Deletion discussions |
---|
|
Articles |
Templates and modules |
Files |
Categories |
Redirects |
Miscellany |
Speedy deletion |
Proposed deletion |
V | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 6 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | 8 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 21 | 21 |
Redirects for discussion (RfD) is the place where potentially problematic redirects are discussed. Items usually stay listed for a week or so, after which they are deleted, kept, or retargeted.
- If you want to replace an unprotected redirect with an article, do not list it here. Turning redirects into articles is wholly encouraged. Be bold!
- If you want to move a page but a redirect is in the way, do not list it here. For non-controversial cases, place a technical request; if a discussion is required, then start a requested move.
- If you think a redirect points to the wrong target article, this is a good place to discuss what should be the proper target.
- Redirects should not be deleted just because they have no incoming links. Please do not use this as the only reason to delete a redirect. However, redirects that do have incoming links are sometimes deleted, so that is not a sufficient condition for keeping. (See § When should we delete a redirect? for more information.)
Please do not change the target of the redirect while it is under discussion. This adds unnecessary complication to the discussion for both potential closers and participants.
Before listing a redirect for discussion
Please be aware of these general policies, which apply here as elsewhere:
- Wikipedia:Redirect – what redirects are, why they exist, and how they are used.
- Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion – which pages can be deleted without discussion; in particular the "General" and "Redirects" sections.
- Wikipedia:Deletion policy – how we delete things by consensus.
- Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – guidelines on discussion format and shorthand.
The guiding principles of RfD
- The purpose of a good redirect is to eliminate the possibility that readers will find themselves staring blankly at "Search results 1–10 out of 378" instead of the article they were looking for. If someone could plausibly enter the redirect's name when searching for the target article, it's a good redirect.
- Redirects are cheap. They take up little storage space and use very little bandwidth. It doesn't really hurt things if there are a few of them scattered around. On the flip side, deleting redirects is also cheap because recording the deletion takes up little storage space and uses very little bandwidth. There is no harm in deleting problematic redirects.
- If a good-faith RfD nomination proposes to delete a redirect and has no discussion after at least 7 days, the default result is delete.
- Redirects nominated in contravention of Wikipedia:Redirect will be speedily kept.
- RfD can also serve as a central discussion forum for debates about which page a redirect should target. In cases where retargeting the redirect could be considered controversial, it is advisable to leave a notice on the talk page of the redirect's current target page or the proposed target page to refer readers to the redirect's nomination to allow input and help form consensus for the redirect's target.
- Requests for deletion of redirects from one page's talk page to another's do not need to be listed here. Anyone can remove the redirect by blanking the page. The G6 criterion for speedy deletion may be appropriate.
- In discussions, always ask yourself whether or not a redirect would be helpful to the reader.
When should we delete a redirect?
The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:
- a redirect may contain non-trivial edit history;
- if a redirect is reasonably old (or is the result of moving a page that has been there for quite some time), then it is possible that its deletion will break incoming links (such links coming from older revisions of Wikipedia pages, from edit summaries, from other Wikimedia projects or from elsewhere on the internet, do not show up in "What links here").
Therefore consider the deletion only of either harmful redirects or of recent ones.
Reasons for deleting
You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met (but note also the exceptions listed below this list):
- The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. For example, if the user searches for "New Articles", and is redirected to a disambiguation page for "Articles", it would take much longer to get to the newly added articles on Wikipedia.
- The redirect might cause confusion. For example, if "Adam B. Smith" was redirected to "Andrew B. Smith", because Andrew was accidentally called Adam in one source, this could cause confusion with the article on Adam Smith, so the redirect should be deleted.
- The redirect is offensive or abusive, such as redirecting "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs" (unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is legitimately discussed in the article), or "Joe Bloggs" to "Loser". (Speedy deletion criterion G10 and G3 may apply.) See also § Neutrality of redirects.
- The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam. (Speedy deletion criterion G11 may apply.)
- The redirect makes no sense, such as redirecting "Apple" to "Orange". (Speedy deletion criterion G1 may apply.)
- It is a cross-namespace redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. The major exception to this rule are the pseudo-namespace shortcut redirects, which technically are in the main article space. Some long-standing cross-namespace redirects are also kept because of their long-standing history and potential usefulness. "MOS:" redirects, for example, are an exception to this rule. (Note also the existence of namespace aliases such as WP:. Speedy deletion criterion R2 may apply if the target namespace is something other than Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help:, or Portal:.)
- If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to an article that does not exist, it can be immediately deleted under speedy deletion criterion G8. You should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first or that it has become broken through vandalism.
- If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects in a language other than English to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created. (Implausible typos or misnomers are candidates for speedy deletion criterion R3, if recently created.)
- If the target article needs to be moved to the redirect title, but the redirect has been edited before and has a history of its own, then the title needs to be freed up to make way for the move. If the move is uncontroversial, tag the redirect for G6 speedy deletion, or alternatively (with the
suppressredirect
user right; available to page movers and admins), perform a round-robin move. If not, take the article to Requested moves. - If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.
Reasons for not deleting
However, avoid deleting such redirects if:
- They have a potentially useful page history, or an edit history that should be kept to comply with the licensing requirements for a merge (see Wikipedia:Merge and delete). On the other hand, if the redirect was created by renaming a page with that name, and the page history just mentions the renaming, and for one of the reasons above you want to delete the page, copy the page history to the Talk page of the article it redirects to. The act of renaming is useful page history, and even more so if there has been discussion on the page name.
- They would aid accidental linking and make the creation of duplicate articles less likely, whether by redirecting a plural to a singular, by redirecting a frequent misspelling to a correct spelling, by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term, by redirecting to a synonym, etc. In other words, redirects with no incoming links are not candidates for deletion on those grounds because they are of benefit to the browsing user. Some extra vigilance by editors will be required to minimize the occurrence of those frequent misspellings in the article texts because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links; consider tagging the redirect with the {{R from misspelling}} template to assist editors in monitoring these misspellings.
- They aid searches on certain terms. For example, users who might see the "Keystone State" mentioned somewhere but do not know what that refers to will be able to find out at the Pennsylvania (target) article.
- Deleting redirects runs the risk of breaking incoming or internal links. For example, redirects resulting from page moves should not normally be deleted without good reason. Links that have existed for a significant length of time, including CamelCase links and old subpage links, should be left alone in case there are any existing links on external pages pointing to them. See also Wikipedia:Link rot § Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites.
- Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways. Evidence of usage can be gauged by using the wikishark or pageviews tool on the redirect to see the number of views it gets.
- The redirect is to a closely related word form, such as a plural form to a singular form.
Neutrality of redirects
Just as article titles using non-neutral language are permitted in some circumstances, so are such redirects. Because redirects are less visible to readers, more latitude is allowed in their names, therefore perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion. In most cases, non-neutral but verifiable redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term. Non-neutral redirects may be tagged with {{R from non-neutral name}}
.
Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:
- Articles that are created using non-neutral titles are routinely moved to a new neutral title, which leaves behind the old non-neutral title as a working redirect (e.g. Climategate → Climatic Research Unit email controversy).
- Articles created as POV forks may be deleted and replaced by a redirect pointing towards the article from which the fork originated (e.g. Barack Obama Muslim rumor → deleted and now redirected to Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories).
- The subject matter of articles may be represented by some sources outside Wikipedia in non-neutral terms. Such terms are generally avoided in Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. For instance the non-neutral expression "Attorneygate" is used to redirect to the neutrally titled Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy. The article in question has never used that title, but the redirect was created to provide an alternative means of reaching it because a number of press reports use the term.
The exceptions to this rule would be redirects that are not established terms and are unlikely to be useful, and therefore may be nominated for deletion, perhaps under deletion reason #3. However, if a redirect represents an established term that is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources, it should be kept even if non-neutral, as it will facilitate searches on such terms. Please keep in mind that RfD is not the place to resolve most editorial disputes.
Closing notes
- Details at: Administrator instructions for RfD.
Nominations should remain open, per policy, about a week before they are closed, unless they meet the general criteria for speedy deletion, the criteria for speedy deletion of a redirect, or are not valid redirect discussion requests (e.g. are actually move requests).
How to list a redirect for discussion
STEP I. | Tag the redirect.
Enter
|
STEP II. | List the entry on RfD.
Click to edit the section of RfD for today's entries.
|
STEP III. | Notify users.
It is generally considered good practice to notify the creator and main contributors to the redirect that you are nominating the redirect. may be placed on the creator/main contributors' user talk page to provide notice of the discussion. Please replace RedirectName with the name of the redirect and use an edit summary such as: Notice of redirect discussion at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]]
Notices about the RfD discussion may also be left on relevant talk pages. |
- Please consider using What links here to locate other redirects that may be related to the one you are nominating. After going to the redirect target page and selecting "What links here" in the toolbox on the left side of your computer screen, select both "Hide transclusions" and "Hide links" filters to display the redirects to the redirect target page.
