Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 February 26

February 26

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 26, 2018.

JOYFUL (X Ambassadors album)

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) 11:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No apparent reason for the upper case version: harmless but a bad precedent. PamD 22:27, 26 February 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.

JOYFUL (album)

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. I've moved the disambiguation page so it now is at Joyful. No prejudice against retargeting the redirect to the X Ambassadors album once it is created, but please add a hatnote if you do. -- Tavix (talk) 19:57, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No apparent justification for use of capitals; we don't need a redirect from every title converted to upper case. Harmless but a bad precedent. PamD 22:26, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The X Ambassadors discography article points to X Ambassadors. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:51, 27 February 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.

Rations

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 Rationing. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:21, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't this target Rationing? Military contexts aren't the only ones where the plural form would be used. BDD (talk) 22:08, 26 February 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.

Iron ration

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 Field ration. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:23, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I came across this term linked from Pemmican, where it's described as being used by the British in the Second Boer War. So it was odd to see the link go to a World War I-era American military ration. The set index Military rations also classifies "iron rations" as US-specific, which doesn't seem right (cf. WP:INUSA). A German version is mentioned at Field ration, though that's at least from World War II. I'm not really sure what to do here, besides that some change seems advisable. BDD (talk) 22:07, 26 February 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.

Sister Sister Sister Tour

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 6#Sister Sister Sister Tour

Upper Vardar dialect

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 6#Upper Vardar dialect

Toby Raidiation Fox

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. Killiondude (talk) 20:43, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would redirect this to Toby Fox, but it has a typo. There is not even a raidiation redirect, so it is implausible. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 19:18, 26 February 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.

Haeagen-Dazs

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. Still a good bot ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:24, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) feminist (talk) 17:09, 26 February 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.

Croeonchy Stars

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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:30, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly not Germanic, right? feminist (talk) 17:07, 26 February 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.

Puedelsi

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. Killiondude (talk) 20:43, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) Now, this is more debatable. feminist (talk) 17:05, 26 February 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.

Koezi

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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:30, 6 March 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.

Girugaemesh

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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:30, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) another one. feminist (talk) 17:02, 26 February 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.

Revolution 5deg du nom

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 6#Revolution 5deg du nom

Internet shorthand notation

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 6#Internet shorthand notation

The Cruexshadows

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. Amazing ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:27, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(eubot) are these supposed to exist? feminist (talk) 16:35, 26 February 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.

1-900-MIXALOT

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) Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:08, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

No reference or connection between redirect and target. Richhoncho (talk) 13:09, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per previous RfD. It's a notable line from the song. Honestly, there's enough coverage that it could very well be included in the target. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 16:03, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete There's certainly a connection, since this a lyric, but most lyrics don't make for good search terms. I can see some utility here for readers who don't know the exact name of "Baby Got Back" (maybe they just think of it as the "big butts song" or something), but think it's a bit more likely that readers will already know this connection and seek information about the (presumably fictional) phone number and be disappointed. --BDD (talk) 22:11, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per previous RfD, and especially the sources presented by AngusWOOF ([3], [4]). Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 22:15, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per previous RFD. Nothing's changed since then to make it less notable or confused with other works. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 03:14, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. If there needs to be no mention of the redirect, or understandable logic, then this redirect could point anywhere. Because some of you know the term is used in the lyric, does not validate the redirect. By all means explain the connection in the article, otherwise the redirect must be redundant. --Richhoncho (talk) 11:10, 27 February 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.

Atropurpurea

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. -- Tavix (talk) 20:32, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a common latter half of a Latin binomial, used in about 30 articles. In this instance however there is also a Berberis thunbergii cultivar called ‘Atropurpurea Nana’, which is presumably why this redirect was created. Since that is only a partial title match I think a redlink would be better. —Xezbeth (talk) 08:12, 26 February 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.

1985 video games

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) Galobtter (pingó mió) 10:45, 5 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Year video games" isn't a search format used here. Created by blocked user. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:56, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, I don't see why it shouldn't be a search format used here. It is a way people may refer to "video games released in 1985", and that's exactly what is listed at the target. -- Tavix (talk) 16:09, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, I could see this redirect getting used a decent amount, not to mention it is not hurting anything by being a {{R from alt name}} --Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ Talk 18:12, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as recently created unnecessary redirect. I'm not clear what sort of agenda this user had, but we don't have such redirect for any of the other years. Instead of fait acompli one at a time, we should gain consensus first and then add these to all years. It's not even a good alternative name as the page covers more than just games, but industry, developers, events, etc. —  HELLKNOWZ   ▎TALK 14:37, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 01:11, 26 February 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.