Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 January 4

< January 3

January 5 >

January 4

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 4, 2009

Snopp → Penis

The result of the discussion was deleted. krimpet✽ 22:15, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This was recently done for vagina, so I thought it should be done for the other one.

• Custard chucker
• Hangular
• Taliwacker
• Wedding Tackle (Slang term) Tavix (talk) 22:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Gronkus
• Shlong (Slang term) Tavix (talk) 22:22, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Todge
• Proud meat
• Pork sword
• Bunzhao
• Love muscle
• Penyzitz
• Vagina cable
• Widge
• Skin flute
• Frilly toy
• Trouser snake (slang term) Tavix (talk) 22:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Sebaceous prominences
• Mirth rocket
• Tho tho
• 陰茎 (Chinese nickname)
• Tallywacker
• Tallywhacker

Thanks Tavix (talk) 23:21, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all except for Wedding Tackle, Shlong and Trouser snake. Seems I've started a trend--Jac16888 (talk) 23:44, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Why keep those three? Tavix (talk) 00:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• The last two are quite common if this makes them keepable...----Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 19:04, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I've never heard of any of them, but I did some reasearch and it seems they are used common enough. I'll withdraw my nomination of those three. Tavix (talk) 22:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I choose Love muscle [1] and Hangular [2]. Thank you.----Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 23:53, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Friendly reminder: WP:ILIKEIT is not a valid justification for keeping a nominated redirect; nor is WP:IDON'TLIKEIT a justification for deletion. Wikipedia policies and guidelines are much more persuasive and make for a more enlightened discussion. Questions about the nominated redirects: are any of these terms present in the target article? How many of these are found elsewhere in articlespace? B.Wind (talk) 00:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Did you count this as a legit vote? Ever heard of WP:DoF?--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 00:39, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Answers (in order): 1) No, as I have not made a recommendation as to deleting or keeping (this is Redirects for discussion, you know); 2) Yes, and it's irrelevant to this discussion in light of WP:RfD#KEEP and WP:RfD#DELETE; I am now confident that you will find an appropriate "home" for them should any be deleted. B.Wind (talk) 06:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Man, just buy some humour. 2.99$ a pound @ Spencer's. ----Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 19:04, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Comment on the edit, not the editor. Personal attacks are disruptive and not constructive. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 20:05, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep shlong as it appears in the target article. If citations from reliable sources for any of the others can be found (trouser snake, for example), they should be added in the appropriate section of the target and the redirect kept. If there are enough of these that can be verified in reliable sources, create a new List of slang terms for penis with the referenced terms (and their redirects retargeted to the new article). All others should be deleted. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 20:05, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Now that the snickering is over, perhaps, other than some bored kids seeing what WP turns up when they type in various synonyms or euphemisms for penis these serve no real purpose. There are whole books devoted to synomyms or euphemisms for nearly all body parts or sexual acts that will give us hundreds of redirects. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:49, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Vandalism in Ireland → Vandalism

The result of the discussion was Delete.Tikiwont (talk) 10:22, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would like this redirect to be deleted because it is quite pointless, and it only promotes stereotypes about Irish people. It also gives WP:UNDUE weight to vandalism in Eire. Jonathan321 (talk) 22:39, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete --Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 23:08, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral for now. I would like to know the circumstances under which this redirect was created. Its creator is still a very active editor, and I have contacted him to ask for an explanation, or whether he still even cares. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:26, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral -- I didn't create the article, I redirected it to Political landscaping and urban design in Ireland, a title that more accurately reflected the article's content. I don't know what happened to it after that. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 22:26, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually it was deleted in 2006 per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Political landscaping and urban design in Ireland (second nomination), but this was after you had retargeted the redirect to Vandalism. At three years, this redirect may be too old to speedy delete by CSD G7 (request by author), but if you decide that it would be better to get rid of it, tagging it with {{db-author}} might do the trick. B.Wind (talk) 04:07, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry, that should read "moved" rather than "redirected". I'm presuming that when Political landscaping and urban design in Ireland got deleted, then the original Vandalism in Ireland (which would have redirected to it) did not. I'd be happy to see the reintroduction of the former; the latter I'd happily see gone. Lapsed Pacifist (talk) 16:57, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - potentially inflammatory. Unless this is part of a series of potential "Vandalism in..." articles, it's not worth keeping. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 01:30, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I could not agree more. This is highly inflammatory to Irish people and will only make Irish people (such as myself) extremely angry. Jonathan321 (talk) 21:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per all above - we don't have an article on this, and we are unlikely ever to. Terraxos (talk) 21:09, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Whoo-ha → Vagina

