[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 May 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 7
May 9 >

May 8

[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 8, 2016.

List of Distros created with remastersys

[edit]
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. JohnCD (talk) 13:18, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Target is not a list. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 23:11, 8 May 2016 (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.

Opulences

[edit]
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. JohnCD (talk) 13:18, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This was reverted by Hullaballo.. That is like saying Wealths. Neelix nonsense although at ANI I have been told off for it in fact nominated for suspension by Si Trew (talk) 22:33, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete and trout Hallaballo for wasting everyone's time protecting fake words created by Neelix Legacypac (talk) 04:26, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Opulences is a valid word. It's used in English versions of the Bhagavad Gita, for one, among other literary works. It would be reasonable to write something like: "The leader of North Korea has made sure to put his face on as many of his personal opulences as possible, particularly given his interest in large, gaudy buildings." However, it's not the same as "wealth". A more accurate target would be something like "immovable property" or "real estate", but that's still too much of a stretch. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:13, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not a dictionary. This should only be added if there was a notable book or film with the title. It would also redirect to a common term "wealth" which would be removed in an overlinking run. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:53, 9 May 2016 (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.

Ghey

[edit]
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. JohnCD (talk) 13:15, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I propose deleting this redirect. Currently, it points to Gay#Generalized pejorative use, where there used to be (c. 2008) a discussion of the usage of "ghey" as an alternative, non-sexual spelling. However, now the section (indeed, the entire page) doesn't mention "ghey" at all, making this redirect confusing. clpo13(talk) 21:58, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm I think I dunno cos I could imagine Ghee is a more likely target considering it is made from Whey so perhaps this is WP:RFD#D2 confusing per WP:XY. Dunno. Si Trew (talk) 22:35, 8 May 2016 (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 Arena

[edit]
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 national stadiums. JohnCD (talk) 13:21, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Should this be a disambiguation page or something? Many arenas are national arenas. Qed237 (talk) 21:09, 8 May 2016 (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.

Mastoplasty

[edit]
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 ostensibly withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:16, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(neelix redirect) this makes sense to me but it is not a mammolasty but a mastoplasty. Breast obsession. I have listed a lot of others a CSD but is this plasible_ I think it is but it is a bit of a breas obsession of Neelix Si Trew (talk) 20:47, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep. The opening phrase of the target article is "Mammaplasty (also called mammoplasty[1] or mastoplasty)". It is hard to conceive of a more appropriate redirect. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 20:55, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
tangent not related to discussion of this redirect
User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz I have asked you several times to explain your actions when reverting my listings at CSD when apparently you are not an admin. I have no problem with a disagreeement, that is just WP:BRD but I do not understand when if you are not an admin you can boldly decline my WP:G6 neelix concessions at CSD. Now perhaps I am going mad but I asked you both at your talk page and at my talk page and you still will not reply, whhat I got of course was at my talk page there was an WP:ANI discussion and there is no ANI discussion but it was said and reverted by you at my talk page. I should ask you kindly to suggest why as a non admin you think you can delete things at CSD because as just a humble WP:WIKIGNOME I can't. I think if you are an admin that is fair and sensible to give a response to a user's questions. If you are not an admin you have no right to go deleting things off CSD as speedily keep or whatever. As it happens with this one I agree with you but there are stacks of WP:G6 neeelix redirects as he had a bit of a breast fetish it seems, fortunately I have a wife and I don't need a breast fetish because they just about reach here knees (nobody is as young as when they were, er, when they were younger), but I think an explanation of why you are either pretending to be an admin, or speedily declining things at CSD when you are not an admin, saying on my talk page that it has been listed at WP:ANI, deleting my question on your talk page, is all a bit confusing to me. If this goes I will assume bad faith. Si Trew (talk) 21:37, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
You have never posted to my talk page (or at least not since last September), unless you posted as an anon/IP vandal. I have never reverted anything on your talk page. I have never pretended to be an admin. I have responded to your questions, and you have generally refused to engage, moving on to demand that I respond to the same question somewhere else. You very seriously need to improve your WP:COMPETENCE. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 22:30, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That is entirely untrue, I have a history of your edit page and my edit page and you continually take out anything I ask you. Thanks for taking me to WP:ANI. We can therefore discuss it there. Si Trew (talk) 22:37, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Post a link to one of those nonexistent posts you claim you made to my talk page. Post a link to one of those nonexistent reverts you claim I made to your talk page, or any other discussion you initiated. If not, I'll take it as an admission you're lying. As will any other sensisble user. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 23:22, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is an appropriate alternative name, per [1], [2], wikt:mastoplasty, etc. clpo13(talk) 22:36, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Speedily keep. I was not sure about this one what with being a mix of Latin and Greek. I did check the target but Neelix had a bit of a breast obsession so I was not sure on this one, I listed several others straight to CSD which I got told off about by another editor who either is or is not an admin. Since that editor patently is not an admin by not quite his own confession he should not be CSD'ing things if he is not an admin. I think I should get some food on the Bachelor griller and perhaps a drink from my Tantalus (cabinet) oh my ears and whiskers two other articles I created, I thought we were here to make the encylopaaedia better. I don't go deleting anything that I am not sure about. THe ANI listing is absurd becase I am not an admin nor want to be, but someone who is doing CSD on my listings is then claiming a ANI that I am. I have a talk page but that user does not seem to wish to reply there, User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz you know damned well which user i am on about. That user seems not to be an admin so should not take stuff out of CSD. People with respect like User:BDD can do that. I have never wanted to be would not be capable to be i am just a WP:WIKIGNOME. I did get a great comptometer today for about five hundred forint (two US dollars) I need to clean it up and it will be fine. Made in Asia but I think that must have been when we (the British) owned it. Si Trew (talk) 22:54, 8 May 2016 (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.

