Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 February 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 67.68.21.106 (talk) at 01:57, 17 February 2016 (→Iron Man of the WWE). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

February 12

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 12, 2016.

Iron Man of the WWE

Non needed redirect. CrashUnderride 12:40, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - not an alias. The only instance of "iron man" in the article is a reference to an iron man match, a type of professional wrestling match. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 14:08, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Too easily confused with Iron Man Match and not synonymous with Ambrose.LM2000 (talk) 02:07, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as creator. @LM2000: this doesn't seem confusable with the match, the root noun in describing those is "match" not "man". I also believe it is synonymous with Ambrose, since that's what announcers are presently calling him. If a reliable source can later establish other wrestlers were called this by voices in the WWE then it could be adapted into a disambiguation page. Although I've seen other people like Cena called this, this was by fans in forums, so it's not on the same level as Michael Cole calling Dean this. @Ivanvector: it actually is an alias for Ambrose. I added it but someone removed it, so I will add it back and cite more thoroughly this time. I supported it with sources which recognized Cole doing so. Ranze (talk) 16:17, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Well if it is notably his alias then obviously keep. If it's just something that some people sometimes call him, then it seems more like a vague comparative, and I'm not so sure. I didn't see it when I searched, but I'll have a look at what you come up with. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 17:25, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: That the creator, Ranze, has a habit of adding unverified "nicknames" to article and then arguing for days when they are opposed. IF it's used as a nickname keep it in the article, same with Rose, but the redirects aren't needed. No one is gonna type www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Man_of_the_WWE or www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radical_Mongoose when they could just go to Dean Ambrose or Adam Rose quicker. CrashUnderride 00:37, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Strong ad hominem attack there, ever heard of arguing the topic and not the person? In this case I've provided 3 reliable sources supporting the 'Iron Man' nickname in WWE. If you can do so for someone else in WWE then I'm all for changing it to a disambig but until then it ought to be a redirect. People will not type out a name if they don't know it. Sometimes people view only clips of shows. Like if you watched Adam face off against Titus tonight shouting "I'm the Radical Mongoose, the UNIVERSE named me the Radical Mongoose" all you are hearing is RM and not AR. Not everyone watches the entire episode, sometimes their attention wavers, they step out, etc. Ranze (talk) 02:48, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Nicknames don't need to be redirects, as I stated previously. Anyone that knows a nickname will know the wrestlers (oops, I'm sorry) sports entertainers name. Therefore they would be able to come to the article without having to use the redirect. CrashUnderride 06:15, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - the sources do indeed confirm this is a name that he goes by, or at least a plausible variation of it. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 17:27, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Ambrose called himself the Iron Man of the WWE. We can't include every time a wrestler calls himself "the XX of WWE". The sources only includes the promo and Saxton and Cole comentating a match (Commentators say a lot of thing). However, at WWE.com, Iron man of WWE doesn't redirect to anywhere.--HHH Pedrigree (talk) 00:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why can't we include every time a wrestler goes by some other alias? Redirects are cheap. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Because it's not an alias or a nickname. Just a promo. Not even WWE talks about Iron Man of the WWE in the website. Every week, a wrestler calls himself The Future, The Man, The Best... this aren't nicknames or alias. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 14:32, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete To call this a "nickname" or an "alias" is misleading. Ambrose referred to himself as this *once*, somewhat off-handedly, in a promo. He may never refer to himself as this again. It seems completely unnecessary to create a redirect that is unlikely to ever be typed into the search bar. Skudrafan1 (talk) 23:42, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 23:01, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nakshal (film)

this page is not necessary and redirect to wrong page. see other related page Naxal (disambiguation) Bongan® →TalkToMe← 18:46, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 15:43, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 22:42, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ow the Edge

Non-notable meme from the game, unlikely search term. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:05, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Invisible control character

