This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 1, 2016.
- 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. --BDD (talk) 16:30, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
I was surprised to find this in article space. I don't think that wikistalking is a concept well known outside of Wikipedia jargon, and indeed it is not mentioned at the target. Its hatnote treatment there is the result of a previous discussion, but that discussion is coming up on 7 years old, and I think our consensus has generally changed about how to deal with this sort of cross-namespace redirect (delete it). Furthermore, the use of the "stalk" language on-wiki was deprecated years ago, and Wikistalking was deleted and salted in 2006. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:40, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, this is pretty trivial, very trivial for mainspace. I created it apparently, in 2009, most of my work back then was lower quality. 2009 was not a good year for a lot of people. B137 (talk) 23:13, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Google search says Wikistalker, a Wikipedia browser with navigation based on semantic (and ontological) relevance is primary topic. wbm1058 (talk) 23:53, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - There is no good target for this in the mainspace. Unless this is converted to a cross namespace redirect, which I wouldn't support, it should be deleted.— Godsy (TALKCONT) 11:26, 5 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.
Second Elizabethan Era
[edit]Red State (2008 film)
[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. -- Tavix (talk) 00:09, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Implausible and misleading redirect. In 2008, Red State was little more than a script with no funding. In no way is it a "2008 film" when it hadn't even filmed a second that year. Also nominating Red State (2009 film). Nohomersryan (talk) 21:19, 1 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 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 "53 port" and "port 1199", keep others. Deryck C. 10:51, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
N Delete all, no significance or inbound links. Port 25565 was previously nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Port 25565 and redirected with results 2 redirect, 2 delete, 1 delete preferred but redirect OK
, so may need to be discussed or reviewed more in-depth. (Port 25565 seems to be related to Minecraft. 80.221.159.67 (talk) 11:54, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawing Port 666, previously a merged article. 80.221.159.67 (talk) 12:06, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Port 25565, with 233 pageviwes a day. Delete 53 port, Port 8333 and Port 1199, as they have virtually zero page views. "Port" is not usually put after the number; the Bitcoin one doesn't seem to be notable enough to attract views; and port 1199 is not mentioned at the target article. nyuszika7h (talk) 12:42, 19 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete 53 port and Port 1199 per Nyuszika. Weak keep 8333, as it's sourced in the article, although I agree with the sentiment that it's not that significant. keep Port 25565 due to the page views. -- Tavix (talk) 14:29, 31 October 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 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. Deryck C. 12:54, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Unlikely misspelling ONR (talk) 19:45, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete that's a novelty. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:43, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Unlikely dab. That said, redirects are cheap. Montanabw(talk) 23:01, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Pie chart? -- Tavix (talk) 23:14, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Unlikely dab. Kaldari (talk) 01:26, 2 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, though we do have an article titled Mathematical Pie. -- Notecardforfree (talk) 00:39, 3 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep considering that there is a hatnote on Pie for the constant, it seems like a plausible typo. Although (math) isn't the standard disambiguator, it is clear what this refers to. Pppery 00:09, 4 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete due to the unusual modifier making this an unlikely synonym --Lenticel (talk) 00:04, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete, but really only because of Pie chart. Misspelling "pi" is completely understandable (cf. Pie Day), and "(math)" is a plausible search term, even if not the way we'd disambiguate a mathematical topic. --BDD (talk) 19:19, 9 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 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. -- Tavix (talk) 00:27, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
This is a problem. It was indeed merged into the target article, but there's no mention of it whatsoever there. I noticed Infoplease as an EL in an article and wanted to find out if it was a Wikipedia mirror, as I suspected. So I can speak firsthand to how this is misleading and harmful. BDD (talk) 19:11, 1 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 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. -- Tavix (talk) 00:25, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is an Anglicized spelling of German “Zett”, which means ⟨z⟩. ⟨ß⟩ is “Eszett”. The proper target would therefore be Z, but since the letter ⟨Z⟩ is not specifically German, it would not make sense to retarget it there, per WP:RFOREIGN. Gorobay (talk) 13:37, 1 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:PD-recycling
[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. --BDD (talk) 16:29, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Unused, misleading, and probably implausible in the context of a file being pd-ineligible FASTILY 07:43, 1 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.
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 November 13#Bhután
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 November 13#Multi-Tool Notepad