Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 May 2

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) feminist (talk) 04:41, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Stormi Webster → Kylie Jenner#Personal life  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:NOTABILITY. Not enough redirection. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panam2014 (talk • contribs) 22:56, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as {{R from relative}}. An article on this person would be inappropriate, so having the name as a redirect is a feature, not a bug. --BDD (talk) 13:58, 7 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I agree w/ BDD. It is completely plausible that one would search for this person. Redirects are generally a dime-a-dozen. -- Dolotta (talk) 04:54, 9 May 2018 (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.

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. As mentioned, this entirely hinged on whether the content was included in the article. It hasn't been there for almost a week, so that alone tilts us towards deletion—albeit a weak one, in which the redirect could easily be restored if there was consensus to discuss the shooting. I also take John from Idegon's point about potential ambiguity, as should anyone who might put something at this title in the future. --BDD (talk) 16:14, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Forest High School shooting → Forest High School (Florida)#2018 shooting  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target contains no information about a shooting. Steel1943 (talk) 16:04, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - It does now. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:05, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. It seems like the question should be whether or not there should be information on the shooting at the target. There looks to have been an edit war of sorts at the target, which Jax 0677 has instigated by re-adding the information to the target. I'll ping the other participants and see if we can get something worked out: John from Idegon, Yeenosaurus. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:25, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - I apologize for edit warring in violation of WP:BRD, but if this info remains, Redirects are cheap. --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:42, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - I added the information on the shooting and reformatted the page without knowledge of any previous edit warring. Even though the event does not have much long term significant, I think it should at least be worth mentioning on the page considering the national news coverage it received. Yeenosaurus (talk) 🍁 23:41, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply - I agree with Yeenosaurus, that such an event at the school deserves at least a mention on the page of the school. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:39, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - There is a discussion taking place about the shooting at Talk:Forest High School (Florida). --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:45, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment There is presently no mention of the shooting in the article, but the talk page discussion fizzled out with that looks to me like a weak consensus in favour of including a mention. Pinging those who commented: @Jax 0677, Yeenosaurus, John from Idegon, and Ansh666:. Thryduulf (talk) 22:08, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • No there isn't. I've been holding off replying until the editor with the WP:ILIKEIT vote fleshed it out. Clearly, this does not belong. A violent crime in an urban school? Whoodathunk it? The ONLY reason this made the national news at all was because of the closeness in timeframe and geography to the MSD shooting. Altho I haven't dug yet, I highly doubt this is the only shooting ever to have occurred at this particular school. Even the one reasonable !vote concedes this isn't a big deal. Regardless of whether this is included in the article or not, having a title at this name is ludicrous. Additionally, this is not the only Forest High School in the US ([1]) John from Idegon (talk) 22:24, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Reply - Per the sources on the school talk page, the shooting should be mentioned, and unless there is some higher use, the redirect should remain. "Altho I haven't dug yet, I highly doubt this is the only shooting ever to have occurred at this particular school" is speculation, so please bring data. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:49, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per this, there has been a shooting at another Forest High School, this one with a fatality. The only plausable course is to delete. John from Idegon (talk) 01:17, 8 May 2018 (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.

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 List of association football mascots#Scotland. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 04:41, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Hoopy the Huddle Hound → Celtic F.C.  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Hoopy the huddle hound → Celtic F.C.  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The only place this is mentioned on Wikipedia is List of association football mascots, but there are no redirects there from any single mascot. Do such redirects seem like a good idea, or should we delete? --BDD (talk) 20:57, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. --BDD (talk) 20:58, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Change target - to List of association football mascots. GiantSnowman 07:53, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to mascot list until it is developed as a section or paragraph in Celtic F.C. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:15, 3 May 2018 (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.

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. No real argument for the existence of this, clear housekeeping of some kind of temporary title. ~ mazca ^talk 23:45, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Bronx-Whitestone Bridge (old history) → Bronx–Whitestone Bridge  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This does not contain old history, since it was created as a result of a page move in 2007. It is an implausible redirect since very few people will think to look for the disambiguator. epicgenius (talk) 19:44, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete All the history points to this being a temporary title used when fixing a cut and paste move in November 2007 and thus no longer necessary. Thryduulf (talk) 22:14, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as housekeeping temporary title. Nothing to histmerge. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:33, 8 May 2018 (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.