Crataegus polyclada

[edit]
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 per discussion.--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 22:27, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm this is not a target. In the infobox there is paradoxa and stuff (I don't know why this would be particularly paradoxical) but I cab't see anyhwere that there is polyclada or anjthink in the genus or genera going upwards. I am probably mistaken but I don't see it Si Trew (talk) 20:05, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete?. Crataegus polyclada is in the synonym list in the taxobox at Crateagus crus-galli, 4 down from paradoxa. I can't check the source cited for the synonym list at the moment, but the synonymy checks out here. There's nothing wrong with this redirect, it could be kept.

But there are 32 synonyms listed at Crataegus crus-galli and the other 31 don't have redirects yet. Are we at en.Wiki going to create redirects for all of them? I'm not going to and I actually care about this kind of thing. Wikispecies isn't really dealing with creating pages for taxonomic synonyms. Wikidata handles synonyms reluctantly, when forced by various language Wikipedias. en.wiki doesn't have the editor base to handle taxonomic synonym redirects in any rational way. There is one incoming link to Crataegus polyclada from C. polyclada but Neelix created that dab page, and Category:Species Latin name abbreviation disambiguation pages is another nest full of Neelix creations that create more problems than they solve. Plantdrew (talk) 03:03, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This is a pointless redirect as Plantdrew notes. Such redirects are harmful, because they will not be maintained. Searching will find all synonyms in taxoboxes; redirects are needed if and only if they might be used as wikilinks. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:58, 9 May 2016 (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.

