Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 March 7

March 7
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 7, 2015.

Troll Foot



 * 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 both. JohnCD (talk) 12:32, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Troll Foot → Danny DeVito (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Troll_Foot&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]
 * TrollFoot → Danny DeVito (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TrollFoot&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Really? I one-time tabloid event does not make a legitimate redirect. If anything, it should target something to do with, you know, trolls, but this is ludicrous enough it doesn't need to target anywhere. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 05:42, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * ok now that I think about it does seem kinda dumb, but I will say your tone is uncalled for. Besides it's not even hurting Wikipedia anyways, and its a call back to one of the most popular episodes and he's brought this up before so it's not a one off thing that just came up.Grapesoda22 (talk) 05:52, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete in its current form; not mentioned at target, potentially WP:BLP-foul. If something can be written about Danny DeVito's odd foot in his article or in the article on whichever medical condition this is, then target to that section, but I suspect not. It does seem to have sustained coverage, however Wikipedia is not a tabloid. Ivanvector (talk) 14:41, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per Ivanvector -- Lenticel ( talk ) 01:28, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Foot and Mouth disease. Si Trew (talk) 19:38, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Do you mean hand, foot and mouth disease? And either way, why? This doesn't appear to be DeVito's condition, and "troll foot" is not mentioned at either article. Ivanvector (talk) 13:49, 9 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as a potential WP:BLP violation. Tavix | Talk  14:30, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment I just remembered something special about the feet of mythical trolls. Like many humanoid mythical creatures such as dwarves and gnomes, they are characterized as having backwards pointing feet. This is probably to confuse trackers and also contribute to their other-worldliness. I can't find a wiki article about it right now but I think an article that collates these other-worldly characteristics can be created in the future.-- Lenticel ( talk ) 03:22, 10 March 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.

National Archives



 * 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 National archives. JohnCD (talk) 12:33, 15 March 2015 (UTC)


 * National Archives → List of national archives (links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_Archives&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure: [ keep]/[ delete] ]

Bizarre and WP:RFD confusing, and WP:SURPRISE, but deletion is probably not the best thing to do here. National archives (without the A cap) is an article, but National Archives is an R to List of national archives (not List of National Archives). Something has to give here, but not sure what. Si Trew (talk) 04:48, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep it is neither bizarre nor confusing. Many nations' national archives are "National Archives", but not all of them. The target's listname is perfectly good for its purposes, the redirect is perfectly good for its own purposes. We can always retarget it to national archives, and I'd also be fine with a retarget, as a R from alternate capitalization for title-case capitalization. -- 70.51.200.101 (talk) 06:22, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I've no problem with the target, it's the caps that confused me.. moost quicksearches on WP and beyond don't differentiate the caps.... I typed in exactly the caps and got a surprise, hence I say confusing. Surely, they should both go to the same place? Si Trew (talk) 15:31, 7 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Retarget to National archives as a common alternative capitalization scheme. The list is also noted at the top of the article. 24.151.10.165 (talk) 18:21, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep because the user would be looking from some particular national archive. That is why they capitalized it. Thus, we should send them to a list of all the national archives so they can pick the one they want.
 * Retarget to National archives - hard to say if a user wants the article on the subject or an article on a particular nation's archives (and which one?) so make it R from alternate capitalization to be consistent with National archives. That page has a link to List of national archives right at the top, so users can find what they want if they wanted a specific nation's page. Creating a disambiguation page would be redundant to the list. Ivanvector (talk) 14:27, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I was roughly on that line of thinking, creating a DAB to a list would be redundant. Si Trew (talk) 19:37, 8 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Retarget to National archives as possible alternative spelling. List of national archives is in the hatnote of the proposed target anyways. -- Lenticel ( talk ) 03:57, 9 March 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.