Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 September 15

September 15

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 15, 2018.

Wikipedia:Wikipedia: Aim for Featured Article

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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikipedia: Aim for Featured Article → Wikipedia:United States Education Program/Courses/Wikipedia: Aim for Featured Article (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Implausible redirect that uses the double 'Wikipedia' namespace and I don't see the point in keeping this redirect. Pkbwcgs (talk) 20:42, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A double namespace name would normally be implausible indeed, but that doesn't appear to be what this is - the title of the course is "Wikipedia: Aim For Featured Article". The redirect is therefore a very plausible way of finding the target page - especially as the actual target page ___location is significantly harder to remember. I debated marking this as a "weak keep" as the course is a few years old and the instructor hasn't edited since late 2015, but that doesn't preclude one of the students (or someone else) wanting to find this again and/or the course being run again by someone else, possibly elsewhere. The title isn't conflicting with anything else, and so I don't really see any benefit to deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 10:29, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Thryduulf. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:02, 16 September 2018 (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.

Malacologist

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. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 16:53, 23 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

MalacologistMalacologist → Malacology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The page "Malacologist" should redirect to the "List of malacologists". Until the webpage "Malacologist" will have its own content. Snek01 (talk) 16:50, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note I've corrected the nomination template (the "target" parameter refers to the current target not the proposed one). Thryduulf (talk) 18:24, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep redirecting the name of a profession to the article about the discipline is common (e.g. Archaeologist → Archaeology, Educational technologist → Educational technology, Herpetologist → Herpetology, Oceanographer → Oceanography, Physiotherapist → Physical therapy, etc). I've looked for about 30-40 different professions and they all fall into one of three categories: An article, a redirect to the discipline/occupation, or a redlink, not one has been a redirect to a list. It's worth noting that Malacology links to List of malacologists in the first section after the lead, but the list does not link to the main article anywhere prominent. Thryduulf (talk) 18:38, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's more likely that a searcher is looking for what a malacoligist does rather than a specific malacologist ... and if they are looking for that, they will find the link on the malacology page. SpinningSpark 19:18, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The list is a derivative subtopic, not a virtual synonym. And the notion of creating a stand-alone article on "malacologist" is quite frankly dumb: the type of hair-splitting pedantic drivel that impedes centralized, comprehensive, quality coverage. We don't need two parallel articles to learn that a malacologist is someone who studies malacology. We have dictionaries for that. --Animalparty! (talk) 21:59, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Science/scientist, engineer/engineering, accountant/accountancy, biologist/biology .... I don't know if a wothwile article on malacologist is possible, but I do know that the only dumb thing here is your statement that there definitely isn't. SpinningSpark 00:08, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per other editors' rationales. For consistency, the redirect should stay as targeted. cymru.lass (talk • contribs) 19:10, 16 September 2018 (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.

Cuziohyla sylviae

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 September 24#Cuziohyla sylviae

BAVARIUHH

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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 02:05, 24 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BAVARIUHH → Bavaria (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Appears to be a (rather poor) attempt at a phonetic spelling. We don't do these as far as I know SpinningSpark 17:55, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment although not used on Wikipedia other than in this redirect, google does tell me that it is occasionally used for sports teams with "Bavaria" in their name. Thryduulf (talk) 18:41, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While there might be a weak retarget to some comments regarding FC Bayern Munich, which the google results imply, there is no usage of this in caps outside of this, even as a sports chant or catchphrase. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:43, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unlikely synonym or joke redirect --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:36, 16 September 2018 (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.