Обама

[edit]
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--Ymblanter (talk) 08:21, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:R#DELETE 8.If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects from a foreign language title to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created. Implausible typos or misnomers are candidates for speedy deletion, if recently created. NE Ent 19:56, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well that may be as such, but this was created on 7 May by [User:[Фред-Продавец звёзд]] on 7 May 2016 and redirected te day afer to it its crrent target. I take WP:CSD but now because essentially you have put your foot it in I think it unlikely to go there, but will try. Si Trew (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • This redirect is from Russian word to the page about Russian phrase. At 1st, I can't understand why article is named with non-cyrillic words (because original phrase is Обама - чмо!, not Obama chmo!). At 2nd, this redirect is normal because it is a Russian word from this phrase. Sorry for my English, I'm Russian. Фред-Продавец звёзд (talk) 20:18, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RFOREIGN. Sorry for your Russian, but this is the English encylopaedia. To an english audience I would think Обама went to Barak Obama, so in the English Wikipedia I do not think this is helpful. Thank you for your swift reply. Together we can work to make the target better, and I shall be happy to do that (I don't understand much Russian but I translate from a few other languages) so Фред-Продавец звёзд I am more than happy to do that together thee and me, I don't think the redirect at the moment makes much sense. The article is not great but it's a start and that's just WP:NOTFINISHED, we can work on it together. Si Trew (talk) 20:54, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I understand your opinion. But... Can you speak me, why article is named "Obama chmo!", not "Обама - чмо!"? This is Russian phrase, and it was written with Cyrillic text. For example, in RuWP all pages with English names are named in English with Latin text (example: ru:Make love, not war, not Мэйк лав, нот воэ). Фред-Продавец звёзд (talk) 22:59, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Фред-Продавец звёзд: on en-wikipedia, the relevant policy is Use English in Article Titles. It specifically states that "Names not originally in a Latin alphabet, such as Greek, Chinese, or Russian names, must be transliterated." (bolding original). This might not be the case in ru-wikipedia, but the different language varieties of wikipedia are free to set their own policies. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 08:47, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, OK! Фред-Продавец звёзд (talk) 09:01, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Фред-Продавец звёзд and Фред-Продавец звёзд: I try to explain ok. This is English Wikipedia and we have Russian Wikipedia for things that are in Russian. That is not at all to have a go at you. We have Make Love Not War in English Wikipedia as well and I imagine the two tie together via WP:WIKIDATA. What you cannot do is stick a Russian phrase into an English Wikipedia, that belongs in Russian Wikipedia as you have already noted. Does that make it clearer? (If it helps, I got an old communist comptometer yesterday made as was in the Soviet Union and am very pleased to have it). Si Trew (talk) 07:11, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand your opinion at all (communism? comptometer?), but I understand main line. OK, I'll stop make Russian redirects. (But, maybe, they are need to articles about Russian subjects and nsmes? Example: Яндекс -> Yandex). Thx for constructive dialog Фред-Продавец звёзд (talk) 08:37, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It is proper Cyrillic. Daily I speak Ukrainian Hungarian German Roma and occasionally English and a couple of other things. No doubt it is the correct Cyrillic. It just don't belong at EN:WP. Si Trew (talk) 00:18, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's fine, it points to the wrong target is all. Should a misguided Russian reader come here and type this search query, they are many many times more likely to be looking for information on the current President, not what appears to be a meme about him. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 01:27, 10 May 2016 (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.

