This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 7, 2019.
Water fab
- 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 (
u •
t •
c) 11:36, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
These redirects should be deleted because they are unhelpful. "Water" is a legitimate search term, but all of these redirects are not because they refer to non-existent things. However, should a search for articles or terms containing "water" be performed, these redirects will show up in the results and hide legitimate results. Further more, some these redirects can mislead the reader, or cause unnecessary confusion, by appearing as legitimate topics related to water, only to redirect to an unrelated article about semiconductor fabrication. I suspect these redirects were created for convenience, because it is possible to mistype "wafer" (which is something related to semiconductor fabrication) as "water" on a QWERTY keyboard, since the T and F keys are next to each other. The problem with this "convenience" is that while it's possible to mistype "wafer" in the manner assumed, it's also just as likely that some other key next to the F key could be struck instead, and there's no reason to preference the mistyping assumed by these redirects. Finally, these redirects will never be used in articles because they don't convey the intended meaning.
99Electrons (
talk) 23:49, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Delete as unhelpful. Those looking for waFer fabs will not make such a typo. This is also misleading, implying that there is a water-based fabrication process which would be more like
Atmospheric water generator or
Water treatment but that the ones pertaining to semiconductor aren't water-related.
AngusWOOF (
bark •
sniff) 03:19, 8 January 2019 (UTC) updated 19:19, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Note: I've copied a note from the
creator's talk below ~ Amory (
u •
t •
c) 11:36, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Thanks. I forget why I created it (it was before the common usage of categorized redirects), probably for misspelling, so I don't mind it being deleted. ··
gracefool
💬 03:57, 15 January 2019 (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.
Xian (abbreviation)
- 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 (
u •
t •
c) 11:37, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Starting a discussion as to the proper target for this redirect. General consensus at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xian (abbreviation) was to redirect somewhere, but there was no consensus as to the target page. Of the choices offered, it looks like only
Christian (given name) has any mention of the term at all. —
Sangdeboeuf (
talk) 23:35, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Keep status quo (ie targetted at
Christians). There is now a sourced mention of the abbreviations at
Christians#Etymology. I think that is the best place for this redirect to point to.
Pam
D 08:39, 8 January 2019 (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.
"Template:Template" 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. I've replaced the remaining mainspace transclusions ~ Amory (
u •
t •
c) 16:03, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Delete We've all done it: included "Template" when the code adds it for you.
UnitedStatesian (
talk) 19:37, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- delete, unused.
Frietjes (
talk) 19:43, 7 January 2019 (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.
Movie: crash
- 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 (
u •
t •
c) 22:26, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Delete Incorrectly structured titles.
UnitedStatesian (
talk) 18:01, 7 January 2019 (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.
Article(publishing)
- 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 (
u •
t •
c) 22:26, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Delete misformatted disambiguator (missing a space).
UnitedStatesian (
talk) 17:14, 7 January 2019 (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.
Cashina Krabs
- 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 (
u •
t •
c) 11:38, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Not mentioned in target article. The subject of this redirect seems to be a character in only one episode of
SpongeBob SquarePants where the subject of the target article married money, but is neither mentioned at the target or listed at
List of SpongeBob SquarePants characters.
Steel1943 (
talk) 23:13, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Sirena Irwin, the voice actor.
wumbolo
^^^ 14:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- That could be seen as somewhat obscure/unhelpful considering that the biographical subject acts as the subject of this redirect, and this redirect is not an alternative name for the actress. It would be like redirecting
Mario to
Charles Martinet.
Steel1943 (
talk) 21:41, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- Weak delete This character is mentioned only in the list of episodes at
SpongeBob SquarePants (season 9). And the last name is probably not "Krabs". (I have not watched that episode.) –
LaundryPizza03 (
d
c̄) 06:14, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- Weak delete. The episode is "Married to Money", but the name is only accurate if she took his last name, which is not guaranteed. --
Tavix (
talk) 01:06, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
MBisanz
talk 15:10, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CoolSkittle (
talk) 16:36, 7 January 2019 (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.
Polystar
- 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) 18:17, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Delete, since Polystar is no UMG, and the article on UMG does not mention Polystar at all.
RekishiEJ (
talk) 07:16, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CoolSkittle (
talk) 16:32, 7 January 2019 (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.
