Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 June 15

June 15
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 15, 2015.

Snootchie



 * 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) 14:33, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


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

While this may be a term used by Jay (of Jay and Silent Bob) to refer to sexual organs, I don't think that's exactly accurate (it's more just a nonsense interjection). I see no reliable usage of this term to refer to the target outside of the View Askewniverse, and it is not mentioned at the target, so it should be deleted. For possible background, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 June 14. Ivanvector (talk) 22:12, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as nominator. See also my rationale in the related discussion. Ivanvector (talk) 22:13, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:SURPRISE. Not mentioned at target. WP:NOTDIC and WP:NEOLOGISM for that matter. But I think it is the -tch- as opposed to -ch- that is probably (genuinely, not pedantically) confusing me here with these. (We don't have Snoochie, for example). Si Trew (talk) 22:37, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as a neologism per WP:RDELETE. Esquivalience t 02:59, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * delete as an obscure synonym. -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:42, 17 June 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 2007/2008 New Edition Reunion Album



 * 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) 14:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Untitled 2007/2008 New Edition Reunion Album → New Edition (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Untitled_2007/2008_New_Edition_Reunion_Album&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Delete: New Edition never did make a reunion album in 2007/2008. This is why we have WP:HAMMER. Tavix&#124; Talk 22:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Also why we have WP:RFD nonsense, and WP:CRYSTAL should have been applied when it was created on 24 December 2006 by User:DJAftermath, but it was an article until turned into a redirect with this edit of 24 March 2007 by User:Bubba hotep. So, we're only seven and a quarter years late... :) Si Trew (talk) 22:50, 15 June 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.

San diego incident



 * 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) 14:28, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * San diego incident → The Lost World: Jurassic Park (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=San_diego_incident&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Delete as vague (WP:RFD). There are a lot of incidents that have occurred in San Diego and most of them don't include dinosaurs. Tavix&#124; Talk 22:01, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as vague WP:RFD. There are also plenty of real places called San Diego (disambiguation), and I am sure many of them had "incidents" once or twice upon a time. Si Trew (talk) 22:43, 15 June 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.

J.D. Poo



 * 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 per WP:G10 by various admins. (non-admin closure) Ivanvector (talk) 19:13, 16 June 2015 (UTC)


 * J.D. Poo → J. D. Drew (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=J.D._Poo&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * JD Poo → J. D. Drew (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=JD_Poo&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Insulting play on the baseball player's name mentioned only a couple of times on obscure websites. Clarityfiend (talk) 18:39, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete this and JD Poo, which I added to the nomination, per WP:RFD offensive. WP:G10 may also apply. Tavix | Talk 19:02, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:RFD offensive. I did think of jodhpur (to which jodpur redirects, but not jaidpur) &mdash? but that surely that is too far away? Si Trew (talk) 19:21, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete criterion WP:G10 per nom and per Tavix. Clearly intended to insult. Ivanvector (talk) 21:57, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per WP:G10 and WP:R3 as offensive/attack. cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 03:06, 16 June 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.

Template NPF roster/doc



 * 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 - G6 cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 00:07, 16 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Template NPF roster/doc → Template:NPF roster/doc (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template_NPF_roster/doc&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Redirect left over from a move that should have been deleted. Move in question was a cross-namespace move to put a template that was created in mainspace into template-space. No transclusions/links to the original mainspace name exist, so this redirect is no longer necessary. Eligible for deletion under criterion 6, as "a cross-namespace redirect out of article space". I would just nominate for speedy under CSD R2, but R2 doesn't apply to CNRs to template space. I thought about nominating for speedy deletion under CSD G8, uncontroversial maintenance, but wasn't sure if everybody would see this as uncontroversial as I do, so here we are. cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 16:37, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * R2 may not apply, but I do think CSD G6 applies. It would fall under: "Deleting pages unambiguously created in error or in the incorrect namespace." Tavix | Talk 16:42, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh, wow. You're right! I must have skipped right over that line... Nominating for speedy deletion now. Thank you!! Should I close the RfD now, or wait til it's speedied? cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 16:44, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd wait for it to be speedied, just in case it gets declined (not saying that it would, but there's always that chance). Tavix | Talk 16:49, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Figured as much. Thanks again :) Cheers, cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 16:50, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:A6 or for that matter WP:G7, author (authesse, authlass?) requests dellchytion. Si Trew (talk) 19:43, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * A6 doesn't exist and G7 doesn't apply because the author never requested deletion. It's being handled under G6... Tavix&#124; Talk 20:17, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * My mistake. I was just trying to support the author's request for deletion, as a disinterested third party (since you are "interested" in the sense of having commented, and for once in my life I hadn't). I slipped on the A6. Si Trew (talk) 20:24, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * A6 does actually exist, as prima facie evidenced by the fact it I just linked to it and it is not a redlink, but it does go a strange place, sort of wanders to WP:G10 under Criteria for speedy deletion. It was a a slip on my part, but I imagine that is how it came up to the criteria for me, because I couldn't work out how this managed to be the first port of call when I typed it, either. But you are dead right I meant G6 not A6. Si Trew (talk) 20:29, 15 June 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.

