< September 15
September 17 >

September 16

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 16, 2014.

Soulja Boy's fourth studio 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 delete. Stop. HAMMER time. --BDD (talk) 15:05, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If/when album is released, an article can be created using its actual title - at the very least, when it has a title, a redirect to the main article can be made there instead. Redirect is overly specific, lengthy, and not needed at this time. As someone else pointed out in its edit history, this topic currently fails WP:NALBUMS, WP:CRYSTAL and WP:HAMMER. I haven't been able to find redirects named according to this pattern, so I assume the precedent is to get rid of them - this isn't a likely search query at all. I doubt we'd keep such a redirect simply because it was made in advance of the target album's release; we certainly don't make them retroactively. I don't know if any information currently exists on this topic, but even if there is, it can probably be included on the main article (which is currently lacking in that department), which the redirect implies has already happened. LazyBastardGuy 18:29, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

But you are hoist with your own petard. "You can find it by searching for 'promise'" indicates the R is not helpful to the search! And Madonna's eleventh studio album doesn't exist, nor Coldplay's 5th studio album. Where is the policy that says where we go from ordinals to numerals? Show me that. Si Trew (talk) 08:15, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The redirect tells you there is something to look for. It could be targetted to the section entitled 2011–present: Various mixtapes, EP's & next album Siuenti (talk) 08:26, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That's another thing I'm concerned about - if we include a certain redirect, we're basically including a certain kind of redirect and might have to account for its various typos and other variations. That seems pretty counterproductive to me, because I don't think people are actually going to be thinking about it this way. If people want to know what his Xth album was, I have a feeling they're probably just going to search Soulja Boy and look for wherever it lists his albums. I don't think people are going to think, "Oh, I don't remember the name of it but this song comes from his second album," and then search anything containing the phrase "studio album". LazyBastard

Guy 15:40, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*gasp* How DARE you?!?!?!?! ;) LazyBastardGuy 01:40, 18 September 2014 (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.

IPhone 7

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 14:26, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nonexsistent product without even rumours. - TheChampionMan1234 07:04, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Champ. WP:CRYSTAL.Si Trew (talk) 10:16, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If salted, I would suggest salting for further redirects (e.g. iPhone 8 and so on). LazyBastardGuy 01:01, 21 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure about salting. F'rexample, Microsoft Windows 2000 was released before Microsoft Windows 7; patently these are marketing terms that cannot be predicted. But equally, we can't predict what terms should be salted. I think we should take them case by case as they are invented. Si Trew (talk) 12:47, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
On that note, I think this is more easily anticipated because Apple does use sequential numbering in addition to unpredictable lettering. I suppose it could be a question of equal treatment (i.e. we salted these terms, why not these other terms which as you suggested we cannot anticipate). Nonetheless, I think salting the basic ones will prevent those ones from being made, because anyone attempting it will find the basic ones don't exist so there won't be a point to making those more-unpredictable ones if their basic equivalents aren't allowed. LazyBastardGuy 15:50, 22 September 2014 (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.

Barcelone

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 no consensus. We'd keep if it were a simple typo, probably delete if it were just a foreign-language redirect. It's ambiguous what's going on here. --BDD (talk) 14:23, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not especially French. - TheChampionMan1234 03:37, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@70.51.46.146:, I don't think its a plausible typo as 'e' in English is never pronounced "Ə" at end of words. - TheChampionMan1234 05:26, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, I got it the wrong way round. Si Trew (talk) 21:02, 16 September 2014 (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.

Dʒenive

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 14:21, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We don't keep redirects from IPA. - TheChampionMan1234 03:30, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am adding this entry to the same RFD as this looks like a redirect from pseudo-IPA instead of actual IPA. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:58, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. That's a bit unfair of me on IPA. The article at glottal stop has the example for "cat" which is broken down for various English speakers (Cockney, Estuary, US etc). I was more having a go at dictionaries: which tend to record one or two at the most. Si Trew (talk) 09:50, 18 September 2014 (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.

