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 deletion per G6. This was obviously a simple mistake that was immediately corrected by the author who moved the page to Kick (2012 film) but lacked the ability to move-without-redirect and didn't think to nominate it for G7. ☺ ·  Salvidrim! ·  ✉ 19:09, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

• Kick (2012 film), → Kick (2014 film) ( links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ delete ] 

Clear case of misspelling. Unnecessary ',' at the end, as suggested by history of the page. Speedy deletion Nadesai ( talk) 19:00, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

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 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. WJBscribe (talk) 00:20, 14 February 2014 (UTC) reply

• Người Bắc Kỳ → Vietnamese people ( links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ delete ] 

It sounds like racist. It means the northern vietnamese not Vietnamese people Namnguyenvn ( talk) 06:17, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

It's not racist. It's an informal term term to refer to "Northern Vietnamese people". Other variants include "Nguoi Bac", "Dan Bac", "Dan Bac Ky", "Nguoi Mien Bac" etc., all meaning the same thing. There's also similar terminology for Central Vietnamese and Southern Vietnamese. Vietnam has 3 distinct cultural regions - North (Mien Bac), Central (Mien Trung), and South (Mien Nam). Nguyễn Quốc Việt ( talk) 08:32, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Delete, no content at previous target, of course content at Vietnamese people. The place for Vietnamese articles is Vietnamese Wikipedia. The nominator says "it means the northern vietnamese people", but then links it to vietnamese people]: You can't eat your cake and have it. Si Trew ( talk) 18:47, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Delete or Redirect.It is not a likely search term for an English audience. It does seem to me "racist" exactly but WP:POV to say "North Vietnames" or "South Vietnamese" not quite racist but a bit POV. It can be redirected how you want, but North Vietnamese is very POV. Other editors will have better suggestions than I where it should be retargeted. Si Trew ( talk) 12:17, 2 February 2014 (UTC) reply

• Nigger is an irellevant argument. From Spanish negro, etc. It is usally called in England "The N word" which is riduculous when one can say F or C. We all now racist terms the thing is whether they are or not. (Eating a bit of cake.) Si Trew ( talk) 12:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC) reply

• Simon, what do you mean by "redirect"? It already is a redirect; the only options are deleting, keeping, changing its target, and converting into a disambiguation page or article. Nyttend ( talk) 14:17, 2 February 2014 (UTC) reply

My mistake. I meant Retarget. I am not used to this little lapts. op and keep slipping on the keys. Si Trew ( talk) 15:40, 2 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Delete. There is a good case to be argued about having a separate article for North vietnamese people, but in English Wikipedia it is not helpful unless that article is created, at least as a stub. It is not the Viets' fault that English speakers don't understand the difference; but that is the way of the world.

Also, {{R from other language}} does not mean that anything in any language can be put as a redirect into EN:WP. Clear case of inapproprate R from other. Si Trew ( talk) 17:28, 2 February 2014 (UTC) reply

To be clear, the start is not marked as R from other or anything. It should be, at the very least. But since it is an unlikely search term for an English audience, it should go Delete. That is entirely without prejudice to North Vietnamese people, just saying this redirect is useless as it stands. Si Trew ( talk) 17:34, 2 February 2014 (UTC) reply

We routinely create redirects for things from other languages when we're talking about things in that language. Thus we have things like République française, 日本国, and even misspelled things like POCCNR for Россия. Unless I'm missing something, this no different: it's a Vietnamese term for a Vietnamese concept. Nyttend ( talk) 19:11, 2 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Keep - whether it's a racist term or not, Wikipedia should provide appropriate balanced information. For example, Nigger - we do not avoid the term, we explain why it is bad (if it is), with appropriate refs. Add content to the article, inform people, that's what Wikipedia is all about. If someone Googles this term - and if it is offensive (I don't know; I'm no expert...but if it *is*) then Wikipedia is exactly the right place to educate the readers about why it is offensive. 88.104.24.150 ( talk) 20:26, 1 February 2014 (UTC) P.S. SimonTrew, I like cake. P.P.S. WP:TIGER is an excellent essay. 88.104.24.150 ( talk) 20:28, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

