< November 27
November 29 >

November 28

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 28, 2016.

Wikipedia:Compunity Portal

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) 22:08, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't seem like a plausible misspelling. Steel1943 (talk) 23:23, 28 November 2016 (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.

Ecole elementaire catholique Elisabeth-Bruyere

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. Deryck C. 16:06, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. The first of these was an article but in the middle of 2015 was turned into a redirect for failing WP:GNG and WP:SCHOOL, with [2]. Yet it is WP:RFD#D2 confusing as there's no mention at the target beyond the navbox (((CECCESchools))). (For that matter, if the school fails GNG then it probably won't ever be created so should it even be in the navbox?) The others are just tracking variants. Si Trew (talk) 22:08, 28 November 2016 (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.

Ecole elementaire catholique Pierre-Elliot-Trudeau

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) 22:07, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all per WP:REDLINK. Not mentioned in the target except in the navbox (((CECCESchools))). It is linked in some other articles, but then that's just WP:RFD#D2 confusing. But, likely to fail WP:GNG per WP:SCHOOL anyway, so perhaps it should not be in the navbox anyway. Si Trew (talk) 22:03, 28 November 2016 (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.

Per Ole Baeckman

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) 21:57, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. The target is Swedish, and I am not sure that this is a reasonable substitution of the Swedish "ä" with "ae". (Eubot redirect). It's marked as ((R from title without diacritics)). Si Trew (talk) 22:01, 28 November 2016 (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.

ColibrI Florido

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) 21:56, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all as WP:RFOREIGN. No particular affinity to Spanish. The top two are by User:Eubot, the bottom two by User:Polbot. Si Trew (talk) 21:43, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as WP:RFOREIGN. These just make it harder for Spanish speakers to find the Spanish Wikipedia article, they don't help English Wikipedia readers. Spanish Wikipedia hasn't split Anthocephala into two species yet and Spanish speakers have their own organization that decides on official common names for birds (es:Anexo:Nombres en castellano de las aves del mundo recomendados por la Sociedad Española de Ornitología); best to let them sort it out themselves when they decide to split the species. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Plantdrew (talk • contribs) 23:20, 28 November 2016 (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.

Colibri A TETe Rose

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) 21:52, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
So probably it's the right target, but delete as WP:RFOREIGN unless there's any particular affinity to French that I have failed to spot. Si Trew (talk) 21:36, 28 November 2016 (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.

Wikipedia:JUSTAVOTE

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. Hatnote discussion can be done on the current target's talk page.))---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:03, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

These above two are redirected to the "Just a vote" section of arguments to avoid in deletion discussions. Because other essays about arguments to avoid in other discussions have been created (see Template:Relevance fallacies), the redirects shall not be limited to just one essay. We can convert the redirect page to disambiguation page, or we can redirect the pages to "Template:Relevance fallacies". Any other alternatives? George Ho (talk) 21:30, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notes[edit]
I have come to this discussion because I was one of six editors to whose talk pages George Ho posted invitations to come here, after this discussion had been open for several days and had received only opposition to his proposal, with no support. Even if this does not fall under any of the specific pieces of behaviour explicitly mentioned in Wikipedia:Canvassing, it does look dangerously like thinking "Hmm, things aren't going my way in that discussion. If I try bringing in lots more editors maybe some of them will support my position." I don't know that George did it in that spirit, and I hope he didn't, but he should take note of the fact that it could be seen that way, and be careful to avoid doing anything similar again. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:48, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I was wondering myself how George Ho chose me to invite, and more so now that you say he selected only six people for this. I don't know that anyone could realistically call it a canvassing problem, though, because, a priori he had no reason to know what my opinion would be and, a posteriori, the two people he invited who've responded so far (you and I) have disagreed with him. Largoplazo (talk) 15:11, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I invited you, James and Largoplazo, because only one participated and you contributed to WP:AADD, an essay about deletion discussions. To make you feel better, what about WP:arguments to avoid in discussion pages#Just a vote? That's more suitable than one about deletion talks, right? I realized days ago that 700+ pages link to the shortcut. George Ho (talk) 18:28, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, I didn't realize Template:relevance fallacies have links to articles. I should have mentioned template:Arguments to avoid earlier. George Ho (talk) 18:29, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And no, I was not trying to outbalance the opposition. I wanted your opinions; that's all. George Ho (talk) 18:45, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
George invites me (via talk or pings) to a lot of discussions, even when I'm pretty sure he's pretty sure I'll disagree with him. At a guess, I think he just pings familiar faces from previous discussions, for continuity. I don't think it's an active attempt at canvassing.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  12:53, 4 December 2016 (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.