  • Delete: This is a redirect from a control character to an article. It is of no use because the control character cannot be entered on the keyboard; it does not display on the screen; it cannot be selected by dragging across it; and if it appears as a link, you can’t activate it by clicking. (It appears as a link to the left of the arrow in the header of this RfD: try seeing it, selecting it, or clicking it!) It is harmful because it is confusing and frustrating that you can’t see it, select it, or click it. —teb728 t c 19:26, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For convenience this is a piped link to the redirect. —teb728 t c 19:44, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: I fucking hate this redirect and how it (doesn't) work or render for the majority of users. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 19:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - if you can't see it, select it or click it, then it's harmless. And it's pretty busy for a "useless" redirect, with 259 hits in the last 30 days. Actually it is a visible character, just not in the font we use. This one's been around for 10 years, and since it's possible to link to it, it's possible there are external links to it, and no good reason to break them. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 20:06, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It also should be salted. The deletion log shows the title has been deleted and recreated numerous times. The deletion rationales in the log give additional reasons why the title should be deleted. —teb728 t c 20:10, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It is not harmful. It can be typed on a keyboard. It is visible with certain fonts and browser configurations. The draft version of CSS Text Module Level 3 requires it to be visible, so pretty soon it will be visible by default to most people. Fucking hating a redirect is not a reason to delete it. And it is a good idea to have a redirect from every Unicode character for which there is an appropriate target, so that users can learn about it by searching for it on Wikipedia; the character is a C1 control character, so the target is appropriate. The two reasons it was deleted according to the deletion log are This title cannot be entered into the search window, is not being used, and it is implausible anyone will need it (but it can be entered into the search window, it could be used, someone could need need it, and even if they don’t it doesn’t hurt having it just in case) and that the character should not appear in valid XHTML, which is irrelevant, because it works fine in HTML. Gorobay (talk) 21:40, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete We've already blacklisted titles with wikimarkup, as the technical problems they cause are disruptive. The same is the case here. Delete this one, and delete all other invisible characters. BTW, the link provided by Gorobay is technical enough that it basically explains nothing. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:00, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I can't see this while reading the page, but in the editor, a block appears saying "008D". Based on that, I think this character is "Reverse Line Feed". I have no idea what that means. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:02, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The target article tells you. Si Trew (talk) 05:47, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • What an odd history. I have a couple of thoughts. Yes, it's been deleted twice before but both were speedy-deletions that were clearly outside of the speedy-deletion policy therefore the two deletions are irrelevant as precedent to the decision here. Second, Cryptic is right that even though the title was first created almost 10 years ago, the title was visible for much less than that. The likelihood of external links is small. All that aside, the arguments that the character can't be seen or linked is simply not true depending on the fonts used by individual readers. That makes it appear broken to some but perfectly clear to others. But appearing broken is different from being broken. And since it is usable to those others, it is apparently helpful and not harmful. Keep. Rossami (talk) 04:14, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Not used outside this discussion, hits are almost all caused by XfDs. For me, this does not even appear in my edit window, let alone in the rendered page (using Mozilla Firefox on a PC laptop). Now, I cannot be the only one. So, it is harmful. I've no objection to it on any purist grounds, but the fact that it does not render properly for some users – and it didn't on my Android tablet either – means it will never be useful. One thing Wikipedia/Wikimedia strives to do is keep the interface simple enough that it can be sensibly rendered on the vast majority of browsers. Saying "Pretty soon it will be visible to most people" assumes people can and will update their browser software, and the browser software will in fact be updated. I have no idea how this would render on a text-to-speech browser, but suspect it may not. Si Trew (talk) 05:47, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Is it helpful? No. Is it useful? No. Even if one is to be charitable and say that it can perhaps be hypothetically useful, it still is problematically confusing. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 07:12, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Maybe replace the entire redirect with U+008D → Reverse line feed, with a visible source and a target that actually explains what the control character does. Apparently (Wikipedia is zero help) it causes backward movement of paper in a pre-laser, pre-inkjet printer. —teb728 t c 08:27, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It could also move the cursor up on a terminal emulator, as line feed (-> newline) moves it down (not always implying a carriage return): I'm not saying it will for any particular hardware, just that it could (I'll do some more research). I'm for adding a section on U+008D, but it could just be a section in newline, since line feed is already an {{-r|R from merge}] into that. The Unicode line breaking algorithm (here, referenced in newline) makes no mention of it.
But that doesn't really sort out what to do with this redirect; User:teb728 you're implying "delete" without actually saying it. Si Trew (talk) 10:57, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I said Delete in my nomination; I suggested this as an alternative for Keep !voters, who want to have something about the control character. I labeled it as "Comment" here to avoid !voting twice —teb728 t c 12:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ooops, I missed that: sorry. Si Trew (talk) 22:21, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The lack of an RS is obviously because nobody would dream of using a reverse line feed on modern hardware. —teb728 t c 12:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why not? Plenty of line printers still around. Microsoft Windows 10 seems to use it in e.g. PosPrinter.PrintNormal to mitigate problems with cr/lf sequences, although the documentation doesn't say explicitly which control characters it emits to do so (that probably depends on the printer driver, anyway). The UNIX/Linux col(1) utility supports it (and half line feeds), e.g. here and imply that nroff(1) and tab(1) will output it; these are usually encoded as two-character (7-bit ASCII) sequences ESC+7, ESC+8 and ESC+9. The Linux console recognises it as ESC-M (says here). Si Trew (talk) 22:21, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

