there's also been recent discussions here about whether ISIS, or ISIL, or both, should redirect to that target, to which I bunged in. I am happy to accept that is just my WP:POV, but at a discussion page I am entitled to have a point of view. Not on an article page of course, but this is not WP:RNEUTRAL in any sense, more WP:PUSHPOV. Si Trew (talk) 11:24, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, Sammy should learn to assume good faith. Secondly, there are dozens of sources that use the term, for example, [1], [2]. Freidnless lnoner (talk) 04:49, 17 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete It doesn't really have anything to do with nationality. A person associated with Islamic State could be called an "Islamic Stater", though somewhat informally. "islamic stater" -wikipedia returns very few results, and not from very reliable sources, so I'm going to say delete this as an obscure synonym. --BDD (talk) 14:01, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as POV. Khestwol (talk) 08:14, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. BDD (talk) 13:26, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, someone who is from a place gets a demonym, not someone who is part of a terrorist organization. BTW: there are a few other redirects like this, including Islamic Staters, Islamic Statesian, Islamic Statist, and Islamic Statists. Tavix | Talk  01:25, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, and Delete all the others Tavix mentioned (which I've added to the nominaton). The more one thinks about this organisation's name the odder it gets, from a linguistic point of view. I was thinking, that since it aims to be an Islamic nation state, it's kinda valid to use it as both the name of the organisation and the name of the potential future state. However since its ultimate goal is (I think) Islam being one global theocracy, the very idea of "state" – at least in the sense of nation state – would become meaningless. Si Trew (talk) 11:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: Islamic Stater was deleted by Beeblebrox as part of a mass deletion of pages added by Freidnless lnoner. Tavix | Talk  17:31, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete These seem to be neologisms with no use by notable sources. Dimadick (talk) 09:23, 29 May 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.

Rec.sport.pro-wrestling

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) 14:51, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. The possibility of expanding the redirect into an article is limited, because newsgroups are generally not notable, and I've found no evidence that this case is different. SoledadKabocha (talk) 06:53, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - it's not directing the readers to what they're looking for. I think a general BBS article might be a better target, but even then, I don't think it's likely to be useful to a reader. WilyD 13:27, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    • Why would a BBS article be appropriate for a usenet forum? NNTP access does not need a BBS -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:34, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is a misleading redirect. It has little or nothing to do with the target article. Dimadick (talk) 09:20, 29 May 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.

NAT hole punching

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 procedural close now that NAT hole punching has been converted to an article. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 18:42, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • NAT hole punching → Hole punching  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

cleared all redirects, no need to keep page Compfreak7 (talk) 06:40, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This seems to be a far better title for the target than the current one is, and in fact I have initiated a move request on those grounds. I'm not sure why we would want to delete it, but I'm sure that "cleared all redirects, no need to keep page" is not a reason to. 209.211.131.181 (talk) 10:58, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - plausible search term, seems to send readers to what they're looking for. No reason suggested for deletion. WilyD 13:25, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep no rationale for deletion presented. And I don't see why you'd clear all uses of the redirect, indeed, it can be inappropriate to have done so in the first place, since the meaning of "hole punching" is under discussion at talk:hole punching, meaning the reversal of all these changes you've made -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:47, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Valid search term. Dimadick (talk) 09:17, 29 May 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.

National Anthem of the Pakistan

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 the delete. --BDD (talk) 14:50, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • National Anthem of the Pakistan → Qaumi Taranah  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is an entirely implausible search term, unlike National Anthem of the Ukraine, for example. - TheChampionMan1234 03:13, 22 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete inaccurate grammatically. Khestwol (talk) 08:18, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. As opposite examples, where "The" would be expected, National Anthem of United Kingdom and National Anthem of Netherlands are also red. National Anthem of The Ukraine is also red (caps on "The"), but that would also be inaccurate would it not, since "The Ukraine" was not a country. Si Trew (talk) 11:16, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete:Grammatical mistake should be corrected.--Human3015 Say Hey!! • 19:53, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Who ever calls this country "the Pakistan"? Dimadick (talk) 09:15, 29 May 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_May_22&oldid=1151361754"