The result of the discussion was deleted all, minus Vegina. krimpet✽ 21:42, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ridiculous and unlikely redirect to Vagina Also:

• Chocha
• Fur burger
• Bearded clam
• Vagoona
• Punanee
• Vagoo
• Screw hole
• Tutuzite
• Bagingo
• Pootytang
• Bitch wrinkle
• Gut locker
• Squish mitten
• Vegina (Consensus is clear this should be kept.) Tavix (talk) 22:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Punanny
• Snizz
• Quimm
• A Piano for Mrs. Cuntcrack (Can I just say, what the fuck?)
• Va jj
• Va-jj

Thanks Jac16888 (talk) 22:35, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all except Vegina which is close enough in spelling to be a likely search term. The rest are all nonsense. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:39, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• A Piano for Mrs. Cuntcrack and Whoo-ha are my favourites, keep them. Vagoona might be useful, too.--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 23:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• WP:ILIKEIT is not a valid rationale for keeping, nor is WP:IDON'TLIKEIT a valid deletion rationale. B.Wind (talk) 00:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Did you count this as a legit vote? Ever heard of WP:DoF? The Vagoona one is not that bad though.--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 00:41, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• See my response above. B.Wind (talk) 06:18, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete this rubbish (though thanks for laugh)--Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 23:10, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Vegina (useful misspelling) and the Va-jj ones (I've heard this before to refer to the vagina so it's useful), Delete the rest. Tavix (talk) 23:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep vegina as a plausible misspelling and, if there are enough of these that can be verified in reliable sources, create a new List of slang terms for vagina (the same could be done for List of slang terms for penis, discussed above) with the referenced terms (and their redirects retargeted to the new article), then delete the rest. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 20:13, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: judging by the Google hits from reliable sources, bearded clam might be best turned into a disambiguation page: two more uses of the phrase is the name of a type of drink similar to a mojito and a type of giant clam native to the Mediterranean Sea (some sources refer to it as the silk-bearded clam - apparently it is a delicacy in some parts - and the pinna marina as reported in Gibbon's The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire). 147.70.242.54 (talk) 23:27, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Now that the snickering is over, perhaps, other than some bored kids seeing what WP turns up when they type in various synonyms or euphemisms for vagina these serve no real purpose. There are whole books devoted to synomyms or euphemisms for nearly all body parts or sexual acts that will give us hundreds of redirects. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

è → Mojibake

The result of the discussion was Delete as there is agreement that these garbled sign combinations do not warrant a redirect to the general concept.Tikiwont (talk) 10:41, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term, I doubt anyone would type in random Mojibake symbols to find Mojibake. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - What if someone sees it somewhere, wonders what it is, then copy/pastes it here? لennavecia 23:02, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no reason to keep this particular one out of all possible code combinations. DGG (talk) 01:19, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - useless, per DGG's reasoning. --Tinctorius (talk) 00:19, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

é → Mojibake

The result of the discussion was Delete as there is agreement that these garbled sign combinations do not warrant a redirect to the general concept.Tikiwont (talk) 10:41, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term, I doubt anyone would type in random Mojibake symbols to find Mojibake. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - What if someone sees it somewhere, wonders what it is, then copy/pastes it here?

لennavecia 23:03, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• • Jenavecia, it's more likely they'd search it on Google and there this "copy/paste" results in the "Ã" WP page at the top -- RCEberwein | Talk 04:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no reason to keep this particular one out of all possible code combinations. DGG (talk) 01:19, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - useless, per DGG's reasoning. --Tinctorius (talk) 00:19, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete definitely not wise to anticipate every possible typo of any kind and then know which article it should be linked to -- RCEberwein | Talk 04:09, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Pro-Ukrainian → Ukrainian nationalism

