Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 December 11

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Agne27 (talk | contribs) at 16:06, 13 December 2016 (→‎Taminac: out of partice). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

December 11

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 11, 2016.

Aboutmcdonalds.com

Non-notable website not mentioned in target. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 22:23, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, no one will ever search on this. Largoplazo (talk) 03:40, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. 181 people (up to 10 a day) viewed this redirect (whether by searching or following a link from somewhere, it is not possible to know which) between 11 January and 10 December, that's a hell of a lot more than "no one", meaning that the basis for user:Largoplazo's recommendation is unsupported by the facts. The website in question is presently an alternate URI for the "Official Global Corporate Website" (corporate.mcdonalds.com) but google hits seem to show that it was the primary domain name as recently as 2015, and official websites of notable corporations are certainly not non-notable. If nobody were using this then I would agree with the nomination, but the figures clearly show this is useful and it's pointing at the correct target so keeping it seems to be the best course of action. Thryduulf (talk) 10:32, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Thryduulf: Thanks for reminding me about making the nominations explicit, however, even if this has received lots of hits. This certainly does not help the reader for they want at least something about the website itself, which we don't have. Also see WPR#DELETE criterion 10. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 20:11, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • How do we know that most or all of those visits weren't by people looking through the New Pages list, wondering what this article was that had been there for so long without anyone reviewing at it, and clicking the link there? I'm just really skeptical that that many people come across an obsolete URL for a company's website and become so fascinated with it at a meta level that they come to see what Wikipedia might have to say about it. Therefore, it strikes me as more likely that there's another explanation than that people care about this topic. Largoplazo (talk) 03:28, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. When searching "Aboutmcdonalds.com" using a web browser, it redirects to http://corporate.mcdonalds.com/mcd.html, obviously associated with McDonald's. However, this redirect is not Mcdonalds.com, the actual domain name of the target web page, so thus my "weak" keep. (Hmm, Mcdonalds.com doesn't exist yet, so I'd better create it.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:31, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unless there is some demonstration that encyclopedic content on this subject is in the public domain there is no reason to have this redirect, because there will be no content at the destination.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:59, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yana Zhilinskayte

Yana Zhilinskayte is the sister of Victoria, both are handballers. User:Tomcat7 (talk) 21:56, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Either (1) delete as an unhelpful redirect or (2) write the article. Yana/Jana has no article that I can find in any Wiki, but here's a citation. Narky Blert (talk) 21:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Perineal urethrostomy

The redirect can't be fixed. the redirected article is now called Feline urethrostomy. Perineal urethrostomy is a surgical procedure mostly done on people. This redirect will not give a reader information on this topic. Urethrostomy (human) is an article I am working on. Barbara (WVS) (talk) 12:50, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm with her

We have I'm with Her perhaps retarget, but if kept, a hatnote would be better. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and add hatnotes to both articles. A very, very recognisable and notable slogan from her campaign. Thryduulf (talk) 10:08, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The slogan is heavily identified with the campaign. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:07, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and add a hatnote to I'm with Her - which I did a moment ago. Mihirpmehta (talk) 23:06, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Heun Sang

Not a valid name, could find absolutely no usage in sources. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 08:39, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Heun Tsang is an alternate spelling for Xuanzang and quite often used in India. Given Heun Tsang is phonetically same as Heun Sang, thus this redirect. IndianGeneralist 13:37, 12 December 2016 (UTC).

