Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 2

< October 1

October 3 >

October 2

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 2, 2015.

Neuroqueer

• Neuroqueer → Neurodiversity  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Neuroqueer" is not mentioned or defined on the target page, nor is it referencees or backed by references. CombatWombat42 (talk) 13:54, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

• Keep per it being used in sources such as here and here. --Rubbish computer 16:34, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Two blogs as sources...CombatWombat42 (talk) 01:23, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 20:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Delete''as WP:NEOLOGISM. What would it mean? Neuro presumably relates to the brain but queer in Br. Eng. is rathher old slang for a male homosexual so it would mean essentially headfuck or brainfuck or something like that? Brainfuck is an article about an esoteric programming language). I have no idea what it could possibly mean. Si Trew (talk) 01:51, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

• Delete per above points: I didn't realise the sources I had used were blogs. --Rubbish computer 15:18, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Digital life form

• Digital life form → Artificial human companion  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is clearly not the same thing as an artificial human companion. I don't know where better to target this and could use some help figuring out where. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:40, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

I have redirected it to Artificial life. Feel free to close if you think that is a good enough target. JesseW, the juggling janitor 04:54, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

• REtarget to artificial life per above -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 05:13, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
• Target it to artificial life - I agree. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:20, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

Digital organism is even better, and it should be re-targeted specifically over there. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:17, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

• Retarget to Digital organism as a more plausible target. --Lenticel ^(talk) 13:49, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
• Retarget Digital organism Artificial life is not specific enough compared with Digital organism that specifies the constituents (digits). And "human companion" is very unsuitable target because it is assuming things already, like equating "animals" with "pets". 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 02:44, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
• Retarget to digital organism per Hisashiyarouin. --Rubbish computer 16:36, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
• Digital organism seems like a very poor target to me. Digital life form doesn't mean a computer simulation of life. If means actual life. Things like Data or gray goo. Basically, robots sophisticated enough to count as a person or reproduce on their own or the other factors we understand as life. Artificial life is much closer to a correct target. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 15:11, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm really not knowledgeable about this subject, but I'd like to see Oiyarbepsy's argument addressed before I close.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 20:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

All right, I will address Oiarbepsy!s argument out of pure pedantry becayse I am quite happy with the retarget suggested. A digital life form presumably is one that has digits ( a DAB), i.e. fingers and toes? Tamagochi would seem the way to go for a digital life form, but I am not suggesting we do so. Conway's Game of Life is also possible but again I should not encourage it. Perhaps we DAB it then?Si Trew (talk) 22:26, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Retarget to artificial life per Oiyarbepsy, digital organism does seem to be a slightly different topic. As long as we're trading pedantry, consider that your hands can be used as a 10-bit digital counter. Wow your friends by counting to 1,024 on your fingers at your next party! Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:26, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Fashion icon

• Fashion icon → Fashion design  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Fashion design (or the original target: Fashion) is not a synonym. Clarityfiend (talk) 02:09, 25 September 2015 (UTC)

• Comment however, it is a synonym for fashion designer which redirects to fashion design. Though it also means other things besides fashion designer... -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 05:14, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
• Comment As the only piece of more defining resource for the fashion-uninitiated me, Time's list defines as "From models and muses to designers and photographers", and also includes non-human brands, fashion magazine editors and stylists. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 09:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
• Retarget to fashion design per nom. --Rubbish computer 16:37, 26 September 2015 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 20:09, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

No, surely a fashion icon is not the designer but the wearer, one on the front cover of Vogue or somesuch, that is to say, standmeat. (Which unfortunately we have not got.) Si Trew (talk) 22:28, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

YSL is referred to as a fashion icon[1] YSL was a designer; as is Karl Lagerfeld, also a designer [2] ; and Jean-Paul Gauthier [3]; etc; though yes, non-designers are also called fashion icons -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 05:27, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

• Delete as vague per above points. Besides that issue, my search also tells me that it can also refer to fashion related Icon (computing) --Lenticel ^(talk) 12:56, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
• Delete - One can be a fashion icon without being a fashion designer, and one can be a fashion designer without being an icon. As well, there's the connection to Icon (computing), as stated above. There's no proper target here really. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 01:46, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

File:SmallLogo.jpg

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 delete. The links are still displaying as blue. If that's not right, please contact me. --BDD (talk) 15:37, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• File:SmallLogo.jpg → File:Saudi Geological Survey logo.jpg  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

File redirect eclipsing Commons. brining here because it's not necessarily uncontroversial... Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Also affected -

• File:EPAM_logo.png
• File:Hirst.jpgAlready deleted by RHaworth
• File:Edge.pngAlready deleted by RHaworth
• File:Winthrop.jpg
• File:Wilfred.jpg

Thanks. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:15, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Sfan00 IMG, do you mean you want the others nominated for deletion as well? Do you mean File:Edge.png? And does your argument mean that different files have these names on Commons? --BDD (talk) 14:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Different files on Commons have these names. The additional files are included in the disscussion. Yes I do mean Edge.png (corrected). Sfan00 IMG (talk) 14:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Comment: RHaworth already deleted two (marked). BethNaught (talk) 15:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
• The remaining three additional listings should be deleted. This is uncontroversial per WP:CSD#F2 because they shadow Commons images with the same title. SmallLogo.jpg only shadows a redirect. It appears to have fallen prey to phab:T30299, so we may as well delete it. It won't work for its intended purpose. BethNaught (talk) 15:21, 2 October 2015 (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.

