Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 April 26

April 26
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 26, 2015.

201x and beyond in film



 * 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. Please note that since the 2014 edition has over 5000 revisions, I need to get a steward to delete it; I haven't overlooked it. --BDD (talk) 13:57, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * 2011 and beyond in film → 2011 in film (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_and_beyond_in_film&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * 2011 and onwards in film → 2011 in film (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2011_and_onwards_in_film&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * 2013 and beyond in film → 2013 in film (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2013_and_beyond_in_film&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * 2014 and beyond in film → 2014 in film (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2014_and_beyond_in_film&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * 2015 and beyond in film → 2015 in film (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2015_and_beyond_in_film&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * 2016 and beyond in film → 2016 in film (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2016_and_beyond_in_film&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Delete as misleading and inaccurate. 201x in film only contains one year, it doesn't deal with anything "beyond" that year. Any notion otherwise is confusing. Tavix Talk  23:47, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * delete as confusing. It may even be misconstrued that the target article covers everything about films from 201x onward.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 23:49, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - misleading, WP:CRYSTAL, etc. Ivanvector (talk) 16:46, 27 April 2015 (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.

Man of the Philippines



 * 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. Just Chilling (talk) 02:44, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Man of the Philippines → Filipinos (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Man_of_the_Philippines&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Delete as an implausible search term and confusing: I originally thought this was an award or a competition. Tavix Talk  18:51, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete I to would havr thought this would have been about a person or award, not about anyone who is citizen of the country.--67.68.161.47 (talk) 20:11, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete I think this is a partial title match to Ten Outstanding Young Men of the Philippines.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 23:34, 26 April 2015 (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.

반달리즘



 * 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. Just Chilling (talk) 02:46, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * 반달리즘 → Vandalism (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%EB%B0%98%EB%8B%AC%EB%A6%AC%EC%A6%98&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Delete. Vandalism is not Korea-specific. Gorobay (talk) 15:28, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete while there is vandalism in Korea the term does not have a strong enough connection to that country to make it a useful redirect for the English Wikipedia.--67.68.161.47 (talk) 20:15, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete vandalism is a worldwide phenomenon that isn't native to Korea. Also since the Wiki isn't a translation dictionary. -- Lenticel ( talk ) 23:51, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * delete as cross-language redirect. Seyasirt (talk) 12:12, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOTDIC Wikipedia is not a translation dictionary. This is a general topic with no affinity for any particular language -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 10:40, 29 April 2015 (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.

Untitled-Vijay-Prabhudeva Project



 * 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) 13:54, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Untitled-Vijay-Prabhudeva Project → Villu (film) (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Untitled-Vijay-Prabhudeva_Project&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This project is no longer untitled... Tavix Talk  03:22, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete with Tavix. Patently it has a title. We don't have Vijay-Prabhudeva Project  fortunatelyl, so it seem an odd creation in the first place, but its time is up. Si Trew (talk) 07:56, 26 April 2015 (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.

Adam Orth Twitter incident
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 May 4%23Adam Orth Twitter incident

Nippleman



 * 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. Let's recreate this if there's ever an article on Batman & Robin's Batman, ok? --BDD (talk)


 * Nippleman → Metallica (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nippleman&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

There is no significant connection between this term and Metallica. Tavix Talk  02:01, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as unlikely synonym. It seems to be a slang based on Supernumerary nipples. -- Lenticel  ( talk ) 00:16, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Supposedly, Nippleman is a major character in a series of web cartoons written around the time that Metallica sued Napster, with the lawsuit as one of its major themes. The web series itself is non-notable, so the character is also not. This could have the potential to be insulting, so let's delete it. Ivanvector (talk) 18:48, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. It sees there's an indirect connection between the two, but not enough of one for this redirect to be useful: people searching for Nippleman will be unlikely to ever find what they're looking for in the Metallica article. --Delirium (talk) 06:38, 30 April 2015 (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.

