December 1
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 1, 2016.
Buzzard (internet celebrity)
- 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) 19:05, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
This redirect makes no sense to me. If anyone can find a use for it, then I'll gladly go along. —
Gorthian (
talk) 22:56, 1 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.
Burj, -al
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 14#Burj, -al
BEc
- 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
Bachelor of Economics. I also added a hatnote at the target per Thryduulf's suggestion. --
Notecardforfree (
talk) 00:07, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
I cannot find this abbreviation on the target page, and have no idea what it might stand for. The combination of upper- and lower-case letters makes it an unlikely search term. Delete to free up any searches. —
Gorthian (
talk) 22:45, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Comment: It stands for a
Bachelor of Economics. --
Tavix (
talk) 22:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Thank you!
I just found out that the creator is a banned sock; I don't know if that changes anything here. (created before the ban) —
Gorthian (
talk) 23:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Bachelor of Economics as
{{
R from initialism}}
, along the lines of
BSc →
Bachelor of Science,
BEd →
Bachelor of Education,
BEng →
Bachelor of Engineering, and so on.
MSc →
Master of Science,
MEng →
Master of Engineering,
CEng → where
Chartered Engineer goes, etc etc etc.
Si Trew (
talk) 04:55, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget per Si Trew, but add a hatnote to
Bec (disambiguation) and
BEC (disambiguation) as it's a plausible typo for both dab pages.
Thryduulf (
talk) 19:39, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget - I agree as well. I've no strong opinion in terms of adding links to the aforementioned disambiguation pages, but it seems like a good idea.
CoffeeWithMarkets (
talk) 18:09, 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.
Awan(Qutb Shah
- 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 without redirect to
Awan (Qutb Shah). --
Tavix (
talk) 04:23, 10 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
Unlikely mess of a single parenthesis and no space is not going to help any searchers. Delete. I like
Thryduulf's solution below. —
Gorthian (
talk) 22:42, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Move without redirect to
Awan (Qutb Shah). This was originally created in good faith as an article in 2009 but a couple of days later was found to duplicate an existing article so the correctly spaced and punctuated title seems like it should exist.
Thryduulf (
talk) 19:42, 2 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.
Elder Scrolls skill redirects
- 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) 19:07, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
No longer mentioned in the target article. Anyone searching for this particular term will be disappointed in the non-answer. Delete. —
Gorthian (
talk) 22:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Comment: The original redirect nominated in this section was
Athletics (Elder Scrolls) by
Gorthian. I nominated the rest and merged them into this discussion afterwards. All of these redirects are skills used in the
The Elder Scrolls universe that are not identified or mentioned at their target page, and since they are in-game subjects that are not notable for inclusion, should be deleted per
WP:NOTWIKIA.
Steel1943 (
talk) 23:18, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete all (Added by –
Steel1943 (
talk) 23:18, 1 December 2016 (UTC)) per
WP:NOTWIKIA. In fact, I'd say that most, if not all, skill-based subjects in the
The Elder Scrolls universe fail
WP:NOTWIKIA, so I might search for them later. (...And, on a related note, I'm probably going to play
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim later today.)
Steel1943 (
talk) 22:55, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- @
Gorthian: In fact, I just found a whole bunch of redirects that should be bundled with this one. Is it okay if I bundle them with this nomination?
Steel1943 (
talk) 22:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Bundle away! But I see you're already adding a bunch. —
Gorthian (
talk) 23:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- @
Gorthian: Yeah, haha. I was going to add them regardless, but it's good to know that I can bundle it here since your rationale applies to all of these!
Steel1943 (
talk) 23:06, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete all. These redirects are all obviously a bit on the pointless side. The skill system as a whole could be described in a gameplay section, but it's unlikely individual skills would be mentioned on the target page, as
MOS:VG discourages that kind of intricate detail.
NinjaRobotPirate (
talk) 06:10, 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.
1979 (number)
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 12#1979 (number)
February 18, 1979
- 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) 19:11, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
WP:XY. Could target
February 18 or
1979.
Steel1943 (
talk) 21:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- The date does have some significance, but of course that's all relative. --
Tavix (
talk) 22:24, 1 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.