Wikipedia:WANNABEKATE



 * 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 WikiProject edit counters. --BDD (talk) 14:23, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * WANNABEKATE → tools:~interiot/cgi-bin/Tool1/wannabe_kate (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WANNABEKATE&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

The tool site has migrated so this needs updating but I can't find anything matching this name at. It presumably no longer exists and this is therefore redundant. JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 23:03, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * No objection from me. Looks like almost nothing even links to it. -- Ned Scott 23:07, 6 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Found a reference to it here: User:Interiot/which but again a link to the old site which just directs you to the new one. The owner seems long retired which may be why this never migrated across.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 01:16, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Note: "wannabe kate" was once a popular edit counter, aka Interiot's tool. See WikiProject edit counters. Deryck C. 11:58, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 13:58, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Harmful in Wikipedia namespace: could see that if one wanted to be Kate Middleton or Kate Moss or Kate Bush would be vaguely useful in mainspace,as if Katharine or Katherine or Catherine or Catharine or Cathy or Kathy et cetera ad nauseam were not common abbreviations of the name: but not in WP space: and we have Wannabe in mainspace anyway. Si Trew (talk) 20:36, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Retarget to WikiProject edit counters. The tool is mentioned and described there, so it's a useful target. This used to be a popular edit counter, and I remember seeing this name a few times back in the day. I can imagine this being useful if someone comes across it in the archives and wants to know what it is. Personally, I always start with shortcuts when searching in the WP namespace, and I can imagine this being a plausible way to search for it. There are companion shortcuts that also target to WikiProject edit counters, including WP:KATE, WP:KT, WP:Kate's Tool, WP:Kate's tool (and Kate's tool, a WP:CNR that I'm nominating now). Tavix&#124; Talk 19:46, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Retarget to WikiProject edit counters per Tavix's finds. Deryck C. 10:38, 21 June 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.

Rifk



 * 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) 14:22, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


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

I don't know what this means. The hits I'm getting make it seem like it's either a misspelling of ROFL or it's an acronym for "rolling in floor kicking." Whatever it is, it's not mentioned at LOL so it's confusing. Tavix | Talk 01:59, 6 June 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment it's a typo redirect for ROFL, due to bad hand placement on a QWERTY keyboard, when you improperly center your hands on the home row off by one key on your right hand to the left, you get this. Indeed, touch typists make such typos commonly, when one hand or the other, or both, are not centered properly, and off-by-one keyhits from one hand or the other or both errors occur. ROFL redirects to LOL, so a typo form of ROFL would also redirect to LOL -- 70.51.202.183 (talk) 05:38, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - nonsense. Too many typos for the intended word to be recognizable, unless 70.51 is around to explain it whenever someone clicks on it. Ivanvector (talk) 14:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Why would I need to be around to explain? If you did the same typing error with the word "explain", the typo would be "ex[aom" a perfectly plausible typo made by touch typists (indeed, Usenet and the Web is replete with such errors) ; Tagging the redirect as a typo redirect should make it disappear, the R from typo already explains what it is a typo of, since there's a parameter for that. -- 70.51.202.183 (talk) 05:17, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Clearly an instance where we can add Draft:Template:Redirect documentation to the redirect page to go along with any rdir documentation messages ; if we get that live -- 70.51.202.183 (talk) 05:01, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 13:58, 15 June 2015 (UTC) Comment. As for the template, I am quite happy to work with 70.51 to get that live: as it stands in Draft namespace the links don't work so well, so it is a bit hard to judge, but I would just be WP:BOLD and move it out of draft namespace into template namespace. It's easier for me to grumble about it then, once it's moved, and I would support that, with loads of reservations as it currently stands. Si Trew (talk) 19:16, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Delete Rifk as WP:RFD confusing and WP:RFD nonsense. For if not, we can redirect to Rifle or Rift (okay those are both right handed) or Riff. or Rik, all of which would be absurd. Si Trew (talk) 19:16, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. As for the touch typing argument by 70.51, that is nonsense. I do touch type but I have English baby typewriter, Hungarian keyboard I am using now, and English UK and English US keyboards, and a Belgian French/German one. Actually to get "[" or "]" on this Hungarian one I have to type AltGr+F and AltGr+G respectively, so that is hardly a likely typo on my keyboard. Even the US and UK keyboards vary substantially in that way, and do not support your argument. (English keyboard layout -> British and American keyboards). Si Trew (talk) 20:46, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If I missed "explain" up the top on the right I would get "exőin". If I missed the L I would get expléin". Si Trew (talk) 20:51, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * One would expect a QWERTY keyboard on English Wikipedia, and not say, AZERTY or some Dvorak configuration, or other non-English keyboards -- 70.51.203.69 (talk) 06:08, 16 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - basically unnecessary. 'Rifk' could potentially be a typo for 'ROFL', but it could also be a typo for something else (Risk, for example), so this redirect is unhelpful. It seems a fairly unlikely search term in any case. Robofish (talk) 22:32, 16 June 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.