El Tigre (comics)
- 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
Sabretooth (comics). --
Tavix (
talk) 18:16, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Kukulcan is not mentioned in the list article, and El Tigre is not listed at #E or #T.
Shhhnotsoloud (
talk) 14:22, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --
Tavix (
talk) 01:52, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
CoolSkittle (
talk) 16:32, 7 January 2019 (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.
Media racism
- 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
Mass media#Racism and stereotyping. ~ Amory (
u •
t •
c) 22:29, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Not exclusive to target, and could be seen as a
WP:SURPRISE.
Steel1943 (
talk) 23:12, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.Relisting comment: When researching this I discovered the redirect
Racism in mass media which should be considered alongside this one, so I've relisted this disucssion to give it a fair hearing
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Thryduulf (
talk) 16:31, 7 January 2019 (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.
QUALIFIED TEACHER LEARNING AND SKILLS
- 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 (
u •
t •
c) 22:25, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Delete per
WP:RCAPS.
UnitedStatesian (
talk) 16:28, 7 January 2019 (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.
Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch railway station
- 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 Withdrawn.
(non-admin closure)
Pkbwcgs (
talk) 17:04, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
There is no point redirecting this to the railway station. The full name of this place is already redirected to
Llanfairpwllgwyngyll which is sufficient enough. The extra "railway station" part is not required. It is unlikely that this full term will be typed up and searched to find this railway station.
Pkbwcgs (
talk) 16:27, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Keep There are two articles with links to this page, and in each of those cases the full title is relevant because of the length of the name. (Another link is to the target of the redirect, so no need for the redirect in that case.) This redirect doesn't apparently satisfy
WP:RFD#HARMFUL. --
David Biddulph (
talk) 16:39, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Keep. While it is unlikely that someone will type out the full term, that is far from the only way redirects are used. One can copy and paste the full name, which seems plausible to me. Additionally, redirects are used via linking and David Biddulph has shown that this redirect is being used in this fashion. --
Tavix (
talk) 16:44, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Keep in addition to the above, the railway station is the reason for the very long name, and the station is famous for this name - it appears in countless lists of facts and trivia, etc, for example - so it is near certain that there are links to this title from outside Wikipedia that would needlessly be broken.
Thryduulf (
talk) 16:59, 7 January 2019 (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.
Qrigin of Species
- 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 (
u •
t •
c) 15:40, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
It is unlikely that someone will put a "q" at the beginning of "origin" so this is not an obvious misspelling of "origin".
Pkbwcgs (
talk) 16:08, 7 January 2019 (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.
Wik.is
- 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) 18:15, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Does not appear in target article.
UnitedStatesian (
talk) 15:19, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Content
was removed in 2010; apparently it used to be part of their services offered. Now it is... spam? Crap? I dunno. Delete as misleading. ~ Amory (
u •
t •
c) 11:41, 15 January 2019 (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.
Alabama (band)
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 20#Alabama (band)
Wikipedia:NAWARD
- 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 (
u •
t •
c) 15:35, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Requesting this shortcut to be deleted since the AfD participants (example
here and
here) are misquoting the shortcut as an acceptable notability criteria for awards which it never was.
DBig
Xrayᗙ 13:42, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Withdrawn by nominator per
WP:WDAFD since the community believes that redirects to unvetted proposals can be kept in WP space. --
DBig
Xrayᗙ 20:45, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Keep, this won't fix people misusing the page, they can still just link directly to the article. If misquoting is really an issue, list the page at
WP:MFD.
Danski454 (
talk) 14:20, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Hi
Danski454, appreciate your kind feedback, based on your suggestion I have started the MFD discussion at
Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Notability (awards). inspite of the MfD, I do believe we should also discuss the benefits of keeping this redirect, when it
leads to folks thinking to believe confuses folks into believing that its a valid notability policy. --
DBig
Xrayᗙ 14:39, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
-
User:AngusWOOF as
Thryduulf rightly said, your comment should be made at MfD, they are indeed valid questions. AFAIK there isn't any community consensus page or RfC for award notability. This
WP:NAWARD definitely isn't one and it should not exist to mislead AfD participants as has happened in the examples I gave. Because of these reason this redirect and corresponding target page is actually doing more harm than good. hence I believe it should be deleted. --
DBig
Xrayᗙ 19:44, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Thanks, I've added my comments there.
AngusWOOF (
bark •
sniff) 21:01, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Keep per
Thryduulf's points.
