< June 9
June 11 >

June 10

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 10, 2016.

Some redirects starting with "Unnamed"

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) 15:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of several redirects which their targets have a name and the redirect seems to not be an alternative name for the target. Steel1943 (talk) 22:20, 10 June 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.

ආයුබෝවන්

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. -- Tavix (talk) 01:18, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A greeting in Sinhalese redirecting to Greeting. To my knowledge there's nothing particularly Sri Lankan in the general topic of greeting so I suggest deleting per WP:RFOREIGN. Uanfala (talk) 22:20, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • @BD2412: Does that mean you are okay with this being deleted per WP:G7? Steel1943 (talk) 22:47, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • No objection whatsoever. I'm guessing - and this is just a guess - that it was a redlink in an article somewhere, and that I created the redirect to resolve the redlink, and then the term got unlinked (or retargeted to Wiktionary, which would be more important for a dicdef usage). bd2412 T 00:53, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
 Done. -- Tavix (talk) 01:18, 11 June 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.

Unnamed 1968 Raleigh Carolina League baseball team

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) 15:26, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per the target article, the team had a name in 1968: The Raleigh-Durham Mets. Steel1943 (talk) 22:14, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Every team and band is unnamed at some point in their existence. That this occurred in 1968 makes it an unlikely search term. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:27, 10 June 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.

Unnamed Kingdom Hearts Project

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) 15:24, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is ambiguous since it does not refer to what unnamed project this redirect refers to. This redirect was created as an article back in 2007, but at some point, was redirected to the series article as shown here. Disclaimer: As someone who knows a bit about the series, the series has had several "unnamed" or "untitled" projects during the last decade, probably to build buyer excitement (or disappointment) for the still unreleased Kingdom Hearts III. Steel1943 (talk) 22:06, 10 June 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.

Grand Collar

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. --BDD (talk) 15:23, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple issues - term doesn't appear in target article, nor does it appear to be actually used as a term per either the article or per Google; "Grand Cross" seems to be much more common, so I can't imagine it being a valid search term. MSJapan (talk) 23:31, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 21:36, 10 June 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.

Sliding doors

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) 15:21, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Odd scenario here, so here's a discussion. Should this term refer to the plural of Sliding door or an alternative capitalization of Sliding Doors? This redirect gets about 15–20 views a day, whereas the film article Sliding Doors gets about 1000 views a day. So, most likely if a reader is looking up "sliding doors" with a lowercase "d", they are not trying to locate the film. But, then again, is there a WP:DIFFCAPS issue with the film article's title Sliding Doors? (There's a lot going on here, and it all seems to originate from the confusion presented by the nominated redirect.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:03, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Three items, is that enough for the dab? Other PTMs can be added at the bottom including Sliding glass door and Sliding door operator AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:31, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 21:36, 10 June 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.

Trumpian

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) 15:20, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While wikt:Trumpian exists, readers will find no information about this term at the current target, as it is not currently mentioned there. —Godsy(TALKCONT) 04:41, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 21:34, 10 June 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.

Hilary with extended titles

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) 15:20, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The name variant and extended topic phrasing of these titles makes them improbable to occur with this misspelling during searches which leads to implausibility. —Godsy(TALKCONT) 04:21, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes and no. Precedents don't have a formal role in most of the project (though note that WP:RFDO could easily be added to that page). But almost anything can start a precedent. For this, or anything, to start one, an editor would only need to cite it in a related argument. So it's not true that if we do X, we're automatically setting a precedent, but neither is it true that we can do X and insist that it never will be one. That said, I did just assert the latter the other day. --BDD (talk) 16:50, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 21:34, 10 June 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.

Isab

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) 15:18, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I think this redirect should be deleted. It replaced an article trying coin or popularize the abbreviation "isab" to mean "I smiled a bit." I can find no evidence on Google that anyone actually uses this abbreviation. The initial article should have been deleted. People may be searching Wikipedia for "ISAB" due to recent news articles about the International Security Advisory Board and confusingly winding up at "Internet slang." That's how I found it. -driver8 (talk) 19:24, 10 June 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.

Bouncy kastle

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) 15:17, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I've ever known anyone to spell "Castle" as "Kastle", I appreciate some may not be able to spell but the moment you search "Bouncy" - "Bouncy castle" then appears, And I'd imagine most people in the world would (or atleast should) know how to spell "Castle", so all in all I fail to see how this is of any use, As always I'm always happy to withdraw, Thanks, –Davey2010Talk 17:20, 10 June 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 greatest american superhero

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. --BDD (talk) 15:16, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect doesn't seem to be an alternate or likely make for the target article. (If search engines return a connection between the redirect and the target article, it is most likely because of Wikipedia mirrors saving the connection since the redirect has existed since 2004.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:22, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This seems like a plausible typo. -- Beland (talk) 19:51, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 16:06, 10 June 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 most Baptist state in the world

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. --BDD (talk) 15:15, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per the redirect's target article, it seems that the target subject has been known as "...the only predominantly Baptist state in the world..." as cited by a reference, but I'm not sure if that warrants the nominated WP:NPOV-violating redirect (unless this is an official term for the target article's subject.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:15, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This doesn't seem like a POV redirect; it concerns a objective demographic attribute, which is correct and referenced. -- Beland (talk) 19:55, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unless repeatedly sourced, I object to any redirect using "the most X in the world" or "the most X ever". Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 21:05, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep clearly defined and referenced in the article. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:22, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: is "most baptist" necessarily the same as "highest proportion of baptists"? I'm not sure that that's at all obvious, and if we are going by absolute population then Texas has approximately ten times as many Baptists as Nagaland. I'm also not at all sure that someone looking for the most baptist state in the world would obviously be interested in subnational states rather than nation-states. For both of these reasons, the redirect is potentially confusing. It's not POV, but nor is it helpful. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 11:14, 3 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 16:06, 10 June 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.

Reich Ministry of Economics

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. -- Tavix (talk) 00:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In Special:Diff/723132940, K.e.coffman (talk · contribs) blanked the redirect with the edit summary Redirect not useful, and the user later moved the redirect to the draft namespace. We don't blank inappropriate redirects or move them to another namespace, so I reverted these actions. However, if the allegation that the redirect isn't useful is correct, then the redirect should be retargeted[where?] or deleted. Stefan2 (talk) 10:40, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The history section, pertaining to Reichswirtschaftsministerium contains only: "The historical predecessor of the current Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy was the Reichswirtschaftsamt (Reich Economic Office), founded in 1917. In 1919, this became the Reichswirtschaftsministerium (Reich Ministry of Economy), which existed until 1945." The de.wiki article option is superior in this regard (please see my comment below). K.e.coffman (talk) 20:58, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 16:02, 10 June 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.

Teachings

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 School of thought. --BDD (talk) 15:12, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Would it make more sense for this to target knowledge? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:38, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 16:02, 10 June 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.

Oz rock

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.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:04, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect. Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:59, 10 June 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