Current list
August 31
La Casa de las siete tumbas
- La Casa de las siete tumbas → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Desafío al coraje → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Los Líos de Estefanía → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- La magia de Los Parchís → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Prima Rock → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Los Pasajeros del jardín → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- La Invitación → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- La Gran aventura de Los Parchís → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Esto es vida → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Fiebre amarilla → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- La Invitacion → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Los Pasajeros del jardin → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Desafio al coraje → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- La Gran aventura de Los Parchis → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Los Lios de Estefania → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- La Magia de Los Parchis → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- La Magia de Los Parchí → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- La casa de las siete tumbas → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Los pasajeros del jardín → List of Argentine films of 1982 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Various redirects from individual film titles to a generic list of their country's films. Wikipedia does not have an established practice of doing this for films -- if a film doesn't have an article, then its name should usually be left either unlinked or redlinked so that people know that an article doesn't exist, and can create one if they're so inclined. A "film title to filmmaker" redirect might be useful sometimes, but there's very little need for a "film title to List-of-Country-films-of -YYYY" redirect, and we don't have an established practice of doing this for any other country.
Exclusively in the case of Argentina, however, there appear to have been a metric shit-tonne of these "film title to YYYY-list" redirects created, despite various problems. Sometimes the title is not reflected in the list at all. Sometimes the title is reflected in the list, but the list provides no additional information about the film except a repetition of its title. Sometimes the list wikilinks the same title, so that it's just functioning as a recursive redirect right back to the same list you're already on. Sometimes the list wikilinks a different spelling of the same title (e.g. differently accented, differently capitalized, English instead of Spanish title, etc.) so that its entry remains a red link even while a redirect for that same film has already led you to the list.
I've even already caught cases where a redirect led to the list, while the list led out to a proper article about the same film, which thus should have been the real redirect target; and cases where the redirect was leading to the wrong year's list; and even a case where a redirect that led to the wrong year's list and a proper article about the same film were both sitting right next to each other in the category.
Furthermore, WikiProject Film has recently deprecated its longstanding practice of deeming the base "National films" categories as "all-inclusive" categories that had to directly include all films from that country even if they had already been extensively subcategorized for genre or other characteristics -- but the sheer number of these that are sitting in Category:Argentine films is deeply impeding the process of getting that category sorted out, because the lists rarely if ever actually provide any information from which I can glean what genre subcategories to move the redirects to. So, if at all possible, I'd like permission to just zap them all on sight instead of having to keep coming to RFD with batch after batch of these -- but there are far too many of them to just batch all of them here in one shot. Bearcat (talk) 21:05, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
I'd like permission to just zap them all on sight instead of having to keep coming to RFD
. If it were solely up to me, then this would be a no. You list multiple different types of redirect and based on what you say above the answer to all of them isn't necessarily deletion. For example, some should be retargetted to the article that has the slightly different spelling, others should be retargetted to the director, etc. Yes, some of them should be deleted but what you are proposing is too broad, especially as you haven't precisely defined the scope of what you want to delete. You are in effect proposing a temporary speedy deletion criterion, so it should meet all the requirements listed at WP:NEWCSD, but the above fails points 1 and 2. Thryduulf (talk) 11:04, 24 August 2022 (UTC)- The definition of "zap" would include retargeting the redirect to somewhere other than the list if a viable redirect target can be identified, and is not (and was never intended to be) just "delete all regardless of context". But the number one most important thing here is that no matter what happens, every single one of the redirects has to be cleared out of Category:Argentine films, because that category has to be emptied out by diffusing all of its current contents into the subcategories, and it can't become a multi-day job because each individual redirect necessitates half an hour of individual investigation — I have to get all of the redirects out of the category one way or another, and I have to be able to clean out the entire category in the quickest wham-bam-next manner possible without investing more than 20 to 30 minutes total on the entire job. So if you've got some other idea that balances the urgent need to empty out the category against the need to not have to invest hours and hours into creating dozens upon dozens of batches of seven-day discussions about each individual set, I'm all ears. Bearcat (talk) 15:14, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Generally retargeting a redirect to somewhere which discusses it doesn't require discussion unless someone disagrees. But I agree that RfD isn't generally well set up for large batches of similar redirects, as we are seeing with the recent nominations of decades, centuries etc. A7V2 (talk) 06:31, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- The definition of "zap" would include retargeting the redirect to somewhere other than the list if a viable redirect target can be identified, and is not (and was never intended to be) just "delete all regardless of context". But the number one most important thing here is that no matter what happens, every single one of the redirects has to be cleared out of Category:Argentine films, because that category has to be emptied out by diffusing all of its current contents into the subcategories, and it can't become a multi-day job because each individual redirect necessitates half an hour of individual investigation — I have to get all of the redirects out of the category one way or another, and I have to be able to clean out the entire category in the quickest wham-bam-next manner possible without investing more than 20 to 30 minutes total on the entire job. So if you've got some other idea that balances the urgent need to empty out the category against the need to not have to invest hours and hours into creating dozens upon dozens of batches of seven-day discussions about each individual set, I'm all ears. Bearcat (talk) 15:14, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Update: Note that I'm removing one redirect, Los Fierecillos indomables, from this batch as a viable alternative redirect target was located. Bearcat (talk) 13:02, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 02:46, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Denvilles halt & The Battle of Havant
- Denvilles halt & The Battle of Havant → Warblington railway station (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
It seems like while bots change the targets through double redirect fixing it should probably target Havant New railway station but neither its current target or the possible retarget above cover both Denvilles Halt (which was the name of Warblington railway station) and the Battle of Havant (which is covered at Havant New railway station). This seems like a WP:XY so it should probably be deleted. TartarTorte 00:55, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
August 30
Christine (upcoming film)
- Christine (upcoming film) → Christine (novel) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
There is no information in the target about a film, sans the film created the same years as the book in 1983. (Note: Draft:Christine (upcoming film) exists.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:41, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - I'm not super invested in it, but if a mention isn't added to the target (surprised there isn't a section for the original film adaptation beyond the one line in the lead), it could be retargeted to Christine (1983 film)#Remake, where it is mentioned. -2pou (talk) 01:04, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
More "upcoming" no longer "upcoming"
- Roar (upcoming TV series) → Roar (2022 TV series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Jersey (upcoming film) → Jersey (2022 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Atari VCS (upcoming console) → Atari VCS (2021 console) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Don (upcoming film) → Don (2022 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Suspicion (upcoming TV series) → Suspicion (2022 TV series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- X (upcoming film) → X (2022 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- The Fairly OddParents (upcoming TV series) → The Fairly OddParents: Fairly Odder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Invasion (upcoming TV series) → Invasion (2021 TV series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Moonfall (upcoming film) → Moonfall (film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Red Notice (upcoming film) → Red Notice (film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Love Life (upcoming TV series) → Love Life (American TV series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Scenes from a Marriage (upcoming miniseries) → Scenes from a Marriage (American miniseries) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Father of the Bride (upcoming film) → Father of the Bride (2022 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Surface (upcoming TV series) → Surface (2022 TV series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Lockdown (upcoming film) → Locked Down (film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Firefly Lane (upcoming TV series) → Firefly Lane (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Vivo (upcoming film) → Vivo (film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- The Last Duel (upcoming film) → The Last Duel (2021 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Bullet Train (upcoming film) → Bullet Train (film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Macbeth (upcoming film) → The Tragedy of Macbeth (2021 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Cobra (upcoming film) → Cobra (2022 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Skulls (upcoming film) → Prey (2022 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- The Rehearsal (upcoming TV series) → The Rehearsal (TV series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- A League of Their Own (upcoming TV series) → A League of Their Own (2022 TV series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 10#Target subjects no longer "upcoming". Steel1943 (talk) 23:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment If it's no longer "upcoming", then why can't the redirect be renamed (if possible)?
- Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 23:30, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Magnatyrannus: Create the new redirect if you so feel inclined. In cases like these, there's no reason to move their edit histories elsewhere. Steel1943 (talk) 23:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all - Skulls is the only moderately interesting one to maintain for it's secretive plans as a big marketing reveal, but "upcoming" is still misleading and Skulls (2022 film) exists, so no need. -2pou (talk) 01:13, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Anjan district
- Anjan district → Anjaw district (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
A long-standing redirect, but I believe an error. The comment in the source leads to a dead link, but see [1] Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:37, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Template:Apocalypse
- Template:Apocalypse → Template:Apocalypse (X-Men) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Last time I brought this up the template was restored from a redirect, fine, but the problem of "Apocalypse (character)" not being the main topic of Apocalypse remains. I have moved the comic characters template to Template:Apocalypse (X-Men), and changed it on the articles where it has been placed. ★Trekker (talk) 12:50, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Did you mean to nominate the talk page redirect or the actual template? While Template:Apocalypse redirects to Template:Apocalypse (X-Men), the talk page should either redirect to the talk page of the target template (as it currently does) or be a talk page for the redirect (which it will become when the {{old rfd}} template is added to it if this discussion closes as something other than delete). Thryduulf (talk) 13:16, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- @StarTrekker: If you think that a certain template should be moved to a new name, you should use the WP:Requested moves process, not RfD. RfD is to discuss whether or not a certain redirect page should exist, and if yes, where to target. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 10:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- I think the nominator made some mistake tagging the pages, but
if the nominator actually wants to discuss about the "Template talk" page, I'd say keep as it is consistent with the main template's target.Per clarification below. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 10:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)- @Thryduulf and CX Zoom: The redirect, I want the redirect gone. I did not tag anything manualy, so not sure how something went wrong with the talk pages.★Trekker (talk) 10:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- @StarTrekker which redirect do you want to delete - Template:Apocalypse or Template talk:Apocalypse? Thryduulf (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Both, the talk page is just a leftover from the move. The comics character is not the main topic of Apocalypse.★Trekker (talk) 11:13, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- @StarTrekker which redirect do you want to delete - Template:Apocalypse or Template talk:Apocalypse? Thryduulf (talk) 11:05, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Thryduulf and CX Zoom: The redirect, I want the redirect gone. I did not tag anything manualy, so not sure how something went wrong with the talk pages.★Trekker (talk) 10:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- I think the nominator made some mistake tagging the pages, but
- Comment: Apocalypse (disambiguation) can mean a lot of things and not just a comic character. On mainspace, the Apocalypse means something different. With no clear primary topic, I thought of deleting it as per nomination, but it would then start showing redlinks when viewing old revisions of an article with {{Apocalypse}} transcluded on it. I'm not sure if deletion is worth the hassle here. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 13:07, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting because subject of discussion was not clear until a day in and there have been no arguments made for keeping or deleting other than from nominator but there has been discussion making it inappropriate for a soft delete.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TartarTorte 19:10, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: Per nom. There are no transclusions of {{Apocalypse}}, so don't worry about that. The template itself should probably be deleted with only three pages using it out of all the Navbox entries...but that is outside the scope of this discussion. Delete the redirect. - 2pou (talk) 01:19, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
CORPSE
- CORPSE → Corpse Husband (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I don't see an indication in the target article, nor at [2], that the subject's name is frequently stylized as "CORPSE". Even if it were, Corpse would be a more natural target. But since that is a common noun with no affinity to an all-caps rendering, I think better to delete. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 01:48, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Corpse (disambiguation) as a {{R from incorrect capitalization}} -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:42, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retargetto Corpse (disambiguation) as per IP64. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 05:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. In addition, the disambiguation page Corpse (disambiguation) contains no entries that use the acronym "CORPSE", so the nominated redirect targeting the disambiguation page could be perceived as misleading. Steel1943 (talk) 20:45, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- If not delete, weak retarget to Corpse as the proper place to target it as a {{R from incorrect capitalization}}. Steel1943 (talk) 16:41, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Corpse (disambiguation), a harmless solution. BD2412 T 15:21, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 03:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Corpse (disambiguation). Simple, WP:CHEAP. Ovinus (talk) 07:43, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Corpse Husband does use this stylization. It's the capitalization/spelling of his official Spotify account as well as his alt Twitter account. Looking at Corpse (disambiguation), I don't see any entries that would be intentionally stylized this way, so I doubt it would be a useful redirect. A hatnote at Corpse Husband would be sufficient to catch edge cases. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 12:51, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep and resolve ambiguity with a hatnote at Corpse Husband. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:55, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Partido Nacionalista ng Pilipinas
- Partido Nacionalista ng Pilipinas → Nacionalista Party (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This redirects to "Nacionalista Party" (Philippines), presumably for translation purposes, but there's a separate "Partido Nacionalista ng Pilipinas" that apparently exists until this day. Howard the Duck (talk) 16:59, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- This translates to "Nationalist Party of the Philippines", and at least so far I've not found any evidence that more than one party has ever used "Partido Nacionalista" in its name. There are multiple other current and former nationalist parties listed at List of Political Parties in the Philippines, but none have "Nacionalista" in the name (most of them use "National" or "Nationalist", English being an official language of the country). Unless there is such evidence then this is definitely pointing at the right target. Thryduulf (talk) 17:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- In 1987 Philippine Senate election, someone ran under this label; the larger Nacionalista Party either had its members run under Lakas ng Bayan or Grand Alliance for Democracy. In the 1995 Philippine House of Representatives elections, there are separate entries for "Nacionalista Party" (it alone get 153,088 votes and a seat, while others ran with coalitions from other parties) and "Partido Nacionalista ng Pilipinas", which got 123 votes and 0 seats.
- Philippine political parties can be confusing with party names in English, Tagalog, Spanish, other local languages or Spanglish. Howard the Duck (talk) 17:58, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- In the 2010 Philippine general election, the Commission on Elections released a list of then active parties. A quick search using "Nacionalista" gets you three results, the original and larger Nacionalista Party, "Independent Nacionalista and Allies", and "Partido Nacionalista ng Pilipinas". AFAIK Partido Nacionalista ng Pilipinas did not run in national races. Howard the Duck (talk) 18:03, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Cowboys
- Cowboys → Cowboy (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Cowboys should redirect to Cowboy per WP:PLURALPT. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: There's enough specific matches on that page for Cowboys that I feel this part of WP:PLURALPT applies
the intentional use of a plural form by a reader or editor can be evidence that a separate primary topic exists at the plural form
. TartarTorte 17:10, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
The midterm effect
- The midterm effect → Six-year itch (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Midterm effect → Six-year itch (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Google Scholar search results for "midterm effect" "election"
(without election the results are primarily medical) return papers about myriad different impacts of midterm elections, not just the six-year itch in the US. While the trend for US incumbents to fair worse during midterms is noted in this literature, it's identified with all midterm elections, not just the 6th-year midterm. Another consistent usage of this phrase is in papers about macroeconomic trends during election years, a completely separate phenomenon ([3] [4]). Articles on these various effects could likely be written, but until such time deletion seems more appropriate than this redirect to a narrow interpretation of the phrase. signed, Rosguill talk 15:14, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- My first impression when reading the nomination is that this is where we should have a broad concept article or dab giving an overview of the various midterm effects in US politics (everything else I'm finding is effects that happen to occur around the midterm of some thing, rather than a specific thing; and if there is any usage of the term in the politics of other countries it's completely drowned out by the USA). Thryduulf (talk) 16:28, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep (as creator) - Regardless of which term is more common, the six-year itch is really just a specific form of the "midterm effect". While the article's lead section is primarily about losses in a president's second midterm, it later discusses the more general trend of losing midterms in the second section ("Comparison with other midterms") and points out that the effect is almost just as pronounced in a president's first midterm as their second. The term "midterm effect" has also been used by a number of notable outlets, including:
- Sabato's Crystal Ball - "could this be another extraordinary circumstance that confounds the usual midterm effect" [5]
- Bowdoin College - "In the United States, midterms go poorly for the party controlling the White House. In the volatile and ever-changing world of politics, this tendency has been described as an “inevitability rivaling death and taxes.” This phenomenon is known as “the midterm effect” or “midterm decline”." [6]
- National Conference of State Legislatures - "Seems likely, given the midterm effect. This will be the 30th midterm since 1902, and in 27 of the 29 previous ones the president’s party suffered an average loss of 412 state legislative seats." [7]
- Carnegie Mellon - "the paper discusses the five most prominent explanations for the midterm effect, an empirical regularity of US Congressional elections in which the president’s party tends to perform poorly" [8]
- The term is well defined enough in political discussion that if a person searches for "midterm effect", they're almost certainly going to be looking for this article, which makes it useful as a redirect.
- --Posted by Pikamander2 (Talk) at 17:13, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- The midterm effect is a real topic but I don't think Six-year itch is a good target. Either the mid-term effect should become a full fledged article or the Six-year itch should become a subtopic under midterm effect article as all 6th years are mid-terms, but all mid-terms are not 6th years. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 10:09, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to United States midterm election. The current target is too narrow. (I thought about suggesting a retarget to Midterm election, but some online searching suggests the term midterm effect is mainly used for US elections.) —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 10:58, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:43, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:PETTIFOG
- Wikipedia:PETTIFOG → Wikipedia:Wikilawyering (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Wikipedia:PETTIFOGG → Wikipedia:Wikilawyering (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Wikipedia:PETTIFOGGING → Wikipedia:Wikilawyering (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Term no longer mentioned as a "related term" in target page. FMecha (to talk|to see log) 16:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- WP:PETTIFOG is listed as a shortcut on the target page. It has many incoming links. WP:PETTIFOGGING also has several incoming links. --Lambiam 19:29, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Salazar Colleges of Science And Institute of technology
- Salazar Colleges of Science And Institute of technology → Salazar Colleges of Science and Institute of Technology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete this redirect. It really was a typo to begin with and clearly failed Wikipedia:Article titles. Santiago Claudio (talk) 12:54, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, the redir has incoming links. Cabayi (talk) 15:14, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- There are now no substantive incoming links. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:42, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
White noise (slang)
- White noise (slang) → White noise (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
There doesn’t seem to be any meaningful use of the subtopic “slang” in the redirected article; I don’t see this as a plausible redirect. If nothing else it’s confusing and uninformative to the average reader. Dronebogus (talk) 11:54, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: There was an AfD for this that was closed as merge but then in the merging process was made into a redirect instead. Either the merge should be completed as a merge or this should be deleted. TartarTorte 12:55, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. It is a
{{r from merge}}
(link to AfD), and therefore should be kept for history attribution purposes. The current article contains a sentence taken from the pre-redirect version (the text of ref #6 which includes the quote "The political rhetoric on Social Security is white noise.")
