Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 May 3

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:28, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Intensive and extensive farming → Intensive farming  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Textbook WP:XY (see Extensive farming). I couldn't find a place that really compares the two in a useful way. Perhaps something could be added at Agriculture#Types. BDD (talk) 18:36, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as unuseful; searching "X and Y" should not end you up at "X". Or, possibly retarget to an article that compares the two subjects, if any exist. Geolodus (talk) 18:34, 7 May 2019 (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:28, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• The Royal Malaysian Navy Portal → Portal:Malaysia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

In addition to the rationale found at #Portal:Royal Malaysian Navy, this is also an XNR. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:35, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Misleading cross-namespace redirect. UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:03, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• (edit conflict) Delete per nom. Inappropriate cross-namespace redirect, and Malaysia's navy is not mentioned at the target. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  21:06, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per others above. I cannot imagine a situation in which this redirect would be useful; all even remotely plausible ones would result in readers being mislead due to the lack of a mention on the target. Geolodus (talk) 18:46, 7 May 2019 (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:28, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Battle Tube → List of Pokémon characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't know what this is. —Xezbeth (talk) 12:31, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Searches show non-notable uses. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:34, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Not sure how this happened: the actual name of the thing in game is "Battle Pike", and even then that would be a real redirect reach. This was a redirect to a character article which was then redirected to a list. Raymie (t • c) 03:58, 4 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete "Battle Tube" is the Japanese name of the Battle Pike in the Battle Frontier in Pokémon Emerald. It's a location, not a character, and not specifically mentioned anywhere as far as I know. Raymond1922 (talk) 03:01, 5 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or redirect to either Pokémon Emerald or Gameplay of Pokémon § Battle facilities (where Emerald's Battle Frontier is mentioned). Both of those targets would be mediocre since the Battle Pike is not explicitly mentioned at either, so I prefer deletion. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  20:59, 5 May 2019 (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:28, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Battle Suit (comics) → Stilt-Man#Powers and abilities  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Too vague, there are a ton of characters in comics that have a battle suit of some kind. Powered exoskeleton doesn't list any fictional versions (nor should it) so there is nowhere useful to point this to. —Xezbeth (talk) 12:27, 3 May 2019 (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:28, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

Promotional redirect, LostNUnbound has no other mention on Wikipedia. Leschnei (talk) 12:15, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as YouTuber [1] who does not have an article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:27, 3 May 2019 (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:28, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Portal:Royal Malaysian Navy → Portal:Malaysia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete There is no content related to the Navy at the target portal; a reader will be sorely disappointed. UnitedStatesian (talk) 11:30, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 14:57, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There is also The Royal Malaysian Navy Portal, which I have nominated above. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:36, 3 May 2019 (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 soft delete Thryduulf (talk) 10:09, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Uk-roi tv net infobox/service → Template:Infobox television channel  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not something anyone would type in for a redirect and should not be considered a valid use in an article as its very hard to understand Gonnym (talk) 08:34, 26 April 2019 (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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 01:27, 11 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Tim Malyon → Battle of the Beanfield  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A redirect from a witness to the target article's subject that receives almost no coverage in the article: the sole information we have about them is that they were a freelance photographer and that they had to run away. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 07:32, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Searches show another Tim Malyon who is a head of research at FIA [2] but is not mentioned on that article either. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:29, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Even if this Tim Malyon is notable, which is possible, the Battle of the Beanfield article says nothing significant about him. Moonraker (talk) 23:58, 6 May 2019 (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 Anal leakage. (non-admin closure) B dash (talk) 09:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Anal seepage → Fecal incontinence  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

term not mentioned in the target article Colgatepony234 (talk) 02:21, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Anal leakage, most reasonable target. --Slashme (talk) 14:01, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to anal leakage as a more plausible target. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 08:14, 3 May 2019 (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 General officer. (non-admin closure) B dash (talk) 09:30, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• High General → Star Wars (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A fictional rank that is not mentioned at the target article or any other Star Wars article. This isn't even unique to Star Wars. —Xezbeth (talk) 13:26, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Tlacateccatl ("general") describes the rank Tlacochcalcatl as translating to "high general", but that article just translates it as "general" - I guess that this is roughly equivalent to the difference between General (United States) and General of the Army (Untied States), both of which would be plausibly be translated as just "General" into distant languages/cultures. So that might make a suitable target. Alternatively maybe a list of characters with the title might work, with Tlacochcalcatl as a see also. Thryduulf (talk) 13:57, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to General officer which explains the various types of generals. 18:33, 26 April 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AngusWOOF (talk • contribs)
  • That works for me. Thryduulf (talk) 11:42, 27 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to general officer. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 14:55, 3 May 2019 (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 disambiguate. (non-admin closure) B dash (talk) 09:29, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• FAPI → Polokwane International Airport  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target explicitly says that it is not to be confused with the nearby Pietersburg Civil Aerodrome (ICAO: FAPI).. While this may be the only article that FAPI is currently mentioned on, it seems potentially confusing to redirect to a target that is frequently confused with this acronym _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:44, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• You could create an article for Pietersburg Civil Aerodrome. cagliost (talk) 07:57, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or disambig. The current target is incorrect, but on Wikipedia FAPI gets mentions as a Fellow of the Australian Property Institute, Functional APIs (see Network Processing Forum#Software interoperability agreements, Foreign Accrual Property Income rules (see mentioned at Copthorne Holdings Ltd v Canada). On google the most prominent usage is "Financial-grade API" which should probably be mentioned at Application programming interface but currently isn't. Thryduulf (talk) 19:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• I turned it into a disambiguation page. cagliost (talk) 06:53, 10 May 2019 (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. (non-admin closure) B dash (talk) 09:29, 10 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Shareconomy → Sharing economy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Neologism, and also seems to be the name of a company. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 00:24, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as is not at target. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 08:12, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Synonym of sharing economy [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11], etc. Also used in a TV show [12][13][14]. Please do a web search next time. —Thibaut120094 (talk) 10:15, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as portmanteau. [15] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:31, 3 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the above evidence of use, seems to have been a failure of WP:BEFORE here. Thryduulf (talk) 19:52, 3 May 2019 (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.