Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 December 30

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 30[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 30, 2018.

WP:MAGENTALOCK[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's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Anarchyte (talk | work) 11:49, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm no fan of WP:WHITELOCK et al (see recent RFD), but at least they're used. None of these are, none of them ever have been, and we shouldn't be encouraging new usage based on whatever colors the interface happens to be this year anyway. —Cryptic 04:07, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all since these redirects were created in November 2018, meaning that both there is no long-standing precedence for these names of colors for the locks, and these redirects were created after the lock icon switch (once again, meaning that there is no precedence for these redirects.) Steel1943 (talk) 10:14, 30 December 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.

MOSFE[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's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Anarchyte (talk | work) 11:51, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Since the target article’s acronym in its entirety is "MOSFET", this redirect is essentially an inaccurate partial-title match. Steel1943 (talk) 01:56, 30 December 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.

ICC Club World T20[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 6#ICC Club World T20

Shitface[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's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Delete. Anarchyte (talk | work) 11:47, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

No mention of the term in the article on alcohol intoxication nor does it seem to be a likely redirect for the term either. Sakura CarteletTalk 00:48, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • comment It should perhaps say shitfaced which is UK slag for being very drunk, if that it the purpose of the redirect. I guess it means falling down and getting your face covered in... There is redirect for shitfaced, so this is useless. scope_creepTalk 00:54, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Shitfaced, yes; shitface, no. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:25, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: the more plausible redirect shitfaced will come up as a suggestion when this is being typed in anyway, shitface is implausible. Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 21:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I might be changing my vote here, I guess, but I think that the singular term 'shitface' is only somewhat plausible. The redirect isn't worth keeping. People who type it in will, as stated above, immediately see the more logical 'shitfaced' anyways. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:37, 4 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Pile of Poo emoji? — Godsy (TALKCONT) 07:01, 6 January 2019 (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.

E-fuse[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's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Anarchyte (talk | work) 11:52, 6 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

E-fuse is a term that has been used to refer to several things; mostly electronic component-level replacements for mechanical fuses and integrated circuit structures that function like fuses. The target of this redirect is an article about a fuse-like integrated circuit structure from IBM, which is called eFUSE. While the trademark eFUSE is similar to the generic term e-fuse, it isn't logical for a generic and ambiguous term to redirect to something that's more precise. This redirect cannot be given another redirect target because there isn't an article about any of the general topics that e-fuse refers to. 99Electrons (talk) 00:37, 30 December 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2018_December_30&oldid=1138582320"