Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 June 14

June 14
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 14, 2018.

Mandy B. Joye
 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) 01:12, 22 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Mandy B. Joye → Samantha Joye (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mandy_B._Joye&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

The redirect was originally deleted because Samantha Joye's article was not there or had been moved to Draft or something. Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2018_June_12. Joye's article has now been created on June 12, having moved from Draft to mainspace. However, she is not known as Mandy B. Joye in any news articles, scientific journals, or websites. She's known as Mandy Joye, Samantha Joye, Samantha B. Joye, so the other redirects are fine. AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 20:55, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. Redirects are cheap. Stifle (talk) 08:53, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Looks like a legitimate way of referring to the subject, and not a valid way of referring to any other topic on Wikipedia. --BDD (talk) 18:47, 21 June 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:NFT
 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  . WP:SNOW (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 14:18, 15 June 2018 (UTC)


 * NFT → Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:NFT&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Doesn't make sense to me. I don't see a connection between the initialism 'NFT' and the target. &thinsp;&mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)&thinsp; 18:51, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Not For Things. -- Tavix ( talk ) 19:37, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep very well used (>700 hits this year), long-standing (created in 2005) redirect with thousands (I stopped counting at 3000) incoming links. Thryduulf (talk) 23:36, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep, a little research goes a long way. Stifle (talk) 08:52, 15 June 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.

River of Blood (Greyhawk)
 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) 01:09, 22 June 2018 (UTC)


 * River of Blood (Greyhawk) → Flanaess (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=River_of_Blood_(Greyhawk)&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

WP:NOTWIKIA, not mentioned at target article. BDD (talk) 16:37, 14 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. River of Blood doesn't even have a dab, so there's no need to add such a modifier.  AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 20:59, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment River of Blood redirects to Rivers of Blood speech and we also have River of Blood (monument), so if there was relevant information at the target the disambiguator would be required. Thryduulf (talk) 09:37, 18 June 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.

User:22.171.193.O
 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) 17:32, 21 June 2018 (UTC)


 * User:22.171.193.O → IP address (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:22.171.193.O&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

An IP user page being redirected to IP a dress is inappropriate B dash (talk) 09:47, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Soft redirect. This is not an IP address (the last character is a letter O). User pages should not hard redirect to any page outside the user or user talk namespace, but where the user has made the redirect themselves (as in this case) a soft redirect maintains the link they want while avoiding all of the problems a hard redirect causes. Thryduulf (talk) 10:18, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. The account in question was checkuser blocked after making only three edits, so the usual reasons for maintaining such a userpage do not apply. -- Tavix ( talk ) 13:11, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per User talk:Tavix. Blocked account no need for maintain a redirect, someone should probably also tag the userpage as being blocked.Gotitbro (talk) 17:30, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, not a useful redirect. Stifle (talk) 08:52, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete – useless redirect; blocked user. Inter qwark talk  contribs 11:01, 21 June 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.

Beeg
 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) 01:09, 22 June 2018 (UTC)


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

This redirect is for the pornographic website beeg.com. Beeg has no reportage of ever being connect to the redirect target MindGeek. This article was also deleted a few days before the creation of this redirect; which mentioned MindGeek as the owner but as can be seen from this archive contained no reference for the claim. As such I propose this redirected be deleted. Gotitbro (talk) 09:12, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment There are lots of sources that say that MindGeek own Beeg, most of them unreliable but seems reliable. If a mention is added to the article then this will be a useful redirect, if it isn't then it probably wont be. There are no competing uses for "Beeg" that I can find though. Thryduulf (talk) 10:37, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for linking to that article. This The Next Web article claims otherwise but not authoritatively and here the cz:E15 journal says says that Beeg is a Czech website. I would like to see the unreliable sources that you say mention MindGeek owning Beeg, can you please link them.? PS: Beeg is also a surname. Gotitbro (talk)
 * I also found this recent court case in which the plaintiff alleges that MindGeek owns beeg.com.Gotitbro (talk) 13:00, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The unreliable sources were most hits for a google search: MindGeek Beeg. Thryduulf (talk) 13:08, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, you're right all others were unreliable forum posts. Gotitbro (talk) 15:49, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Seeing the little information at hand, I don't think this qualifies for a redirect. Gotitbro (talk) 15:49, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * To summarize we just have two somewhat reliable sources saying MindGeek owns Beeg.com, the first, XBIZ, fleetingly mentions MindGeek owning Beeg and the second is a court complaint in which the same is alleged (not sure if this is a good source). And we've got two (The Next Web, E15) similar sources claiming otherwise.
 * Delete - If you look on https://www.whois.net and compare beeg.com, pornhub.com and redtube.com - PHub and RTube all have virtually the same info whereas Beeg has different info which to me confirms they no longer own Beeg - They may of owned it previously and it could've changed hands ? ... Who knows but given the lack of info on the Beeg website as well as the WHOIS thing I'd say the website isn't related to MindGeek and as such doesn't need to redirect (nor exist given the lack of sources too). – Davey 2010 Talk 20:20, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. There are a few other uses, all of which are very minor. There is Gunda Beeg, of which this could be a R from surname, Bluegrass Beeg (though I have notability concerns), and beeg, which calls it an eye dialect for Big. -- Tavix ( talk ) 20:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * If there were multiple people with the surname on Wikipedia maybe then we could create a disambig page but as you mentioned there currently aren't. Redirecting based on the surname of a not much known person doesn't seem right either.Gotitbro (talk) 22:05, 14 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete as there is no primary topic. If it were Beeg.com then it could go to MindGeek, although it would need to be mentioned per MOS:DABMENTION. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 20:57, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Disambiguate? Leaving aside the website (which I haven't looked into), Beeg is the local name of the Dutch town/village of Grevenbicht, and also a surname (we have one person with an article listed above, and several others that we would ideally have articles for some day). – Uanfala (talk) 10:32, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete – no current relation and not mentioned in the article. Inter qwark talk  contribs 17:36, 21 June 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.