- I would note that the AfD nominator (Zxcvbnm) proceeded to turn the page into a redirect with an "unnecessary disambiguation" tag and an edit summary that no merge was required six minutes after the AfD closure. I am aware that AfD closes as "merge" are hard to implement if the closer did not give clear instructions, but still, I think it was a bit high-handed. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 15:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Baja, California
- Baja, California → Baja California peninsula (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
There is an article Baja California about the administrative entity and Baja California peninsula about the geographic feature. "Baja, California" should probably either redirect to the former instead of the latter, or possibly be deleted as an implausible typo. Note that Special:WhatLinksHere/Baja,_California has a dozen or so entries, which would need to be inspected manually (from a cursory glance most of it should go to the peninsula).
(There might also be an argument to reorganize the state/peninsula articles with a DAB page, but I am not touching this.) TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 11:43, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget back to Baja California and tag as {{R from incorrect punctuation}}. This redirect was originally created because of editors incorrectly changing links for the Mexican state because they thought they refer to a town in the U.S. state of California. Indeed, this seems like an important redirect to ensure these links still bring users to the correct article. I agree all current incoming links should be manually reviewed and made to directly target the appropriate page. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:01, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete since there's no place called Baja in California, and any other interpretation is ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Saudi Arabia and the apartheid analogy
- Saudi Arabia and the apartheid analogy → Human rights in Saudi Arabia#Allegations of apartheid (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This redirect targeted a contrived subsection of Human rights in Saudi Arabia that was largely based on opinion pieces. I have removed the unqualified opinion pieces and folded the remaining quote, which was specific to 'religious apartheid', back into the main introduction on religious freedom. There is no remaining obvious target with regards to Saudi Arabia, and even if people wanted to search for Saudi Arabia and the theme of 'apartheid', this page would be an unnatural and implausible title for a redirect. People would more naturally type something like 'Saudi Arabia and apartheid' or 'Saudi Arabia and apartheid allegations' not the above. Iskandar323 (talk) 10:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: As there is no reasonable target, I think deletion make sense. Having said that, I do find the redirect formulation to be fine as it's using the same format as the article Israel and the apartheid analogy. TartarTorte 15:17, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
GWR 1501 Class
- GWR 1501 Class → Daniel Gooch standard gauge locomotives (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Retarget to GWR 645 Class. GWR locomotive numbers were a long way from reaching no. 1501 during Gooch's term of office as Locomotive Engineer (1837-64), they had just about reached no. 350 by the time that Gooch resigned. The number 1501 was first used in 1878 when William Dean was in office (1877-1902), and no. 1501 was only used twice - one was a 645 Class loco, the other was of the GWR 1500 Class. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 09:58, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Primal Instinct
- Primal Instinct → List of Yu-Gi-Oh! GX episodes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This was formerly an article for the episode of the tv series before being BLARed by TTN as a result of a discussion that I could find (not that I looked very hard) in 2008. I have two issues with this redirect. The first is that this is a highly generic term (and right now primal instinct doesn't exist) so it is a surprising place to end up for searchers (I note many redirects to the same list article are possibly in the same boat). But even apart from that I'm not at all convinced this is the primary topic amongst the numerous non-notable proper nouns which use this name with capitals which can be found in a wikipedia or google search, such as on Simon's Cat, By Way of the Drum, Angerfist and List of programs broadcast by Investigation Discovery. So I'm not really sure what to do with this but I don't think the current status quo is suitable. A7V2 (talk) 07:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate with the other uses mentioned. This redirect is the top search result in Wikipedia but the next five are not useful. Peter James (talk) 14:53, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Dabify per nom's findings. --Lenticel (talk) 02:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Move the redirect edit history to Primal Instinct (Yu-Gi-Oh), to keep having an episode redirect around -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 22:37, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 11:40, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - is a dab of just mentions really what we want? I should point out my list above is not necessarily exhaustive, I think there were other mentions around the place as a proper noun. There is apparently also a band which had an article that was delete (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Primal instinct). I find it surprising given there are usages of the term (in the actual instinct sense) both on wikipedia and wikitionary that there is no wikitionary entry for it. If disambiguation is the way to go I think Instinct and Instinct (disambiguation) should also be included, even if only as see also. A7V2 (talk) 08:12, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not particular about a disambiguation page, vs having the search results doing the job. Similar DABs like Primal Fear and Basic Instinct (disambiguation) also do not have a corresponding lowercased article, but at least they have entries with articles, unlike only mentions in the case of Primal Instinct. However if the outcome is to dabify, I won't oppose it. Jay 💬 11:46, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to seek a firmer consensus on disambiguating and also for closing the August 21 log page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:47, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
August 29
Athletics at the 2024 Summer Olympics
- Athletics at the 2024 Summer Olympics → 2024 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Too early for this and a draft already exists. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 23:28, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete to allow the draft to be moved here in 2024. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:21, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Flatiron Partners
- Flatiron Partners → Fred Wilson (financier) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
flatiton co-founded by wilson & Jerry Colonna (financier) Enigmamsg 18:22, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep or retarget to Jerry Colonna (financier). Might as well redirect it to one of the founders, and I"m not sure why it matters which. Ovinus (talk) 18:28, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete to promote article creation. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:49, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 21:01, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per Ovinus: it's a coin-toss. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:27, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:41, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Debut issue
- Debut issue → First appearance (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I'm not sure that the "first issue (of an American comic book) to feature a fictional character" is what most people mean by "debut issue": I would have thought it would be the first issue of a thing (comic book, periodical, newspaper...). This current redirect is therefore confusing and should be deleted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. If there were an article for first issue of a publication, we could disambiguate "debut issue", but there's no such article. In the absence of any other plausible redirect target, better to redirect to the only meaning of "debut issue" that has an article than to have nothing at all. —Lowellian (reply) 13:15, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:58, 14 August 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:11, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Confusing and certainly misleading. No need for keeping this around if it's not helping anyone. CycloneYoris talk! 23:07, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Periodical literature#First which is an anchor at Periodical literature#Volumes and issues which is the same target as redirects First issue and Premiere issue. Jay 💬 04:16, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Due to the extremely late retargeting suggestion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:32, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Hario V60
- Hario V60 → Brewed coffee (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, seems like a minute detail that is unlikely to be DUE. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 15:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- The Hario V60 is one of the most important brewers in pour-over coffee. This article is a bit of mess right now, I will try to improve it and at least add a mention of it, though it might be notable enough for it's own article as well.--Cerebral726 (talk) 15:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- I have started a section on methods in brewed coffee. It is also possible that that section should be merged into Coffee preparation#Brewing and the Hario V60 should redirect to that section.--Cerebral726 (talk) 15:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - the only mention in Brewed coffee#Methods is just a name drop and a bluelink. Nothing actually about this. If it is notable then it will benefit from a redlink to encourage article creation. A7V2 (talk) 06:40, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - the V60 is important in pour-over coffee, and is the most-used brewer in the World Brewers Cup. Instead of deleting the redirect, the article it redirects to should be updated with more information on the V60. JackDunnCodes (talk) 22:28, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- I have just added a section on the V60, but I am new to editing Wikipedia so someone more experienced may want to make some improvements. JackDunnCodes (talk) 23:17, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Additional info about the device was added.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:31, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Refine to Brewed coffee#Hario V60: The V60 is a pretty notable piece of coffee technology. Absent of having its own article like the Chemex or AeroPress, a refinement to a mention at Brewed coffee seems appropriate. TartarTorte 18:44, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:DENIALS
- Wikipedia:DENIALS → Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Denial (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Recently created redirect, that points to a single sentence of WP:PUBLICFIGURE out of context. Seems to have been created as part of an ongoing dispute at Wikipedia talk:Mandy Rice-Davies applies. Sideswipe9th (talk) 22:54, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Wikipedia doesn’t currently have a dedicated policy on denials, just a one-sentence statement at WP:BLP that already includes an anchor for easy linking. And this redirect makes the linking even easier, nothing wrong with that AFAIK. I say keep regardless of whether this redirect is used at Wikipedia talk:Mandy Rice-Davies applies or not. Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:03, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- Note: Anythingyouwant was the creator of this redirect. Sideswipe9th (talk) 23:26, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- Yup, I did, thanks for mentioning. And User: Sideswipe9th is among those who have deleted use of this redirect. I did not, however, create the anchor used by this redirect, and the anchor seems just as legitimate as the redirect. Anythingyouwant (talk) 23:33, 13 August 2022(UTC)