Wikipedia:CSDG
- 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
Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#General. --
Tavix (
talk) 23:51, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
Retarget to
Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#General. Follows suit with
WP:CSDA,
WP:CSDR, etc. Only ~25 links currently exist to this title. —
Godsy (
TALK
CONT) 08:07, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget per nom, after fixing the current links of course. Not sure why "CSDG" is an initialism for the current target, and as I said in a recent discussion it's better for shortcuts to speedy criteria to be consistent across the categories.
Ivanvector (
Talk/
Edits) 23:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget per nom and Ivanvector. --
Notecardforfree (
talk) 00:08, 9 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.
Putin 2.0
- 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's findings, unchallenged in over two weeks, seem to answer the objections raised by CoffeeWithMarkets and AngusWOOF and disprove the assumption in the nomination that the term is unlikely to be used.
Thryduulf (
talk) 13:33, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
This doesn't seem like a likely way of referring to a politician's second administration, or for Putin himself. --
BDD (
talk) 22:08, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete original name, obscure synonym (
WP:R#DELETE 8). -
CHAMPION (
talk) (
contributions) (
logs) 23:34, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete just casual mentions by random bloggers who would put 2.0 on any second administration or event. It hasn't stuck like
Obamacare.
AngusWOOF (
bark •
sniff) 16:13, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete - If/when this receives significant coverage by reliable sources, then we can consider having such a redirect. For right now, "Putin 2.0" appears to be an empty buzzword.
CoffeeWithMarkets (
talk) 07:14, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Keep. Term used by reliable sources ranging from the
Brookings Institute,
Bloomberg,
Financial Times,
Carnegie Mellon's Moscow Centre,
Christian Science Monitor,
Radio Free Europe, etc. and the not so-reliable
Russia Today to refer to Putin's return to the presidency in 2012. Insisting on Obamacare levels of prominence is way too high and would invalidate a lot of legitimate terms used b reliable sources such as this one. ----
Patar knight -
chat/
contributions 03:10, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Deryck
C. 11:56, 1 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.
Cooking bananas
- 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 as a result of
a follow-up discussion to
a requested move, consensus has emerged to move
cooking plantain to
cooking banana. The consensus that developed here is that there should be a disambiguation page, which is in the process of being set up at
plantain (and is reflected in the aforementioned discussion). --
Tavix (
talk) 21:05, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
These were recently created and even more recently
added to the lead of the
"cooking" plantain article. These could seemingly equally refer generally to edible
bananas depending on which source you look at. —
Godsy (
TALK
CONT) 05:29, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
Find sources:
Google (
books ·
news ·
scholar ·
free images ·
WP refs) ·
FENS ·
JSTOR ·
TWL
- If you look at the bottom of the "Cooking plantain" talk page, it describes an effort to differentiate between plantains (AAB group) and cooking bananas (ABB group). But it looks like the term always excludes dessert bananas. --
Bod (
talk) 05:55, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
- @
Bodhi Peace: Take a look at
this, it's not the greatest source, but it differentiates by stating "cooking bananas and plantains". —
Godsy (
TALK
CONT) 06:04, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Yes. Thanks
Si Trew.—
Godsy (
TALK
CONT) 06:13, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Rename main article to Plantain and organize from there. Article is a mess right now. It should be one Plantain article and then have the classifications explained like the Banana article. Cooking plantain then goes to the section pertaining to that classification. Cooking banana goes to the subsection in banana. If a subsection needs its own article, then create a clearer disambiguator like Plantain (AAB group)
AngusWOOF (
bark •
sniff) 15:51, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
- I'd hold off on renaming/deleting the redirects until the editors get their act together. As it stands the plantain articles (true and cooking) even share the same picture.
AngusWOOF (
bark •
sniff) 15:43, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
- @
AngusWOOF: In UK, the
WP:PRIMARY meaning of "plantain" is
Plantago; except in communities with Caribbean heritage, in which it is what is currently titled
cooking plantain.