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. Potentially a useful target for this redirect could exist, but the current target is found by consensus to be not helpful. ~ mazca ^talk 23:46, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Clear backpack → Wissahickon High School  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A redirect to content in a single school article, that was trivial enough to be removed from the target article. The topic "clear backpack", altho not in any way notable, has 0 to do with a school. John from Idegon (talk) 18:37, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. There are reliable sources about clear backpacks that suggest there might be something encyclopaedic that could be written about the controversy surrounding them, but they all seem to relate to the Stoneman Douglas High School shooting. Our article on that has less than a single sentence, "... the requirement that all book bags must be transparent." and so nowhere enough to support a redirect. The most content on WP I've been able to find about it though is at North Forest High School, where there is the sentence "After the shooting, the school began requiring all students to have transparent backpacks.", again not enough to support a redirect. There is no mention of transparency, "clear" or any other synonyms I could think of at backpack (and the controversy, which is most likely what is being looked for, would be tangential to that article anyway). Thryduulf (talk) 22:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: there's probably a notable topic around the Clear backpack policy, but a redirect to a particular school is not helpful to readers. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:00, 3 May 2018 (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.

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. There is a consensus that this is both unhelpful and ambiguous. ~ mazca ^talk 23:47, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Second son of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge → Prince Louis of Cambridge  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete as a placeholder no longer necessary. Similar to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 October 1#First child of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, Prince Louis of Cambridge is not the only person this applies to. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:29, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: unnecessary. --K.e.coffman (talk) 01:59, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Just to make sure, I verified that at least one other Duke of Cambridge had a second son. The answer is yes: see George II of Great Britain#Issue and Prince George, Duke of Cambridge#Issue. --BDD (talk) 15:55, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for the ambiguity discussed above. To add to the ambiguity, I would've called Prince Louis their third son because their second child is a daughter. Deryck C. 10:09, 10 May 2018 (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.

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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:07, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Alan Ashby (Guitarist) → Of Mice & Men (band)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unnecessary, WP:COSTLY redirect due to the use of a capital "G" in the disambiguator, and since its equivalent with a lowercase "g", Alan Ashby (guitarist), exists. Steel1943 (talk) 16:39, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per {{R from move}} and {{R from other capitalisation}} as the redirect existed at this title for ~18 months until 6 days ago. There is zero maintenance overhead for this redirect (watching the title for vandalism takes at most exactly the same effort as watching the title for recreation) so WP:COSTLY is even less relevant that usual (and that takes some doing) - WP:CHEAP is what applies here. Thryduulf (talk) 22:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • FWIW and IMHO, {{R from other capitalisation}} doesn't apply to disambiguators, and {{R from move}} only applies if a redirect's target is where the redirect's former content moved. Steel1943 (talk) 02:36, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:19, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Harmless and takes readers where they'd want to go—or at least as close as we'll let them. Since there's been discussion of Rcats, I'd give {{R avoided double redirect|Alan Ashby (guitarist)}}, followed by {{R from miscapitalization}}, the idea being that Rcats following "avoided double redirect" explain the relationship between the redirects. As far as I know, though, I'm the only one who follows that practice specifically. --BDD (talk) 16:11, 11 May 2018 (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.

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) 16:07, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• The Ultimate Showdown of ltimate destiny → Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Now that the edit history that was previously at this title has since been moved to Ultimate Showdown of Ultimate Destiny (song) ... since this redirect is a highly unlikely misspelling of its target with the missing "U" and the lowercase "d" on "destiny", this redirect should be deleted as unhelpful and unlikely. Steel1943 (talk) 16:18, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom as implausible typo. Nothing in the stylization of the title hints that U would be interpreted as an I. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:35, 8 May 2018 (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.

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 Wrong forum. Howpper, the proper venue for requesting that a title have its creation protection removed is Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Also, it may be advisable to have a draft article ready for moving to this title prior to the page being unprotected, if one has not been created already. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 16:26, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• iDubbbzTV → iDubbbz  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A redirect must be created by an administrator from a protected page. The page was deleted multiple times (and then protected) because the subject did not meet the criteria for notability, but the subject's single Asian Jake Paul charted, so the subject now meets the criteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Howpper (talk • contribs) 15:41, 2 May 2018 (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.