Affectation
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">


 * 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) 14:21, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


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


 * Delete as WP:RFD confusing. This target has a very specific legal meaning in some civil law jurisdicta, most of which do not use English language as the first language.

Since the lede of the target says "s (e.g., France, Quebec, Mexico, etc.), " and doesn't even do WP:BOLDTITLE and "e.g."..... "etc." is WP:VAGUE to say the least, and the title of the article itself is rather Francophone, I think the redirect is harmful.

Do I have to sign or does Twinkle do it for me? I forget. Si Trew (talk) 06:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC) Si Trew (talk) 06:35, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - 'affectation' is a common English word, and it's far from obvious that someone who searches for it is looking for this legal concept. Robofish (talk) 22:27, 16 June 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.

Transracial Transformation
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;">


 * 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) 14:20, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Transracial Transformation → Racial transformation (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Transracial_Transformation&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

No-one ever uses the term "Transracial Transformation" for this topic. It appears to be made to save the Transracial disambiguation page. -- haminoon  ( talk ) 00:31, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment it's 9 years older than the dab page! (instead of more WP:AGF, using the ambiguous term in the dab is preferred per WP:MOSDAB / dab project common practice). Widefox ; talk 01:09, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * And I have a book 300 years old that says the white man is better per se. I don't think the age of it makes much difference to its accuracy. Orwell, for example, deposes that myth in Shooting an Elephant. (I'm thinking specifically on his comments there and others in e.g Burmese Days about Eurasians). Si Trew (talk) 22:54, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Si Trew My point is that the nom was factually incorrect (and that incorrect bad faith assumption has now been retracted) - the redirect predates the dab by 9 years so (a) it could not have been created to save the dab page and (b) as the (lowercase version of this redirect) is the former article name and is a redirect left after a move, some editors at one time thought this was an appropriate name. The fact that there's a lowercase one too means this uppercase one is redundant. Widefox ; talk 08:50, 22 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Delete (changed due to existing lowercase exists) long-standing redirect to valid (but poor) target. Plausible usage e.g., some usage of "trans-racial" in others like (only quick check)  Widefox ; talk 01:15, 15 June 2015 (UTC)  Widefox ; talk 12:21, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - per nom - nobody would use this as a term to get to the article it directs to. Just because it's been around awhile doesn't make it a logical redirect, especially when it's being used to prop up a claim to keep a DAB. —Мандичка YO 😜 05:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The nom is flawed and the factually incorrect part retracted. The usage of the term in links above go unchallenged, so that leaves your "per nom" needing further reasoning. The desire to remove the dab by delegitimising possibly valid longstanding redirects is also flawed, as 1. the entry would stay but revert to not using the redirect and 2. the dab has enough entries even if this one was deleted. Widefox ; talk 01:13, 18 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. The trans- is essentially duplicated, but we are WP:NOTDIC. The target itself could be replaced by an R to something more sensible such as Human migration (can probably do better than that, just a first offering), since it offers little content, but one thing at a aime. Si Trew (talk) 06:40, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Agree it appears to be somewhat of a tautology. Moving on from the factually incorrect, AGF lacking, flawed nom, this redirect should be deleted on grounds of wrong capitalisation. Whether it should be replaced with a lowercase version is another matter. It's not clear to me the creator's intent, and it does aid on this valid dab. The deletion of the dab has been procedurally closed (as requested) to reduce the drama of valid anti-WP:NEO deletion. As dabs (and long-standing entries on them) are about separate meanings, extending the drama to here is just disruption based on flawed logic and facts. Blanket deleting all plausibly valid ambiguous terms in an attempt to delete the dab that predates the NEO is just that, flawed and disruptive. Widefox ; talk 10:07, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The lowercase also already exists, and is long-standing (well before the NEO drama). Widefox ; talk 10:32, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * (The lowercase) is a redirect after a move, there's discussion of the use of "transracial" at Talk:Racial_transformation. Widefox ; talk 01:21, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I think "transracial" is also used as a word to mean people of mixed race, which is to say (roughly) anyone who is not Aryan. Bang goes all thee and me then, of mixed blood. WP:RFD nonsense. Si Trew (talk)
 * Oh dear. I did have a look at that talk page. Filipino, for example, should go to Filipino people or Filipino language in the way that we have English people to distinguish from English language, or Spanish people to distinguish from Spanish language. It is the correct word for it and has no side to it, but I imagine there have been edit wars about it: but it's just the way to spell it (we don't have Philipino, for example, even though it is named after some Philip.) Si Trew (talk) 10:18, 22 June 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.