This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 22, 2015.
- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)16:39, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
AGospel is different from anEpistle. While Paul wrote13 epistles, he did not write a Gospel, making this redirect misleading. --Tavix(talk)21:48, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keepDelete - I see some evidence that Paul's Epistle to the Romans is referred to as the "Gospel of Paul" (and his other epistles aren't), although I haven't seen any sources which I would consider reliable.Ivanvector 🍁 (talk)00:16, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- You've kind of proved my point. If there are reliable sources calling Romans the "Gospel of Paul", then it should be explained at the article. Since we don't have that, it shouldn't be described at the article and we shouldn't have a redirect there because it would create confusion or disappointment. --Tavix(talk)02:54, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, you're right. There's also theActs of Paul, theApocalypse of Paul, theCoptic Apocalypse of Paul, and gospels of various other figures (James,Mary,Judas), but not a gospel of Paul or one thought to be written by him (that I can find on Wikipedia, anyway). So, yeah, delete.Ivanvector 🍁 (talk)16:47, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete agree wih nominator rational. Also Paul not paul would be correct so double strike on the paul oneLegacypac (talk)01:32, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom as misleading. Epistles are letters while gospels are more similar to personal accounts. --Lenticel(talk)02:09, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete -Paul didn't write agospel (i.e. an account describing the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ), he wroteepistles, per nom. "Witherup, Ronald D. (2003).101 Questions and Answers on Paul. 38.: Paulist Press. p. 79.ISBN 0809141809.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link)" specifically states that Paul didn't write what is considered a gospel.—Godsy(TALKCONT)16:07, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply] - Delete both as misleading.Discuss-Dubious (t/c)16:43, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above points; rather than being a typo, this appears to be a factual error. --Rubbish computer (Merry Christmas!:...And a Happy New Year!)17:16, 23 December 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.
مثلث الخطر في الوجه
[edit]Paul McMullan (footballer born 1996)
[edit]- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasnomination withdrawn.JMHamo (talk)19:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC)(non-admin closure)[reply]
Unused, created in error, title should include a comma perWP:NCPDABJMHamo (talk)14:53, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This discussion has been included inWikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions.JMHamo (talk)14:59, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep as a likely search term.WP:NCPDAB, as well as other naming convention-related policies, relates toarticle titles, nottitles of redirects. When it comes to redirects, variations of the article naming guidelines are useful, especially if it was how titles were built prior to the guideline existing. So ... there is no good reason to impair readers from finding the target article just because they forgot to type the comma.Steel1943 (talk)16:12, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Steel1943. --Notecardforfree (talk)16:19, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as above, completely valid. The previous naming style (no comma) was in use for so long that having both versions (one as a redirect) makes perfect sense. 18:05, 22 December 2015 (UTC)— Precedingunsigned comment added byGiantSnowman (talk •contribs)
- 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.
External ear protection
[edit]- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasno consensus.(non-admin closure)sst✈02:06, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Earmuffs are not the only piece of equipment that provides external ear protection. The best alternative target I have been able to find isPersonal protective equipment#Hearing protection, but I'm not sure if that is appropriate since not external ear protection is not the same as hearing protection provided by personal protective equipment.Steel1943 (talk)19:25, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, various types ofhelmets can provide exterior protection for the ears.Steel1943 (talk)19:48, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I guess. But they'rehead protection, notear protection specifically.Ivanvector 🍁 (talk)20:33, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- That's loosely my concern. A reader could be trying to find some information about the general concept of the subject "external ear protection", then arrive atEarmuffs and think that is the only item that could provide "external ear protection".Steel1943 (talk)21:05, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Abatter's helmet specifically has a part on one side to protect the exposed exterior part of an ear, and it has nothing to do with hearing. Earmuffs and various hats and bands protect against freezing, not hearing loss.Legacypac (talk)09:16, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- 'Comment'.Exterior ear -> andInterior ear,Exterior auricle andInterior auricle are all red.Si Trew (talk)00:23, 16 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The articleearmuff currently is the main article for information on Wikipedia about things you wear over your ear - earmuffs and ear defenders. The disambiguation pageear protection tells us that the content is currently organised that way - earplugs for everything inside the ear, earmuffs for everything outside the ear.Deryck C.23:06, 25 December 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.
- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdeleted byThe Anome.(non-admin closure) --Tavix(talk)16:24, 23 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: unlikely redirect, clear NPOV-breaking judgment that is against policyThe Anome (talk)14:45, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I merged these two entries together.The Anome, hope you don't mind.Steel1943 (talk)16:15, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Besides not beingWP:NPOV, they probably also create aWP:XY issue.Steel1943 (talk)16:16, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as misleading. (Fun fact: in 2013, theWashington Post ran a piece called"Trashy Magazines," in which they profile a magazine calledFOUND.) --Notecardforfree (talk)16:25, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Not the only possible target. Usages, generally as a pejorative label, are too vague and broad.—Godsy(TALKCONT)01:46, 23 December 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.
Jordan Stewart (footballer born 1996)
[edit]- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)16:26, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Meaning of Hebrew name but you would usually search the name, not the meaning. More common meaning is two sides in a debate/conflict etc. Delete as too many possible meanings.Legacypac (talk)12:37, 22 December 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.
- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)16:20, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Why does this exist?Legacypac (talk)12:34, 22 December 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.
Relisted, seeWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 December 30#The jealous one
Relisted, seeWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 December 30#To go both ways
- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)16:09, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
too vague. lots of animals have horns.Legacypac (talk)12:26, 22 December 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.
- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)16:09, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This is how to say the city in German. Not the name of the city in German, just how to say it, Neelix creation so maybe housekeeping.Legacypac (talk)12:22, 22 December 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.
Christian Friedrich Lücke
[edit]- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)16:06, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Another batch of mix and match partial name redirects for some obscure person created by Neelix. We generally delete these batches,Legacypac (talk)12:14, 22 December 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.
Holy oil of the sick
[edit]Arrogant towards God
[edit]- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)16:05, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nonsense by Neelix.Legacypac (talk)12:02, 22 December 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.
- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)15:54, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
nonsense partial name redirects by NeelixLegacypac (talk)11:41, 22 December 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.
- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)15:53, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Another mix and match Neelix creation. Useless and misleading.Legacypac (talk)11:16, 22 December 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.
- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasretarget.(non-admin closure)sst✈07:43, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Bad Neelix redirect, Abaj = stone in Mayan so there are any places and things that use the word. There are also other uses as shown in Google.Legacypac (talk)10:59, 22 December 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.
- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)15:50, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Neelix creation. Searches do not suggest this is an actual thing, and it sounds vaguely vulgar.Legacypac (talk)10:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I've seen some usage of "USAF-UK," but literally nothing for this, probably for good reason. I could see it useful as a variant in case someone doesn't know what the proper acronym is, but wouldn't care either way if this is kept or not. --Tavix(talk)20:03, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, a little use with the dash, but ya this pronounced out is not cool. Maybe the Iranians will pick it up as a hashtag.Legacypac (talk)20:12, 22 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as made up, no such entity or acronym, possibly made up, the USAF didnt actually have a UK organisation as such as units were either controlled from the United States or part of USAFE (United States Air Force Europe).MilborneOne (talk)23:30, 25 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The article title is one of convenience to cover the history of the topic. The title is not a thing at all.Legacypac (talk)03:31, 26 December 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.
You Don't Have to Call Me
[edit]- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)15:48, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be a song that she recorded, but didn't make it on to any of her albums. Since the song isn't mentioned anywhere, it should bedeleted. --Tavix(talk)08:29, 22 December 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.
Fairytale of New York (film)
[edit]- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)15:44, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete perWP:R#D2, confusing. Unless there's an article on a film of this name, this should beWP:REDLINKed. --Tavix(talk)08:13, 22 December 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.
Worsted and Woollen Manufactures Wool
[edit]- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)15:44, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I can't seem to figure out the point of this redirect.Worsted andwoollen are two different types ofyarn, and the manufacturing process of each type is kinda sorta at those individual articles. Since there's not a place where the manufacturing processes of both of them (or maybe a compare/contract?) are described, I could see this being anWP:XY situation. --Tavix(talk)08:02, 22 December 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.
- 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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
- The result of the discussion wasDelete All per consensus below. —xaosfluxTalk16:08, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Unlikely search term based on the initials of a song that is not known by them.MaranoFan (talk)06:18, 22 December 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.
