September 7

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 7, 2018.

Ryan Cramer

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. ~ Amory (utc) 01:26, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Ryan Cramer and what's he got to do with Zone 66? This redirect appears to violate WP:NOTPROMOTION. KalHolmann (talk) 18:57, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

According to the previous redirect history, Cramer was associated with the Renaissance demo group which developed the Zone 66 game. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:18, 7 September 2018 (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.

A Girl in a Lower Grade

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 September 17#A Girl in a Lower Grade

Donetsian Coal Basin

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. ~ Amory (utc) 01:28, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. These names for the Donets Coal Basin were invented/coined by the redirects's creator, when he/she made an article move. A Google search made at the time of the move discussion for the article revealed only sources that got their content from Wikipedia.[1]. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day Toddy1 (talk) 06:11, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense. The first link is a translation from a Ukrainian paper at Research Gate, which does not make it recognisable or intuitive in English. It doesn't appear anywhere else. The second reference is to "Dniepr-Donetsian" as a specialist archaeological region, not 'Donetsian' on its own in reference to the coal basin. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:00, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing that out with regard to the first link – I hadn't realised I could access the full paper and assumed it was in English. The word obviously isn't used frequently in English-language geology, but there are a few mentions: e.g. [2] (quite an old source, but least there's no risk of citogenesis). As far as the second, I'm aware that it isn't referring specifically to the coal basin, which is why I said it "refer[s], as far as I can tell, to the area in which the coal mining region sits". I don't claim any expertise in geology, archaeology or eastern European geography, nor that these are necessarily likely search terms, but they don't strike me as especially implausible search terms either and – vitally – they don't strike me as redirects that are likely to cause confusion or that cause any harm in any other way. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 00:03, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Arms & Hearts: I don't have access to the entire 1977 article, but the usage there is extremely obscure... or, perhaps, you're citing it to demonstrate how specialised areas of research can sometimes create their own lexicology where existing terminology doesn't accommodate the research being translated without becoming extremely awkward(?). While I'm usually on board with the 'redirects are cheap' approach, 'Donetsian' as a descriptor is so unlikely that encouraging such stretches of the imagination become strained to the point of being disruptive. Wikipedia already has likely search strings - such as "coal in donets" - in place. There are multiple (in fact, innumerable) potential permutations of so many nouns from languages other than English that Wikipedia could choke on them: they're not quite as cheap as they may appear to be. For me, it is not a matter of whether such a redirect will cause confusion but a question of whether there is even reasonably plausible that such a search string would actually be used, and of any use. I guess it's a matter of our personal views as to the function of redirects. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:58, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia should not be perpetuating neologisms - particularly ones that have no existence outside Wikipedia (and sites that get their content from Wikipedia). WP:NOTNEO-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:14, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The two terms were created here:
One of the weird leftovers following the article rename to Donets Coal Basin is that it acquired a revision history from somewhere else the redirect called Donets Coal Basin.-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:27, 31 August 2018 (UTC) modified 13:04:31[reply]
@Iryna Harpy: I was citing it mostly just to make the point that "Donetsian" is sometimes used outside of Wikipedia, so speaking of a "Donetsian coal basin" is neither totally implausible nor a neologism invented by a Wikipedian. I agree of course that the issue boils down to our respective views on the function of redirects, and specifically the effects of keeping them – as I've argued in other discussions, the idea that keeping a given redirect "sets a precedent" that leads to the creation of others (which you seem to be invoking by referring to "encouraging such stretches of the imagination") is rarely if ever supported by any evidence. Editors, in my experience, simply don't behave that way: people create redirects because they think they will be useful, and occasionally for vandalistic or POV purposes, not because they think that a precedent exists to which they must conform. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 11:47, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The keep arguments here read to me to be slightly stronger but I'd like more discussion before declaring them to have consensus. Thryduulf (talk) 14:22, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 14:22, 7 September 2018 (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.

Mota Varachha

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. Not exactly an overwhelming consensus here, so this could just as easily be a "no consensus, delete" close. I still think the question as posed in the initial relist is worth discussing, but I don't think another relist will be fruitful so perhaps this isn't the time/place to have it. ~ Amory (utc) 11:16, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Term not present in target article - no indication that this is a useful redirect. PamD 23:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Striking vote per my comment below AngusWOOF (barksniff) 19:22, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm sufficiently interested in the debate between "redirect from small->large place" versus "REDLINK" arguments, so I think this merits a relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (utc) 11:21, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Like Amorymeltzer, I think the arguments here deserve further comment
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 14:08, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It really depends on whether Surat's major neighborhoods / suburbs are going to be listed. Right now only the Varachha area has its own article. The article already suffers from an excessive number of non-notable redirects to List of tourist attractions in Surat. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 18:16, 7 September 2018 (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.

List of racist attack on Africans in India

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. If someone wants the content to start a draft, happy to provide. ~ Amory (utc) 11:13, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelled, and subject is not discussed at target.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  17:55, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 22:14, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (utc) 12:18, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The issue is that the Title is pure OR made up with cherry picking of crime incidents. you can see my comment below for further elaboration on this. --DBigXray 21:32, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I very nearly closed this as no consensus but figured that one more relisting wouldn't hurt. Thryduulf (talk) 14:02, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 14:02, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: author was also blocked for sockpuppetry Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Abc-wtf-def/Archive around this time. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 15:11, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Uanfala, should List of racist attack on Indians be moved to Draft as well? It's got a list of incidents as newspaper coverage? Should it be renamed to "Racism in India" ? AngusWOOF (barksniff) 14:58, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That looks even less mainspace-worthy. I'm not sure its scope is well-defined: it's about racist attacks on Indians, wherever they might be in the world. We do have "Racism in ..." articles, but no "Racism against ..." ones that I'm aware of.Uanfala (talk) 15:06, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, there are in fact such articles, like Anti-Indian sentiment. – Uanfala (talk) 21:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to respectfully disagree. We are going offtopic, but FWIW I was closely following some of the events via news when it actually happened. In one of the case related to a road accident, the African driver was mobbed up and beaten. the cause was not him being african but the accident, even local drivers are regularly roughed up by locals in India. A few of the cases in Delhi was related to drug cartel wars among the Africans. And locals anger against the drug syndicate. Indian TV media and Print media is also notorious to fire up incidents to get more TRP and grab eyeballs. Of course these incidents i gave example are not exhaustive list of cases. Racism exists in the world but not everywhere, we have to follow Notability to decide something on wikipedia. Using these cases as a Racism against Africans will be WP:SYNTH and analysis. regards.--DBigXray 21:28, 10 September 2018 (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.

Raymond Kertezc

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. While a previous AfD appears to have been closed as Merge, there doesn't appear to be any content in the target, so we don't need to keep the redirect's history. ~ Amory (utc) 01:25, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It's redirecting to a non-existent section in an article that doesn't mention his non-existence! Celia Homeford (talk) 13:48, 7 September 2018 (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.

Great British Mobility

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 September 17#Great British Mobility

Quipper

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 disambiguate. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 11:41, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The current redirect to Quipper is about Index of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters#TSR 2012 - Fiend Folio (1981). If you will search Google, the first search on the list on Quipper is about Quipper (company). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlojoseph14 (talkcontribs) 06:54, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate. Good finds, Uanfala. -- Tavix (talk) 14:42, 7 September 2018 (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.