Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 April 22

April 22
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 22, 2019.

Atheist church
 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 Nontheistic religion. (non-admin closure) Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me &#124; my contributions 21:37, 29 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Atheist church → Sunday Assembly (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Atheist_church&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

The target is just one example. Not sure if there is a better target since no article on the broad concept exists. MB 15:39, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Are there other "Atheist churches" with articles? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:53, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes. See North Texas Church of Freethought for one example. I'm not sure if there are others that have articles or not.   I've assembled a handful of sources in my userspace if someone wants to write an article on the broad topic.  Not sure when or if I'll get around to it myself. ~  ONUnicorn (Talk&#124;Contribs) problem solving 18:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete and create an article with this title to cover the phenomenon of so called "Atheist Churches." A quick Google indicates that this is a thing, and it is probably notable. -Ad Orientem (talk) 19:09, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Nontheistic religion
 * Also see:
 * The elusive phenomenon of churches without God
 * Atheist and Agnostic Unitarian Universalists
 * What happens at an atheist church?
 * Atheists Are Sometimes More Religious Than Christians
 * Non-Theistic Religions
 * --Guy Macon (talk) 18:28, 23 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Retarget to nontheistic religion. The UUA is a church that includes self-declared atheists, but if we retargeted there, it would imply that they were the only ones.  Maybe ONUnicorn's sources will be enough to write a separate article, but until/unless that happens, we should redirect this to Guy Macon's broader topic, as it clearly includes atheist churches.  Nyttend (talk) 00:06, 26 April 2019 (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.

Game of Thrones:
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 April 30%23Game of Thrones:

Hill tribe
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 April 30%23Hill tribe

High Inquisitor
 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 disambiguate  . King of  &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:16, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Common title in fiction not limited to Harry Potter, not to mention real-world uses like the head of the Portuguese Inquisition (e.g., José of Braganza, High Inquisitor of Portugal). My gut says this isn't a good candidate for disambiguation, but someone else could try a draft. --BDD (talk) 19:07, 29 March 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * High Inquisitor → Ministry of Magic (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=High_Inquisitor&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * High-Inquisitor → Ministry of Magic (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=High-Inquisitor&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]
 * Comment: See also Grand Inquisitor.&thinsp;&mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)&thinsp; 20:08, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Good find. I wonder if we could expand the scope of that one, or if we'd be veering too much into WP:OR territory. --BDD (talk) 20:54, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The scope should be the Portuguese and Spanish Inquisitions. Both of them used the term "Grand Inquisitor".&thinsp;&mdash; Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)&thinsp; 00:52, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B dash (talk) 01:15, 6 April 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B dash (talk) 04:26, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment doesn't the hatnote at the Dolores Umbridge section explain the two possibilities enough? AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:01, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes. Keep. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:22, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Let's have one more time

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B dash (talk) 13:13, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Meh: I don't think Umbridge is the primary topic for this title, so it should not be left as-is. The correct approach is probably to dabify it, but I'm not sure it's worth having a dab page just for Umbridge and the Portuguese Inquisition. Maybe we could merge the dab into Grand Inquisitor ("Grand Inquisitor or High Inquisitor may refer to...")? -- N Y  Kevin   23:55, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmmm Umbridge is Hogwarts High Inquisitor.  High Inquisitor is more of a Star Wars term, and hence exiled to Wookiepedia.  All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 07:55, 25 April 2019 (UTC).


 * Actually Imperial Inquisitor is the Star Wars term, a term not entirely exiled to Wookieepedia. – wbm1058 (talk) 17:06, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Grand Inquisitor (Star Wars) (Imperial Grand Inquisitor), but no High Inquisitor (Star Wars). – wbm1058 (talk) 18:24, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Imperial High Inquisitor. The term isn't used at the target of that redirect. I believe this refers to Inquisitors (Inquisitorius), a topic deleted by PROD in 2007... "Organization of Force-sensitives who serve Emperor Palpatine and Darth Vader by hunting down surviving Jedi and others with Force potential". The lead of the deleted article said:
 * "The Inquisitorius was a secret division of Imperial Intelligence instituted after the Clone Wars and the rise of the Empire which consisted of dark side Force-sensitive agents known as Inquisitors. These Inquisitors were considered the highest ranking of the Emperor's dark side adepts, outranking the Emperor's Hands, Emperor's Mages, Emperor's Royal Guard, and lesser Dark Jedi. They reported directly to Emperor Palpatine and Darth Vader."