- Note: Anythingyouwant was the creator of this redirect. Sideswipe9th (talk) 23:26, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- Don't care/no opinion, however.... FWIW, the anchor was created here [9] by user:Herostratus in June 2021, with edit summary add in-section anchor for link from WP:MANDY, an essay which refutes this. Of course, that essay has undergone extensive recent revision but FWIW, that's the origins of the anchor. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 00:00, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete This just appears to be one in a series of attempts to game policies, article content, and essays that our creator doesn't like. SPECIFICO talk 20:02, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Making Wikipedia policy easier to access is not gamesmanship in the least. Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Please see wp:MANDY. I see nobody else taking up your cause. SPECIFICO talk 17:56, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don’t know what cause you’re referring to. Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Please see wp:MANDY. I see nobody else taking up your cause. SPECIFICO talk 17:56, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Making Wikipedia policy easier to access is not gamesmanship in the least. Anythingyouwant (talk) 20:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - let's not decontextualize policy in order to WIN disputes. Newimpartial (talk) 20:33, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to #Public figures - people are using it, and the fact that it was created or used during a dispute is not a reason to delete the redirect. That said, it's far more useful to read the whole subsection than just the isolated final sentence. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 20:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Note that the whole subsection already has at least three redirects to it: WP:PUBLICFIGURE, WP:WELLKNOWN, and WP:BLPPUBLIC. Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- It can have more! I don't think DENIALS needs to be a displayed shortcut. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 21:06, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- So readers can slog through seven sentences before they see anything about denials? Anyway, AFAIK, no one is suggesting that DENIALS should be a displayed shortcut, it can be an available redirect without being displayed as such at WP:BLP. It seems silly to have an anchor and then force people to type a long tedious name to access it. Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- I wouldn't describe a paragraph and two examples as a slog. There's vital context in the sub-section heading and early language that is missed by redirecting to the single, final sentence. This distinguishes this case from WP:MDYCOMMA, given as an example below. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't agree that MDYCOMMA is not a good example; it redirects to the middle of a section rather than the start of a section, skipping over information in the same section about how to avoid commas. In any event, there are tons and tons and tons of other examples. WP:3RRBLP redirects to WP:Edit_warring#EX7. WP:TPA redirects to WP:Blocking policy#TPA. MOS:CLEAR redirects to Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Clarity. MOS:FMC redirects to Wikipedia:Manual of Style#FMC. WP:NORPS redirects to WP:No original research#NORPS. Etc, etc,etc. Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:02, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- I wouldn't describe a paragraph and two examples as a slog. There's vital context in the sub-section heading and early language that is missed by redirecting to the single, final sentence. This distinguishes this case from WP:MDYCOMMA, given as an example below. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- So readers can slog through seven sentences before they see anything about denials? Anyway, AFAIK, no one is suggesting that DENIALS should be a displayed shortcut, it can be an available redirect without being displayed as such at WP:BLP. It seems silly to have an anchor and then force people to type a long tedious name to access it. Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- It can have more! I don't think DENIALS needs to be a displayed shortcut. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 21:06, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Note that the whole subsection already has at least three redirects to it: WP:PUBLICFIGURE, WP:WELLKNOWN, and WP:BLPPUBLIC. Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: No, we shouldn't have an unmarked redirect to a single sentence made by someone in a fit of pique. Is that really even a question? Loki (talk) 04:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- You guys are too much. I’ll give you credit for cohesiveness. Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:33, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. It is a useful redirect to a relevant part of a major policy (BLP). The history of a mere redirect is not relevant, and it's no more decontextualized than numerous other "WP:" links to pieces of policy. That proponents of the WP:MANDY essay seemingly disagree with this rule is also not relevant. Crossroads -talk- 20:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- 'Keep This is an easy to remember shorthand for an important policy statement. People who want more context can easily scroll up. But the sentence speaks for itself.--agr (talk) 14:58, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. In practice this is an effort to promote a single sentence (pulled out of context) to the level of an independent policy in its own right; it's easy to see that if this redirect is used people will cite it as a policy in its own right. That sort of promotion should have discussion and a clear consensus first, given that this aspect of policy is clearly controversial and has ongoing disputes about how it ought to be applied. There's no indication that this sentence has ever had the level of discussion or consensus-building that would be necessary to emphasize it in this way, especially since the discussions that do exist suggest that it may not have a clear consensus as to its meaning. --Aquillion (talk) 17:47, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Every Wikipedia policy that I know of has redirects to specific pieces of it, without elevating each of those pieces to an independent policy in its own right. Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:07, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- I am not aware, off the top of my head, of any policies that have redirects to specific single-sentences, only to complete sections. If you want to give that sentence the significance of a full section, demonstrate a consensus to do so on the talk page. I don't think, though, that such a consensus is likely to exist. --Aquillion (talk) 22:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- It's common and mundane in Wikipedia guidelines. See, for example, WP:MDYCOMMA which is a quick and painless way to get to the anchor at WP:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#MDYCOMMA. Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- I am not aware, off the top of my head, of any policies that have redirects to specific single-sentences, only to complete sections. If you want to give that sentence the significance of a full section, demonstrate a consensus to do so on the talk page. I don't think, though, that such a consensus is likely to exist. --Aquillion (talk) 22:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Every Wikipedia policy that I know of has redirects to specific pieces of it, without elevating each of those pieces to an independent policy in its own right. Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:07, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep An absolutely necessary sentence/section in BLP to make sure WP stays compliant with NPOV in regards to BLP. There are some that support the WP:MANDY essay (which is to say that simple/obvious denials can be omitted) but that is definitely still in dispute there. --Masem (t) 01:10, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- To clarify, this discussion is about a redirect to a specific sentence in the BLP policy, and not the policy itself. No-one here has disputed it as part of the policy I believe. This discussion is about whether or not a shortcut to a specific sentence, out of context from the remainder of the section, is proper. Sideswipe9th (talk) 01:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- I think everyone realizes that, but if someone doesn't, then thanks for your clarification. Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:26, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Masem's comment was sufficiently vague that it can be read as though he's !voting on keeping the sentence in the policy, instead of !voting on keeping the redirect to the sentence. Sideswipe9th (talk) 01:27, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Seems clear User:Masem supports keeping the redirect because it redirects to an "absolutely necessary" sentence, rather than an unimportant sentence. Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:37, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Yes. First, there is zero harm for redirect in terms of WP's performance, so we should only get rid of redirects when they are not useful. WP:DENIALS (given that DENIAL is take by a humor page) is absolutely useful to point to policy-level advice about the inclusion of denials from BLP. While we do not have to show that shortcut (I've been there with the number of shortcuts that point to WP:NOT but not advertised there) having it available as a clearly understand pointer to policy level advice is useful. Masem (t) 02:05, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Seems clear User:Masem supports keeping the redirect because it redirects to an "absolutely necessary" sentence, rather than an unimportant sentence. Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:37, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Masem's comment was sufficiently vague that it can be read as though he's !voting on keeping the sentence in the policy, instead of !voting on keeping the redirect to the sentence. Sideswipe9th (talk) 01:27, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- I think everyone realizes that, but if someone doesn't, then thanks for your clarification. Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:26, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- To clarify, this discussion is about a redirect to a specific sentence in the BLP policy, and not the policy itself. No-one here has disputed it as part of the policy I believe. This discussion is about whether or not a shortcut to a specific sentence, out of context from the remainder of the section, is proper. Sideswipe9th (talk) 01:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:23, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. The Delete arguments at the above link are pretty appalling. The link points to a section in a rule, which is very common (in this case it's not a section actually, but a sentence in a section, which same difference pretty much IMO). The sentence reads "If the subject has denied such allegations, their denial(s) should also be reported..." This is in WP:BLP.
- A lot of people don't like that. They don't want have to report denials. They want to be able to say "Mr Unlikable was accused of mopery" periodt rather than "Mr Unlikable was accused of mopery, which he vigorously denied". Well sucks to be those people because WP:BLP is a core policy. And because of course you're going to everything reasonably possible to give our victim a fair shake. That is the spirit of BLP.
- But, people are allowed their opinion, we are not rule-bound here, and advocating for rule nullification is allowed (altho WP:LOCALCONSENSUS is often worth considering too, particularly when you're talking about core policies).
- If people want to excise that sentence from BLP, fine, they can run an RfC and try, and good luck with that. But while it remains part of BLP it needs to be pointed out, and have WP:DENIALS in place in order to do that. Especially since the essay Wikipedia:Mandy Rice-Davies applies exists, which basically says "nullify that sentence". I don't agree, but it's legit to have that essay. What's not legit would be to delete WP:DENIALS without deleting WP:MANDY and WP:MRDA which point to that essay. That truly would be saying "We like WP:MANDY, and while a contrary rule exists we want to at least make it harder for editors to point to it". That would be taking sides.