Paises Bajos

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 14:19, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I pretty much agree with all you say there. It is occasionally useful to have an ((R from alternate language)); I tend to do so when I have translated an article so that the article has both the title from e.g. FR:WP as a redirect. (And also ((R from title without diacritics)) etc. if necessary.) However, we are the English Wikipedia, that is to say English language. In all its stupid varieties. So to start adding foreign words, I cannot see the point: I would think it hinders a Spaniard trying to search for an article that is better served at ES:WP. Those in other alphabets are just totally spurious, how would someone with an English keyboard layout possibly type them? Si Trew (talk) 07:31, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
All very excellent points there, my friend. This is also why I don't think we should have wikilinks to other-language Wikipedia articles within enwiki articles - it just doesn't serve the English-speaking reader well. Plus, it opens a whole new can of worms when it comes to whether or not we should include one specific language edition instead of another - I mean, what's the criteria there? LazyBastardGuy 15:42, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ahem. "What's the criterion" or "what are the criteria". Blimey! Si Trew (talk) 02:57, 18 September 2014 (UTC) (Sings, you say potato and I say patatas.... you say the beano and I say bananas.... oh call it all off shall we?)[reply]
I was aware it wasn't grammatically correct, but for some reason it just sounded better in my head ;) LazyBastardGuy 01:03, 21 September 2014 (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.

Contraversies about the Netherlands

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 14:17, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note that there is a typo in the title, but not only that, no plausible target can be found. - TheChampionMan1234 03:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would read them. What fascinates me is in countries that are exclusively metric, the TV screen sizes are in imperial (17 inch screen etc). Which was nominal for CRTs, but is even more arbitrary for these newfangled flat screen thingies. You should hang out at Template talk:Convert more! Si Trew (talk) 07:37, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ha ha, I will give that a try! LazyBastardGuy 05:06, 18 September 2014 (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.

Der Nederlands

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. --BDD (talk) 14:16, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Imitation of someone else's accent, not funny. - TheChampionMan1234 03:18, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Then it would come under WP:TITLE for not starting titles with "The". It has always bothered me a little that the article is at Netherlands whereas in English we generally say The Netherlands, (or of course Holland which is technically incorrect as it is only one part of The Netherlands); the problem we have is how much are we "correct" and how much do we reflect what people actually say? I doubt an English-speakin person would put in Der Nederlands, however much they have a cold in their nose.
But there are always exceptions, of course, Das Kapital or The The or whatever. It's not a hard and fast rule. Si Trew (talk) 06:59, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Some people will search for article titles with "the" though (not everybody is familiar with Wikipedia article title policy) hence why we have redirects like The Netherlands. Thryduulf (talk) 07:28, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely right, and I see no harm in that redirect. But how likely are they to search for "Der Nederlands"? I know what you said about it not setting precedent etc but unfortunately in practice it does, and the next thing you know the D disk back at Wikipedia Central gets full up with der der der or da da da). Si Trew (talk) 07:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I'd use Google Translate for something I didn't know, as I don't think Wikipedia should be anyone's translating service, but that is just me. No strong opinion here. LazyBastardGuy 19:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have a suspicion (not that I would ever be able to prove it) that one of Google Translate's sources is the Interwiki links on Wikipedia, especially if marked (as I do) with the required ((translated page)) tags, etc: since if it is roughly a parallel text it's a good crib. Of course, when I translate I move things around a little to conform to EN:MOS as best as I can hit that moving target, but I bet that they use WP a lot as a crib and e.g. shared pictures on WP:COMMONS gives a good hint at the translation for the captions. I know it is statistical machine translation, but sometimes one can see in the back-translation a hint of one own's style, and "every man likes the look of his own handwriting like everyone likes the smell of his own farts" (W. H. Auden). Declaration of Interest: I studied Machine translation under one of the leading lights in that subject, in a futile attempt to get my girl. I learned a bit of Japanese and Spanish, but I never got the girl. Si Trew (talk) 21:19, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think I see what you mean regarding the hint of one's own style (sometimes I'll run a translation of something I know and it comes up exactly as I would have translated it, but that's pretty rare). I don't think girls know how smexy machine translation studies can be... LazyBastardGuy 01:06, 21 September 2014 (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.
More