Late Quaternary



 * 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. Deryck C. 20:53, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Late Quaternary → Quaternary (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Late_Quaternary&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

The article does not say anything about Late Quaternary A8v (talk) 22:41, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep unless anyone can come up with a better target. I don't think we have much to say about the Late Quaternary period; readers will find relevant information at the Quaternary article. — This, that and the other (talk) 04:24, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep as above: every boy is fascinated with dinosaurs and some of the best were in this period, I think it is a likely search term. It's a pity we don't have a separate article, but what we have is as good as it gets right now untill some paleaontologist decides to edit Wikipedia. WP:NOTFINISHED, WP:NOTPERFECT. It ususally gets a couple of hits a day lately though in march there was a bit of a rise peaking on 10 March it got 12, then falling off in the days after, perhaps something on the telly? But this definitely gets hits above noise level so to delete it would be harmful. Si Trew (talk) 07:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I hope you were joking about "some of the best dinosaurs" being in this period... Tavix Talk  15:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I was not exactly joking but taking the POV of when I was a seven year old boy, so being childish in that biggest are best as a boy playing with dinosaur toys etc. I wouldn't say joking exactly but that from the POV of a seven year old boy they are the best the great big ones. (Most dinosaurs were actually about the size of a starling, within a few inches here or there, according to the Natural History Museum, but of course they don't put that in their front entrance as it's not as impressive as a plastercast of – if I remember correctly – a brontosaurus (I think they changed the name of that but then changed it back). Si Trew (talk) 00:01, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep; Quaternary is a broader topic, which includes Late Quaternary, even though it doesn't specifically mention it. This redirect isn't misleading anyone, and creating eight redlinks wouldn't help anyone. Perhaps someone with knowledge in the field can advise whether "Late Quaternary" is a recognised term, or if the linking articles would be better coded as "late Quaternary". I've raised this question at WT:WikiProject_Geology. Colonies Chris (talk) 08:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete not mentioned at target. If WP doesn't have anything to say about a topic it should be upfront about it. Siuenti (talk) 15:41, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep and tag as per Colonies Chris. Thryduulf (talk) 15:54, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete According to the United States Geological Survey, "Late Quaternary" is an informal term. As such, I don't think it should be mentioned in the wiki. I voted "Weak" since I'm not that knowledgeable in Geology. -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:40, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for finding the USGS link - I've added a sentence to the article to explain the meaning of Late Quaternary, with that as a reference. Colonies Chris (talk) 10:49, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Welcome. I am open to changing my vote to "keep" if we can find other reliable sources which supports that informal term. -- Lenticel ( talk ) 02:06, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Changing vote to Keep looks like Tavix found some cites about it. -- Lenticel ( talk ) 06:29, 28 April 2015 (UTC)


 * I've got a few comments as a Geology minor (that counts for something, right?). I recommend taking a peak over at Geologic time scale, because it might help everyone see where the Quaternary period fits in with everything else. Some periods, such as those in the Mesozoic, are divided up into epochs labeled as "Early" and "Late" (sometimes "middle" as well). The Quaternary isn't one of these, and it is divided up into the Pleistocene (early-middle) and the Holocene (late). With that logic, the Late Quaternary would seem to be roughly equivalent to the Holocene, but it's not because the Holocene covers significantly less time than the Pleistocene. As Lenticel pointed out, the "Late Quaternary" is informal. I found various definitions of it, including one that uses the term "Late Quaternary (Holocene)", a USGS paper that uses the term "Holocene" for sea-level changes but "Late Quaternary" for the depositional history, and this one that hyphenates the two terms. My inclination is to create a section in Quaternary about it because it is used, but with varying definitions. Tavix  Talk  15:14, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per Thryduulf and Tavix. It is a known term even if demonstrably "unofficial", and it seems to point to the right place. Possibly we could expand our definition in the article as Tavix suggests. Ivanvector (talk) 16:49, 27 April 2015 (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.