Lucinde Paradol

[edit]
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) 18:14, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Neelix redirect declined at CSD). I should very mush like to know why the declÍning admin User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz has turned down this speedy delete of a Neelix redirect. under the [[WP::G6]] Neelix concession, I presumed admins knew what they were doing when they got adminship. I have asked this admin to respond several times at RfD for other redirects. Lucinde is patently not a synonym for Lucien. I am nonplussed as for why this was declined. Si Trew (talk) 19:20, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Si, you have got to stop accusing everyone who disagrees with you of being an admin; as conspiracy theories go, it's a singularly flimsy one, since it takes the most cursory of glances at Special:ListUsers/sysop to see if someone is an admin or not. ‑ Iridescent 19:29, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
User:Iridescent. I didn't accuse anyone of anything. I asked for an explanation of why it was speedily declined by an admin who rarely replies to my polite requests to explain that admin's actions. I am totally in good faith but I think an explanation from an admin would perhaps clear the matter up and we can get on with trying to improve the encylopaedia. Since that admin/user is patently about when I am about, I think it would behove an admin to reply to a simple request. But I expect nothing less. This admin has not replied to anything that I have ever asked, so, yes, you are right my good faith is waning. I do about sixty or seventy Neelix redirects a night after doing a day's work and I think a reply when an admin declines one (because as you see I take the ones I am not sure of to RfD) would be the merest of courtesy. I think it is to User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz to explain why not to you. Si Trew (talk) 19:57, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Once again, I deny the accusation of being an admin. I declined the speedy nomination as "incoherent and invalid". The speedy deletion rationale that Simon provided was "This well known brand of tum antacid is now a Neelix, I'm not placid, this makes nonsense of the targ it don't make sense so thus I arg it be deleted swiftly by some admin who knows more than I would ever do (RfD it will not ever do)." I think "incoherent and invalid" is a relatively gentle way of describing that gibberish. As for the second rationale, which Simon finally provided here, "Lucinde is patently not a synonym for Lucien" that statement is accurate but irrelevant. It helps to read the article carefully. Lucinde Paradol is the article subject's mother, is identified as such in the article, and is notable enough to have a page of her own in the French wikipedia.[3] It should have been evident to you that this redirect was not an appropriate candidate for speedy deletion. And your comment that "This admin has not replied to anything that I have ever asked" is simply false; I have responded [4], and you simply refused to engage, moving on the restart the same argument in a different location. And, frankly, when you call another editor you half-arsed small brained fuckwit it is difficult to see why you expect courtesy in response. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 20:27, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
User:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz is not an admin. Alcherin (talk) 20:21, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well User:Alcherin that user should not be declining my requests at WP:CSD under the WP:G6 Neelix concession. Only admins can do that. If the user is not an admin that user cannot or should not speedily decline my requests at CSD. Please excuse my bad faith but I have asked this user a lot to explain some actions that I thought a little odd, and I didn'r check the list that Iridescent give above, but this user has been declining under the Neelix concession many I take to CSD rather than bother RfD with it. There is something odd with this admin or user. Si Trew (talk) 20:29, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Any editor may decline a speedy deletion nomination except the article creator, and no exception was made for the temporary Neelix criterion. The underlying discussion expressly referred to other editors declining such nominations. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 20:59, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The half arse small brained fuckwit was a joke to someone a regular contributor to WP:RFD as I rarely swear not just in in Wikipedia but in real life. If another editor cannot seTrewe that is a joke, as the editor I said it to certainly did, I am unsure about this apparently admin's ability. I am also a half-arsed half-brained super fuckwit but I don't go around accusing other editors of bad faith. Si Trew (talk) 19:33, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • SimonTrew, any editor can decline an afd. Having done so, they are under no obligation to place an XfD, It's always been up to the original nominator to keep track and decide which are worth following up. DGG ( talk ) 23:30, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@DGG: this editor has been taking out a lot of my CSD nominations for Neelix redirects not because of the WP:G6 Neelix concession but I believe from WP:HOUNDING. This user does not ever respond to any request I have asked for why something was speedily kept or so on. This user will probably not even respond here. My good faith starts to wain with this user. By the way I am getting through a lot on the Neelix redirect list that are about swearing so I have to swear but in real life I very very rarely swear. The overdoing it with the other user was deliberately swearing kinda tongue in cheek and that was totally accepted by that user, it was not at all a genuine insult. I forget which user I said it to and this user has not been kind enough to link to the discussion but it wwas very much a joke and taken as such. My mother would wash my mouth out with soap and water if I swore, but going through all the curses and things like that I have to swear sometimes to make sense of it. It was very much a joke and taken as such, Si Trew (talk) 00:21, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: according to the target article, Lucinde was Lucien’s mother; I guess she’s not a notable enough opera-singer to have an article of her own. I have accordingly bolded her name there; if the result of this discussion is Delete I’ll try and remember to revert myself.—Odysseus1479 22:37, 13 May 2016 (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.