Rubbish computer (
Talk:
Contribs) 21:56, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
-
Comment: How about retargeting the redirect to
WP:GNG since there isn't a community vetted proposal for NAWARD and the crux of the draft that NAWARD is currently targeted to is also
WP:GNG, this should also prevent the confusion among AfD participants. --
DBig
Xrayᗙ 13:49, 8 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Keep - Acceptable shortcut even if the page is userfied. —
Godsy (
TALK
CONT) 20:39, 10 January 2019 (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.
Speculated to have been autistic
- 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 (
u •
t •
c) 15:34, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Originally an r from typo, now lost in the bot changes. Implausible. [
Username
Needed 10:36, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. Even if there was still a list of people suspected to be autistic then I'm not sure this would be a good redirect to it, and it certainly isn't a good redirect to something other than such a list (or possibly category).
Thryduulf (
talk) 17:13, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per nom.
AngusWOOF (
bark •
sniff) 18:14, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Very unlikely search term.
Rubbish computer (
Talk:
Contribs) 21:56, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Delete, it might make sense as a category, but as a article redirect it is junk.
Roger (Dodger67) (
talk) 11:12, 8 January 2019 (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.
Little Ed Blue/A Twist of Ed
- 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 (
u •
t •
c) 01:36, 19 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
There's already a redirect for
Little Ed Blue, so why have this longer one, too?
Paper Luigi
T •
C 09:00, 7 January 2019 (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.
Run Ed Run / A Town Called Ed
- 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
List of Ed, Edd n Eddy episodes#ep66.
Deryck
C. 18:38, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Redundant and implausible redirect. There's a redirect for
Run Ed Run already, so why have both?
Paper Luigi
T •
C 08:59, 7 January 2019 (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.
Take This Ed and Shove It Pts. 1 and 2
- 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
List of Ed, Edd n Eddy episodes#ep52.
Deryck
C. 18:39, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Implausible redirect. There exists a redirect already for
Take This Ed and Shove It.
Paper Luigi
T •
C 08:57, 7 January 2019 (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.
Episodes from Ed, Edd n Eddy, Special episodes
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 20#Episodes from Ed, Edd n Eddy, Special episodes
Talk:Once upon an Ed
- 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 restore page.
Early close given clear resolution. In addition, the fate of this page is tied to the upcoming result of
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 7#Once upon an Ed. (
non-admin closure)
Steel1943 (
talk) 23:51, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Redirect from one namespace to another.
Paper Luigi
T •
C 08:55, 7 January 2019 (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.
Once Upon An Ed
- 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
List of Ed, Edd n Eddy episodes#ep28.
Deryck
C. 18:38, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Redundant redirect.
Once upon an Ed already exists.
Paper Luigi
T •
C 08:54, 7 January 2019 (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.
Full version of Avast Ye Eds
- 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) 22:28, 16 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Implausible redirect at best. This article's only noteworthy edit history is a fan-made plot summary.
Paper Luigi
T •
C 08:53, 7 January 2019 (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.
For the Ed, By the Ed
- 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 (
u •
t •
c) 15:33, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
This redirect is unnecessary because
For the Ed, by the Ed already exists.
Paper Luigi
T •
C 08:50, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Comment: you do understand that when an admin moves a page a redirect is automatically created. That redirect is from the existing page that was titled incorrectly and redirected to the correct page after it was moved. I have no feelings on it being deleted or not.
«»
Who
?¿? 16:05, 7 January 2019 (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.
Episodes from Ed, Edd n Eddy, Season 5
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 19#Episodes from Ed, Edd n Eddy, Season 5
10th province of the kingdom of armenia
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 20#10th province of the kingdom of armenia
Rivals
- 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. on whether "Rivals" should point to
Rivalry or
Rival (disambiguation). Therefore, I will default to "do nothing". --
Tavix (
talk) 20:49, 20 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
I just closed
Talk:Rival (disambiguation)#Requested move 4 December 2018 as move. There was some discussion over where
Rivals should target. Should this point to
Rivalry or
Rival (disambiguation)?
feminist (
talk) 04:32, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- @
BD2412,
Crouch, Swale,
AjaxSmack, and
Steel1943: pinging RM participants.
feminist (
talk) 04:32, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- I would assert that the clear primary topic of "Rivals", as with "Rival" (since they tend to come in pairs), is
Rivalry. All references to films and other media with that name invoke rivalry, and they are so named for that reason.
bd2412
T 04:54, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Rivalry per BD2412 and
WP:PLURALPT.