 * Now we're getting into Wookieepedia territory. I deleted ten pages:
 * Imperial Inquisitorius
 * Inquisitor Malorum
 * Malorum
 * Imperial Iquisitorius
 * Imperial inquisitorius
 * Inquisistorius (Star Wars)
 * Iquisitorius
 * Inquisistorius
 * Inquisitorius
 * Inquisitorius (star wars)
 * Let me know if you want me to restore any of these, or make it eleven. – wbm1058 (talk) 19:19, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I take it these were redirects? All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:43, 28 April 2019 (UTC).


 * Yes, all redirects, and creating redirects to borderline-notable topics like this belies the idea that "redirects are cheap" because of the significant amount of valuable administrator time wasted on managing them.
 * I've restored Inquisitorius (Star Wars) and moved it to the base title Inquisitorius because unnecessary disambiguation.
 * I deleted these redirects because they were targeting List of Star Wars Rebels characters and that section neither mentions any variant of the Inquisitorius term nor a "Malorum".
 * But then I noticed the outlier Imperial High Inquisitor targeting List of Star Wars characters which does mention the "Inquisitorius". So I retargeted Inquisitorius to that.
 * It appears to me that "Imperial Inquisitors" and "Inquisitorius" may be two terms for the same thing. If so, then we should explicitly say so.
 * And, from the content that was deleted by redirection, some of the "Known Inquisitors" were called "High Inquisitor". – wbm1058 (talk) 17:34, 28 April 2019 (UTC)


 * José of Braganza, High Inquisitor of Portugal seems rather sketchy. Unreferenced. Says he was "High Inquisitor" of the Portuguese Inquisition, but Portuguese Inquisition was headed by a Grand Inquisitor, or General Inquisitor – that article doesn't use the word "high". There seems to be no Portuguese version of José of Braganza, High Inquisitor of Portugal the illegitimate son of John V of Portugal and Paula de Odivelas. The Portuguese version of the father's article, João V de Portugal says he had a son José de Bragança, arcebispo de Braga. – wbm1058 (talk) 20:38, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * 1720–1801 or 1703–1756 ?! wbm1058 (talk) 21:28, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Disambiguate. I have drafted a disambiguation page. wbm1058 (talk) 15:16, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , can you add high inquisitor to the star wars entries where appropriate so that it gets a WP:DABMENTION? AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 15:19, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * FWIW, here is the Fandom's High Inquisitor article. Maybe that can help with sourcing for the list entries. wbm1058 (talk) 15:43, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * ...and their Inquisitorius article confirms that "Members of the Inquisitorius were known as Imperial Inquisitors". – wbm1058 (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2019 (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.

Boy Blunder
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 May 2%23Boy Blunder

Blue penis
 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.  --BDD (talk) 19:01, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Blue penis → List of Watchmen characters (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Blue_penis&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

I do not believe that this is a defining characteristic that warrants a redirect. &mdash;Xezbeth (talk) 08:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete as neologism. The term used most often is Blue balls. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 16:53, 29 April 2019 (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.

Blitzmann
<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.  --BDD (talk) 19:01, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


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

Apparently a German name for this character. Not mentioned in the article, and even the German Wikipedia article is at the English name. &mdash;Xezbeth (talk) 08:15, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom as not mentioned. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 15:50, 29 April 2019 (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.