Extinct bird dodo



 * 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. --BDD (talk) 13:43, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Extinct bird dodo → Dodo (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Extinct_bird_dodo&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

A redirect that is not of much use A8v (talk) 22:25, 25 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep as harmless. It gets hits, sometimes as many as four a day. That is four people in the entire world who found this a useful search term on that day. We're kinda defeated a little by the WP search engine plugin in that they may have just selected it that way, but it's harmless. It's not a great number, but I think four is better than zero. Si Trew (talk) 07:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep It's accurate enough. Plausible search term as kind of a reversed dab "Dodo (extinct bird)".  野狼院ひさし  u/t/c 11:50, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep plausible synonym since the bird is known for its extinction. -- Lenticel ( talk ) 23:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. People searching this would reach their destination even in absence of this redirect. And all redirects are harmless. In fact, I dare User:Si Trew to harm me with a redirect. Fleet Command (talk) 14:13, 28 April 2015 (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.

Former Turkish Province Of Yunanistan



 * 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) 13:42, 4 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Former Turkish Province Of Yunanistan → Greece (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Former_Turkish_Province_Of_Yunanistan&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Delete. "Yunanistan" is the Turkish for "Greece" (cf. tr:Yunanistan) but Greece has never been a Turkish province. It was (excluding the Ionian Islands) part of the Ottoman Empire (of which Turkey is the modern successor state) - see Ottoman Greece for the main article on this period of Greek history. The Administrative divisions of the Ottoman Empire fluctuated but based on our articles, there was no single province covering the modern concept of Greece. Those parts of the territory now forming Greece that were part of the Ottoman Empire were included in at least the following divisions: Pashalik of Yanina, Morea Eyalet, Salonica Eyalet, Ottoman Crete and Eyalet of Adrianople, most of which also covered land not in contemporary Greece. This, along with Google results, suggests that "Former Turkish Province of Yunanistan" is not a term used outside of a few discussions concerning Turkish Irredentism and/or suggestions to sell Greece to Turkey to pay off the former's debt (nothing even approaching a reliable source that I've found). There exists also the FTPOY acronym, a redirect that has been separately nominated at Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 April 24 and that was how I discovered this redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 15:44, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Note I will advise the Greece and Turkey wikiprojects about this discussion. As this has the potential to a lively debate, commenters should be aware that this discussion is within the purview of the discretionary sanctions authorised for "Topics related to the Balkans, broadly interpreted" at WP:ARBMAC. Thryduulf (talk) 15:44, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. Instead of deleting, redirecting to Ottoman Greece is a better choise. Nedim Ardoğa (talk) 16:21, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I considered that, but as the few uses of the term are in unreliable sources and are all talking about 21st century Greece, I don't think that anyone using it will be expecting to land at that target. Thryduulf (talk) 15:07, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete this is obviously an attempt to rile people by equating Greece with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia name, just as the now-deleted Former Macedonian Republic of Greece. The redirect serves no purpose other than nationalist "humour"... Constantine  ✍  21:34, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. If the term were in widespread use, rather than directing to Greece or Ottoman Greece, imo it'd best be redirected to an article that explains the joke, such as Macedonia naming dispute. But afaict it isn't in enough use to merit mentioning there, so a redirect wouldn't be helpful. --Delirium (talk) 15:32, 27 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong delete There was never a Turkish province called Yunanistan, or anything like that. This redirect (and related FTPOY) was created by a SPA, probably in a lame attempt at being rude. Anyway, the two redirects have no meaning, serve no purpose and can be speedily deleted according to WP:G3 and WP:G10. Place Clichy (talk) 13:17, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per the above mentioned findings. -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:11, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Greece was never a province of Turkey. Parts of Greece were part of the Ottoman Empire. There was never an administrative division of the Ottoman Empire called Yunanistan. Eyalets of the Ottoman Empire that had parts of today's Greece were: Morea Eyalet, Eyalet of Adrianople, Eyalet of the Archipelago, Crete Eyalet, Rumelia Eyalet, Salonica Eyalet and Ioannina Eyalet. Even in later administrative divisions there was never any of them that was called Province of Yunanistan.Hansi667 (Neighbor Of The Beast) a penny for your thoughts? 08:30, 4 May 2015 (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.