Narky Blert (
talk) 16:29, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Keep, basically per AngusWOOF. I'm not thrilled with that RM, but in light of it, just changing these redirects seems harmful. --
BDD (
talk) 22:13, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Deryck
C. 11:56, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Disambiguate. I think our readers will be best served by being sent to a DAB page. At the aforementioned
move discussion for
cooking plantain, there seemed to be general support for some sort of broad concept disambiguation; some suggested that the various ambiguous titles should be disambiguated at a neutral title, such as
culinary uses of bananas. This new DAB page can hopefully explain the difference between
bananas,
cooking plantains,
true plantains,
other banana cultivars, etcetera. Another option would be to retarget this to
Musa (genus)#Cultivated bananas, though I'd rather not conflate cultivation with cooking. --
Notecardforfree (
talk) 08:19, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- That sounds acceptable to me too. --
BDD (
talk) 15:27, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- I'd support Plantain to be the dab as it can then cover the different definitions like plantago, cooking plantain, true plantain.
AngusWOOF (
bark •
sniff) 16:41, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Support disambiguate per AngusWOOF. Two (or more?)
WP:PRIMARY meanings = readers best served by a DAB page.
Narky Blert (
talk) 02:07, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Disambiguation is much better than the status quo.—
Godsy (
TALK
CONT) 21:16, 9 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.
Elizabeth Trump
- 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.
Thryduulf (
talk) 13:37, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
This name is most commonly used to refer to Donald's sister, whom we don't have an article about.
Elizabeth Christ Trump is always referred to by her full name. -
CHAMPION (
talk) (
contributions) (
logs) 09:38, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Good point. If Elizabeth Trump is mentioned in an article, perhaps the redirect can point to that article.--
Nowa (
talk) 12:31, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Keep Not even worth a hatnote, in my opinion. There's exactly one mention of Trump's sister in his article, and it's only to give her name. Other instances of "Elizabeth" in the article refer to this one. I don't doubt that she's more commonly referred to with her maiden/middle name, but the article does use the shorter form ("Elizabeth Trump was born as Elisabeth Christ..."). It doesn't look like Trump's sister is notable, and she isn't even mentioned at
Family of Donald Trump. --
BDD (
talk) 17:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Keep. It's much better to redirect to a notable person than one who's barely mentioned. Please don't forget about
WP:RECENTISM. --
Tavix (
talk) 20:06, 11 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.
Ṣrimati
- 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.
Thryduulf (
talk) 13:41, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
See previous RfD at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 3#Ṣrimati, where
User:Tavix nominated this Neelix redirect and it was closed as retarget. I've re-rcatted it as {{
R from other language|sr}}
, but really it has no affinity to Serbian or Bosnian and is not at the target: Delete as
WP:RFD#D2 confusing,
WP:RFD#D8 foreign.
I note that
Srimati also redirects to the same target, was also created by Neelix at the same time, and is not rcatted as anything right now. Really, that one should probably have been included in the original discussion: it was retarget (from
Mrs. to
Shrimati) way back in 2011 and so is not a "Neelix redirect" in the sense of
WP:X1 etc.
Si Trew (
talk) 04:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
-
Shrimati is a
Sanskrit word, whose
standard romanisation is Śrimatī, so
Śrimati makes sense (although it lacks the macron over the last letter). The spelling with sh for ś makes sense too as it's a common way to represent that sound, and s (in
Srimati) is how this is pronounced in a fair number of Indo-Aryan languages. ṣ on the other hand stands for a different Sanskrit sound which does not occur in this word and is otherwise rare in the modern IA languages. Ṣrimati can't be found in sources and I can't imagine a user going to the trouble of putting underdots in the wrong places when typing in the searchbox, so that's a clear delete. –
Uanfala (talk) 01:32, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- To make clear: I'm not proposing deletion (or anything else) for those in the
basic Latin alphabet, only the one with the diacritics. Thanks for the explanation: Gtrans reports it as Bosnian, and I could see that it would be thus written (just as in Hungarian, if magyarised it would probably be just "srimati" because the letter "s" in Hungarian sounds like the digraph "sh" usually does in English, and the other vowels probably would be fine as they are).
Si Trew (
talk) 04:46, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per Uanfala. I thought about closing this, but decided against it. I'm technically
involved by being the one to originally nominate it. --
Tavix (
talk) 20:09, 11 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.
Native black thorn
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 12#Native black thorn
PooPoo
- 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
Poo poo.
JohnCD (
talk) 21:47, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
(Neelix) Retarget to the DAB at
Poo poo. This character is mentioned once simply by name at the target with the person playing it, and therefore is rather
WP:RFD#D2 confusing, I think. I imagine this was created not with any idea that it made sense, but from a scatalogical enumeration and finding that one variant just happened to be used in one article. That information can be found via a search. Retarget to the DAB at
Poo poo and fix up the link there to refer straight to the section in the target.
