< July 4
July 6 >

July 5

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 5, 2015.

SCOTUScare

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. Deryck C. 12:05, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If we need to keep this redirect, King v. Burwell seems to be a better target (since the term was coined in the dissent in that case). RJaguar3 | u | t 03:33, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 15:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Marks, Michael (8 January 2015). "Freshman Brian Babin explains "present" vote in defiance of Speaker John Boehner". The Dallas Morning News. Retrieved 5 July 2015. ...another idiot Texan congressman...
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. We clearly can't agree on one target for this emoji, so deletion is the most viable outcome. Deryck C. 22:04, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I considered tagging this CSD R3, because to me, it's totally implausible (I have no idea what this character is, let alone how to type it!). This was originally a redirect to Extraterrestrial life, but now redirects to Space Invaders. I don't see what this has to do with the game, and I think it's an implausible redirect to Extraterrestrial life. I notice a similar discussion resulting in keep. Extraterrestrial life maybe, but Space Invaders? Adam9007 (talk) 00:38, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, we should keep this one. The emoji itself is a clear reference to the aliens from Space Invaders. Most of the other emojis redirect to something too, since they're easily accessible with an iPhone keyboard, and useful to those who don't know what certain emojis represent. —Will(B) 02:07, 26 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • None of the characters look even remotely like this emoji to me. I see here what looks like a goomba with comically large eyes or wings protruding from its head. Is it a font issue? Out of curiosity, I just tried looking up this page on my Android and got an image that looks like the head of a grey alien, which is a very long way from the Space Invaders aliens. If I do an image search for "space invaders emoji" I see ones that look like this, which is certainly a Space Invader but it's not what I see here, and on other pages I see that emoji listed alongside the grey emoji, suggesting that they are separate characters. Can someone with an iPhone look up this page and report what they see? Ivanvector (talk) 14:31, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It's only "identical to" some other icon if one's glyphs and fonts are the same as those intended by the author. That need not be the case, QED above. Si Trew (talk) 17:39, 29 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Just confirming that link only shows a larger version of the character, which still varies based on your software (and hardware?). I'm looking on a Chromebook now, and it looks like an angry squid with light-up stalks (no longer eye stalks). Still doesn't look like anything I know of from Space Invaders. --BDD (talk) 16:18, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I regularly switch back and forth between editing from a computer (Windows 8 Firefox/Chrome) and my iPhone and it's been crazy seeing just how different it is. My computer shows an angry green alien with eye-stalks but my phone renders what looks like a pixelated purple crab. This is an excellent article that explains the situation and contains a graphic showing 5 versions of this emoji. -- Tavix (talk) 16:41, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 15:09, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
At the very least Space Invaders does not work since this creature does not look of any of the one from the game.--69.157.254.210 (talk) 03:39, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good find, but the problem with this emoji (as is the case with many other emoji) is that it appears very differently depending on the reader's platform, as noted above. We don't have the technical capability to redirect to different targets based on the user's operating system or browser, so wherever we target this, it's going to be surprising to some users. Apparently iOS users see a Space Invader, and won't be expecting a page on bug-eyed monsters. Conversely, some other users see the bug-eyed monster (myself included) and won't expect a redirect to the video game. And even some other users see an icon which is neither of these two things. Disambiguation was suggested but I think we should resist this. It's not that 👾 is ambiguous: it's literally a different glyph to different users. We disambiguate apple because it's a word in our language with different meanings, but every user who renders this page sees the green text apple; nobody is seeing an entirely different word in green right there, and if they were, how would we disambiguate? How would we even know, for that matter? Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 15:32, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, the image has a completely different shape and color when I look on it from my PC/Wii U and my Ipad. Had I not known that they were from the same RFD I would have assumed that they were two completely different images. The Ipad image has somewhat a resemblance to one of the Space Invaders but the round faced black creature with big eyes connected to lines ememnting from the top of its head on my PC looks nothing like one at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.254.210 (talk) 02:45, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can't give you a shot but I can give an example. The Playboy Bunny image on my Ipad are two yellow skin women wearing what is either a black shirt or one-piece bathing suit and bunny ears. On My PC, however, it is a single black outlined face with black hair and bunny ears. Also on a different RFD for cue sports the image on the Ipad is the black 8 ball whereas on my PC it is 6 plain black circles inside a black triangle.--69.157.254.210 (talk) 04:06, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Emojipedia shows the different appearances on different platforms. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:38, 7 July 2015 (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.

Swanee Shuffle

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 Hallelujah! (film). [Since Ivan insists on it. Non-admin close.] Oiyarbepsy (talk) 23:37, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Term is not mentioned in the article, and it does not appear to refer to anything in the article.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  04:15, 27 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:10, 5 July 2015 (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.

إسلام

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. (Early close, WP:Snow close) Deryck C. 09:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

'Delete as Not a plausible typo. Bazj (talk) 10:05, 5 July 2015 (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.

February 29, 1900

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. Deryck C. 23:18, 11 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1900 was not a leap year. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 04:32, 5 July 2015 (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.

Great Revolution

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 agree we shouldn't keep this redirect as is. Some argued for deletion and others for retargeting, but there's no agreement on the best alternative target. Default to delete. Deryck C. 12:04, 12 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since when was the French Revolution called the Great Revolution? It might be my ignorance talking, but I've never heard this title applied to this event. Mr. Guye (talk) 02:29, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hobsbawm referred to it this way many times in his books, the redirect didn't existed so I decided to created it, I doubt any harm was done. Bertdrunk (talk) 03:45, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Great Revolution seems a bit ambiguous to me, even if somebody called it that because they felt like calling it that. Compassionate727 (talk) 00:52, 6 July 2015 (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.
Category