Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 December 6

December 6
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 6, 2017.

The General Election 1906
 Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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 ) 17:24, 18 December 2017 (UTC)


 * The General Election 1906 → United Kingdom general election, 1906 (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_General_Election_1906&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * The 1906 General Election → List of elections in 1906 (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_1906_General_Election&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

The definite article in front makes this a pretty unlikely search term. --Nev&eacute;–selbert 23:34, 6 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete per nominator due to odd formatting. As a second choice, it could be retargeted to list of elections in 1906, but I don't think this is necessary. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 05:58, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom as it is not referred to with the definite article capitalized as such, and could refer to any of the 1906 elections. The event Liberal landslide would be a better informal title that points specifically to that UK general election. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 15:47, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * FYI Articles for deletion/Liberal landslide: In my opinion, a lot of effort to make Wikipedia less accessible. Bosley John Bosley (talk)
 * If this isn't deleted—and I'm not saying it shouldn't be—List of elections in 1906 would be the appropriate target. --BDD (talk) 21:15, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect I cut and pasted "the General Election" from some article somewhere and probably from the context added 1906. If I had instead inserted 1906 to create "the 1906 General Election", would there be a problem? Bosley John Bosley (talk) 22:12, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: Bosley John Bosley created "The 1906 General Election" as a redirect to List of elections in 1906 right after commenting here. I'm including it in this discussion for completeness. -- Tavix ( talk ) 23:53, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete both - I'd rather that we just get rid of these. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:58, 18 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Security barrier
 Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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  . (non-admin closure)  f eminist 13:17, 14 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Security barrier → Barrier (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Security_barrier&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Since this redirect currently targets a disambiguation page, it could be considered confusing. In addition, I'm not finding a specific target which this redirect could be considered exclusive to in its meaning. Steel1943 (talk) 22:17, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. If there's no specific article then a redirect to a dab page seems sensible. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:42, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The problem with the current setup is that there are no subjects at the target dab that are called "security barrier". In a case like this, it could be more helpful for this redirect to be deleted so that Wikipedia's search function can help readers find what article they are looking for, rather than being redirected to a disambiguation page which may not contain the subject which they are trying to locate. Steel1943  (talk) 15:40, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. The dab page provides a number of different types of barriers used for security. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 15:38, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

José Correira
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 December 18%23José Correira

ASSOL
 Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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  . -- Tavix  ( talk ) 22:36, 16 December 2017 (UTC)