Next king of the United Kingdom

The best potential target I could find was list of heirs to the British throne. Leaving these where they currently target places an undue maintenance burden on the community which may not be adequately fulfilled, and makes a perhaps undue prediction (I'm basically arguing portions of WP:COSTLY and WP:NOTCRYSTAL here). — Godsy (TALKCONT) 08:00, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all - I also don't think that these are that useful. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:07, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all this is crystal ball gazing but with no useful benefits, now or in the future  Velella  Velella Talk   08:35, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget all to Succession to the British throne#Current line of succession which gives people using these redirects exactly the content they are looking for. It seems likely that the next three generations of monarchs (at least) will all be kings so for the foreseeable future there is going to be no maintenance load on anybody. Thryduulf (talk) 10:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. I don't see these as particularly useful terms that anybody's actually going to search for — I find it excruciatingly difficult to imagine that there's anybody in the world who knows that these countries are monarchies, yet doesn't already know that the current heir to the throne is Prince Charles, who can thus be located by searching for "Prince Charles" instead of "Next king of...". Bearcat (talk) 20:45, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fortunately we don't need to imagine, we can look at the page view statistics and see that they are getting a non-zero number of people viewing them. While I suspect that most Britons do know that Charles is next in line to the British throne, this is a global encyclopaedia and we must approach this with a neutral point of view. I know that Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Belgium, Netherlansds, Swaziland, Thailand, etc. are monarchies but I could not tell you without looking who the heir to any of these thrones is, so why should we expect a native of these countries to somehow know without looking who is heir to the British throne? Thryduulf (talk) 21:41, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Because the British royal family (or at least the Charles-Wills-Harry cluster right at the top of the line of succession, if not necessarily all the distant minor nobles at the bottom) is markedly more famous than most other royal families, maybe? Bearcat (talk) 22:38, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        • Is that true everywhere? Does everybody know that? Does everybody who knows that remember it all the time? Do they remember how to spell his name? Do they know and remember what title he has, and how to spell that? I don't think that the answer to all these questions is "yes", and so these redirects will help some people. Thryduulf (talk) 01:59, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Even if we make such assumptions about the notoriety of Prince Charles, we're building an encyclopedia for the long term. --BDD (talk) 14:28, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Thryduulf, though I don't think this would be any less valid if women were in the top few spots. That's a place where we'll consistently have the most accurate information at the time as to who's most likely to be the next king of the UK (etc.). I see no potential for harm here, and plenty of potential for benefit. --BDD (talk) 14:28, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Thryduulf and hatnote to Prince of Wales. I think this is a plausible search term, and the proposed target is where information on the topic will be found, and the current person in this position will be prominently featured. I feel like a hatnote (or a prominent link) to the Prince of Wales article is also warranted because that is the actual position that is currently in position to be the next king. But unlike cases like President-elect of the United States, this type of position exists regardless of elections, and there it is both known and interesting to readers who is 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or further down the line. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 23:26, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I wouldn't favor such a hatnote. The Prince of Wales article says "the failure to be granted the title does not affect the rights to royal succession". As a matter of practice, we'll still have the Prince of Wales at the top of that section. --BDD (talk) 15:58, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Mayagüez-San Germán-Cabo Rojo, PR CSA

2016 presidential elections

General ambiguous title. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:03, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to National electoral calendar 2016 which includes several presidental elections. -- Tavix (talk) 06:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to "National electoral calendar 2016" since that article gives information for country after country. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:06, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per commenters. I can believe somebody typing this term into the search bar — but the United States was not the only country where a presidential election took place in 2016, so it doesn't get dibs on the generic term "2016 presidential election" without a specific country name. Bearcat (talk) 20:47, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Svenska Arbetsgivareföreningen