Crouch, Swale (
talk) 13:53, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- "I would assert..." etc. Any evidence that someone typing "rivals" is most likely to be looking for an article/definition on
rivalry, keeping in mind that
this is an encyclopedia and not a dictionary? Without such evidence forthcoming, oppose a redirect of
Rivals (plural) to the page on rivalry; there are numerous entries on
the "rival" DAB page that are actual encyclopedic topics and "
rivals" should direct there. —
AjaxSmack 21:13, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- Neutral, but I have just spent some time tidying up
Rival (disambiguation) and retargeting to there:
The Rival,
The Rivals (disambiguation),
Rival (song),
Rivals (film),
Rivalry (disambiguation),
Rivals (disambiguation).
Shhhnotsoloud (
talk) 13:59, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- Comment
Here's the page view statistics for everything at
Rivalry (disambiguation) which is actually called plain old "Rivals" (as opposed to The Rivals or other
WP:PTMs like Sonic Rivals). As of now, those nine articles combined get about twice as many page views as Rivalry has been getting since it was turned into an article
[1].
59.149.124.29 (
talk) 12:36, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Deryck
C. 19:01, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- Keep pointing to Rivalry as with
Rival. Anyone looking for the dab page should try it with (disambiguation)
AngusWOOF (
bark •
sniff) 20:35, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to the disambiguation page. Looking at google searches for "Rivals" excluding Wikipedia and mirrors and it's clear that there is no primary topic. Re AngusWOOF: yes, anyone looking for the disambiguation page should search
Rivals (disambiguation) (which is why we should have such links to set indexes also), but most people are looking for a topic - just there is no single one that the significant majority are looking for.
Thryduulf (
talk) 18:21, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- Point to disambiguation page. ("Keep" and "retarget" seems to have swapped meanings halfway down the discussion.) I contemplated closing the discussion but couldn't confidently call a "rough consensus" either way, and there's no status quo ante to default to, so I may as well vote. The disambiguation page includes some artistic works whose titles are in the plural, so I think the s in the title pushes it just over the edge for me to think it's worth the disambiguation.
Deryck
C. 18:29, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- I think in this case the status quo ante to default to is redirecting to the DAB, since the DAB was moved, the status quo would be the new location of the
DAB.
Crouch, Swale (
talk) 18:39, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --
Tavix (
talk) 00:12, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- If we were to eliminate all of the partial title matches on the disambiguation page, are there any significant uses of the word "Rivals" as a name that are not references to a rivalry, real or fictional? Note that I would consider instances of "The Rivals" to be partial to the extent that there is no basis for thinking that these are commonly referred to as "Rivals" without a preceding "The".
bd2412
T 15:40, 7 January 2019 (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.
Tony Bray
- 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)
AlbanGeller (
talk) 03:07, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
Redirect from the name of a person notable only for briefly dating the redirect target in her youth. He's not a plausible search term on this basis, because even the few people who've ever heard of him at all would still be unlikely to expect him to have an encyclopedia article.
Bearcat (
talk) 01:32, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (
u •
t •
c) 15:28, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- Anthony Bray definitely goes to the band member. Tony is less used, mentioned in some random articles, but does not seem to be an actual credit for their album which is Abaddon.
AngusWOOF (
bark •
sniff) 02:49, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
- We don't routinely create DABMENTION redirects for every person who happens to get briefly namechecked in an article about somebody else; we do that only if there's a reason to believe the person is still a plausible search term in their own right even if they don't quite clear a notability standard.
Bearcat (
talk) 17:27, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.Relisting comment: Involved relist to close an old log page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --
Tavix (
talk) 00:11, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. DABMENTION is a necessary, but not a sufficient condition for something to be included in a dab page. Young Miss Thatcher's boyfriens is mentioned several times in her article, but that's only providing a vantage point on her: there's no substantial content about himself to warrant either a redirect or inclusion in a dab page. The band member, on the other hand, is more eligible, but I'm not sure how far we'd want to go creating redirects about alternative names of band members. I'd rather we leave it to the search engine in this case as it appears to be doing its job well enough. –
Uanfala (talk) 15:00, 8 January 2019 (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.