Haunted School

[edit]
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 withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:22, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure about this one. The target is a film or drama but without the "the" this is a bit WP:RFD#D5 nonsense I think Si Trew (talk) 19:06, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Not nonsense at all. Any variation of a title with or without a "the" is inherently a proper redirect. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:02, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - As what (I think) is an international production with an international fan-base, it's reasonable enough to expect people to be confused about whether the definite article is a part of the title or not. It's a helpful redirect. Of course, places purported to be haunted are a dime a dozen, but the film's page already has hatnotes. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:49, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn by nominator I was just not entirely sure about this one. Speedily keep. Si Trew (talk) 19:35, 9 May 2016 (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 Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess II

[edit]
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. JohnCD (talk) 13:13, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No reliable sources refer to Skyward Sword as Twilight Princess II. No other existing video game is referred to by this title. The1337gamer (talk) 18:38, 8 May 2016 (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.

Super Mario World 3

[edit]
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. JohnCD (talk) 13:12, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No such video game exists. No reliable sources refer to any existing video game by this title. The1337gamer (talk) 18:37, 8 May 2016 (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.

Peaceful Seas (disambiguation)

[edit]
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. JohnCD (talk) 13:11, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a disambiguation for things called "Peaceful Seas." It's a disambiguation for things called "Ning Hai," which happens to literally translate to "peaceful seas." You wouldn't actually call any of these things "Peaceful Seas" in English, so this is nonsense. -- Tavix (talk) 18:09, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

{{ec} I was just going to say here that to declare an interest I think it was me that nominated it at CSD. Si Trew (talk) 19:44, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Right @BD2412: I think we are going across each other so I am going to leave this one to you and wholly support you but becaue of the "seas" and "sea" business I was not sure quite what you were saying so we are going across each other. I leave this one to you and fully support whatever you say as a good faith regular contributor to WP:RfD (BD I mean not me). Si Trew (talk) 19:39, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I would be opposed to that. The Pacific Ocean is not known known as "Peaceful sea." -- Tavix (talk) 19:44, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well that was pretty much what I was thinking. However if there is a disambiguation page which it appears there is then it can be moved over as the usual procedure, but I never heard of a Pacific Sea. It is quite imaginable obviously but it doesn't really seem, you know that stuff with water in it and stuff, ever have to been called the Pacific Sea. Si Trew (talk) 19:49, 8 May 2016 (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.

Goo&gle

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 May 19#Goo&gle

First Serbian Volunteer Division

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 May 19#First Serbian Volunteer Division

iPad Air 3

[edit]
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. JohnCD (talk) 16:50, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to see the "iPad Air 3" redirect removed, as Apple have no product called the iPad Air 3, and there is no credible evidence that they intend the 9.7" iPad Pro to be the next generation of 9.7" iPad Air rather than the first generation of 9.7" tablets in a separate line of iPads, the "Pro" line. Guy Harris (talk) 15:25, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User HW can't "decline" a CSD they can only object or remove it. Your Google search shows this redirect is quite misleading as the 3, if released, will be a diffeeent product all together. If this becomes a real product some one will write it up, so red link it. Legacypac (talk) 19:26, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Any editor may decline/reject/refuse a speedy nomination, except the article creator. Your claim simply shows unfamiliarity with speedy deletion policy. The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo). Treated like dirt by administrators since 2006. (talk) 19:39, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Declining, objecting, removing; they're all the same thing. Whatever this is, it is not a hoax. Adam9007 (talk) 19:32, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
A simple Google search reveals no such thing. What it reveals is rumors about an upcoming product - which do not speak of it as being an iPad Pro of any sort. And, for all we know, Apple might, for example, kill off the iPad mini and iPad Air brands and come out with a next generation iPad, just called "the new new iPad" or something such as that, with 7.9" and 9.7" models, so that Apple has the iPad range with 7.9" and 9.7" models and the iPad Pro range with 9.7" and 12.9" models, so that there is never an "iPad Air 3", and the successor to the iPad mini 4 is the 7.9" "new new iPad" and the successor to the iPad Air 2 is the 9.7" "new new iPad". After all, Apple have gone from the MacBook to the MacBook Air and back to the MacBook.... Guy Harris (talk) 19:53, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This one does. Adam9007 (talk) 19:56, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And that page is a reliable source, rather than some random person saying what he thinks the iPad Air 3 will be, because? Guy Harris (talk) 20:18, 8 May 2016 (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.