Si Trew (
talk) 03:28, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget per nom. That dab page has all the spelling variants.
AngusWOOF (
bark •
sniff) 16:43, 5 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.
Poo-poo (call)
- 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) 19:50, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
Delete, I think, per
WP:XY. (Neelix.) I can't believe this is the only bird whose call can be described as "poo-poo". According to WP, the
Amethyst brown dove calls "
poo-poo-pooh" and the
Serendib scops owl calls "
poo-ooo".
Si Trew (
talk) 03:23, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom.
The parenthetical "(call)" is misleading and unnecessary. --
Notecardforfree (
talk) 20:26, 1 December 2016 (UTC) Post script: the
Laurel pigeon article also says that the bird makes a "pu-pu-pooo" sound. --
Notecardforfree (
talk) 08:51, 2 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.
Mulberrycoloured
- 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.
SimonTrew,
WP:X1 is still in effect. --
Tavix (
talk) 04:48, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
(Neelix) Is
WP:X1 still in force? Delete all of these. From
User:Anomie/Neelix_list/6#To be checked.
Si Trew (
talk) 03:14, 1 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.
Motherly
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 12#Motherly
Acraa
- 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 disambiguation page at
Acra, where the alternate suggestion
Accra is listed.
Thryduulf (
talk) 13:52, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
(Neelix redirect). As the target notes, this is "{{
hatnote|Not to be confused with [[Acra (disambiguation)|Acra]], [[Accra]], [[Akra (disambiguation)|Akra]], [[Åkra (disambiguation)|Åkra]], or [[Aqra (disambiguation)|other Aqras]].}}
" Leaving aside the questionable wisdom of piping disambiguation pages in hatnotes, I am wondering whether this is so blatantly
WP:XY that we shouldn't just delete it. An alternative would be to turn it into a disambiguation page listing all the other disambiguation pages, but I'm not sure that's such a brilliant idea. Perhaps retarget to the DAB at
Acra as {{
R from other spelling}}
, {{
R from ambiguous page}}
? That seems to list most if not all of those mentioned in the hatnote.
Si Trew (
talk) 03:00, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Comment: The target title was
Mount Aqraa at the time the redirect was made, so "Acraa" seems reasonable for that, but of course no longer applies. I can't decide. Maybe retarget it to
Accra, since that's exactly the kind of dyslexic mistake I'd make during a search. But you're right about
WP:XY. Given all the separate dabs there are for all the separate spellings, even pointing it at
Acra still seems like
WP:XY. —
Gorthian (
talk) 03:33, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
-
Si Trew, I also wanted to note that you seem to have a doppelgänger: the editor that wanted to
move the article sounds eerily like you: humorous, long-winded, erudite. Go read it, if you haven't already.—
Gorthian (
talk) 03:33, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Isn't
erudite some kind of glue? I shall try to write more
Taciturnly.
Si Trew (
talk) 04:26, 2 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.
Trump sex
- 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) 19:51, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
Vague redirect from partial title match, I doubt this is plausible at all for any topic for it can possibly refer to multiple topics. Whatever the reader is looking for, they will find it by search results. -
CHAMPION (
talk) (
contributions) (
logs) 00:55, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom. Vague. I'm intrigued about the implications for
euchre night ....
Ivanvector (
Talk/
Edits) 23:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. LOL. Is this his newest product? Nice sideline to the casino and "University".
wbm1058 (
talk) 04:30, 2 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.
Google Turkey
- 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 delete per consensus below and
WP:CSD#G7. @
SimonTrew: U1 is not applicable because this redirect is in mainspace; G4 is not applicable because the redirect was created before the previous RfD. Sometimes though we allow G6 when an XfD result necessitates deletion of another page not explicitly nominated.
Deryck
C. 10:47, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
Per precedent at
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 22#Google Spain. -
CHAMPION (
talk) (
contributions) (
logs) 00:25, 1 December 2016 (UTC)
reply
- It is fine to delete it. --
Frmorrison (
talk) 14:56, 1 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.
Castro regime
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 12#Castro regime