White stereotypes

Another "In the United States" problem. Similar redirects for Hispanics, West and Central Asians, and Arabs have already been deleted. Links available from the most recent of those discussions. --BDD (talk) 17:08, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete. We deleted the others, and while WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST it would seem a surprise that these existed and the others didn't – and although WP:RNEUTRAL applies to indvidual redirects, this could seem to be a form of systemic bias when a bloc of (say) "Hispanic" ones is deleted but a bloc of "White" ones is kept. These are redirects from the general to the specific, but that is not in itself a reason for deletion (it's a reason for moving the page and then marking it as WP:WORLDWIDE).. Si Trew (talk) 05:55, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, as I mentioned in the other discussions and wrote at Wikipedia:In the United States, moving the target article to a general title is also acceptable, at least as an improvement over the status quo. Though I suspect there are enough stereotypes of white people, and perhaps different enough in different places, that multiple pages would be necessary and you'd have a situation like Stereotypes of Asians. --BDD (talk) 15:46, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tn air

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

These brands aren't discussed at the Nike article, making them just about worthless to readers. The "T90 Tracer" is probably a variant of the Nike Total 90, but it's not discussed there either. We're not a product catalog. --BDD (talk) 16:58, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Nike Quickstrike because that title holds considerable history of content that was merged to the target. The fact that the content has been edited out since is irrelevant since that could be just as easily restored if editorial opinions change. Preservation of the history is important. The rest have no significant history so I abstain on them. Rossami (talk) 04:23, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target (dangling pointer). Although preservation of history is important, it's irrelevant to whether a page is deleted. For if not, we could never delete anything or {{db-blanked}}, since creating a redirect or blank article is (by definition) a creative act and so needs attribution (although I seem to remember having an RfD discussion where consensus was that the process of an editor creating a page was not in itself creative enough to consider it a creative act). The history is still preserved and can be retrieved by admins, who have done so on request for mere mortals like me. Si Trew (talk) 06:07, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Jahga Sports

This was created as an article about a Pakistani soccer ball manufacturer partnered with Nike (I think). It was shortly thereafter redirected, since the controversy was apparently discussed at the Nike article at the time (July 2008). Now it's not, so the redirect will only mislead and disappoint readers. I don't know if trying to recreate an article would be worthwhile. --BDD (talk) 16:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. --BDD (talk) 16:54, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nike football

Retarget to Ball (association football) or delete. The phrase is ambiguous enough to delete. It could refer to lines of Nike products for any game called football, or the balls themselves. It doesn't look like Nike makes American footballs, at least not for the NFL. But they do make association footballs, and some of the Nike models are mentioned there. Either outcome would be an improvement IMO. --BDD (talk) 16:46, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. --BDD (talk) 16:47, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Palestinian infiltrators

Delete as confusing, WP:RFD#D2. Not used anywhere, stats are three in 90 days. I just don't see how an infiltrator implies political violence, or vice versa. And is it Palestinians doing the infiltrating, or being infiltrated?

See also Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_February_11#Palestinian_terrorists. Si Trew (talk) 03:31, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Gabi S.: you're right, and I'll put my hands up and say that I didn't check whether it was at the target – I had meant to, but ran out of time (and battery power) before I could. Striking my delete. Si Trew (talk) 06:51, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Casting around for similar terms, Infiltrator is a DAB at which this Palestine/Israel sense is not mentioned (probably should be); infiltrators is red, as is Palestinian infiltrator, Israeli infiltrator and Israeli infiltrators. Si Trew (talk) 06:51, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Monte Karlo metode

Delete per WP:RFOREIGN. -- Tavix (talk) 02:53, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_February_12&oldid=705366474"