Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 6

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 6[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 6, 2018.

Baseball USA (Houston)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 15#Baseball USA (Houston)

Revolution 5deg du nom[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. Revolution 5 du nom created ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:09, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How many people would type in "deg"? feminist (talk) 16:46, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 20:43, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note - eubot creation. Other than an odd spike last week this has seen zero activity in the past 90 days. Probably safe to delete. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:36, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no one will type this. Legacypac (talk) 01:48, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The target article could probably use another incoming redirect or two that is easy to type, considering that its only other incoming redirect is Revolution 5° du nom. Steel1943 (talk) 17:45, 8 March 2018 (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.

Upper Vardar dialect[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 15#Upper Vardar dialect

Sister Sister Sister Tour[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 keep. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:02, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Term not found in target article; no evidence that this is a useful redirect. PamD 21:36, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 20:43, 6 March 2018 (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.

Greek Orthodox Ochrid Archbishopric[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:12, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With the exception of the foreign text at the bottom of the lead, this target article doesn't seem to have any affinity with any aspect Greek. That, and if there was any Greek affinity, most likely such a title would be in Greek itself. Steel1943 (talk) 23:41, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Killiondude (talk) 07:06, 25 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • The matter is probably quite intricate (see BDD's comment above), but isn't it possible that the "Greek Orthodox" used in the title of the redirect could simply be a synonym for "Orthodox"? – Uanfala (talk) 20:23, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'll leave a note at WP:EO to see if we can get more participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 20:29, 6 March 2018 (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.

Bepis[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. Killiondude (talk) 03:28, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOTNEO. I don't mind slang terms being used for redirects, but this is overdoing it... Thegreatluigi (talk) 20:13, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Without any context on the Pepsi article, this has no value. Retarget if the meme is notable enough for the List of Internet memes [2] AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I imagine this will get created again at some point, but at the moment we aren't making use of it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:08, 14 March 2018 (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.

Peppsey[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Seems too implausible of a misspelling to be worthwhile. Thegreatluigi (talk) 20:10, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Refers to non-notable usernames rather than alternative brand spellings. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:47, 6 March 2018 (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.

Cracker juice[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aside from the obvious problem that the company is called "Cracker Drinks", they make other drinks than just orange juice. Thegreatluigi (talk) 20:04, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Not notable phrase except in Urban Dictionary as a random oxymoronic phrase "dry as cracker juice", which isn't really used notably in news articles or magazines. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:50, 6 March 2018 (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.

Petsmort[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely misspelling. Steel1943 (talk) 19:19, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. It's only really one letter, but I can't imagine how anyone could think "smart" was spelled "smort"... Thegreatluigi (talk) 19:57, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. It's not like the A is stylized to look like an O in the logo. (they use all-caps) AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 20:51, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete in the unlikely chance some types this, search will get them there. Legacypac (talk) 02:27, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as a probable WP:ATTACK page. Pets + mort looks like an attempt to disparage the subject. No evidence that the term is commonly used. - Eureka Lott 16:12, 11 March 2018 (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.

Cheesie puffs[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 keep. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:04, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Cheesie" is an unlikely misspelling of "cheese" or "cheesy". In fact, Chessie is a disambiguation page with no entries related to cheese at all. Steel1943 (talk) 19:09, 6 March 2018 (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.

Cheese poofs[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 keep. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 20:23, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"Poofs" is not a widely-used alternative name for the subject. Either retarget to South Park#Merchandising as a misspelling of Cheesy Poofs or delete. Steel1943 (talk) 19:08, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per nom as most likely usage of the term. No news articles showing use of "cheese poofs" prior to South Park. Also okay to Keep since the article has a list of different brands of cheese puffs actual and fictional. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:40, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Striking vote. Only Cheezy Poofs, Cheesy Poofs and Cheesie Poofs should go to the South Park one. This is closer to the original puffs article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:25, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - For Google Results: Page 1 is obviously South Park stuff, Page 2 onwards is more or less about "Cheesy Poofs" is an alternative name, The article mentions "Cheesy Poofs" as an alternative name so IMHO it makes more sense to Keep than to retarget (Although I can see the logic in retargetting). –Davey2010Talk 18:51, 7 March 2018 (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.

So rich[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:03, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The target subject has a song named "So Rich, So Pretty". But, this redirect, as it stands, is a ambiguous partial title match that could even describe Wealth. Steel1943 (talk) 19:06, 6 March 2018 (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.

Joi choi[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 keep. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:02, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Unclear how the word "joi" describes the target. Steel1943 (talk) 19:04, 6 March 2018 (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.

Fresh salsa[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 15#Fresh salsa

Surburbia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 15#Surburbia

Bull of red[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. Per WP:YODA ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The phrases is not used as any marketing by its topic. The redirect fails WP:NOTNEO. Steel1943 (talk) 17:12, 6 March 2018 (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.