- Which, for large important issues like this, this page is not for. Rather an RfC -- a WP:CENT RfC I'd think since we're talking about a core policy here -- discussing whether "If the subject has denied such allegations, their denial(s) should also be reported..." should remain in BLP, and if so if WP:DENIALS should also exist, if Wikipedia:Mandy Rice-Davies applies should continue to exist and if so if WP:MANDY should also. That's bigger than this page. Herostratus (talk) 08:02, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:29, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - Is it actually wikipedia policy? Yes. Is this an easier way to access it, in a manner that conveys what the policy is in short form? Yes. The deletion arguments sound like they have an axe to grind, like they disagree with the policy, or at the very least that they disagree with how the policy is being applied in debates. That's fine, they can disagree with the policy in the proper places for that, the village pump or RfCs or similar. But this is not the place to debate the existence or usage of the policy. This is merely the place to discuss whether a redirect is useful, clear, and unambiguous. This redirect meets those qualities easily. Fieari (talk) 02:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Jewishm
Implausible typo TartarTorte 16:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Seems so - presumably created by a typo and then a move. Iskandar323 (talk) 19:19, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as unlikely synonym at best --Lenticel (talk) 03:41, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Jewish music. It’s a hash tag on Twitter and pops up at other unreliable places too. Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: I don't think this is a plausible typo to make. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 05:13, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Charles and Mary Beard
- Charles and Mary Beard → Charles A. Beard (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Seems like a very unlikely search term, and it's not intuitive for it to redirect to Charles A. Beard when there is also an article about Mary Ritter Beard. Graham (talk) 03:31, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Restore article without prejudice to AfD. I agree (as did an IP editor in the page history) that it is not appropriate for this title to redirect to one of them, but the history indicates that there might be scope for an article about them as a couple as they seem to have collaboratively written at least two significant works in addition to writing individually. That they are joint authors of those works makes that it is plausible someone would search for them together. While that article was unsourced 2 minutes on google suggests it would be trivially verifiable. Thryduulf (talk) 10:56, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Restore: per Thryduulf. As a redirect this has an WP:XY problem, so WP:BLAR seems to have been an incorrect way to resolve this.Similarly to Thryduulf, I have no opinion one way or the other if it headed to AfD after this is closed. TartarTorte 13:13, 29 August 2022 (UTC)- Retarget to Mary Ritter Beard#Collaborations with Charles Beard. Yes, this would ordinarily be an WP:XY situation, but there is only one place where their interactions are detailed. This is a solid four paragraphs, much more than the stub proposed to be restored, and I do not see much room for expansion beyond this. -- Tavix (talk) 14:02, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- That is better content, but I think it would be better located at this title (that's certainly where I would look for it). I don't object to retargetting there, but I think I prefer restoring the article and merging the content from Mary Beard there (such a merge would need subsequent discussion if not much occurs here). I'll drop a note about this discussion to both article talk pages. Thryduulf (talk) 14:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Move content from Mary Ritter Beard#Collabortions with Charles Beard to Charles and Mary Beard with attribution: Per the findings above this has the be the correct thing to do. Striking my previous vote. TartarTorte 20:51, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Pnetophyta
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
2887
- 2887 → 3rd millennium (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned in target article - If this is valid the so are all the other years? No reason to think someone searching for this is after the year rather than the number or another use, so non helpful KylieTastic (talk) 15:47, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- @KylieTastic Note that currently a lot of other years are in fact redirected to that article too, such as 2888, 2890–2900, and 2902–2999 (2901 being a dab). 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:52, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- 1234qwer1234qwer4 It came up at WP:NPP and made no sense to me and when I did a spot check 2880, 2881, 2882, 2883, 2884, 2885, 2886, 2887, 2888, 2889 most didn't and it just seems random, so I submitted to test the waters. Oddly 3rd_millennium#29th_century only has an entry for 2883 and that is one of the non-linked ones. However your correct that it's more than just this one and I would say the rule should be it its not listed it should not be redirected. KylieTastic (talk) 17:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- There is also the Category:Redirects to a decade and Category:Redirects to a century, and Wikipedia:Timeline standards says that
[a]rticles for the year 4000 BC and earlier should be redirected to the relevant millennium
, so there might be an argument in extending this to future years as well (though we don't have Category:Redirects to a millennium). 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:15, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- There is also the Category:Redirects to a decade and Category:Redirects to a century, and Wikipedia:Timeline standards says that
- 1234qwer1234qwer4 It came up at WP:NPP and made no sense to me and when I did a spot check 2880, 2881, 2882, 2883, 2884, 2885, 2886, 2887, 2888, 2889 most didn't and it just seems random, so I submitted to test the waters. Oddly 3rd_millennium#29th_century only has an entry for 2883 and that is one of the non-linked ones. However your correct that it's more than just this one and I would say the rule should be it its not listed it should not be redirected. KylieTastic (talk) 17:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:50, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and the arguments I and others made at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 11#6100s. A7V2 (talk) 08:05, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- 'Disambiguate 2887 (number) (a prime number), U+2887 (unicode codepoint 2887), Farm to Market Road 2887 (highway 2887), 2887 Krinov (asteroid #2887) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:42, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Template:Notodntidae-stub
August 28
IOS 17
Per WP:CRYSTAL. iOS 17 is not announced yet. Hajoon0102 💬 23:25, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: iOS 16 is only currently in preview. While it certainly will exist, it doesn't yet. TartarTorte 15:34, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as a crystal-clear case of crystal balling. This phone will almost certainly exist, but we shouldn't have redirects for models that haven't been announced or discussed in reputable sources yet. Recreate when Apple announces this model. Glades12 (talk) 15:40, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: "Not crystal ball". —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 04:41, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete iOS 17 hasn't been announced by Apple right now, if they announced it, then this should be not deleted. StaleGuy22 (talk) 15:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Album cover tag
- Wikipedia:Album cover tag → Template:Non-free use rationale album cover (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Unnecessary WP:XNR with no incoming links and created by a banned user. Steel1943 (talk) 22:28, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Shrek 5 Confirmed
- Shrek 5 Confirmed → Shrek (franchise)#Future films (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I find it unlikely that someone would type "Shrek 5 Confirmed" to find the page for Shrek 5. Liliana (UwU) 21:57, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete – example of enthusiastic fandom rather than encyclopedic value. TNstingray (talk) 01:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and TNstingray. Shrek 5 has been confirmed, but I'm not sure this is really a plausible title because it reads more like a news headline. It's also the only "[film] confirmed" redirect on Wikipedia. Regards, SONIC678 22:48, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete This is what a fandom user would type instead of a person that visits an encylopedia all the time. StaleGuy22 (talk) 15:42, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete for not being a plausible search term. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:24, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Most-viewed page listings
- Wikipedia:Top pages → Wikipedia:Popular pages (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Wikipedia:Most-viewed pages → Wikipedia:Popular pages (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Wikipedia:Most visited articles → Wikipedia:Popular pages (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Wikipedia:Popular articles → Wikipedia:Popular pages (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Should this redirect to WP:Popular pages or WP:Statistics? Interstellarity (talk) 14:25, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- From the page histories, it looks like I merged Wikipedia:Most visited articles to Wikipedia:Popular pages at some point, and the rest point there for other reasons. I actually think Wikipedia:Statistics#Page views is a better target for all of these, because it has a variety of sources, some more up-to-date and some with better filtering tools. -- Beland (talk) 17:23, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:02, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Closure of the map
- Closure of the map → Temporary Autonomous Zone (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This term is not mentioned at the target. Google results show that the term is used in the book, but it is not the only use (e.g. there appears to be something related to a mathematical function that I don't understand, maybe related to closure (mathematics) or closure (topology)?) and it doesn't appear to be particularly prominent. I suggest deletion unless content is added somewhere. Thryduulf (talk) 12:25, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom czar 11:55, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Autonomous zone
- Autonomous zone → Temporary Autonomous Zone (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This redirect doesn't seems to match what sources say about what is an "autonomous zone": https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/style/autonomous-zone-anarchist-community.html C933103 (talk) 11:56, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget or add a hatnote to Autonomous administrative division to match Autonomous area as this is a plausible search term for that concept. If retargetted consideration should be given to adding a hatnote back to the present target. Thryduulf (talk) 12:41, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep redirect, where the concept of the (temporary) autonomous zone is discussed. Alternative target list of autonomous zones already exists in List of anarchist communities. It wouldn't make sense to redirect to autonomous administrative division because that isn't how the term is commonly used. I originally leaned towards disambiguating but I don't think we have many other elements besides the aforementioned list of autonomous zones and the existing dab at Free Zone (Q522773). czar 16:46, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
List of British dark comedies
- List of British dark comedies → Category:British black comedy television shows (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This cross-namespace redirect promises a list article, but the category is actually an incomplete list of articles in an ill-defined genre. There is no list on Enwiki of British dark comedies, and neither British comedy nor Black comedy are suitable targets, so delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:56, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Revert to list without prejudice to AfD per BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 11:14, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Restore list without prejudice against AfDing it per Thryduulf. As this is a {{R with history}} that's not trivial, this course if action would fulfill the promise like it did before it was BLARed back in 2016. Regards, SONIC678 16:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Restore list per WP:CLN, categories and lists should not be confused with one another. -- Tavix (talk) 13:12, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/British Dark Comedy
- Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/British Dark Comedy → Category:British black comedy television shows (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I don't think this is helpful: Articles for creation/British Dark Comedy is red. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:51, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Before draftspace existed, draft articles by those unable to created pages in the article namespace were created as subpages of Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation and then moved to mainspace. We generally keep these redirects per WP:RDRAFT, but in this case the article British dark comedy was moved to List of British dark comedies and that was then redirected to the category. I've recommended above that the list article be restored, if it is then this should be retargetted back to it. If the list is not restored then this should be kept or deleted the same as the redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 11:19, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, any use this would have had has long since expired. -- Tavix (talk) 18:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
