November 27

Malia Obama Biography

Adams 6

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, default to keep. On the keep side, it's been pointed out that Adams was the 6th POTUS and similar redirects likeBush 41 andBush 43 exist. On the delete side, it's been pointed out that this isn't a plausible way of referring to the president and that the "series" is incomplete because some similar titles are redlinks (e.g. "Adams 2", "Washington 1") because of ambiguity.Deryck C.15:48, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Adams 6Adams 6 →John Quincy Adams (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not plausible synonym, by the way, for some strange reason, the top result on Google isTony Adams. Note thatAdams 2 was deleted at an RfD months ago. -CHAMPION^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)}22:07, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, and note lack of relevance of Adams 2 discussion: Adams 2 was deleted because it was believed that there was significantly ambiguity betweenthe second President of the United States andthe second Adams to serve as President. There's no ambiguity as to whom "Adams 6" refers. I'd also contest the "not plausible"; several Presidents are referred to as "LAST NAME #". No harm in keeping this.pbp22:11, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the central question here would be: is "Adams 6" ever used to refer to John Quincy Adams? --Tavix^(talk)22:21, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• @Tavix andPurplebackpack89: Please seethis list there are only 3 blue links left other than this redirect. One isWashington 1 (below) which is subject to another discussion. The others areBush 43 andBush 41, which were closed as keep in the previous discussion. -CHAMPION^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)}22:23, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That's a 100%WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST argument. Also, how many of them are red because they were AfDed vs. red because they never were created? Finally, "Washington 1" doesn't even redirect to George Washington, and, near as I can figure, part of the reason it might be deleted is because there's significant ambiguity between George Washington and whatever it redirects to now.pbp22:29, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is obviously not a widespread name as Bush 41 or Bush 43. There are obscure non-notable topics this refers to, and even "Roosevelt 26" and "Roosevelt 32" are not valid synonyms. -CHAMPION^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)}22:37, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. This isn't some nomenclature for presidents like chapter and verse.AngusWOOF (bark •sniff)03:11, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep as part of a series (ie.Bush 41 ,Bush 43) this would be POTUS#6 Adams --65.94.171.217 (talk)06:23, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, since I don't have any evidence that John Quincy Adams was ever known as "Adams 6". --Tavix^(talk)05:00, 7 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.

Washington 1

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 wasprocedural close. Redirect already under discussion atWikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 November 17#1166 Neelix redirects on Vermont Representative Districts. --Tavix^(talk)21:37, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Washington 1 →Washington-1 Vermont Representative District, 2002–12 (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:PTM. By the way, I am looking for such redirects following the discussion atWikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_November_20#Trump_45. -CHAMPION^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)}21:34, 27 November 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.

Benjamin Franklin Thomas

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 waskeep.Deryck C.23:11, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Benjamin Franklin ThomasBenjamin Franklin Thomas →Benjamin Thomas (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not listed on the target page.Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);Talk to Andy;Andy's edits18:51, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as a(n){{R from ambiguous name}}. Multiple people (Benjamin Thomas (congressman) andBenjamin Thomas (industrialist)) have the full name "Benjamin Franklin Thomas", so it points to the disambiguation page. --Tavix^(talk)19:22, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Tavix. -CHAMPION^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)}21:35, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Tavix --Lenticel^(talk)00:29, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: it would be a legitimate redirect to either of the abovementioned BFTs, so it's useful to redirect it to the dab page where they're both listed.PamD13:19, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I've made it a dab page in its own right. Nomination withdrawn.Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing);Talk to Andy;Andy's edits14:16, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. The change to a disambiguation page was reverted byBkonrad and the redirect toBenjamin Thomas reinstated. I've reverted to the version with the RfD banner, without prejudice, while discussion here continues.Thryduulf (talk)22:18, 2 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.

Whiskey Jack

A.J. Styles and Kurt Angle

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.JohnCD (talk)15:45, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• A.J. Styles and Kurt Angle →A.J. Styles (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:XY redirect: we can't redirect users to bothA.J. Styles andKurt Angle. Former article at this title was created by a sockpuppet and needn't be preserved.Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits)13:45, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as nominator.Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits)13:47, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Feuding articles in wrestling don't work. The individual articles explain the feuds and alliances much better.AngusWOOF (bark •sniff)15:41, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as confusing --Lenticel^(talk)00:28, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per the aboveCoffeeWithMarkets (talk)03:01, 29 November 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.

€cherli Pass

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.JohnCD (talk)15:44, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• €cherli Pass →Ächerli Pass (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. I don't think this is a likely typo, and stats seem to confirm that (3 hits in 90 days). A quick Gsearch reveals it is used nowhere at all in the wild, except in one word list.

There are already several perfectly reasonable redirects to this target, such asAecherli PassAecherli Pass andAcherli passAcherli pass, and all seem to be reasonably rcatted. But surely we should discourage currency symbols used to substitute for letters (although we make exceptions for things likeMicro$oft when they are frequently used in the wild). In any case this would presumably substitute for "E", and we don't have "Echerli Pass", etc.

The Euro symbol does move around a lot between different keyboard layouts, but we can't cater for every possible typo. (We don't havetzpo, for example, which I just typed instead of "typo" as I'm on aQWERTZ layout).Si Trew (talk)10:54, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, unlikely typo. I would allow for Echerli Pass though.AngusWOOF (bark •sniff)15:43, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I also don't think that this is useful.CoffeeWithMarkets (talk)15:51, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above --Lenticel^(talk)00:26, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. I wonder if this ismojibake?Thryduulf (talk)20:58, 28 November 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.

