Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 August 17

August 17
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 17, 2018.

Litmus test (Mary Sue)
 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  . ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 11:22, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Litmus test (Mary Sue) → Mary Sue (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Litmus_test_(Mary_Sue)&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Phrase no longer appears in target article, and the redirect is only linked to by one disambiguation page (which would be unnecessary anyway if this is deleted). ... disco spinster   talk  18:11, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. No useful information in the target. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 15:37, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and from dab page. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 21:51, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: The term was removed by an anonymous user in 2011 on the basis that it was a "misnomer". The section discussing tests was removed by in 2012 for lack of reliable sources. – Laundry Pizza 03  ( d  c&#x0304; ) 04:40, 21 August 2018 (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.

Calm Belt
 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  . ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 11:23, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Calm Belt → One Piece (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Calm_Belt&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]


 * Calm belt → One Piece (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Calm_belt&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

I'd expect these to be targeted at the Intertropical Convergence Zone, rather than the obscure fictional setting. – Uanfala (talk) 16:28, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Except that the name isn't listed in the Zone article? Calm Belt is a notable feature in One Piece. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 17:15, 17 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. Google results suggest the phrase is most commonly used in relation to the obscure fictional setting, and most mentions in the encyclopaedia are in reference to the same. The only articles to use the phrase in another context are John Gilpin (clipper) and MV Nimbin, neither of which is a viable alternative target. I think the reader who searches for this is most likely to be looking for the current target, but a hatnote for Intertropical Convergence Zone would probably be useful. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 15:15, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Well, I didn't elaborate on my search because I thought the case was obvious: but from the first 20 or so results on google books, the fictional setting was the subject of only two (one of which was a wikia site, I'm surprised these show up on google books). – Uanfala (talk) 21:58, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * In terms of what the primary topic is, I'm usually more inclined to follow google web search results unless the topic is very strongly connected with academia or predates the popularity of the web. In this specific case, the google books results just strengthen the case for a hatnote rather than cast doubt on the primary topic imo. Thryduulf (talk) 22:19, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with Thryduulf. I'd also note that, of the same 20 or so Google Books results, 12 are dated 1900 or earlier. This doesn't mean we should disregard them, but we should prioritise, within reason, what readers are likely to be looking for in the present over what the term has meant in the past. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 23:28, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep and add a hatnote per Arms & Hearts. Thryduulf (talk) 21:44, 18 August 2018 (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.

South American fish
 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 retarget  to Category:Fish of South America. Amazing ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 11:25, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * South American fish → Piranha (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_American_fish&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * South American Fish → Piranha (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_American_Fish&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * South american fish → Piranha (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=South_american_fish&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

WP:SURPRISE! There are many, many South American fish. The piranha may be prominent among them, but this is not a common name for any one species. --BDD (talk) 15:28, 17 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Retarget to Category:Fish of South America? I don't see a list article otherwise. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 17:06, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Retarget per AngusWOOF. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 15:03, 18 August 2018 (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.

Wikipedia:DELREASON
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 August 27%23Wikipedia:DELREASON

Castaibert IV
 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 speedy deleted  per WP:G7. -- Tavix  ( talk ) 14:07, 22 August 2018 (UTC)


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

Delete 2 pages link to this page. It redirects to one of them. Having a red link obviously is a better impetus for creating pages than a blue link. I don't have the pertinent Jane's as of yet or I would just do it now/ &#32;- speednat (talk) 05:34, 17 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and point #10 of WP:RDEL. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 14:00, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Actually all the variants should be merged into the Castaibert aircraft page as they could be sectioned stubs. The II and III pages only have a brief listing of specs and not much else about the craft. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 15:51, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete away.&#32;- NiD.29 (talk) 22:15, 21 August 2018 (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.

Agonia Records
 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  . An article can always be created, but even the one keep !vote notes that there are many albums associated with this label, so I find the argument that redirecting it to one band is misleading quite convincing, especially as there incoming links from other bands. ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 11:40, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Agonia Records → Impiety (band) (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Agonia_Records&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Retarget or new article depending on notability? Redirecting a record label to one of its many bands doesn't sound quite right, and given that it does have a few bands linking to it I think it might warrant its own article, but I wanted to check (esp as I have no knowledge/interest in metal labels). Regardless, I'm pretty sure the current redirect target isn't suitable. Blue Edits (talk) 10:40, 17 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Searches on Wikipedia show multiple bands that have signed with Agonia, and this particular band isn't responsible for the originating label.  AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 17:12, 17 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per AngusWOOF. Agonia is described in the article as a Polish label, so it doesn't look as though there's any strong connection between the label and the band, who are from Singapore, i.e. the label wasn't founded by members of the band or anything like that. As the nominator suggests, point #10 of WP:RDEL also applies. – Arms &amp; Hearts (talk) 13:58, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
 *  Keep or create article - Agonia Records has a long list of albums at Allmusic, therefore, the redirect should be kept, or turned into an article. --Jax 0677 (talk) 13:31, 22 August 2018 (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.