2019 Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election
- 2019 Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election → Elections in Jammu and Kashmir (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election, 2019 → Elections in Jammu and Kashmir (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ] Added. -- Tavix (talk) 14:53, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
there weren't any legislative assembly election in JnK in 2019 -MPGuy2824 (talk) 04:23, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Revert to the article without prejudice to AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 09:37, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, this is a perfect example of inappropriate article content to restore. We should not and cannot restore false and/or outdated information. As explained at Next Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election, there has not been a Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election since 2014 and there is not one scheduled. -- Tavix (talk) 18:25, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Whether article content is appropriate or not is something that can only be judged at an appropriate venue for discussing article content. RfD is not such a venue, AfD is. Thryduulf (talk) 19:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- RfD is the appropriate venue for discussing redirects, which this is. Please provide evidence of scope for an article at this title. There was not an election in 2019, so you are making an argument to restore false information, which is absolutely in violation of WP:V. -- Tavix (talk) 19:34, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- The page history contains a sourced article stating that elections "are due to be held in 2019". Whether there is scope for an article about elections that were due to happen but did not is not something that RfD is an appropriate venue to discuss for multiple reasons. You are not the sole arbiter of what is appropriate article content. Thryduulf (talk) 10:48, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Lol, I'm not trying to be a "sole arbiter", this is a discussion to establish consensus on what to do with this redirect and I'm explaining my position for anyone who wants to read it to help them come to the common sense conclusion. Can you at least take a step back and think about what you're wanting to restore? Would you really think it's appropriate to restore an entirely outdated article that only establishes that an election is "due to be held in 2019" in 2022? -- Tavix (talk) 11:39, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- If it were to be restored and then preserved as-is forever, definitely not. However this is a wiki, I'm proposing it be restored so that those with knowledge of the subject can properly and easily evaluate it so that it can be updated, merged or deleted after discussion in venues where articles are properly discussed and those people who are knowledgeable about the topic and/or have other relevant expertise relating to discussions of article content like this can find it. I have considered what I am proposing to be restored and, having considered it, relevant policies and guidelines, past consensuses and general practice, I believe that the goals of the project will best be served by restoring the article for the reasons I've explained here and in multiple previous discussions where you've objected to doing things properly. Thryduulf (talk) 14:30, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- There is nothing there to update because the election in question did not take place—the redirected article reads like a faulty crystal ball. It would either be a restoration to promote false/outdated information, which is very much not in the best interests of this project or be a restoration purely for the exercise of deletion elsewhere, which makes little sense because it would be twice the effort for the same obvious result. If you have any reliable sourcing that the election was scheduled to take place in 2019, then that can be noted at Next Jammu and Kashmir Legislative Assembly election and then this can be retargeted there. That is the only other outcome besides deletion that would not be to the detriment of this project. The source in the redirected article is from 2018 and notes that it would be "not anytime soon" so I have not seen establishment of a 2019 date. -- Tavix (talk) 14:52, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- If it were to be restored and then preserved as-is forever, definitely not. However this is a wiki, I'm proposing it be restored so that those with knowledge of the subject can properly and easily evaluate it so that it can be updated, merged or deleted after discussion in venues where articles are properly discussed and those people who are knowledgeable about the topic and/or have other relevant expertise relating to discussions of article content like this can find it. I have considered what I am proposing to be restored and, having considered it, relevant policies and guidelines, past consensuses and general practice, I believe that the goals of the project will best be served by restoring the article for the reasons I've explained here and in multiple previous discussions where you've objected to doing things properly. Thryduulf (talk) 14:30, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Lol, I'm not trying to be a "sole arbiter", this is a discussion to establish consensus on what to do with this redirect and I'm explaining my position for anyone who wants to read it to help them come to the common sense conclusion. Can you at least take a step back and think about what you're wanting to restore? Would you really think it's appropriate to restore an entirely outdated article that only establishes that an election is "due to be held in 2019" in 2022? -- Tavix (talk) 11:39, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- The page history contains a sourced article stating that elections "are due to be held in 2019". Whether there is scope for an article about elections that were due to happen but did not is not something that RfD is an appropriate venue to discuss for multiple reasons. You are not the sole arbiter of what is appropriate article content. Thryduulf (talk) 10:48, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- RfD is the appropriate venue for discussing redirects, which this is. Please provide evidence of scope for an article at this title. There was not an election in 2019, so you are making an argument to restore false information, which is absolutely in violation of WP:V. -- Tavix (talk) 19:34, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Whether article content is appropriate or not is something that can only be judged at an appropriate venue for discussing article content. RfD is not such a venue, AfD is. Thryduulf (talk) 19:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Himalaya Mayflower
- Himalaya Mayflower → New Federal State of China (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Boston Mayflower → New Federal State of China (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Himalaya Boston Mayflower → New Federal State of China (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
no mention of mayflower anywhere on the target page -MPGuy2824 (talk) 03:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per WP:R3/WP:G11. As noted by the redirects' creator in the edit summaries, Himalaya Mayflower is the name of a non-notable Gettr account. There's no good reason for promoting that account on Wikipedia. (Note that Himalayan Mayflower is the common name of the plant Maianthemum purpureum, but both of those are (obviously) redlinks.) - Eureka Lott 10:27, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- After some Google searches in Chinese, I still don't quite get what it mean, but it is apparently not a reference to any individual social media account or reference to any individual. I found a transcript of a video from Guo Wengui which claim to introduce the "Construction of Boston Mayflower Farmland" and claim its operation mainly consist of "Spreading the truth and revealing dark side of CCP to help construct New Federal State of China" and also "Use 'G-series' to provide economic foundation of our New Federal State of China" with 'G-series' involve things like crypto but also Gnews. After searching the term "Farmland" in "G News", apparently the concept of "farmland" is roughly similar to a lower level administrated unit in the proposed federation of "New Federal State of China" that aim to displace the power of CCP in China, but it seems to be virtual and operate over internet. Since many of the information they publish are infowars tier, I can't separate fact from fantasy in their claims. C933103 (talk) 12:22, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget the first of these three redirects to Maianthemum where the Himalayan Mayflower is mentioned. Anythingyouwant (talk) 21:53, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Weakish retarget Himalaya Mayflower to Maianthemum#Species per Anythingyouwant-it is mentioned there, so it could be helpful to take this course of action, but there's a redlink on the specific species as Eureka says. Delete the other two per Eureka. I'm not sure I can find a good target for Boston Mayflower (not even Mayflower, the first thing that came to my mind, surprisingly!), as it could possibly WP:ASTONISH readers looking for other stuff (e.g., the Mayflower, a non-notable company with the exact name that came up on a Google search), but for lack of a better option, I'll have to reluctantly go with deleting it. As for Himalaya Boston Mayflower, it just...doesn't make sense, I'm not really sure if it is true. Regards, SONIC678 03:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
101th century
- 101th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
While "101th" is a plausible error as argued in its previous discussion, this particular century isn't mentioned on the target article, the redirect's pageviews are going down, plus it was declined for speedy deletion over three hours before that discussion took place, hence why I've decided to list it separately. Not sure why we still need it-though I'm also open to being swayed otherwise. Regards, SONIC678 01:21, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
41st century
- 41st century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Another one I'm nominating separately because of a different kind of interesting history-categories being added more than two years after its creation, which were removed several hours after. I'm not sure what to do here, maybe delete to encourage article creation? I thought I'd bring it over to RfD to discuss. Regards, SONIC678 01:19, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
92nd, 98th-99th centuries
- 92nd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 98th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 99th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I'm also listing these three separately for similar reasons to 93-95, but with sockpuppet account 98th Century converting them into articles. They're also not mentioned on the target page. Regards, SONIC678 01:11, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
93rd-95th centuries
- 93rd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 94th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 95th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I'm nominating these three separately because part of their history consists of Dklover77 converting them into articles when they were "not [...] notable centur[ies] yet." Until sufficient info is known about these centuries, these can be deleted unless someone can provide a justification or suitable alternative course of action. Regards, SONIC678 01:07, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
42nd-91th, 96th-97th centuries
- 42nd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 43rd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 44th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 45th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 46th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 47th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 48th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 49th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 50th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 51st century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 52nd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 53rd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 54th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 55th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 56th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 57th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 58th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 59th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 60th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 61st century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 62nd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 63rd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 64th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 65th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 66th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 67th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 68th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 69th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 70th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 71st century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 72nd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 73rd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 74th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 75th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 76th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 77th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 78th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 79th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 80th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 81st century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 82nd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 83rd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 84th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 85th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 86th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 87th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 88th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 89th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 90th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 91st century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 96th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 97th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
