Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2012 August 17

August 17
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 17, 2012

Lake Terrace/Lake Oaks, New Orleans



 * 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 Reverse page move. Tikiwont (talk) 19:12, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * → Lake Terrace - Lake Oaks, New Orleans (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Implausible, incorrect and ambiguous. The article was incorrectly created with an / and that was causing it to indirectly link and associate to the Lake Terrace building in the UAE. Kumioko (talk) 23:54, 17 August 2012 (UTC) Kumioko (talk) 23:54, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see what the problem is. Does the redirect not go where it's supposed to because of the / ? Siuenti (talk) 09:44, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep This is one of the most plausible redirects I've ever seen. Ego White Tray (talk) 06:58, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
 * OK if I understand this correctly, the redirect is for the "correct" title which can't be used for technical reasons. There seems to be no reason not to keep at least the redirect, which has many inbound links. Siuenti (talk) 11:10, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - plausible search term, no value in deletion Wily D 08:13, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment—Why shouldn’t this article’s title have a slash? The article and its sources consistently use “Lake Terrace/Lake Oaks”. There is no technical reason to avoid slashes: see J/ψ meson, /dev/null, and .hack//Sign. Gorobay (talk) 09:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Move to the correct title, Lake Terrace/Lake Oaks, New Orleans, per WP:NC-SLASH - "article names can contain slashes if appropriate – there is no need for such titles to be fixed". Keep the resultant redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 18:21, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.

American resistance



 * 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) 21:24, 26 August 2012 (UTC)


 * → American Revolutionary War (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

I don't know that American Revolutionary War is an appropriate location for this. There are far too many things that American resistance could refer to. It could easily be redirected to Anti-Americanism or Insurgency. It could also refer to various things the US is resistant to do or take part in like the International Criminal Court. Ryan Vesey 19:04, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. I've been searching my library and checking search engines, and I see no indication the revolution was ever referred to as an "American resistance" movement. The primary search result is this website related specifically to "The fastest growing, law-bidding, most vigilant patriot network in America..." Now it's possible the modern militia network covered by the website is notable (not, IMHO), but I can't find any source which supports this redirect as currently targeted. BusterD (talk) 22:12, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * In the general sense, do you think a redirect to Militia movement would be appropriate? In a more general sense, it could possibly link to Militia (United States). Ryan Vesey 23:50, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - Conur with the above. Kumioko (talk) 23:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete could refer to the jungle warriors in the Philippines after the US Army capitulated. Union activists in the South, Confederate sympathizers in the North, etc. -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 04:41, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.

Alien



 * 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 both to Alien fixing the links for Alien (Alien) . Tikiwont (talk) 19:18, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Retarget to Alien (disambiguation page), since "Alien (Alien)" can quite likely refer to the first film in the Alien franchise. "Alien (alien)" can easily mean UFO aliens or somesuch, if you want to clarify that it is not the Alien franchise (small "a") -- 76.65.128.252 (talk) 12:42, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 *  → Alien (creature in Alien franchise) (links to redirect • [ history] • )    [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]
 *  → Alien (creature in Alien franchise) (links to redirect • [ history] • )    [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]


 * Retarget the former per nom as R from unnecessary disambiguation. Neutral on the latter: the capitalized 'A' in the second redirect implies the proper noun Alien, though this is not made explicit so it's an argument (albeit a weak one) for leaving the latter as-is; however, there is opportunity to reduce confusion by having two very similar redirects such as these share the same target, so I can see logical arguments for both sides as far as Alien (Alien) goes. BigNate37(T) 16:16, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Retarget both per nom. Theoldsparkle (talk) 15:04, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.

Wikipedia:ITSOKAYITHINKWEGOTASOLUTIONTOTHISONE



 * 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, G7. BencherliteTalk 06:56, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * → Consensus (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Created as a result of a former discussion and is not required to still exist. Also HEYYOUTWOQUITINSULTINGEACHOTHERWITHFANCIFULREDLINKEDSHORTCUTS should be deleted for similar reasons. meshach (talk) 06:29, 17 August 2012 (UTC) meshach (talk) 06:29, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * OK. BencherliteTalk 06:56, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * 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.

Phytochemical Society of Europe



 * 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) 21:23, 26 August 2012 (UTC)


 * → Simon Gibbons (links to redirect • [ history] • )     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Delete. Phytochemical Society of Europe was deleted twice before, its third creation was as a redirect. Simon Gibbons is one of two Honourary Vice-Chairs of this organization, according to their web page. Nothing about this redirect is particularly helpful to the reader and I don't see any other possible targets. Hairhorn (talk) 02:41, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I can't find any AfDs pertaining to Phytochemical Society of Europe. Could an admin shed some light into the nature of the previous deletions, please? BigNate37(T) 20:39, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Once deleted as A7, once as G12. Ryan Vesey 20:42, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Right, thanks. I didn't even think to look at logs. BigNate37(T) 20:50, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete with no prejudice to the creation of an article that demonstrates notability. The redirect is not helpful and I too cannot find a useful alternative title, but it is possible that the organisation is notable and so deserving of an article. Thryduulf (talk) 10:39, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.