Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 October 18

October 18
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 18, 2018.

Univesity of Education, Indonesia
 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 Move without redirect to University of Education, Indonesia  . ~  Amory  (u • t • c) 01:32, 26 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Univesity of Education, Indonesia → Indonesia University of Education (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Univesity_of_Education,_Indonesia&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This is not a common misspelling of "university" and it could have been created in error because it is not a "Redirect from move". Pkbwcgs (talk) 19:56, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Move without redirect to University of Education, Indonesia which is a plausible title and what the creator intended had they not typoed (their other edits from the same day show they know how to correctly spell University). This has received only 2 page views this year - showing what an unused redirect actually looks like. Thryduulf (talk) 22:51, 18 October 2018 (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.

Lightworker
 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) 01:29, 26 October 2018 (UTC)


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

Term not explained at target. Nowak Kowalski (talk) 04:40, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. The term is mentioned in passing in a couple of articles (e.g. Geoffrey Hoppe, but I can't find any suitable target related to the New Age movement or anything else. See also the separate nomination for Lightworkers. Thryduulf (talk) 12:03, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm equally happy with the soft redirect suggested below. Thryduulf (talk) 23:06, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Soft redirect to lightworker. This is a specialist/technical term which isn't discussed in any depth anywhere in the encyclopaedia, and there's no obvious article that such a discussion could be added to (no glossary of New Age terminology or the like), but it's a plausible search term and Wiktionary has the definition. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 22:58, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ( talk ) 15:53, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Oppose a soft redirect to per WP:SPECSOFTRED. —  Godsy (TALK CONT ) 05:27, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete reason #10. No suitable article exists; soft redirect not appropriate. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:01, 21 October 2018 (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.

The herb
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 October 26%23The herb

Julian Faye Lund
 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) 01:30, 26 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Julian Faye Lund → Jacob Faye-Lund (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Julian_Faye_Lund&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

The player Julian, as far as I know, does not pass notability standards, and his page is redirected to his brother Jacob, who passes notability standards. I am not sure if this should be done, since the page of Jacob has no information relevant to Julian except that they are brothers. This seems to open a pandora box that any sportsperson who is not notable but has a parent/sibling/child who is notable would get a redirect. Chanheigeorge (talk) 05:46, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep redirects from non-notable people to the article about notable family members where they are mentioned are common and frequently useful. Thryduulf (talk) 12:40, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Such redirects are indeed common, but there are a few factors that lead me to think this one is not particularly useful. First, the mention in the target is a single sentence that tells us nothing other than that Julian is Jacob's sibling and also a goalkeeper (who does he play for? does he play professionally? etc. – cf. a redirect like Ryan Ripken, who is discussed in some depth in the target). Second, that single sentence is an unsourced claim about two living people (a source could probably be found, but I don't know what's considered an RS). And third, Jacob Faye-Lund is a fairly low-profile person who isn't significantly more well-known than his non-notable sibling (so this is different from cases like, to pick some at random, Donda West or Blanket Jackson or Giulia Sarkozy, all of which point to much more high-profile people). This redirect was the result of Articles for deletion/Julian Faye Lund, but only one of six participants there mentioned a redirect, so I don't think revising that consensus here is a problem. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 21:55, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per Thryduulf and the logic myself and others expressed at Articles for deletion/Julian Faye Lund which was closed as delete and redirect last year. Smartyllama (talk) 18:00, 23 October 2018 (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.

Selma Bacha
 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 <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 01:31, 26 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Selma Bacha → Olympique Lyonnais Féminin (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Selma_Bacha&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

While the player currently plays for the club, it does not make sense for the page of the player to redirect to the club, as players can change clubs at any time. The page of the club also has no information about the player except that the player currently plays for the club. Chanheigeorge (talk) 05:42, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete: the mention in the target is insubstantial enough that the redirect isn't really any use to anyone. I assume, based on the fact that the other members of the squad all have articles and our notability guidelines for sportspeople are very broad, that Bacha is also likely to be independently notable, in which case the final point of WP:RDEL also applies. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 21:25, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Sajjad Ali 1980 singles
<div class="boilerplate rfd vfd xfd-closed" style="background:#FFEEDD; margin-top:0.5em; padding:0 10px 0 10px; border:1px solid #888888;"> 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 <small style="color:#555"> (u • t • c) 01:31, 26 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Sajjad Ali 1980 singles → Sajjad_Ali (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sajjad_Ali_1980_singles&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Delete. Implausible and unused in article space. The section that it redirects to doesn't say which singles were released in 1980. Clarinetguy097 (talk) 03:27, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. While my first reaction was just to say retarget this to the #Singles section of the article, but that doesn't list the dates for most entries, and I can't find any evidence that he released any singles in 1980 - the list appears to be in chronological order (as is conventional) and google suggests the first entries in the list were not released until 1993. He released albums in 1979 and 1987 but apparently nothing in between, and wile did appear on a television program in 1980 (age 14) this was apparently not his first appearance and the article says he didn't become famous until 1983. All this adds up to this not being a useful search term. Thryduulf (talk) 12:53, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. The article that was at this location from 2007 to 2009 says this was an alternative title of Master Sajjad Sings Memorable Classics, but that article doesn't mention it, nor does any other article. Google finds eight results for "Sajjad Ali 1980 singles" that don't also mention Wikipedia, so this seems like either an awkward translation or mistranslation, an exceptionally infrequently-used alternative title that couldn't be sourced, or something made up. Taking Thryduulf's point into consideration, there's nowhere this could reasonably be retargeted to. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 21:01, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.