Crimson jihad

• Crimson jihad → Jihad  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This term is not mentioned in the target. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 08:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Comment this was originally a redirect to True Lies, which has a fictional group by this name. According to this book, there was another fictional group by this name in 24 (season 4), but Wikipedia doesn't seem to mention them. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 09:16, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
• 'Comment. We do not have Purple Jihad nor Red Jihad nor Brown JIhad, I don't sre why this colour/collor is especially special. Si Trew (talk) 11:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm a liar, we do have Red Jihad but not Red jihad. We could take it via that, red is not that far awaz fro crimson is it, if you are going to paint a wall with it, but this has religious significance so I think that would be wrong. Si Trew (talk) 11:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Delete as there appears to be no suitable target. --Rubbish computer 14:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Crimson Jihad with the cap om the J is also red (not crimson). Si Trew (talk) 16:27, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Cf. Crimson Permanent Assurance, which is a bit of a pun on Pearl Assurance. Please stop takimg my comments out. Si Trew (talk) 16:39, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Delete per anon's findings. Looks like these are just obscure fictional organizations --Lenticel ^(talk) 23:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
• Delete the only place the term is mentioned is the plot section of True Lies but I doubt Thea someone typing this is looking up a fictional organization from a 1994 film.--67.68.29.107 (talk) 05:06, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
• Retarget to True Lies; the "Crimson Jihad" is the primary antagonist of the film, so should target that film article. The entire film is based around the threat posed by Crimson Jihad -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 05:30, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
  • NOTE the "Crimson Jihad" is mentioned at True Lies -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 05:35, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
    • Turd it mentioned once in the plot section but I find it questionable that someone would type the term to find out about a fictional organization form a film that is over two decades old.--67.68.29.107 (talk) 21:58, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
      • Why are you writing "turd"? -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 04:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
      • WP:CHEAP We have many redirects from characters and organizations to the movies they appear in, this is no different. It is a subtopic of the film, and it will lead people to the article. It is a popular film. This is a central "character" for the film, regardless of how we wrote the article. Most of the antagonists in the film are members/associates of the Crimson Jihad. -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 04:50, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

Molecular Machines and Nanoassemblers

• Molecular Machines and Nanoassemblers → Molecular nanotechnology  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't think this redirect with inappropriate capitalization is needed. Leyo 08:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Çomment'' I have special knowledge of this having worked for Accelrys for seven years. I can probably add into this but rule myself out. Si Trew (talk) 11:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Keep as a plausible typo and therefore potentially useful redirect: see WP:RFD#K5. --Rubbish computer 14:44, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:XY. Nanoassembler redirects to Molecular assembler, and Molecular machine is its own article. While they're both examples of molecular nanotechnology, this seems an unlikely search term generally, and specifically for the concept of molecular nanotechnology. This is not unlike redirecting Solutions and Compounds to Chemistry. --BDD (talk) 14:53, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

OK I rule myself back in, molecular modelling is more likely or molecular modeling depending on which we we do the WP:ENGVAR, as it stands we have it in Br. Eng. and the American spelling (speling) is a redirect thereto. Si Trew (talk) 16:09, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

צ'יפס

• צ'יפס → French fries  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not related to Hebrew. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 08:09, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) (I think with Champion)Delete. They are {{|r[Belgian fries} -> French fries anyway. Si Trew (talk) 11:54, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:FORRED as a redirect from an unrelated foreign language. --Rubbish computer 14:45, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Entirely unrelatad, I think the word was invented by that little Scots firm, you know, McDonalds. Neither Belgian nor French. (et je peux parler comme une vache espanol. I can speak French like a Spanish cow). See English as She is Spoke. Si Trew (talk) 16:48, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 23:29, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

חציל

• חציל → Eggplant  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not related to Hebrew. - Champion (talk) (contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234) 08:09, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Actually I t hink you are wrong, the eggplant or aubergine (which redirects there) was actually first raised in Israel wasn't it? But has little to do with an auberge, a cheap hotel or inn, essentially Travelodge. Si Trew (talk) 16:12, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

@SimonTrew: Instead of guessing, it'd be a lot better to read the article and find out for yourself. Here: Eggplant#History. -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:40, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