Christmas Stories

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 Christmas by medium, as that seems where this discussion is headed. There's really no consensus for anything, but with no appetite for keeping it as is, something had to happen. -- Tavix (talk) 03:56, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the need for a dab here, but this clearly misleads the reader. We have A Christmas Story (disambiguation) but I don't see that as any help for they could be looking for anything. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:08, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 21:12, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, as much as that's a clear improvement (and I guess I wouldn't object to going over to there, instead), it only focuses on written works while there are a variety of Christmas stories that are best known for their portrayl on television, over the radio, in films, et cetera. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 01:56, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@CoffeeWithMarkets: Christmas by medium exists (Christmas in film redirects there). A literature section could be added there with a ((main article)) hatnote to Christmas in literature.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 02:03, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose that works out. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 02:14, 8 December 2016 (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.

스트래스필드

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) 16:04, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Nominating for deletion per WP:FORRED. The target article talks about the large immigrant population, but it's certainly not all Korean. Yet this is the only foreign-language redirect to the article. Delete. — Gorthian (talk) 02:42, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 21:10, 28 November 2016 (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.

100th anniversary of the sinking of the RMS Titanic

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 Cultural legacy of RMS Titanic#100th anniversary commemoration.---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 04:07, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Section being redirected to no longer exists at RMS Titanic. --Nevé–selbert 18:35, 28 November 2016 (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.

USA Today Available Around 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 Keep "NEWS", "ONLINE", "INTERNATIONAL" and "SPORT"; No consenseus' about "LIFE" and "MONEY" (specifically mentioned to be kept, late in the discussion, and not addressed individually by anyone else), Delete the rest. Thryduulf (talk) 14:30, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All are unlikely search terms, these are also on the boundary of violating WP:SOAPBOX for it is almost promotion. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:10, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If they're used by ((cite news)) won't deleting them break links? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:33, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Only if they grouped the entire part of the citation in work= and not section= None of these section names are notable like that. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:49, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep NEWS / ONLINE / INTERNATIONAL / SPORT. Delete the Section and Slogan related ones. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:04, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 18:37, 28 November 2016 (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.

Wikipedia:Chemical compounds

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 the MOS entry. Deryck C. 16:11, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This should probably redirect to a guideline about use of chemical compounds in articles, etc, but I cannot find such a guideline at the moment. Steel1943 (talk) 16:26, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

With some more thought, I guess I agree with a retarget to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Chemistry#Compounds makes sense. I don't have strong opinions either way. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 16:53, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 00:18, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 18:37, 28 November 2016 (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.

Washingtontimes

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. as similar to their websites' addresses - Nabla (talk) 23:03, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term (IDK why Twinkle "failed to find a target", so I had to manually nominate this. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:19, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • These redirects don't necessarily refer to the websites though. I just don't understand the benefit of deletion here. -- Tavix (talk) 22:01, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 18:37, 28 November 2016 (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.

Online calculator

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 Software calculator#Software calculators on the Internet. Deryck C. 11:34, 15 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOT linkfarm, this will mislead the reader. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:04, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to software calculator#software calculators on the Internet. I'll concede that target is "close enough". -- Tavix (talk) 18:57, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wheel calculator shows one such example. -- Tavix (talk) 16:04, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 18:37, 28 November 2016 (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.

Georgian nationalism

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 longer a question for RfD. The redirect was deleted along with its target, and a new article has been created at the target, JohnCD (talk) 18:45, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tiptoethrutheminefield blanked this redirect with the edit summary, "Deleting this redirect - the article it is directing to is too subject specific to cover a broad topic like Georgian Nationalism that covers a much wider time period and subject matter". I happen to agree with that assessment, but simply blanking the redirect isn't the correct procedure, so I'm bringing this here. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:32, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

How is it supposed to be done then? If I have made a mistake it is because advice is unclear. Two other editors, (probably three, the third is a bit vague in his comment), had already said in the article's talk page that the redirect was inappropriate [5]. As well as deleting the redirect because of the reasons stated in my edit summary, I want to encourage an actual "Georgian Nationalism" article to be created. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:38, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Tiptoethrutheminefield:, it's done by bringing it here (as I have done). This discussion is the place to ask that it be deleted. There are instructions on at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion#How to list a redirect for discussion. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 16:57, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If it's reached consensus through discussion at a talk page, it can go straight to WP:CSD with ((db-xfd)), though: it needn't come here. Si Trew (talk) 22:41, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've added my opinion to the talk page. There is also an AfD going on, in which the redirect has been criticized by a fifth editor: "This article is in place of the article on "Georgian nationalism" .. Info about the slogan could be included in such an article, but the whole article shouldn't be about the slogan instead of a well-balanced article on Georgian nationalism." - so that makes 5 editors in agreement that the redirect is inappropriate. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 15:43, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just for an update, the target page Georgia for Georgians is deleted per AfD. George Ho (talk) 19:54, 4 December 2016 (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.

