This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 11, 2016.
Human factors in Aviation safety
Roman eating and drinking
- 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
Roman food. --
BDD (
talk)
21:06, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
Seems like a very unlikely search.
Iazyges
Consermonor
Opus meum
11:42, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- But reatrget to
Roman food as below. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough,
21:44, 14 October 2016 (UTC).
reply
- Delete as vague, could equally refer to
Food and dining in the Roman Empire. I see no need for a disambiguation page. -
Champion (
talk) (
contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234)
04:06, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per Champion;
WP:XY. Each hatnotes the other so I agree there's no need to DAB. It could also, less likely, mean
Category:Restaurants in Rome (does anyone use "Roman" to mean things from present-day Rome?)
Si Trew (
talk)
05:04, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete - I agree that there's unhelpful ambiguity.
CoffeeWithMarkets (
talk)
06:24, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Disambiguate. In addition to
Ancient Roman cuisine (which doesn't have a hatnote) and
Food and dining in the Roman Empire, I also think
Roman cuisine is a plausible target. As a sidenote,
Roman food is a redirect that targets
Ancient Roman cuisine. If we create a DAB page, then we may also want to retarget
Roman food to the new DAB. --
Notecardforfree (
talk)
05:15, 13 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Disambiguate at
Roman food and retarget this there per Notecardforfree. ----
Patar knight -
chat/
contributions
18:12, 13 October 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.
- 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)
21:05, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
Generic and non-specific name. It currently redirects to a template on Indian fugitives as a result of a move.
Mar4d (
talk)
10:29, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- That would not make sense. The current target is a navbox, and your proposed target is a sidebar.
Si Trew (
talk)
05:24, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- AFAIK there's nothing that prevents redirects that formerly targeted navboxes to be retargeted towards sidebars. Both are templates, and my proposed target would be the best fit for a redirect of this name.----
Patar knight -
chat/
contributions
22:21, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Comment. This was taken to CSD by
User:Smsarmad on 10 October with the rationale "This title is a POV. This template was serving the purpose of grouping together a set of articles just like a category does and we previously had a
discussion about a category with the same title that was deleted on similar grounds. So it can be considered a CSD#G4 case" (with
this edit) but was declined by
User:Pppery with the comment "Consider RfD - redirects do not have to have neutral titles and the rest of your rationale applies to the target of this redirect, rather than the redirect itself".
- (Speedily) delete. It's a
{{
R from page move}}
by
User:Smsarmad and essentially is
WP:G6 housekeeping; which slightly complicates (not much) its deletion: we can just add links to the relevant discussions at the talk page of the target to preserve attribution etc; such as the {{
old rfd}}
from this discussion when it closes. The current target was only created on 9 October and moved very shortly thereafter, so it's extremely unlikely we'd break any external links.
- I suppose it is aLSO
WP:RFD#D8 "novel or very obscure synonym".
Si Trew (
talk)
05:46, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Comment
WP:IARring, I've been
WP:BOLD and "fixed" theten
WP:NOTBROKEN transclusions of the redirect. Since the navbox now at target was onlz created on the 9th, and moved very shortly afterwards, we've no need for this vestige. We can put the attribution,
{{
old rfd}}
etc on the target's talk page. I've updated the name
and title
fields in the target. All this should really have been done as part of the page move, but never mind. Currently my "what links here" doesn't seem to have updated yet (the external tool shows 0 transclusions of the redirect).
Si Trew (
talk)
05:24, 12 October 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.
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 October 19#A Cat
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 October 18#Hopper 7
- 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.
JohnCD (
talk)
18:04, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
Nonsense.
SST
flyer
09:55, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia, not plausible. (Interesting fact:If you search this on Google, it will correct you to search for YouTube, so I assume Google is automatically fetching these suggestions from Wikipedia redirects, still, that further clarifies my vote, considering such redirects will do harm to external search engines.) -
Champion (
talk) (
contribs) (Formerly TheChampionMan1234)
10:12, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete "you-to-be" might be a joke pronunciation of YouTube, if this is documented I might reconsider. Otherwise I think it's a bad target - "you to be" has plenty of meaning of its own. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough,
20:38, 11 October 2016 (UTC).
reply
- Comment We've also got
U2BE,
EU Tube,
EUtube,
Eutube pointing to the same target.
58.176.246.42 (
talk)
02:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete - This looks like a non-notable joke term and nothing more. It's not really helpful as a redirect.
CoffeeWithMarkets (
talk)
06:41, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Delete as confusing --
Lenticel (
talk)
00:47, 18 October 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.
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 October 18#Microsoft China
- 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, and change the section to #Driving license codes. --
BDD (
talk)
21:03, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
Delete all. These could be refined to section "
#Driving licence categories", but that lists categories, not codes. Doesn't look like anyone searches this way.
WP:RFD#D5 nonsense without links to the given section. Neither has any internal links, no hits in the last 90 days for "license", one or two a day at most for "licence".
UK driving licence codes (not nominated) is a {{
R from merge}}
and should be kept, but there's no need for these variations and since they are both incorrect names and one is also incorrectly spelled, I think the sum of all the individually minor problems with these pushes them into "delete" territory.
Si Trew (
talk)
09:13, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- The table header says "Categories". The words "code" and "codes" are absent from the article except once, "codes", in an external link. It's harmful to have
WP:RFD#D2 confusing redirects when there are no "codes" at the target. They could just as sensibly be retargeted to
The Highway Code, so these are a bit
WP:XY, too.
Si Trew (
talk)
08:13, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
reply
- Change my mind, Keep and retarget to
Driving_licence_in_the_United_Kingdom#Driving license codes. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough,
22:06, 14 October 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.
- 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.
JohnCD (
talk)
17:54, 18 October 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.