• Keep. I don't particularly understand SimonTrew's reasoning. On the other hand, if this means "people from North Viet Nam", it's more relevant to this article than any other. Since it's been almost 40 years since South Viet Nam ceased to exist, we're not going to have separate articles for people from north and south. Moreover, note that the most similar situation, Korea, has a single Korean people article; South Korean people and North Korean people are both redirects. Granted, the latter is a redirect to North Korea, and the former to Korean people, but I'd say that the article on the people in general is much more helpful than the article on the state. Nyttend ( talk) 04:24, 2 February 2014 (UTC) reply
• Delete,It sounds like racist in vietnamese. It is Pejorative word.-- Namnguyenvn ( talk) 04:07, 3 February 2014 (UTC) reply
• Closing admin, please note that *four* of the "delete" bits are from SimonTrew. Nyttend ( talk) 19:11, 2 February 2014 (UTC) reply
  • I've grouped them together to make this clear. — Scott • talk 21:03, 2 February 2014 (UTC) reply
    • Closing admin, please note that Namnguyenvn the nominator has added a "delete" vote just above this comment. Meanwhile, Scott, thanks for grouping them together; note that I've stricken my previous comment because it's no longer applicable. Nyttend ( talk) 05:46, 3 February 2014 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Wikipedia is not censored. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 10:43, 4 February 2014 (UTC) reply

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 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 Pau D'Arco. ( NAC) Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:10, 17 February 2014 (UTC) reply

• Pau d'arco → Tabebuia ( links to redirect • history • stats)     [ Closure:  keep/ delete ] 

According to Tabebuia, "Those species known as ipê and pau d'arco (in Portuguese) or poui were transferred to Handroanthus" in 2007. (The page also suggests that Tabebuia avellanedae is known as "pau d'arco", though.) The page Lapacho defines it as "a tisane or "herb tea" made from the inner bark of the Pau d'arco tree." Both Tabebuia and Handroanthus species are apparently used as tea/herbal remedy, and this sense of "pau d'arco" seems to be common on the World Wide Web. I don't know which of these three articles (Tabebuia, Handroanthus, or Lapacho) is the most appropriate target, so I'd like other opinions. Cnilep ( talk) 02:48, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

• I searched PubMed Central for "pau d'arco". My search was apparently parsed as:

tabebuia OR (pau AND d'arco) OR pau d'arco

I guess that means that PubMed considers "pau d'arco" and "tabebuia" synonyms. Cnilep ( talk) 05:26, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

• If "pau d'arco" is used for some species still in Tabebuia, I think it should be turned into a disambig. If all species of pau d'arco are now in Handroanthus, then point it at Handroanthus. phma ( talk) 13:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Comment. If it doesn't point to Tabebuia, where should it point? Si Trew ( talk) 18:56, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

• I suggested "which of these three articles (Tabebuia, Handroanthus, or Lapacho)" above. I would also consider Tabebuia avellanedae Tabebuia impetiginosa. PierreAbbat suggests disambiguation, for which Pau D'Arco (disambiguation) currently exists. Cnilep ( talk) 23:00, 1 February 2014 (UTC) reply

I was going to suggest Impetigo but WP has it as the facial disease. I think best to Keep at Tabebuia, a Pnd Delete Pau d'arco; it is not a likely search term. Si Trew ( talk) 12:32, 2 February 2014 (UTC) reply

Sorry – what? I got "Keep at Tabebuia", but I don't understand the rest of the comment. Cnilep ( talk) 02:36, 3 February 2014 (UTC) reply

• Retarget to the dab at Pau D'Arco. This is the simplest solution, where the nuances of the plant naming can be explained. -- BDD ( talk) 17:38, 10 February 2014 (UTC) reply
• Retarget to Pau D'Arco per BDD. WJBscribe (talk) 00:24, 14 February 2014 (UTC) reply

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.