Demarcay

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 May 19#Demarcay

Peaceful sea

[edit]
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. JohnCD (talk) 16:50, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

(Neelix redirect) I have nominated Tepre Pacificum and Peaceful Seas which redirects to a Japanese ship over at CSD. However not entirely sure about this one. We don't have Pacific Sea which you would think we might, so it is a bit kinda well I dunno. Like it is pretty obvious etymologically that a pacific sea might be Pacific Ocean but it kinda isn't it has never I think been called the Pacific Sea and was only called pacific in the first place to kinda pacify the sea or ocean in a kinda gesture to the gods. I have nominated Tepre Pacificum and Peaceful Seas which redirects to a Japanese ship over at CSD. However not entirely sure about this one. Si Trew (talk) 09:21, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So there is some distant logic to this, since the original Spanish name translates as peaceful sea. However, now there is a fairly large ship names Peaceful Seas http://www.marinetraffic.com/en/ais/details/ships/shipid:756114/mmsi:636016197/imo:9707584/vessel:PEACEFUL_SEAS while fhe Japanese ships Neelix redirected to are not named this, but naturally named with japanese names that can be translated to this. I don't see it as a very helpful redirect. Legacypac (talk) 10:38, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, the Pacific Ocean isn't called "Peaceful sea" in English. Wikipedia is not a literal translation dictionary. -- Tavix (talk) 18:13, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per my comment at "Peaceful Seas (disambiguation)", above. bd2412 T 19:21, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
You're a bit stuffed there @Bd2412: because Peaceful Seas is now red as speedily deleted at my request. (I think with the other capss peaceful seas was always red but not sure.) Perhaps I was hasty but we can move the DAB over what do you think? It i is red and we can move the DAB over now I dunno what is best. Si Trew (talk) 19:28, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I am mistaken User:Bd2412 but I see no talk at the disambiguation page at all, from you or anyone else. Have you perhaps got the wrong page to link here at RfD; it is probably my fault I can never even blink my eyes with a woman without geting an enormous cock up. Si Trew (talk) 19:34, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No that is just running round the houses. As Legacpac said and I implied, this is a back-formation from the Japanese. It is no good then to send Pacific Sea as someone seems to have blued it (it was red when I listed it) back to a Japanese ship or set of ships. Nihongo-no benkyo daigatu shimasitu, but even I can work out that this is WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 23:47, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Si, I agree with your rationale, but the ships are Chinese, not Japanese. -- Tavix (talk) 00:10, 10 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well that makes it even m ore nonsense because the names are in Japanese (not Chinese) and the ships you say are in China. I can quite understand why someone would like to call their boat the pacific, peaceful, Ted Heath did that too, but one way or another this is nonsense. Si Trew (talk) 00:38, 10 May 2016 (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.

Alan and Kathryn Hughes

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 May 19#Alan and Kathryn Hughes

William Mears (bell-founder)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 May 19#William Mears (bell-founder)

Unprogress

[edit]
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. JohnCD (talk) 10:46, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You can't really do this (neelix redirect). I have taken a few obviously absurd ones to CSD such as Unprogressional and Unprogressionalistically or something like that but this one brings to my mind Orwell's Newspeak and it is not in Nineteen Eighty-Four as far as I recall from memory but it is just about plausible (Appendix B of that book tells you you can form any Newspeak noun in that way). Does it exist in real life? Of course we can {{R from antonym}} (or for that matter {{R from other language|Newspeak}} but I don't think it really exists does it? Si Trew (talk) 06:43, 8 May 2016 (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.