Internet shorthand notation[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. Killiondude (talk) 03:30, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – The redirect arose as the outcome of a 2007 deletion discussion, the idea being that the (unsourced) content might be merged to the redirect target. However, this never happened and the target article does not reference the concept of an "Internet notation" or other shorthand notation in any way, making the redirect useless or even confusing.  --Lambiam 10:23, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak retarget to Internet slang since that mentions Internet shorthand in the lead sentence. Note there is nothing in List of shorthand systems. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:05, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Remark. A Google search for "Internet shorthand notation" only returns results going back on the pre-2007 Wikipedia article or the current redirect. Apparently, it is not a plausible search term for the topic of the Internet slang article. So the proposed retargeting will not be useful.  --Lambiam 11:35, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 16:44, 26 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:10, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This just doesn't appear to be useful. I could be persuaded to keep it, but as things stand we should just get rid of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CoffeeWithMarkets (talk • contribs)
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.

Dustrubia[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:59, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely misspelling. For reference, Dustrub doesn't exist. Steel1943 (talk) 17:10, 6 March 2018 (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.

Autrefois[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 no consensus. Killiondude (talk) 03:30, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

While the word autrefois probably appears more in the context of double jeopardy than it does anywhere else in English, it's still very strange to have a somewhat common word from a major world language redirecting to a legal concept with no real relation to the word's meaning. If it were a more common word, I'd say softly redirect to Wiktionary, but it isn't, and there doesn't seem to be any logical target here on Wikipedia, so I propose we delete.  — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 00:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: Page's target from '07 to '11 was peremptory plea, a related topic. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 00:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:RFOREIGN — JFG talk 00:14, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or retarget to peremptory plea. There's quite a bit of this usage in the legal context, even on this very encylopedia. The Law French page just points autrefois convict and autrefois acquit to peremptory plea (which they already redirect to) so this would presumably be useful. I recognize that WP:RFOREIGN exists, but this is a case where the foreign word isn't commonly used in English for its French meaning via direct translation, but rather as a specific use — one could even argue that legalese qualifies as "some form of English." There could be an argument for dabification — with links to the two legal terms, Autrefois, Maison Privée, Hang On Little Tomato, Giuseppe Silvestri, La damnation de Faust, and List of compositions by Jules Massenet — but honestly most of those are fairly tenuous and are all meant in the context of the French meaning. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Amorymeltzer: I agree that RFOREIGN does not apply to the redirects for autrefois acquit and autrefois convict, since Law French is self-evidently relevant to the topic of law. However, as far as I know autrefois is not a freestanding term in Law French. Rather, it appears only in those compounds, in the related term autrefois attaint, and maybe in a few other compounds of which I'm unaware; but never on its own. The fundamental problem here isn't so much one of RFOREIGN, as it is that we're redirecting a foreign word to a topic with which it has only an indirect connection (and this is true in the case of either of the two targets). If the common name here were in English—formerly acquitted, let's say—would it make sense for formerly to redirect to either of these articles? — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 23:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think your analogy isn't quite right. The proper analogy would be if formerly acquitted was used in the French legal system, and the only place the word "formerly" showed up in the French language was in that context. That doesn't seem too crazy to me, but then again I expect to be in the minority here. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 13:58, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Based on this context, I believe the redirect of just "autrefois" is misleading. Legal expressions do not use this word on its own, and they are already appropriately redirected. A reader searching for "autrefois" will see the autrefois acquit and autrefois convict, they should not see a plain "autrefois". — JFG talk 15:02, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep roughly per Amorymeltzer. Loanwords often end up with absurdly narrowed meanings compared to their original language (c.f. guanxi vs "relationship", apparatchik vs "operator"); this just seems like another example of that. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 18:37, 17 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 17:00, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Galobtter (pingó mió) 17:09, 6 March 2018 (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.

Babbage patch kids[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:59, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Highly unlikely misspelling due to the notability of its target. Steel1943 (talk) 17:09, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete useless mispelling. Seach results will get someone there. Legacypac (talk) 02:34, 8 March 2018 (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.

White guy[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 15#White guy

Merocino cherry[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:57, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing this as a likely misspelling in the least. Also, Merocino doesn't exist. Steel1943 (talk) 17:00, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - my first thought is maybe a plausible phonetic typo because of the tendency for "c followed by a vowel" to be pronounced as "ch". However, if that were the case there would be stats supporting its usefulness. The API seems to think this page does not exist, so that's not hopeful. The creator was blocked today for "spamming redirects", however this redirect is not recent. Does not appear to be useful. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:47, 7 March 2018 (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.