The result of the discussion was Delete.Tikiwont (talk) 10:26, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Inherently POV redirect to Ukrainian nationalism. There's no re-direct of, say, Pro-Russian or Pro-Polish and we don't need this one either. Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 18:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, may cause confusion and is inherently POV. For example, George Bush's pro-Ukrainian policy of eventual NATO membership for Ukraine does not make GW a Ukrainian nationalist. Martintg (talk) 22:07, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a potentially confusing redirect, as "pro-Ukranian" has multiple meanings depending on context of its use. "Nationalism", for example, is not the same as "patriotism." B.Wind (talk) 00:30, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

World's largest mall → South China Mall

The result of the discussion was retargeted. krimpet✽ 21:48, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Action: Delete

Reason: 1) the mall in question has closed down due to economic reasons; 2) Unencyclopedic. Voidvector (talk) 17:54, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Seems a logical search term, as this indeed was the world's large mall, closure or not. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:10, 4 January 2009 (UTC) Retarget per below, makes a little more sense. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:38, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to List of largest buildings in the world#List of the world's largest shopping malls as there is an ongoing controversy as to whether the closed South China Mall is still a mall (a variation of the "Falling Tree Dilemma", I suppose). This new target seems more appropriate in light of this. B.Wind (talk) 19:24, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per B.Wind. If a business is closed down, is it still a business? I don't know about this one. I do know that if a bowling center is abandoned, it's no longer a bowling center, and if a store is closed down, it's no longer a store. It seems the same concept is at work here. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 19:09, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to List of largest buildings in the world#List of the world's largest shopping malls per B.Wind. -- MISTER ALCOHOL ^{T C} 20:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Boldly retargeted per above discussion. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 01:37, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Sdkjflksjd;faljklf → Nonsense

The result of the discussion was speedy delete G1 --B (talk) 13:43, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Action: Deletion

Reason: Well, the title certainly is nonsense, but the chances of this being searched for or used as a link target are as close to zero as you can probably get. There is no useful history and no links RichardΩ612 Ɣ ɸ 16:50, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nom. Simply south not SS, sorry 16:56, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Nonsense redirect. This was around over 2 years? Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 19:10, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as quickly as permitted by policy - take your choice: patent nonsense, improbable typo, or most improbable search item. It's too old to speedy as vandalism (which it appears to be), but clearly this redirect should not be around any longer. B.Wind (talk) 19:41, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- I made this redirect, but I don't remember why (it was 2.5 years ago!). It's completely useless and unneccessary. It should have been deleted in 2006, but now it should be deleted as soon as possible.--Porsche997SBS (talk) 20:08, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Finnish histography → History of Finland

The result of the discussion was Delete --Allen3 ^talk 00:29, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Action: Should be deleted.

Reason: Redirect very unlikely to be ever used. There's nothing particular about Finland in the study of histograms. Διγουρεν_{Εμπρος!} 11:51, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as histography seems to be to do with anatomy and so there seems not to be much connection. Simply south not SS, sorry 16:30, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Digwuren. Besides that histography is “ A description of, or treatise on, organic tissues.” which, I believe, would make the reader presume that the re-direct directed to e.g. Medicine in Finland not History of Finland ;-) --Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 20:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete, the redirect is obvious nonsense. Martintg (talk) 22:00, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as above. Good intention, bad implementation, worse semantics. Whiskey (talk) 10:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - I would assume that Historiography was what the creator had in mind here. Terraxos (talk) 21:07, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Neighbours 2009 plots → Neighbours

The result of the discussion was Restored and sent to AfD. Non-admin closing. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:39, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Action: Recommend deletion.

Reason: Seeing that this article was a rather blatant violation of WP:CRYSTAL, I converted it to a redirect. But I'm not sure it is appropriate even as a redirect.  Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 05:11, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Revert to original article (such that it was) and take to AfD. Essentially, nom is proposing the deletion of an original article, having redirected the article one minute after its creation (side note: Originator of redirected article has sunbsequently created duplicate articles on the same speculative topic - one is prodded, the other is already at AfD). B.Wind (talk) 19:47, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Essentially, this article is a copy of an early version of the article that is already at AfD. So basically, I will follow this suggestion and add this article to the already ongoing AfD. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 23:34, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Template:Thanatopisis → Template:Thanatopsis