Well, which is it, the employers association or the confederation? (Hint: it's the first). I presume we are supposed to keep these Eubot redirects synchronised for evermore, if we are to keep them at all. Since that is WP:COSTLY, it is better to Keep the first and Delete the second. Si Trew (talk) 04:57, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep both. The synchronisation need can be handled best by (a) a note on the redirect page that tells people to change the other to the same target if they change this one; and/or (b) a bot that reads such notes and either retargets the one that wasn't changed automatically or posts a note to RfD (or some other suitable place) for human investigation. We judge redirects like this on the basis of utility to readers, not convenience to editors. Thryduulf (talk) 10:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
What utility is it to readers to target these to different places. If one has to be changed, and reader's utility is unaffected by its deletion, then it might as well be deleted.
As for the 'note' idea, both (or all) related redirects would need such an rcat/note. I can think of an algorithm where a bot couldauto-cat many redirects like this: but then, it could continue and do the job you described. That's better discussed at WT:CSD or WT:RFD but one reason I listed this rather than boldly changed it is the current discussion was/is short of examples. (There'd need to be an exclusion note when we definitely wanted different targets. None of this would be necessary if we deprecated R's from titles without diacritics.)
Are you really proposing both are kept as-is, User:Thryduulf? Si Trew (talk) 12:53, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the confusion, I'm proposing to keep both at whichever is the better target. Thryduulf (talk) 12:56, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Why on earth would we want to deprecate redirects from titles without diacritics!? It would make it very significantly harder for many people to find the article they are looking for, result in the creation of unwanted articles and so more, and more complicated maintenance overhead including merges (which would result in the recreation of the very redirects you don't seem to want). Nope, this is one of the worst suggestions I've seen at RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 14:34, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Stiftelsen Fritt Naringsliv

Delete as patently WP:XY. Timbro "is a subsidiary of the Swedish Free Enterprise Foundation, which is financed by the Confederation of Swedish Enterprise" (according to Timbro); "The Confederation of Swedish Enterprise finances Timbro ... via the Swedish Free Enterprise Foundation (Swedish: Stiftelsen Fritt Näringsliv)", (according to Confederation of Swedish Enterprise). So the SFEF is a middle-man for which we have no article: WP:REDLINK. (sv:Stiftelsen Fritt Näringsliv is a stub with no IW links.) Si Trew (talk) 04:55, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kaeaeriainen

(Eubot) Delete both. The problem with first is that Kääriäinen is marked as {{R from surname}} but of course Eubot dropped that, and I don't think we can sensibly tag Kaeaeriainen with it when that's not his (or anyone else's) surname. So we end up with rather an orphan when we take the diacritics off of surname Rs (this is not an isolated case).

In any case, these are not Germanic umlauts so to treat them as such is WP:RFD#D8 if not WP:RFD#D5 nonsense. Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_December_28 q.v. Si Trew (talk) 04:33, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Laszlo lovasz

(Eubot) Delete. We already have László lovász, which I've rcatted as {{R from incorrect capitalisation}}; there's no need to compound the felony by changing the spelling of his name too. Si Trew (talk) 04:30, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

it's an {{R from incorrect spelling}}. How many incorrect things do we need before it becomes nonsense? Si Trew (talk) 13:47, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It's no more an incorrect spelling than any other that differs only in the omission of diacritics, so {{R from incorrect spelling}} is not relevant here. How many incorrect things make nonsense depends entirely on how they are incorrect and the plausibility of the differences - and as with every redirect it is up to the person wanting to change the status quo to demonstrate that the change is beneficial to the encyclopaedia. In this instance all lower case without diacritics makes a very plausible search term, meaning deletion would make it harder for readers to find the topic they are looking for and so keeping brings the greatest benefit to the project. Thryduulf (talk) 14:27, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

DraÏen Petroviç

Neither of these is used in the target, and both seem unlikely typos (with the caps "Ï"/"I") in the English Wikipedia. WP:RFD#D8 novel or obscure synonym. Si Trew (talk) 04:15, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

K'un-ch'u

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 Withdrawn by me (keep). (non-admin closure) Si Trew (talk) 04:47, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eubot creation from K'un-ch'ü. Does this make sense? Even K'un-ch'ü is not at the target. Si Trew (talk) 04:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Si Trew (talk) 04:47, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Oernskoldsvik

Delete (not Eubot). The first "ö" has been transliterated as "oe" but the second one as plain "o". WP:RFD#D8 novel or obscure synonym. No links, one hit in ninety days. Si Trew (talk) 03:54, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Čapek

Perhaps Karel is primary, but we have more than one Čapek: At the very least, his brother Josef Čapek. Both are venerable articles (Karel created on 9 March 2002 and Josef on 12 July 2003).

