This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 15, 2016.
Admiral of the Fleet Louis Francis Albert Victor Nicholas Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma, KG, GCB, OM, GCSI, GCIE, GCVO, DSO, PC
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) 19:37, 25 March 2016 (UTC)reply
This redirect is certainly sincere but I do not think that it can be of much use.
The Traditionalist (
talk) 20:55, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as entirely implausible. It looks like this has only received 7 hits in the last 90 days. --
Notecardforfree (
talk) 21:09, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as this is all kinds of implausible. No one in their right mind would go through this alphabet soup to look him up, even if they are able to remember it all. (I added one more redirect for the same reasons) --
Tavix(
talk) 21:27, 15 March 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.
Santorum's Google problem
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, default to keep. The findings below are that this phrase has seen substantial usage, unlike the "Yahoo" equivalent deleted earlier, but it is uncertain whether it's appropriate to be a redirect title.
Deryck C. 06:04, 6 April 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep This is actually a fairly common phrase in media, who pretty much have to resort to some sort of euphemism to describe the issue. Rick Santorum has a problem with name searches for "Santorum" in Google. That's true—or at least
as true as anything can be here. Yahoo just doesn't have the same sort of cultural ubiquity (cf.
Google (verb) and
Google bomb vs.
Yahoo (verb) and
Yahoo bomb). --
BDD (
talk) 14:55, 9 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
BDD (
talk) 20:51, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep. Searches for "Santorum's Google problem" show many mainstream sources using this phrase (often in the titles of articles about it) including Mother Jones, Esquire, ABC News, The Wall Street Journal, NPR, the Daily Telegraph, CNN, and many more. The analogy with the Yahoo redirect does not work at all: doing the same search for "Santorum's Yahoo problem" finds hardly anything, and the things it finds are generally comparisons of Santorum's Yahoo presence with the aforesaid Google problem. --
The Anome (
talk) 00:20, 16 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Vague? What else could be referred to as "Santorum's Google problem"? --
BDD (
talk) 14:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)reply
A poor rationale late yesterday, I've adjusted above. Regards,—
Godsy(
TALKCONT) 19:28, 24 March 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.
Caralibro
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) 19:37, 25 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:RFOREIGN (kind of). While "Caralibro" might be a literal translation of "Facebook" to Spanish, it's not the name of the site in Spanish,
it's still Facebook... Besides, it appears that caralibro.com is completely unrelated to Facebook, which could be misleading. --
Tavix(
talk) 20:06, 15 March 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.
Arïana Grande
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) 19:35, 25 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:RFOREIGN. She's American and has no affinity with any language besides English. --
Tavix(
talk) 19:42, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete I doubt this is her name in a real language. Seems like more of a
mëtãl ümlàüt to me.
Oiyarbepsy (
talk) 03:08, 17 March 2016 (UTC)reply
For what it's worth, it's tagged as
Kazakh language. I agree, but I gave the creator the benefit of the doubt. --
Tavix(
talk) 03:26, 17 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete target has no relationship with Kazakh. --
70.51.46.39 (
talk) 03:50, 17 March 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 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 the remaining items to the disambiguated
Prevarication. --
BDD (
talk) 19:39, 25 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Retarget all to
Waffle (speech); and hatnote any other articles for prevaricate as needed. --
70.51.46.39 (
talk) 04:26, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Alternately, turn prevaricate into a dab page and point all the others there, and list waffle, lie and other topics there; though I think just retargetting to waffle is sufficient. --
70.51.46.39 (
talk) 04:27, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete. As the nominator points out, "prevarication" is not necessarily synonymous with lying or dishonesty. --
Notecardforfree (
talk) 06:35, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Thanks. I've now retargeted the other redirects to
prevarication. but have left the RfD headers in until someone closes this RfD. --
The Anome (
talk) 08:15, 18 March 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.
Chairman of the Presidency Council
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) 18:35, 25 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as vague. There seems to be a lot of Presidency Councils --
Lenticel(
talk) 12:43, 16 March 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.
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 15, 2016.