The result of the discussion was Delete taking into account that this misspelling was discovered by the creator and immediately remedied.Tikiwont (talk) 10:33, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Action: Recommend deletion.
• Reason: Typo when created, then moved, no actual links there, future links unlikely.--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 04:56, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep likely as misspelling. Simply south not SS, sorry 16:32, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please keep in mind that only a handful of articles use this template (the band, three members, three albums plus some Wikiproject pages). No big thing, all actions of this undeground act are in the scope of our project so we would notice mispellings in possible new articles rather fast I guess. Usually I like to keep pages but in this case I really see no reason, even as a fan of the band.----Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 20:08, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete --Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 23:11, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Science Faxtion (album) → Living on Another Frequency

The result of the discussion was Delete taking into account that article was immediately moved to the right title by the original creator.--Tikiwont (talk) 10:47, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

.Tikiwont (talk) 10:47, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Action: Recommend deletion.
• Reason: Useless. Only used shortly when the album's title had yet to be announced and there wasn't an article about the band around. Only links now are from user pages and our project.----Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord² 07:01, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. There appears to be no evidence of Science Faxtion ever being considered as a possible name for the first Science Faxtion (name of the group) album, and thus is a misleading redirect. B.Wind (talk) 03:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep, as this was the original name of the article, and traditionally we keep redirects that document page moves. (In this case though, I agree, it doesn't seem highly useful...) Terraxos (talk) 21:04, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Largest → Wikipedia:List of "largest" articles

The result of the discussion was Delete. Lenticel ^(talk) 16:59, 11 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Action: Recommend deletion.

Reason: Cross namespace redirect that was formed after moving target from article space (the move triggered a double redirect). Original incoming links were removed except one from a userpage which lists various words in Wikilinks (large links to an article about the English surname; larger is a redlink). B.Wind (talk) 03:23, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete --Pan Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 23:12, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as the person who originally nominated the article for deletion. Tavix (talk) 23:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - not useful even as a cross-namespace redirect. Terraxos (talk) 21:03, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.

Edmund Howard (disambiguation) → Lord Edmund Howard

The result of the discussion was Deleted by User:Protonk as G7. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 18:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Action: I am assuming that he/she is also objecting to the extraneous "(disambiguation)" in the name and wishes the redirect to be deleted.

Reason: Completing process started by User:Boleyn2, who tagged the redirect after I removed the PROD tag (PROD applies only to articles). The prod tag stated "dab with only one entry", making this a redirect. B.Wind (talk) 01:55, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I started this page erroneously when I first started writing dabs, and recently realised there was only one valid link. As Edmund Howard already redirects to Lord Edmund Howard, it can only cause confusion to have Edmund Howard (disambiguation) as a page, even as only a redirect, when it serves no purpose - there is nothing ambiguous. Boleyn2 (talk) 10:53, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete redirect or recreate as disambiguation page as the disambiguation has been sorted. There is Lord Edmund Howard and Edmund H. Hinshaw. Simply south not SS, sorry 16:27, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Recreate original disambiguation page at Edmund Howard as it was previously a two-target dab page and retarget this redirect to it. Redirects of [[Foo (disambiguation)]] to [[Foo]] are actually a very common occurrence at Wikipedia. B.Wind (talk) 19:16, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Recreate as disambiguation page per Simply South. There are two valid targets for this proposed page. If the dab page is recreated, Edmund Howard should be retargeted to the "revived" page. 147.70.242.54 (talk) 19:04, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• CSD G7 as author requested deletion. Tavix (talk) 22:33, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note. Redirect was created by User:Boleyn, while User:Boleyn2 requested the deletion (per rfd tag and above). Both usernames have been credited with edits in 2009 (in fact, within 24 hours of this post); so, they're either two different editors or one is a sockpuppet of the other. I tend to believe the former. Boleyn does have the option of tagging the redirect with {{db-author}} if he/she wishes it to be deleted speedily (subject to admin approval). B.Wind (talk) 03:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Struck per reviewing User:Boleyn2, which states that they are one and the same. Now Boleyn/Boleyn2 would need to tag the redirect for speedy deletion and state in the edit summary that the two accounts belong to the same person... and hope that the admin believes that CSD G7 would apply here, as opposed to requiring the request from the original user account for it to apply. B.Wind (talk) 03:44, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as the archive of a RfD nomination. Please do not modify it.