We have Čapek (surname) (which is hatnoted in Karel Čapek) and it might be better to retarget there (or what would likely result from that, move it over the redirect at Čapek). The first is marked as {{R from surname}}. Si Trew (talk) 03:47, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. It seems clear to me from Google that Karel is the primary topic. Si, I hope you haven't forgotten about WP:BEFORE? Thryduulf (talk) 10:23, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Čapek should not go to one particular one when we have Čapek (surname). Typing in without the mark is what most will do and is already covered by the redirect Capek (surname). The single word redirect gives it primacy over the fully functional one. There is some argument for redirecting Chapek to Čapek (surname). Chemical Engineer (talk) 17:48, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Chemical Engineer: Your reasoning supports an argument to retarget these to Čapek (surname) (or rather it would support that argument if there weren't a primary topic), but doesn't support deletion (whether there is a primary topic or not). Thryduulf (talk) 21:44, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The brothers Čapek

Delete. This is only one of the brothers. His brother is only mentioned in passing, once in the running text (piped), once (unnamed) in a picture caption and once in full in the infobox, from where we find that he was Josef Čapek.– So WP:RFD#D2 confusing as WP:XY. Si Trew (talk) 03:23, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There was only one link, hidden (literally) in a table in Progress_Theatre#Past_seasons. I've just changed that to link them both individually, there, as "Josef and Karel Čapek". Si Trew (talk) 04:08, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all as we have no article that I can find about both men. There is apparently a museum about the brothers in Malé Svatoňovice, but the brief mention there is all the content I can find we have about it and that is nowhere near enough to sustain a redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 10:27, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Citizens of Georgia

Very ambiguous redirect. --Nevé–selbert 03:10, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as WP:RFD#D2 per WP:XY. Quite likely to refer to Georgian people → Georgians, among others. I'd say more likely since one is the citizen of a nation-state, not of a federal state. Nothing links to it, six hits in ninety days. Si Trew (talk) 03:18, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "Citizens" is rather vague. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 06:15, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Union of Citizens of Georgia, a notable political party in the country of this name. Thryduulf (talk) 10:30, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is too ambiguous, and the target offered by Thryduulf only makes it more so. 64.105.98.115 (talk) 12:22, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • How does my proposal make things more ambiguous? There is no notable organisation or any other grouping that I can find about citizens of the US state, and we don't have "Citizens of" articles or redirects about any other US state. Thryduulf (talk) 12:59, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • Only because it widens the number of targets to three. A citizen of whatever US state is synonymous with a resident of that state, at least since the passage of the 14th Amendment. It's a reasonable search term even if not currently represented for other states. 64.105.98.115 (talk) 18:30, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • List of people from Georgia is a longstanding disambiguation page. The redirect could be retargeted there. - Eureka Lott 16:56, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. None of the proposed targets is sufficiently unambiguous. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:25, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Demographics of Georgia, which should solve the ambiguity. -- Tavix (talk) 18:38, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    • Demographics includes people living in (whichever) Georgia who are not citizens and does not necessarily include people who are citizens but do not reside in that locality. Thus I oppose this suggested retargetting. Thryduulf (talk) 21:47, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's a lot more inclusive than your suggestion, a WP:PTM for a political party. -- Tavix (talk) 02:42, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
        • The political party is what I found using Google and the internal search engine for the exact title, and it is a plausible search term - being a partial title match is simply a descriptive term, it does not indicate anything about whether the redirect is good or bad. I didn't find anything relating to the US state. Thryduulf (talk) 10:18, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
          • Show me a source that calls them "Citizens of Georgia". The article uses "Citizens' Union" as the short name. -- Tavix (talk) 21:13, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Taminac