Carle

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 set index created. As it's no longer a redirect, it no longer falls within the jurisdiction of RfD. -- Tavix (talk) 15:07, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Change to a disambiguation page due to there being various people and places also named "Carle". Examples include Matt Carle, Frankie Carle, Carle Place, Nick Carle, Gilles Carle, and Mathieu Carle. Alternatively, in the event it's decided Eric Carle is far and away the most famous Carle we could create Carle (disambiguation) and add a hatnote to Eric Carle's page. Rejectwater (talk) 14:22, 28 November 2016 (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.

Trompete

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 Trompete; disambiguate Tromba. -- Tavix (talk) 16:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not related to these languages. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 00:15, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For the other, Wiktionary lists both "Trompete" (German) and "trompete" (German and Portuguese). Si Trew (talk) 07:07, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:11, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My objection stands, which is that it's not at the target. While there is no doubt that in other languages these mean a trumpet, WP:Wikipedia is not a dictionary, in particular not a musical dictionary. As I stated, these are listed at Wiktionary. Si Trew (talk) 20:30, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer not to change targets in a way that directly would influence the discussion: poca a poca. But I've no objection to the foreign-language term being added there, and it would make sense to keep the R if it were. As it stands, I don't see how we could know that a reader hadn't stumbled across a Spanish waterspout or a Portuguese proboscis, although admittedly that seems less likely. Si Trew (talk) 22:36, 28 November 2016 (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.

Efficient Networks

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. Article creation is welcome. Deryck C. 16:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently was (is?) a part of Gigaset Communications, but is not mentioned in that article. There's one other mention on Wikipedia, at TI-AR7, but it is not worth a redirect. Needs to be deleted. — Gorthian (talk) 00:19, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:11, 28 November 2016 (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.

Prime Minister of the United States

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, while muttering that a Prime Minister is Head of Government but is often (e.g. in constitutional monarchies) not Head of State; however since POTUS is presumably both, the conclusion is correct. JohnCD (talk) 19:08, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A President and a Prime Minister are quite different. SSTflyer 13:28, 28 November 2016 (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.

CIA reports regarding Nigeria

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) 20:12, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All articles like CIA activities in Morocco were deleted per this AfD, so this redirect does not make sense now JMHamo (talk) 10:11, 28 November 2016 (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.

Eslovaquia

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) 20:15, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not related to Spanish. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:35, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • That link goes to an essay that attempts to explain an unnamed portion of a guideline. Color me a bit confused. Perhaps citing the guideline at WP:R#DELETE, #8, would be better, and the nominator would have done well to quote the guideline directly. Striking my "Keep". I think redirects like this are useful, but I won't die on this hill. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:34, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
True, I'd forgotten that WP:RFD#D8 says so directly. I agree it would be better generally if nominators generally referred to the criterion under which they are nominating something for deletion (if indeed they are: this is Redirects for Discussion, but I'm assuming it is the case here). That being said, I don't think that the deletion guidelines should be taken as exclusive. Si Trew (talk) 22:26, 28 November 2016 (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.

Sip Kin-ping

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 10#Sip Kin-ping

Eslovenia

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) 20:16, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not related to Spanish, does not seem to be a plausible ((R from typo)) to me. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:26, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Striking my "Keep"; see similar discussion on this page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 21:35, 28 November 2016 (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.

Vorstandsvorsitzender

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 10#Vorstandsvorsitzender

كاثوليكي

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. 23:10, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not particularly related to Arabic. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 06:51, 28 November 2016 (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.

Arthur J. Salemme

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 per nom to encourage article creation. Deryck C. 23:01, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect used to be a tiny stub article, and was later deleted and made into a redirect to the single page that refers to this person (Arthur). But that page (NSA Hall of Honor) lists many people who were honored, who have redlinks because nobody has written a page for them yet. Arthur falls into the same category and should show up as a redlink, rather than as a wikilink to a redirect back to the same page. A search for his name will still find the single useful page that mentions him (the list of honorees) and will also lead to the source citation of that list, which has a page about him and why he was a notable employee of NSA. Gnuish (talk) 03:41, 28 November 2016 (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.

Shiists

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 10#Shiists

Shi?a Islam

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 10#Shi?a Islam

Template:Hasan

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. 23:00, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Inappropriate redirect from template space. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 02:25, 28 November 2016 (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.

Template:Namco's X series

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 10#Template:Namco's X series

More