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 List of Final Fantasy video games. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 04:43, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Final Fantasy Online → Final Fantasy XI  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirect was created before there were 2 online games in the FF series. Currently it has no clear target and should be deleted. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 03:43, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Turning it into a disambiguation page would be better than deleting it, I think.--Alexandra IDV^talk 10:21, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak redirect to PlayOnline as a {{R from incorrect name}}. Otherwise, Delete as vague, considering that this title is not a title match for Final Fantasy XI or Final Fantasy XIV, rendering a disambiguation page not as helpful as Wikipedia's search results that would appear if this redirect was deleted. Steel1943 (talk) 16:47, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Turns out that Square Enix has been attempting to phase out the PlayOnline service, so striking out that option as redirecting readers there is not helpful anymore. (I haven't played Final Fantasy XIV, but have played Final Fantasy XI, so I assumed the former used the PlayOnline service, but turns out that I was wrong.) Steel1943 (talk) 16:51, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to List of Final Fantasy video games as there are multiple titles now that are Online. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:19, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  The issue I see with this option is that because the "O" in "Online" is in caps, it could be used as a search term for an actual title of a game, which no such game (as the title of this redirect) exists. That, and it could still be used as a misnomer for the PlayOnline service. Steel1943 (talk) 17:49, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retrget to List of Final Fantasy video games per AngusWoof, with a hatnote to PlayOnline if desired. The capitalisation is not relevant as we don't require people to know how we capitalise our pages in order to be allowed to read them. Thryduulf (talk) 10:51, 2 May 2018 (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.

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) 16:04, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Anna Bell → Ashley Bell  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A redirect to a {{hndis}} page. There is no sign that either of the people on that hndis page is ever called Anna. However, there was an Anna Bell who might scrape through WP:GNG - a jazz singer, and she's linked in QRS Records. I propose deletion to turn that bad bluelink red. Narky Blert (talk) 09:40, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Annabel disambiguation as phonetic like how Franken Stein or Frank N. Stein would go to Frankenstein (disambiguation) or Frankenstein's monster AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:11, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That does not solve the problem of jazz singer Anna Bell. It just hides the problem in a different, equally useless, way. Narky Blert (talk) 00:34, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like her voice had been wrecked by too many ciggies: I Don't Care Who Gets What I Don't Want

There's also a modern Quebecois artist called Anna Bell. She may or may not be notable (no article in frwiki), but a redirect to Annabel would damage not help. Narky Blert (talk) 00:49, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why would it damage? If any of the Bells are notable, you can just create the article as primary topic and hatnote to the dab. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:58, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment note there are a number of people with given name Anna Bell or Anna Belle All pages with titles beginning with Anna Bell. I have added them to the Annabelle (given name) dab. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:10, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also a number of singers with the other spellings, as listed on that dab page and the Annabelle (given name) page. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:37, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. There isn't an article on any Anna Bell. Search is better. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:43, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, the existing redirect is clearly unhelpful, and while "Anna Bell" is a plausible misspelling of Annabel, it's equally far from common. This appears to be a circumstance where, barring a more notable primary topic, the search function is most useful. ~ mazca ^talk 23:40, 10 May 2018 (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.

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) 21:13, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Clout from grandmas closet → SKAM Austin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This title for a fictional band from a web TV series was redirected to the series' article. But Google has no hits for "Clout from grandmas closet" or "Clout from grandma's closet", other than another article here, so it seems to be, at best, insignificant cruft worthy of deletion. Largoplazo (talk) 09:36, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete cannot find any evidence of its usage. And the article has shorter, more memorable title. It is not useful anyway. –Ammarpad (talk) 10:16, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. No news articles to suggest anything past WP:NEO AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:12, 2 May 2018 (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.

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 deleted per WP:G7. See below. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Successful (Ariana Grande song) → Sweetener (album)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Sweetener (song) → Sweetener (album)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Breathing (Ariana Grande song) → Sweetener (album)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Borderline (Ariana Grande song) → Sweetener (album)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Blessed (Ariana Grande song) → Sweetener (album)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These were created based on speculation sourced to a few frames of a music video where "Track List" is shown written on a few pages in front of the singer, with some details crossed out. Speculative at best; removed from the target article as these specific titles were not adequately sourced (of those remaining in the article, Grande confirmed them in an interview). It looks like we've reached the day on Wikipedia where Easter eggs in music videos suffice as well-sourced information. Ss112 09:35, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ss112: Did you nominate Raindrops by mistake? It's an intro to the album and Grande announced it herself. Other than that I don't oppose to deleting all of them, apparently I didn't look close enough at the sources, might as well G7 them. Hayman30 (talk) 09:42, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that was a mistake. I have removed it. Ss112 09:44, 2 May 2018 (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.

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 delete per WP:CSD#G6 - redirect created when moving a page obviously created in an incorrect namespace. Thryduulf (talk) 09:32, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Michael McCrudden(Before They Were Famous) → Draft:Michael McCrudden(Before They Were Famous)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not a useful redirect; product of an undiscussed and improper move of a draft to Wikipedia: space. General Ization ^Talk 03:46, 2 May 2018 (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.