WP:RFD#D8, seems too far out for a typo for "Traminer". Not mentioned at the target, WP:RFD#D2. Si Trew (talk) 03:06, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per WP:RFD#KEEP #3 "They aid searches on certain terms." The list of synonyms for Gewürztraminer was culled from Jancis Robinson's Wine Grapes and the Vitis International Variety Catalogue (VIVC). These synonyms are not translations or potential typos but rather the grapes actual name in different languages. These names can appear in text, scholarly articles and on wine labels that originate in other countries. For English speakers, they may come across these seemingly obscure synonyms and search for them on places like Google so it is helpful that on the first page of the Google search, they are guided to Gewürztraminer via Wikipedia. Additionally, as the English Wikipedia is the largest, most accessed version of Wikipedia, visited by millions of users across the globe (many of whom English is a 2nd language), it is exceedingly helpful to have known synonyms of wine grape's from other languages as redirects for day to day user. After all, Redirects are cheap. AgneCheese/Wine 16:05, 13 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gewuertztraminer

(eubot) "-eurtzt-"? WP:RFD#D8, novel or obscure synonym. Si Trew (talk) 02:56, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy keep But this is "ue", not "eu". It's a very accepted way of rendering German umlauted characters, and probably the reason this Eubot endeavor was initially seen as useful. --BDD (talk) 14:24, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clavner

Delete WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target. See also #Klavner, below. Si Trew (talk) 02:46, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tramini Piros

I categorised Tramini Piros as {{R from other language|hu}} and made it to the section Gewürztraminer#Synonyms and was going to do likewise for the others but.... do we really' need the word "red" translated into half a dozen languages? Si Trew (talk) 02:39, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fűszeres

Delete both, or retarget to Cserszegi Fűszeres. In Hungarian this simply means "spicy" (well the first one does, the second one is nonsense), so as a combining term it's fine, but standing alone it is a bit WP:RFD#D2 confusing for it to go here. It would be like "rouge" or "rosso" going to a grape variety. Si Trew (talk) 02:32, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete both - Were there a strong Hungarian connection to the global trade in spices either now or historically, then maybe I could see going over to the main page 'spice'... but that doesn't seem to be the case. I'd rather that we just get rid of these. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:01, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Christkindltraube

WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target ("Christkindeltraube" and "Christkindlestraube" are). Si Trew (talk) 02:24, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fermin Rouge

WP:RFD#D8, "Fermintin Rouge" is mentioned. Si Trew (talk) 02:22, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Frenscher

Delete as WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target. ("Frencher" is, and Frencher already goes there, although not to section Gewürztraminer#Synonyms). Si Trew (talk) 02:18, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. This target has about 90 redirects, so missing this one is not going to make it hard to find. Si Trew (talk) 02:21, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Klavner

Delete per WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target. (Would suspect to be in section Gewürztraminer#Synonyms, but isn't.) Si Trew (talk) 02:17, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"Klaevner" is, but Clavner is a different grape that is not mentioned at its target: see #Clavner, above. Perhaps WP:XY.Si Trew (talk) 02:45, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gewurtzaminer

Delete as WP:RFD#D8. "aminer" for "traminer" seems an unlikely typo. IP creation. Si Trew (talk) 02:14, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gewuerstraminer

(Eubot) I've just tagged Gewürstraminer and (Eubot) Gewurstraminer as {{R from misspelling}}, but I wonder if this one with the "ue" and the "s" for "z" is pushing it a bit far. Weak delete as WP:RFD#D8. Si Trew (talk) 02:10, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Bushian