Aaron Shapiro[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 retarget to Huge (digital agency). Hatnotes are cheap, should the draft get approved, and so is G6 ~ Amory (u • t • c) 14:52, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelling no evidence this is needed potentially notable Advertising exec by the redirect version of the name. Legacypac (talk) 16:24, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I should be more clear. There is a Draft:Aaron Shapiro and this misleading redirect holds up it's potential promotion. Legacypac (talk) 02:36, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A distinguish hatnote can be added to direct folks to the Huge exec if the redirect is retained, or vice versa, depends on how this ends up. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 16:41, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per AngusWOOF. Iff the draft is chosen for promotion, there will need to be a discussion about how to disambiguate these two living businessmen from New York, and an admin or pagemover can handle moving pages to where they need to be at that time. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:46, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Where would that discussion happen? If retargeted, the redirect just sits in the way of a move. Legacypac (talk) 17:43, 9 March 2018 (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.

Monster Reborn[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:56, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is a procedural nomination from WT:RFD, where 69.118.34.204 writes: "Think that redirect should be deleted, but unfortunately, it is protected so that only admins can edit it. My rationale is that the redirect refers to just one Yu-Gi-Oh! card that is not mentioned anywhere in the target article and is not a franchise trademark like the "Blue-Eyes White Dragon," "Dark Magician," and "Exodia." Even though it was used quite a lot in the anime and considered a must-have for anyone playing the card game, people will not likely search for individual cards here, they would do it on a Yu-Gi-Oh! wiki, the franchise's official website, places that sell cards, etc." -- Tavix (talk) 16:19, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. If it's not covered anywhere then it has no business being a redirect. —Xezbeth (talk) 19:11, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete And if there is a good reason for protecting then salt the article.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 18:18, 7 March 2018 (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.

Heinz chicken & Golden sweetcorn Soup[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:54, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of those where I'm sure it could have been speedy deleted, but I wasn't sure which criteria it fit under... Thegreatluigi (talk) 15:16, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete implausably capitalized search term. If someone knows Heinz makes the soup they will type Heinz Legacypac (talk) 16:26, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete due to the unavoidable WP:SURPRISE. Steel1943 (talk) 17:20, 6 March 2018 (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.

Ethiop[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 disambiguate. Killiondude (talk) 03:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

The Oxford English Dictionary defines this archaic word as "A black or dark-skinned person; a black African; (occasionally) an Ethiopian.". So there are two meanings, and picking one of them as the target of a redirect is bad, especially given that it's apparently not the most prominent one. I think these redirects should be either deleted per WP:XY, or turned into soft redirects to wikt:Ethiop, or dabified. Noting also the existence of the, probably irrelevant, dab page Aethiops. Pinging participants in the previous discussion: Thegreatluigi, Amory, Ivanvector, Tavix. – Uanfala (talk) 04:55, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment We've got some other articles which touch on the origin of this term, like Aethiopia and Black people in Ancient Roman history. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 10:17, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment note that both can be considered alternate spellings to their ligatured counterparts, Aethiop and Aethiope (both also redlinks), which may aid in determining what to do with these. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:57, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify Well I obviously think having these around is useful, although I'm not sure what would be best. A dab with wiktionary, the historical links provided by 59.149.124.29, and the current two targets might be the most straightforward and helpful. Incorporating the content at Aethiops and pointing everything to one target would make the most sense to me. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 17:02, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is a reasonable suggestion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:52, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose Aethiops would be the best place for it: it's the original latin, and a current dab to build off. wikt:Ethiop references wikt:Aethiops, so it makes sense. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 13:57, 12 March 2018 (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.

Porn star suicide[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:54, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not appropriate to point this term to a specific event. power~enwiki (π, ν) 03:07, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete current target is inappropriate per nominator, and in the absence of a topic article for Category:Pornographic film actors who committed suicide, we have nowhere in mainspace to point these terms. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 06:15, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not appropriate. Legacypac (talk) 16:27, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Inappropriate on all levels. –Davey2010Talk 17:00, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 03:44, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete if we had a well sourced article regarding suicides of people in the porn industry or a sizeable subsection in a larger article this redirect would make sense. Though as it stands it shouldn’t redirect to a single persons article especially since the category mentioned earlier shows that she not the only one to commit suicide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.68.210.105 (talk) 00:11, 8 March 2018‎ (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.

African Aster[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 15#African Aster

Bussing[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 disambiguate. No comment on busing (or busing (disambiguation). ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:57, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Student transport or Bus. A British term probably shouldn't redirect to a topic that deals with the United States. feminist (talk) 08:56, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for more input, in particular whether or not Busing should be listed here as well.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:02, 6 March 2018 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2018_March_6&oldid=1036305861"