< January 29
January 31 >

January 30

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 30, 2016.

Now i am become death, destroyer of worlds

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 February 7#Now i am become death, destroyer of worlds

Miss Sunshine

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 move Miss Sunshine (song) over redirect. --BDD (talk) 16:22, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I expected this redirect to point at Little Miss Sunshine the children's book main character in (Mr. Men) not the unrelated Movie Little Miss Sunshine, but I also found at least one song [1] by R.I.O. called Miss Sunshine that was the cover track of one of their albums and charted in every German speaking country in Europe according to our article. Therefore this is an XY partial title match for two things and an exact title match to at least one song, and is therefore not helpful. Legacypac (talk) 22:17, 30 January 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.

Henry Ryecroft, The Private Papers of

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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 01:18, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a directory-like search term that is unlikely to be typed. Rubbish computer (HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 19:48, 30 January 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.

Tea tea

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 speedy deleted G7 at the request of the creator. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 10:03, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused about the purpose of this redirect. "Tea tea" isn't mentioned in the article, and it's tagged as a page from an alternative language, even though "tea" is an English word. My searches for "tea tea" shows nothing to do with Masala chai, so this is WP:R#D5, nonsense. -- Tavix (talk) 19:20, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

High tea is a meal. We drink tea there too. Legacypac (talk) 06:37, 31 January 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.

Christsakes

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 "Christsakes"; retarget Christ's sake to Christ's Sake. Deryck C. 22:48, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Not helpful to the reader. Legacypac (talk) 12:32, 30 January 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.

By goners

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 speedy deleted --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 19:29, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This looks like Neelix nonsense. Any better ideas or just delete them all? Neelix work so they can be G6 by any Admin.Legacypac (talk) 10:29, 30 January 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.

Dearling

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 February 8#Dearling

Kitchen tea

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 both. Deryck C. 22:41, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seems excessively vague and is not mentioned at target. Legacypac (talk) 10:09, 30 January 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.

Mother Teresa the Saint

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 refine to Mother Teresa#Sainthood. Deryck C. 22:50, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

She is not a Saint (yet) and even if she was, this redirect will not assist the reader in finding the target. We don't add "the Saint" to other saints. Neelix invention Legacypac (talk) 08:52, 30 January 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.

Paltry

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. The consensus is that "paltry" means "trivial", which is not synonymous to "trivia". Deryck C. 22:37, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These are related terms but not the same. They are related to trivial, not trivia. Legacypac (talk) 08:19, 30 January 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 fiftieth day

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 February 8#The fiftieth day

Gentleman-farmers

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. (Note:"Gentlemanfarmers" could plausibly be closed as no consensus but the end result is the same.) Rossami (talk) 00:04, 11 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No help for the searcher at the target. Last three of these constructions are wrong too. Delete this Neelix nonsense? Legacypac (talk) 06:56, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I endorse redirection of Gentleman farmers but think we should delete the error ones. Legacypac (talk) 19:37, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There's no error in any of the four. Nyttend (talk) 22:04, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Gentelmanfarmers is not a word. Si Trew (talk) 04:08, 31 January 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.

White-man

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 apologize for the irregularity here; this had also been added to the nomination at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 January 29#White-guy, where there was consensus to delete. But there's consensus to keep here. Make of that what you will, but I'm re-closing this one as keep, with no prejudice against speedy renomination given the mix-up. But as often, think twice before renominating. --BDD (talk) 21:54, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This one got lost on the RfD page. More Neelix nonsense shoving English words together with dashes Legacypac (talk) 06:03, 30 January 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.

Salut!-mobile

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) 10:18, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Another Aldi brand (see discussion for Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_January_29#Willow Woods which is not mentioned at the target; WP:RFD#D2 confusing. Si Trew (talk) 05:23, 30 January 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.

Unsinkable

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) 10:21, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This used to be directed at RMS Titanic, which was rather famously described as such (of course, before it sank); it was later blanked by User:EEng as "absurd" and redirected to the current target by User:Malcolmxl5. I think that redirecting from a phrase commonly used (however incorrectly) about ships to a relatively obscure military concept about islands is rather confusing, and is very likely not what the very small amount of people viewing it are looking for. As its only incoming link is an old DYK nom, I think it can be safely deleted. ansh666 04:32, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You sure won't hear any complaint from me. EEng 05:00, 30 January 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.

Reductively

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 February 6#Reductively

Pre-figurative

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) 10:16, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

None of these terms mean what the target DAB is pointing to, even though they are different forms of the same root word. Legacypac (talk) 00:30, 30 January 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.

Prefigurational

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) 10:14, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Very rare word dreamed up by Neelix (top google result is a dictionary that does not define it). Makes a poor redirect to a two item DAB that does not define it. Legacypac (talk) 00:28, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Wiktionary doesn't have this formation, so I'm strengthening my delete per WP:NEOLOGISM. Si Trew (talk) 05:42, 30 January 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.
More