(pseudo-Neelix redirect) According to Oxford, this can refer also to the elder Bush [1], but I don't see this as a plausible search term. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 21:02, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Several other options exist. There's dabs at George Bush and Presidency of George Bush, the latter would work better if the term is limited to their respective presidencies. Bush family is another target if it's been used by other family members, such as either First Lady, Jeb!, etc. Getting even more broad is the dab at Bush, but I think that's a bit too broad. Hmm... -- Tavix (talk) 21:44, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Bush family, as probably the best redirect, since there are non-George Bush people this can apply to. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 18:35, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 14:20, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • SIA. Per the dictdef, a reader searching for this term will be expecting to find Bushian policies - the presidencies of either President Bush. I'm drafting an SIA under the RfD banner. Deryck C. 16:33, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That seems to be awfully duplicative of the Presidency of George Bush disambiguation page. Why not just redirect it there? -- Tavix (talk) 21:08, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Deryck C. 18:32, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've drafted a hatnote inside comments on Presidency of George Bush, to go live if this is closed as redirecting there. Deryck C. 15:07, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Presidency of George Bush per Deryck. Bush per BDD and my response to him. -- Tavix (talk) 02:07, 7 December 2016 (UTC) updated 20:12, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Presidency of George Bush.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 02:13, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Presidency of George Bush but I want to make it clear that just an outright deletion would also be probably fine with me CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 09:10, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget, but to Bush. Sorry, Tavix, but I think the premise that the term is somehow limited to the Bushes' presidencies is false. Both George Bushes were public figures before their presidencies, and after. The term could also refer to Jeb Bush, or various uses outside the political family. Since it is so vague, I wouldn't oppose deletion, but retargeting to the presidency dab page seems like a kludge, resulting in the sort of redirect I'd expect to come up at RfD later. --BDD (talk) 19:57, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
My thought was one of WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. I know that the term is used outside of the Bushes' presidencies, but I figured it would be unlikely to see the term used in another context besides their presidencies. I don't think the term is that vague, unless someone might be looking for Ian Bush, but I'll concede anyway. After thinking about it some more, I'd rather it redirect to somewhere too broad than too narrow. -- Tavix (talk) 20:12, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I can appreciate that someone is probably looking for a George Bush, but sometimes vague queries need vague answers. No wonder the term itself is only used once on Wikipedia. So anyone hoping for discussion of the term itself is bound for disappointment. --BDD (talk) 20:16, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @BDD and Tavix: Wouldn't Bush family be preferable to Bush? The use of this term is seemingly limited to describing views held by members of that family.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:27, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    Not exclusively, at least. I'm seeing a few results for bushian vannevar -wikipedia, related to Vannevar Bush. --BDD (talk) 21:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    I'd be fine with that as well. My results brought up a lot of hits for Ian Bush, but it's probably for a different reason. -- Tavix (talk) 21:50, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Bush family and add the hatnote "'Bushian' redirects here. For the views held by the American engineer, see Vannevar Bush." (i.e. {{Redirect|Bushian|the views held by the American engineer|Vannevar Bush}}). Views held by the bush family are definitely the primary topic (e.g. wikt:Bushian).— Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:39, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • On a side note, I did find a few uses of this related to Kate Bush, but they were generally preceded by "Kate" and contained a dash.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 22:13, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 02:13, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kuolemanjaervi

(Eubot) Delete as WP:RFD#D8. (Cloned from Kuolemanjärvi and Kuolemajärvi). Not a German umlaut but a letter in the Finnish alphabet. WP:RFD#D8. Si Trew (talk) 01:56, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sender Beromünster

Delete all. "Sender" is not used at the target; presumably a mistranslation of "transmitter". We have redirects for "Beromuenster Transmitter " etc. WP:RFD#D8 novel or obscure synonym. Six hits between them in ninety days, no internal links. Original was created by IP editor who seems only to have contributed on 13 December 2004. Si Trew (talk) 01:43, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - "Sender" isn't a mistranslation, it's the German word for "transmitter". Narky Blert (talk) 21:49, 12 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nimbu pani

Delete as WP:RFD#D8. No affinity with Bengali; not at target. See also Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_November_30#Lebu_jol. Si Trew (talk) 01:36, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I also want to add that it seems that this drink is often regarded as distinct from 'lemonade' as an Anglo-American person would be familiar with; recipes that I see online have various additional ingredients in there. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:06, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Actually a North American and an English person would disagree to what lemonade is: however, this distinction is covered at the top of the target. Si Trew (talk) 04:20, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Shikanjvi? (The nominator's statement is false, it is mentioned at the current target.) -- Tavix (talk) 06:12, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I sought but did not find, somehow. It also uses the spelling nimbu paani. Si Trew (talk) 09:29, 11 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_December_11&oldid=754612333"