Ambrose and his Orchestra
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 May 1%23Ambrose and his Orchestra

Rape holocausts
<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) 16:28, 29 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Rape holocausts → List of mass atrocities by number of sex crime victims (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rape_holocausts&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

I Tried changing the name for it to mach with what some one would type in if researching the subject. Rape holocausts is not normally used by reliable sources? Jack90s15 (talk) 02:29, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Jack90s15, I don't see where you tried to change it; can you add a link to where you tried? Also, I suspect you want this redirect to be deleted, but it would help if you said explicitly that you wanted deletion, or if you don't want it, please say explicitly what you do want.  Nyttend (talk) 03:23, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete – unlikely search term and misuse of the term 'holocaust'. (Jack90s15 applied (incorrectly), since corrected.) -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 03:32, 22 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete it is a unlikely search term Jack90s15 (talk) 03:40, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Per . Shearonink (talk) 15:11, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete article it redirects too talks about mass atrocities caused by those who were victims of a sex crime and not mass sex crime atrocities. Dreamy <i style="color:#d01e1e">Jazz</i> 🎷 talk to me &#124; my contributions 20:26, 28 April 2019 (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.

Character Assassination (comics)
<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 retarget  to Character Assassination. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 03:14, 29 April 2019 (UTC)


 * <span id="Character Assassination (comics)">Character Assassination (comics) → Menace (Marvel Comics) (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Character_Assassination_(comics)&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

This a story arc that was merged and redirected via AfD back in 2010. However the merged information was removed shortly after and now the current target has no mention of it. Even if it did, I question the benefit of redirecting the name of a story arc to an article on just one of several characters that appeared in it. &mdash;Xezbeth (talk) 12:13, 14 April 2019 (UTC) <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment: The merged page's history was at Character Assassination, which I have moved to Talk:Menace (Marvel Comics)/Character Assassination in order to preserve attribution. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:59, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I've reverted because that move puts the edit history in the wrong namespace. Character Assassination is not under discussion so the attribution is still preserved no matter the result here. -- Tavix ( talk ) 16:07, 16 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Retarget to Character Assassination. Since the merge was undone, I have restored the former article given a strong desire to keep it at Articles for deletion/Character Assassination (comics) should a merge be untenable. Perhaps a fresh AfD is warranted but I agree it makes no sense to redirect the name of a story arc to a single character. -- Tavix ( talk ) 16:14, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, B dash (talk) 02:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Retarget per Tavix. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 23:30, 27 April 2019 (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.

Tata Indicom photon+
Relisted, see Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 April 30%23Tata Indicom photon+

Mark Records
<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 keep  . (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 04:45, 30 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Mark Records → Mark Custom Recording Service (talk · links · [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mark_Records&action=history history] · stats)     [ Closure:  ]

Offer advice; I'm not sure what to do, as this is basically a matter of priority. What should be treated as the most useful meaning: an abbreviation of the name of a marginally notable company (the current target), or a misspelling of a highly notable concept, the MARC record (we have a Marc record redirect), or should this be a disambiguation page? I strongly prefer the second option, but I'm a librarian and work with MARC records all the time, so I don't want to assume that this preference will be universal. Google tests are difficult, as there's a surprisingly large number of men named Mark Record, and as many other results are unrelated, e.g. this page that uses "mark records" as shorthand for "trademark records", or this page for an organization named Musty Mark Records. Nyttend (talk) 00:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm aware of MARC, it doesn't affect Mark, we also have no "do you mean PURL" on Pearl. Update: Pearl (disambiguation) offers Purl (disambiguation) . –84.46.53.117 (talk) 17:02, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Record collector comment - I've seen records made by this company often, but I've not seem them labeled as "Mark Records", only "Mark Custom Recordings". There wouldn't be a huge loss if this was redirected elsewhere, so long as a redirect notice was placed at the target. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 13:35, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep; at the moment this is the best target. It is a standard step to append "Records" to a short-form label name when looking for information.  On the other hand to mis-spell MARC record would require one mis-spelling and two mis-capitalizations.  A redirect hatnote at the target might still be useful though.  All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 00:48, 28 April 2019 (UTC).


 * Keep - Already has a hatnote, though personally I would have gone for redirect-distinguish instead. -- N Y  Kevin   02:30, 30 April 2019 (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.