The reaon I purposely guess rather than looking is that is what I think our readers would do, so I purposely do not look at the targets but what would someone searching for want to find? Am I wrong in doing it that way? Si Trew (talk) 01:28, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, because you're wrong in this regard. Eggplants don't have any affinity for Hebrew; and you guessing that it might doesn't create that affinity. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:31, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. According to this document the plant was first cultivated in the modern Indian and Burmese regions. If we need a foreign redirect then I think it should be Indian or Burmese rather than Hebrew. --Lenticel ^(talk) 13:01, 3 October 2015 (UTC)

Ugaritisch

• Ugaritisch → Ugaritic  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:FORRED. This ancient language has no connection with Germany or German-speaking cultures, none of which would exist until millennia later. BDD (talk) 03:17, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Redirect to Finno-Ugric, essentially Finnish, Hungarian, Latvian and Estonian. This is a bit weird cos it is the German name for Finno-Ugric, but we can't help that. Modern languages from Finno-Ugric exist, so I don't think a delete is appropriate. Si Trew (talk) 05:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Actually I just wondered if we had Hungarish which would be the cognate but it seems we do not. Si Trew (talk) 05:36, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Comment The German name for Ugric is de:Ugrisch, several letters away from Ugaritisch. 210.6.254.106 (talk) 12:21, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Do not retarget to Finno-Ugric, as Ugaritisch is Ugaritic, not a Finno-Ugric language. I don't super care whether this is kept or deleted. —Kusma (t·c) 12:53, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
  • @Kusma: please do not change my comments. I said retarget and others are allowed to disagree with what I may have said, as RubbishComputer has done below which I respect, but You can have your own comments but don't go changing mine. Si Trew (talk) 16:14, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Whoa there. Kusma did no such thing. Ironically, though, you did change Kusma's. (I've fixed it.) Careful. --BDD (talk) 16:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Completely my fault then: I thought Kusma had, but entirely my mistake, sorry about that, and I have apologised on Kusma's talk page. Not technically an edit conflict but essentially so, and absolutely completely my cock-up. Thanks for fixing it. Si Trew (talk) 19:28, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:FORRED as a redirect from an unrelated foreign language. --Rubbish computer 14:46, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Combat operation

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 speedily retarget to Combat (non-admin closure) Si Trew (talk) 16:22, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Combat operation → War  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Combat operations are not synonymous with war. World leaders can send in troops for some form of minor military intervention Mr. Guye (talk) 01:59, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• REtarget to combat -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 02:51, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
• Retarget to combat as that would be helpful CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 02:58, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
• Retarget' to Combat as bleeding obvious. Si Trew (talk) 05:18, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
• Retarget to combat per above points. --Rubbish computer 14:47, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Taisen

• Taisen → War  (links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No known relation between these two words. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Delete WP:NOTDIC Wikipedia is not a translation dictoinary. War is a general topic with no particular affinity for Japanese -- 70.51.202.113 (talk) 02:50, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

:What os ot. Japansese I would guess? Si Trew (talk) 05:19, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

OK you already said that. I check kanji and hiragana for this. Still seems unlikely. Tai-sen definitely means "I shall fight", not exactly "war" but we dont have tai-sen. Si Trew (talk) 05:21, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Any chance at Tarzan that seems like pushing it a bit. @Lenticel: is usually the expert on this. Si Trew (talk) 05:24, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

tai is a DAB at which taisen is not listed. sen is also DAB and at forurh lists the Japanese Zen. So this means four Japanese Yen, if it means anything, which it doesn't. Si Trew (talk) 05:33, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

We have the distinction between a tsunami and a Toon Army. What are we to do with this? Si Trew (talk) 05:45, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

We don't have Toon army by the way. I support Arsenal F.C. s I am neutral with that one. Si Trew (talk) 05:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Comment - I see the term used most (although I may be mistaken) in reference to video games, specially the whole Sūpā Robotto Taisen series (see: Super Robot Taisen). So, the word does have a strong pop culture influence, but I'm not really sure what to do with this redirect. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 06:43, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
• My guess is that this is a Japanese reading of wikt:大戰, but I don't see a good reason for having this redirect. —Kusma (t·c) 12:30, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

  And thanks to CoffeeWithMarkets I know now that I am right, although it is written 大戦 in Japanese instead of Chinese 大戰 / 大战. —Kusma (t·c) 12:35, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:FORRED as a redirect from an unrelated foreign language. --Rubbish computer 14:47, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
• Delete due to lack of potential targets. The closest targets that I got are "Taisen" series like Sakura Wars and Super Robot Wars --Lenticel ^(talk) 23:34, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
• Delete - As stated above, there really isn't a primary target, and it looks like the best thing is just to leave the text red. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 01:22, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
• Delete as above. I was trying to think of Taiszen or Taishen as well but that seems far away. Taiwan surely would be a huge stretch. I only learned nihongo for a couple of years so am not very good at it. Si Trew (talk) 01:36, 3 October 2015 (UTC)