From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 18

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 18, 2015.

2060 Summer Olympics

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) 17:51, 26 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. You may find a related discussion from May 2015 here. -- Tavix ( talk) 19:58, 18 October 2015 (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.

Wii launch games

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) sst 08:50, 26 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Implausible redirect sst 15:33, 10 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Der yck C. 16:59, 18 October 2015 (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.

Nindendo Revolution

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) 17:50, 26 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Implausible redirect sst 15:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Der yck C. 16:59, 18 October 2015 (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.

Wiintendo

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 no consensus. -- BDD ( talk) 17:50, 26 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Implausible redirect sst 15:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Der yck C. 16:59, 18 October 2015 (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.

Nintendo revulution

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) 17:34, 26 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Implausible redirect sst 15:35, 10 October 2015 (UTC) reply

How do you spell revoulve, then? Very 18th century :) Not dropped but replaced. Still plausible. Si Trew ( talk) 10:11, 13 October 2015 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Der yck C. 16:59, 18 October 2015 (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.

List of art historians who happen to be women

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) 17:33, 26 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Gloriously fails WP:NPOV. The Traditionalist ( talk) 16:53, 18 October 2015 (UTC) reply

I notice that the the redirect was the original title. If this is the case do we need to keep it of are we allowed to remove original titles?-- 64.229.166.187 ( talk) 19:48, 18 October 2015 (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.

Anatidaephobia

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. Der yck C. 18:46, 27 October 2015 (UTC) reply

AFD'd twice, years ago, as a joke phobia from an old Far Side strip. It was redirected to List_of_phobias#Jocular_and_fictional_phobias until that section was removed; it now directs to Specific phobia which has nothing to say about anatidaephobia. McGeddon ( talk) 19:40, 16 September 2015 (UTC) reply

(I got an "Adding deletion tag to redirect: Failed to save edit: Page is fully protected" warning when nominating this, but I assume this doesn't invalidate the discussion?) -- McGeddon ( talk) 19:41, 16 September 2015 (UTC) reply
I put an edit request on the page to add the tag. No, it should not prejudice this discussion. Ivanvector 🍁 ( talk) 19:51, 16 September 2015 (UTC) reply
The talk page discussion referred to is here. It seems that the longstanding section was removed by a consensus of one editor. Since the section was for the most part properly referenced and contains information that readers are obviously looking for, I propose per WP:PRESERVE that we restore the section and retarget this redirect there. Alternatively, a new list article could be created from the content in that section, and this redirect pointed there. In any case full protection on the redirect should be maintained, according to the history it's actually been deleted ten times and was a frequent target of vandalism. Ivanvector 🍁 ( talk) 20:02, 16 September 2015 (UTC) reply
Consensus of two, actually. The issue was that while much of the material was properly cited, it was not suitable for coverage on Wikipedia or the coverage given was undue. Most of these were neologisms created for humorous effect and used once, but then covered in various lists of phobias in other media. Anatidaephobia is a good example, the term having been created for a comic strip and never used anywhere else, except in discussions of that comic strip and lists of phobia names.-- Srleffler ( talk) 16:28, 18 October 2015 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD ( talk) 14:15, 23 September 2015 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Godsy( TALK CONT) 22:38, 10 October 2015 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It seems that the two options are either outright deletion, or restore content. I've left a note on Talk:List of phobias to direct more participation to this discussion. I note that a related possibility is to restore the list of fictional phobias into a separate list article at List of jocular and fictional phobias.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Der yck C. 14:21, 18 October 2015 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. A good case for speedying. The page has been deleted twelve times and permanently protected against recreation, so how have we even got here? This kind of material is more suitable for Wiktionary, but even there it would probably struggle. Their CFI require three quotations of usage from durably archived sources. I doubt that anybody other than Larson has actually used the word, as opposed to mentioning it (ie, just defining it). I am also in favour of do not restore the list. It is pure cruft, there is no limit to such made up words; a comprehensive list would be huge. Any list should be limited to notable examples of such words (if there are any), that is, words that already have, or could have, an article. Spinning Spark 16:13, 18 October 2015 (UTC) reply
  • The term lacks notability; content relating to it does not belong anywhere on Wikipedia nor Wiktionary, for the reasons discussed above. The redirect serves to prevent the page from being recreated. If recreation can be prevented by other means, by all means delete the redirect. -- Srleffler ( talk) 16:22, 18 October 2015 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. Not a notable subject and there isn't a suitable target. -- Tavix ( talk) 18:59, 18 October 2015 (UTC) reply
  • Delete - We're not talking about any kind of really popular and well-covered fictional concept here (like death rays, anti-gravity things, etc). This just isn't particularly notable. CoffeeWithMarkets ( talk) 22:31, 25 October 2015 (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.

RIVER

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) 17:32, 26 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Redundant. Why would any reader type River in caps.? — | Gareth Griffith-Jones | The Welsh Buzzard| — 11:53, 18 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Walks plus hits per innings pitched (WHIP). Ivanvector 🍁 ( talk) 19:56, 19 October 2015 (UTC) reply
The other WHIP is a radio station, hence why it is at a disambiguation and not Walks plus hits per innings pitched. -- Tavix ( talk) 21:00, 19 October 2015 (UTC) reply
Ah, thanks, missed that. Struck my incorrect statement. 58.176.246.42 ( talk) 02:29, 26 October 2015 (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.

If you want to know what God thinks about money, just look at the people He gives it to

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) 17:30, 26 October 2015 (UTC) reply

Just an excuse for a POV statement. No incoming links and an unlikely search term. Spinning Spark 10:33, 18 October 2015 (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.

Pedovement

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) 17:30, 26 October 2015 (UTC) reply

WP:R#D8. Apparently an effort to promote an obscure protologism. Not mentioned on target, and the only Google hits are for Wikipedia scrapers. I suppose it might be a typo for "pedocement" (a geological term for cement formed through pedocementation, i.e. cementation (geology) of soil), but that article doesn't use the term pedocementation. 210.6.254.106 ( talk) 06:56, 18 October 2015 (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.

United States presidential election, 2028

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. The same will go for 2020. -- BDD ( talk) 17:27, 26 October 2015 (UTC) reply

WP:BALL. 333 -blue 03:38, 18 October 2015 (UTC) reply

United States presidential election, 2024 is create-protected, to boot. Ivanvector 🍁 ( talk) 14:53, 19 October 2015 (UTC) reply
2028 has been deleted a few times now, so it seems that one should be salted as well. -- Tavix ( talk) 14:59, 19 October 2015 (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.

华夏电影

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) -- Tavix ( talk) 01:15, 26 October 2015 (UTC) reply

These are foreign language redirects. GeoffreyT2000 ( talk) 03:20, 18 October 2015 (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.