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. The emerging consensus is that this template title is too vague for us to decide which template it should point to. Deryck C. 10:17, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Really → Template:Peacock term  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Template:Really? → Template:Peacock term  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I came across these when I attempted to use one as a shortcut for {{dubious}} and was surprised that instead it redirected to {{Peacock term}}. The two shortcuts have a total of 32 transclusions, in quite a few of which the intended meaning doesn't seem related to the current target, see for example Hybrid mail or Marek Hłasko. I don't know if outright deletion is the optimal solution as these might be likely to get recreated, in which case the best thing would be to deprecate them. Just noting that the second shortcut has been listed in the template's documentation since 2008. – Uanfala (talk) 12:37, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as far too vague ({{citation needed}}, {{dubious}}, etc. could also be referred to with that title). Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 02:27, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Nope, there doesn't seem to be any good targets for these redirects. ToThAc (talk) 14:07, 2 May 2018 (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.

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. Ultimately, I have to give greater weight to the arguments based on page views, which strongly suggest this is not, in fact, a plausible search term. --BDD (talk) 21:11, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, badger, mushroom, mushroom → Badgers (animation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Don't get me wrong, this is a fantastic redirect, but I can't imagine many people are typing it in. Especially since there's one "badger" too few... Thegreatluigi (talk) 20:22, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete it's quoting the second verse no? Legacypac (talk) 20:36, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as Badger Badger Badger and Badger Mushroom already exist. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:19, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep It's relevant, and I could *kind of* imagine someone typing it in, but more likely Googling it. Jjjjjjdddddd (talk) 02:24, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Badger, badger, badger redirect covers the case for typing with commas. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:23, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unless someone is copy and pasting the full verse, which is likely how the redirect was created. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:19, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete- I just created Badger, badger, mushroom, mushroom as a catch all for this sort of search term. Maybe my page is stupid too, but less so :P ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 22:23, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Great animation ... REDIRECTSARECHEAP and all that. –Davey2010^Talk 17:59, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, the redirect goes where it should and it's harmless. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:09, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Ah, a simpler time. It concerns me there's now been an Internet culture for long enough things can count as old-fashioned Internet culture. Anyway, this is how these kind of viral things work; it's not implausible to see the whole thing typed out, it's not implausible to copypaste and search it to try and track down the original animation if it's been years since you saw it. TL;DR: very plausible search term. Silly? Perhaps. Notability doesn't discriminate on such grounds. -- BobTheIP editing as 88.111.202.102 (talk) 22:13, 27 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - not a useful redirect, evidenced by its absolute absence of pageviews (that means zero). It's the wrong number of badgers, and besides it's "badgers, badgers, badgers, ..." etc. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:27, 30 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Ivanvector. We shouldn't autocomplete our readers' query with the wrong number of badger(s). Deryck C. 16:29, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - inaccurate and unlikely search term, already covered by other, saner redirects. Richard⁰⁶¹² 13:09, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Low pageviews compared to the other redirects. ToThAc (talk) 14:12, 2 May 2018 (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.

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) 21:07, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Wiener Landtag und Gemeinderat → Gemeinderat and Landtag of Vienna  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. It also appears to be a German translation of the English title(?). TheSandDoctor ^Talk 01:13, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, it's the native title. Lordtobi (✉) 06:12, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:FORRED and Lordtobi. We should have redirects from the native names of non-English subjects like this. Thryduulf (talk) 09:36, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:FORRED. The German title is de:Wiener Gemeinderat und Landtag, but switching the two nouns is a plausible minor error. Narky Blert (talk) 09:51, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Gemeinderat and Landtag of Vienna is an English translation of the German title. Not the other way round. <sigh /> Narky Blert (talk) 00:58, 3 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Delete. WP:FORRED does not apply. The Gemeinderat of Vienna and the Landtag of Vienna are two separate entities that are described in one article because they consist of the same people and meet in the same building. (In addition to its primary jobs, the city council of the City of Vienna is also vested with the powers and responsibilities of the provincial council of the Province of Vienna. City and Province are coextensive. Austrian provinces don't actually do very much.) Nobody will ever enter "Wiener Landtag und Gemeinderat" into an English Wikipedia search box. Nobody even enters "Wiener Landtag und Gemeinderat" into a German Wikipedia search box. Users enter Wiener Gemeinderat and get redirected. Kramler (talk) 03:16, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This DuckDuckGo search shows that local German-language media do sometimes use the words "Wiener Landtag und Gemeinderat" in this exact sequence to refer to these two concurrent organisations. I think it makes sense to keep the redirect for readers who read those German articles and start thinking "Wiener Landtag und Gemeinderat" is one organisation with a long name. Deryck C. 10:15, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Personally I'd say it's a loooooong shot but I think I can see your point. Downgrading my vote. Kramler (talk) 10:20, 10 May 2018 (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.