 * ASSOL → Antonin Scalia Law School (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ASSOL&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * ASSoL → Antonin Scalia Law School (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ASSoL&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * A.S.S.O.L. → Antonin Scalia Law School (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=A.S.S.O.L.&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Was listed at MFD by mistake. Rationale was "Unused, nonexistent acronym only used to disparage current/former graduates of George Mason University. Nothing redirects here and the acronym is not a likely search term." Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:55, 25 November 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. The existence of this acronym was what prompted the current name of the law school as opposed to the original one. This scenario is mentioned in the first footnote. Patar knight - chat/contributions 23:11, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment added ASSoL and A.S.S.O.L. to this discussion. (These were all created at the same time, along with ASS Law, ASSLAW, and ASSLaw, following an AFC request in April 2016.) The acronyms themselves aren't mentioned at the target. The erstwhile full name "Antonin Scalia School of Law" is only mentioned in a footnote. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 16:01, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep ASSOL and ASSoL which made news  and Snopes .  Delete A.S.S.O.L. as the version with the periods was not propagated in news sources. Add the appropriate tag as would be used for working titles.   AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 17:34, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ( talk ) 17:02, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Not likely a search term and any references can be made in the article. Disparaging redirects are not encyclopedic.  This was never the name of the target and was used purely for disparagement by detractors.  Fits #3 of WP:R. --DHeyward (talk) 20:35, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep all - The college made this unfortunate name decision (before wisely taking it back, albeit too late), and their choice generated a significant response. Although, I can see deleting "A.S.S.O.L." as that particular version appears far more obscure. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:57, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep A likely search term and it is irrelevant whether or not references can be made in the article. The institution was at one time known as the Antonin Scalia School of Law and the acronyms are valid. Bosley John Bosley (talk) 09:29, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Am I being detained?
 Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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 deletion. People are mostly split on whether a redirect to an article that doesn't mention the phrase would be useful. However, also retargeting to Detention (imprisonment) as the clear choice over the other two options. (non-admin closure) Galobtter (pingó mió) 08:06, 27 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Am I being detained? → Sovereign citizen movement (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Am_I_being_detained%3F&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This question isn't unique to "sovereign citizens", but is a question asked by anyone who isn't sure if they are being detained or not. The most appropriate target would be Detention (imprisonment) (the target of Detainment), but the question isn't mentioned there either. That leaves deletion. -- Tavix ( talk ) 14:10, 25 November 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. Someone searching for this phrase is presumably looking for information about the phrase, which doesn't appear to be provided in any article. &mdash;Xezbeth (talk) 08:44, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Stop and identify statutes. There's some information at http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/am-i-being-detained but nothing in the Sovereign citizen movement article. Stop and identify statutes seems to be what this refers to, and although it doesn't mention this phrase it explains detention and mentions the related question "Am I free to go?". Peter James (talk) 11:27, 26 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete: There are a lot of similarly titled redirects and duplicate articles at WP:DAFT, such as “Is there butter in peanut butter?” 165.91.13.204 (talk) 23:54, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Detention (imprisonment). If someone is unsure enough as to whether they are actually being detained that they need to consult Wikipedia, hopefully that article will clarify it for them. (Just kidding. I think that's a better target than Stop and identify statutes, which isn't global enough.) —  Scott  •  talk  14:15, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ( talk ) 17:02, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Stop and identify statutes as the best target. --RAN (talk) 20:41, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Detainment. Searchers are looking for what detainment is, like Indicted goes to Indictment. If the statutes article has a list of common phrases, then consider hatnote to it, but there is no such list there. The phrase "Am I free to go?" can redirect there since it is posted there. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 21:56, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * That would be a double redirect - it points to Detention (imprisonment). —  Scott  •  talk  00:54, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. This redirect is too vague, as hinted by the several different options for retargeting presented in this discussion thus far. Steel1943  (talk) 22:18, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Detention (imprisonment): encyclopedic coverage to answer the search "Am I being detained?" Bosley John Bosley (talk) 16:28, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Heaveno
 Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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 ) 22:35, 16 December 2017 (UTC)


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

No such section exists in the article. 165.91.12.190 (talk) 08:08, 6 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment the relevant section was removed from the article in 2010 by an editor who had previously vandalised it. It seems a bit trivial to be worth restoring, but for what it's worth, it did have a WP:RS citation 59.149.124.29 (talk) 12:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete as failed WP:NEOLOGISM. There was coverage on this idea across news:  He did make the Encyclopedia of American Loons though  so it might be WP:BLP1E but not seeing much on overall news coverage for notability. This is not as notable as Fishkill, New York  AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 21:48, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, notability isn't really the standard here..definitely shouldn't be included in hello as extremely undue, but maybe in Kleberg county Galobtter (pingó mió) 12:42, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

2018 T10 Cricket League
 Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:
 * 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 ) 22:33, 16 December 2017 (UTC)


 * 2018 T10 Cricket League → T10 League (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2018_T10_Cricket_League&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Per WP:CRYSTAL. Störm  (talk)  07:28, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't really care whether you delete it. I realized that it was a mistake to create the redirect but I can't delete pages. Fcbbminiestadi (talk) 12:53, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * put at the top of 2018 T10 Cricket League  to request deletion of the page. Galobtter (pingó mió) 11:33, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Right, thanks a lot, Galobtter! Fcbbminiestadi (talk) 12:09, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.