Cetraria nivalis

[edit]
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 all. JohnCD (talk) 11:10, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Here is a series of species names that redirect to higher up in the taxonomy. I suggest that all be deleted to make clear that we do not have articles on the individual species and to encourage creation of one. Even more ludicrous, Pinguicula Nivalis redirects to the journal that first described it, which might be the stupidest redirect idea ever.

Here's the list:

- Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:36, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't want to abuse the privilege but that's probably worth pinging User:Plantdrew and User:Peter coxhead about, I know what these mean in Latin/Greek just as translations but they are usually the two experts on taxonomy. Pinguicula nivalis which targets Carnivorous Plant Newsletter for some reason I find particularly pleasing (the word I mean) although the target is I imagine meaningless. [[Cotoneaster nivalis targets Cotoneaster. Cetraria targets Parmeliaceae. User:Oiyarbepsy I think when listing these you should properly put the RfD tags on the top to show they have different targets. T. Nivalis targets Taeniopterygidae. So these are now listed with five different targets all in one nomination, so that is a bit confusing and makes no sense of your argument that they are "higher up in the taxonomy" as I believe they are in completely different parts of the taxonomy but I am no expert. Si Trew (talk) 06:57, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Higher up" in that a species is redirecting to the genus or family that contains it.
As these do not fall into either of these cases, they should be deleted. (As an analogy, they are like redirects from the name of a town on which there's no article to the state/province/country in which the town is located.) Peter coxhead (talk) 08:36, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Peter coxhead: thanks Peter. I agree we can have of course alternative scientific names but these sounded a bit WP:MADEUP to me. I liked Pinuicula nivalis particularly because it sounds like it should be (of course isn't) some kind of new Penguin or perhaps some new cocktail derived from a Piña colada. It rather amused me to find it was not, but I am not sure that is helpful. My name is not dropped in Linnean circles, nor do I get mentioned in dispatches where taxonomists foregather. I just thought these were a bit nonsense. (All Neelix redirects I think). Si Trew (talk) 09:40, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that this list I sorted together is more of the same problem. User:Anomie/Neelix_list/5#Delete_these_all_-_shown_to_be_errors_by_Neelix Legacypac (talk) 16:30, 8 May 2016 (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.

Of the soul

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 May 19#Of the soul

Nam (war)

[edit]
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. JohnCD (talk) 13:03, 19 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Neelix special. No one is going to type "Nam (war)" in search. No incoming links. No point to this redirect. Legacypac (talk) 01:10, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually I think that is quite a likely search term and I see no harm coming of it, User:Legacypac, clocking off in a few minutes and I have done about sixty Neelix ones tonight, sorry to flood RfD with em. Your shift now. Si Trew (talk) 01:14, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We cover it at Nam. Legacypac (talk) 01:18, 8 May 2016 (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 Preacher (book)

[edit]
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. JohnCD (talk) 10:48, 15 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why should this go to Ecclesiastes? The whole of the OT and NT for that matter is preaching that is not a religious statement just a factual nonreligious one. I love Ecclesiastes

I returned also unto the sun
And saw that the race was not always to the swift, nor the battle to the strong
Nor yet riches to the wise, nor yet peace to men of understanding
But time and chance happeneth to all

I think, I have probably misquoted that (deliberately not checking that is just the version in my head and I only know the KJV). Nevertheless this is a very obscure redirect I think Si Trew (talk) 00:52, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh neelix redirect forgot to say that. Si Trew (talk) 00:56, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like he created it to go in a DAB page for Preacher he created. Someone has wisely deleted the link from the DAB at some point, so this redirect can be deleted Legacypac (talk) 01:15, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hullaballoo is not an Admin, he just enjoys "declining" (his term) Neelix G6 CSDs everyone else thinks are junk. Legacypac (talk) 19:13, 8 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Added to Preacher (disambiguation). AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:42, 9 May 2016 (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/2016_May_8&oldid=1146691843"