Admiral of the Fleet Louis Francis Albert Victor Nicholas Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma, KG, GCB, OM, GCSI, GCIE, GCVO, DSO, PC
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) 19:37, 25 March 2016 (UTC)reply
This redirect is certainly sincere but I do not think that it can be of much use.
The Traditionalist (
talk) 20:55, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as entirely implausible. It looks like this has only received 7 hits in the last 90 days. --
Notecardforfree (
talk) 21:09, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as this is all kinds of implausible. No one in their right mind would go through this alphabet soup to look him up, even if they are able to remember it all. (I added one more redirect for the same reasons) --
Tavix(
talk) 21:27, 15 March 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.
Santorum's Google problem
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, default to keep. The findings below are that this phrase has seen substantial usage, unlike the "Yahoo" equivalent deleted earlier, but it is uncertain whether it's appropriate to be a redirect title.
Deryck C. 06:04, 6 April 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep This is actually a fairly common phrase in media, who pretty much have to resort to some sort of euphemism to describe the issue. Rick Santorum has a problem with name searches for "Santorum" in Google. That's true—or at least
as true as anything can be here. Yahoo just doesn't have the same sort of cultural ubiquity (cf.
Google (verb) and
Google bomb vs.
Yahoo (verb) and
Yahoo bomb). --
BDD (
talk) 14:55, 9 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
BDD (
talk) 20:51, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Keep. Searches for "Santorum's Google problem" show many mainstream sources using this phrase (often in the titles of articles about it) including Mother Jones, Esquire, ABC News, The Wall Street Journal, NPR, the Daily Telegraph, CNN, and many more. The analogy with the Yahoo redirect does not work at all: doing the same search for "Santorum's Yahoo problem" finds hardly anything, and the things it finds are generally comparisons of Santorum's Yahoo presence with the aforesaid Google problem. --
The Anome (
talk) 00:20, 16 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Vague? What else could be referred to as "Santorum's Google problem"? --
BDD (
talk) 14:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)reply
A poor rationale late yesterday, I've adjusted above. Regards,—
Godsy(
TALKCONT) 19:28, 24 March 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.
Caralibro
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) 19:37, 25 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:RFOREIGN (kind of). While "Caralibro" might be a literal translation of "Facebook" to Spanish, it's not the name of the site in Spanish,
it's still Facebook... Besides, it appears that caralibro.com is completely unrelated to Facebook, which could be misleading. --
Tavix(
talk) 20:06, 15 March 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.
Arïana Grande
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) 19:35, 25 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:RFOREIGN. She's American and has no affinity with any language besides English. --
Tavix(
talk) 19:42, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete I doubt this is her name in a real language. Seems like more of a
mëtãl ümlàüt to me.
Oiyarbepsy (
talk) 03:08, 17 March 2016 (UTC)reply
For what it's worth, it's tagged as
Kazakh language. I agree, but I gave the creator the benefit of the doubt. --
Tavix(
talk) 03:26, 17 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete target has no relationship with Kazakh. --
70.51.46.39 (
talk) 03:50, 17 March 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 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 the remaining items to the disambiguated
Prevarication. --
BDD (
talk) 19:39, 25 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Retarget all to
Waffle (speech); and hatnote any other articles for prevaricate as needed. --
70.51.46.39 (
talk) 04:26, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Alternately, turn prevaricate into a dab page and point all the others there, and list waffle, lie and other topics there; though I think just retargetting to waffle is sufficient. --
70.51.46.39 (
talk) 04:27, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete. As the nominator points out, "prevarication" is not necessarily synonymous with lying or dishonesty. --
Notecardforfree (
talk) 06:35, 15 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Thanks. I've now retargeted the other redirects to
prevarication. but have left the RfD headers in until someone closes this RfD. --
The Anome (
talk) 08:15, 18 March 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.
Chairman of the Presidency Council
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) 18:35, 25 March 2016 (UTC)reply
Delete as vague. There seems to be a lot of Presidency Councils --
Lenticel(
talk) 12:43, 16 March 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.