·𐑡𐑩𐑥𐑱𐑒𐑩 ·𐑐𐑤𐑱𐑯

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 both.JohnCD (talk)10:38, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• ·𐑡𐑩𐑥𐑲𐑒𐑩 ·𐑐𐑤𐑱𐑯 →Jamaica Plain (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• ·𐑡𐑩𐑥𐑱𐑒𐑩 ·𐑐𐑤𐑱𐑯 →Jamaica Plain (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete,WP:RFOREIGN,WP:RFD#D2 confusing, not at target. I don't have a font where these glyphs show up, but they're in theShavian alphabet. The first one, it's marked as{{R from misspelling|·𐑡𐑩𐑥𐑱𐑒𐑩 ·𐑐𐑤𐑱𐑯}}), i.e. as spelled by the second one.They differ only in the fourth character: U+010471 (𐑱, "/eɪ/") in the first redirect and U+010472 (𐑲, "/aɪ/") in the second. The penultimate character is U+010471 in both cases. Since WP is organised by language not orthography, and we accept someWP:ENGVAR, and these are English, then I suppose they are in some sense acceptable alternative spellings, but that seems rather stretching it: we don't generally have redirects for IPA, various shorthands, and so on.Si Trew (talk)10:19, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also not sure why the middle dots (U+U+00B7, "·") are there after each word. That doesn't seem to be a character in the Shavian alphabet, but I'm no expert.Si Trew (talk)10:38, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete perVery Confusing. Never ran across this alphabet before. The user that created these was enamoured with it for a while. The middle dots areinterpuncts, and indicate capital letters. —Gorthian (talk)19:00, 29 November 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.

Barrio Chino (Havana)

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 toHavana#Barrio Chino.JohnCD (talk)10:34, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Barrio Chino (Havana)Barrio Chino (Havana) →Chinatowns in Latin America (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Havana is not mentioned in the target. -CHAMPION^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)}07:56, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom.AngusWOOF (bark •sniff)15:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget perThryduulf toHavana#Barrio_ChinoAngusWOOF (bark •sniff)03:18, 29 November 2016 (UTC) updated 02:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and refine toChinatowns in Latin America#Cuba where it is mentioned in the second paragraph orretarget toChinese Cubans where it is mentioned several times but in no more detail.Thryduulf (talk)21:22, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good find! Changing vote.AngusWOOF (bark •sniff)03:18, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Actually placing it to Havana itself is a better link, given the other Barrio Chinos are going to city articles or district articles. Changing vote again.AngusWOOF (bark •sniff)02:26, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget toHavana#Barrio Chinos where there is more detail on it than either of the targets I found.Thryduulf (talk)22:20, 2 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.

Wikipedia:Lua/Modules

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 wasdisambiguate.Deryck C.15:48, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:Lua/Modules →Wikipedia:High-risk templates (talk·links·history·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not all lua modules are high-risk.Pppery04:00, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep for historical links per the redirect's creator. This was previously an active page prior to it being deleted perWikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Lua/Modules. Also, redirects in the "Wikipedia:" namespace are not always required to be useful search terms if the redirect has a specific historical benefit, such as this one does. (Other related examples are redirects left over from page moves if the leftover redirect was the former, longstanding name of the page; this redirect somewhat falls under that classification.)Steel1943 (talk)14:11, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I'm in two minds about this. It's absolutely true that not all Lua modules are high-risk, but that's not the reason that I created the redirect. The reason was that betweenApril 2013 andMay 2014 the "High-risk Lua modules" option in the protection reasons drop-down that admins see in the page-protection dialog was linked toWikipedia:Lua/Modules, so all theedit summarieslog entries for modules protected between those dates (i.e. most of them) linked to that page, and they can't be changed (at least not easily). The redirect was intended to give people clicking on those links a handy explanation of what "high-risk" means in relation to modules. The protection log entry appears both in the log pages and at the top of protected modules when you try to edit them, so it is fairly high-profile.

  Deleting this redirect would make it harder for people to find information about high-risk modules, so I'm not in favour of that. However, I agree that the redirect isn't an obvious one, so just keeping it isn't ideal either. Perhaps we could make it into some kind of disambiguation page linking to bothWP:Lua andWP:High-risk templates? —Mr. Stradivarius^{♪ talk ♪}14:21, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• I alsosupport the creation of a disambiguation page given the multifaceted issues here.CoffeeWithMarkets (talk)07:44, 22 November 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 Squall (1993 film)

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.JohnCD (talk)10:25, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• The Squall (1993 film) →The Scream (film) (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I see nothing that suggestsThe Scream (film) was ever titled or confused withThe Squall.Clarityfiend (talk)01:27, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Support deletion of the redirectThe Squall (1993 film). The titleThe Squall was apparently created as the result of a misunderstanding on the part of this film article's creator. —Roman Spinner(talk)(contribs)05:21, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete housekeeping.AngusWOOF (bark •sniff)15:42, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete to avoid confusion --Lenticel^(talk)00:27, 28 November 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.

Help:Dr. Sanjay Singh Negi

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 wasspeedy deleted criterionG6 byAnthony Bradbury. Procedural close.(non-admin closure)Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits)13:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Help:Dr. Sanjay Singh Negi →Sanjay Singh Negi (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Help pages shouldn't redirect to articles. Just the result of a confused page move ([1]) on August 16, 2016.2600:1003:B84F:C889:6C25:D40F:54E1:AD72 (talk)00:54, 27 November 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.

Template:Infobox Government

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.JohnCD (talk)10:28, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:Infobox Government →Template:Infobox government agency (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

redirect to some other template. Current target doesn't seem optimal.Prisencolin (talk)06:19, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete possible targets are too vague. -CHAMPION^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)}06:33, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - 'Governments' are not the same thing as 'government agencies', and I also think that deletion is the right call.CoffeeWithMarkets (talk)16:56, 29 November 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.