These 52 century redirects, on the other hand, don't really have a lot of edit history besides being created by Voortle as redirects to their millennium articles (before they were merged) in 2006-2007 and then retargeted to the current target in 2020. They may need to be deleted as well, unless someone can provide a justification. Regards, SONIC678 00:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe useful for inlink. Like the 48th century article (I randomly picked to check) was linked by a comet article as the next time it will approach sun. Although it is only one article. C933103 (talk) 12:25, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
31st-40th, 100th centuries
- 31st century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 32nd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 33rd century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 34th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 35th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 36th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 37th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 38th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 39th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 40th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 100th century → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
These century redirects were once articles talking about their respective years, but despite their interesting histories the target doesn't mention them. Like A7V2 said over at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 20#XXXIII century (which was closed as delete), they may need to be deleted and/or the previous articles restored, though I'm open to being swayed otherwise. Regards, SONIC678 00:24, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget 100th century to 100s, as I could easily see confusion with the century encompassing the 100s. No opinion on the rest of these. BD2412 T 01:22, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- We have a WP:OR rule, right? If there is something written and published on a century, great, but if not, why keep it?Paradise Chronicle (talk) 02:01, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget per BD2412, and add an entry on the target disambiguation page for the timeline of hte future -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:28, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all, possibly create a new disambiguation page for 100th century as likely a confused reader mistyping. It's not strictly true that these aren't mentioned in the target article - in the timeline of the far future, I see mention of things both 1,000, 1,100, and 2,000 years from now, aka the 31st / 32nd / 41st century. Seems the most relevant article to redirect to regardless (even for "missing" centuries, if any events are added that take place in them in the future, it'd likely be this article), so it's useful. SnowFire (talk) 01:57, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all
except 100th. There is coverage at the target of a few of these, and regardless of that the target is as far as I know the only place on-wiki where these topics could ever be covered at any point in the next 1000 years. (I'm going to assume Wiki lasts that long for the purposes of this discussion.) casualdejekyll 02:49, 28 August 2022 (UTC)- @Casualdejekyll: Just out of curiousity, why "all except 100th"? There are a half dozen events on the page projected to happen in the range of 10,000 years. BD2412 T 17:49, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- You know what? I'm not even sure myself. Changing !vote. casualdejekyll 17:56, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Casualdejekyll: Just out of curiousity, why "all except 100th"? There are a half dozen events on the page projected to happen in the range of 10,000 years. BD2412 T 17:49, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Naval Network Warfare Command (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ] →
Redirect is not correct. Navy Information Operations Command (NIOC) is not the same as or part of Naval Network Warfare Command (NAVNETWARCOM). See [10]; in upper right hand corner, hover over "Organization" then "Operational Support". NIOC is separate from NAVNETWARCOM.
This will break some links on other pages but I've made sure that the links that should be to NAVNETWARCOM are switched to link directly to that while the ones that should be linked to NIOC will remain so and would become red links if this redirect is deleted Jasonkwe (talk) (contribs) 00:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to United States Tenth Fleet where a whole bunch of NIOC’s are listed. Alternatively, retarget to Information Operations (United States). Anythingyouwant (talk) 22:22, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
August 27
Ban on caffeinated alcoholic drinks
- Ban on caffeinated alcoholic drinks → Ban on caffeinated alcoholic drinks in the United States (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
A redirect to the article talking about the US is not good for a global encyclopedia. Best to keep this red to encourage an article about a general ban, with different examples from around the world. QueenofBithynia (talk) 00:42, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:REDLINK and avoid systemic bias --Lenticel (talk) 00:58, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Caffeinated alcoholic drink#Legal status which discusses the US ban and mentions a restrictions in Mexico and Canada that might be considered bans, a call for a ban in the UK and consideration of one in Australia. Thryduulf (talk) 11:04, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Caffeinated alcoholic drink#Legal status: Per Thryduulf. Good place to target as it allows for expansion. TartarTorte 13:20, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - This was the title of the current target for 10 years before a pagemove in October last year. Given look at the recent edit history of the article it might be better to simply revert the move and change the scope to be more global as it seems that there is content which could be added. A7V2 (talk) 08:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:59, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- I equally support both Thryduulf's proposal to retarget and A7V2's proposal to revert the move and make it reflect global information. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 08:44, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Porn scanner
- Porn scanner → Backscatter X-ray (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Porno scanner → Backscatter X-ray (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Naked machine → Backscatter X-ray (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
These phrases do seem to have been in use to refer to the TSA's backscatter X-rays in the early 2010s, but none of them appear in the article and all are potentially ambiguous, so the redirects are likely to cause more confusion than clarity. My inquiry at the target talk page didn't reveal any enthusiasm for adding mentions that would make the redirects useful to the reader. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 15:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- Is this mention (rather than use) of "porno scanner" in Revista de Derecho UNED of any help? --Kizor 20:48, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Kizor: Looks like a good source to me – from the Google translation it seems to tick the box of mentioning the use of the term rather than merely using it. I wouldn't be comfortable paraphrasing from a machine translation but if your Spanish is better than mine and you'd like to add a mention I'd be happy to remove that redirect from the list. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:56, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:10, 21 August 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:58, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
4570s
I'm not sure that this decade should be pointing to a disambiguation page which includes only two things numbered 4570, and 5th millennium which redirects to Timeline of the far future. See below also the 236 decade redirects to the latter page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:41, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Given the (hopefully) likely outcome with the below redirects, this should not be targeting Timeline of the far future without a mention. I suppose it's possible this could target .45-70 as a plural but that seems a bridge too far. So then as there is no mention at target or anywhere this should be deleted. A7V2 (talk) 08:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep it is not a decade redirect, it is a plural redirect. Tag as {{R from plural}}, since at lease one of the topics on the disambiguation page can be pluralized (the bullet) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:25, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Given that only one thing on the disambiguation page (.45-70) has a plural (and one, the millennium, should probably be removed), wouldn't it make more sense to retarget there instead? A7V2 (talk) 04:09, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, we could do that as well. -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:57, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Given that only one thing on the disambiguation page (.45-70) has a plural (and one, the millennium, should probably be removed), wouldn't it make more sense to retarget there instead? A7V2 (talk) 04:09, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:58, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Fiii
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Tvrkmenistan
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Taiikistan
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Orthodox Christians in Germany
- Orthodox Christians in Germany → Eastern Orthodox Church in Germany (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This could also refer to Oriental Orthodox Church. Vague redirect. Super Ψ Dro 15:58, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Religion_in_Germany#Orthodox_Christianity_and_Nestorianism. Readers can decide where to go from there. Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Draft:Untitled Brian Fee Project
- Draft:Untitled Brian Fee Project → Encanto (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Draft:Untitled Brian Fee Pixar film → Encanto (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Space might be needed for his next project. ★Trekker (talk) 09:04, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, considering that Encanto was released back in 2021. And also because it's a pointless redirect from draft projectspace to main projectspace. EeJayEss2008 (talk) 09:29, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Weak keep: It's in draft-space and has a fair amount of article history that it doesn't see worthwhile deleting. I would agree if it were in articlespace, but this seems pretty harmless. TartarTorte 18:49, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Can't the history be merged before deletion?★Trekker (talk) 11:28, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- No, due to parallel histories. -- Tavix (talk) 13:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Can't the history be merged before deletion?★Trekker (talk) 11:28, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep TartarTorte. If someone writes about another project of theirs before it has a title they can either overwrite the redirect or use a different title, but in most cases writing about something before it has a title is TOOSOON. Thryduulf (talk) 12:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Move without redirect to acceptable titles, perhaps Draft:Encanto and Draft:Encanto (film). "Untitled" should not be used for a project that is now titled, and the second one is also a bit misleading because it was not a Pixar film. -- Tavix (talk) 13:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Huskies
![Retarget](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg/16px-Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg.png)
Arashabbasi
- Arashabbasi → Arash Abbasi (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- ArashAbbasi → Arash Abbasi (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete both of these as redirects from implausible typos. These redirects were created after two succesive page moves. 2601:647:5800:1A1F:40D5:8B1F:2BD2:8163 (talk) 00:53, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Not plausible for a person's name, especially the CamelCase one. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:02, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment both are plausible typos, because the second one is a simple omission of a single character, and the first one is the same but for an all lowercase entry (first letter capitalized by Wikipedia software) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 22:17, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:52, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Super Ψ Dro 16:11, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete these redirects created in error. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Russia cancelled
- Russia cancelled → International sanctions during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Cancellation of Russia → International sanctions during the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Vague terms, not found specifically in the article. Don't see any evidence of "Russia cancelled" in use, except for one YouTube video. "Cancellation of Russia" shows up a few times, but it refers to a general rejection of Russian - vandalizing Russian restaurants in Manhattan for instance, or stripping Putin of "his honorary taekwondo black belt". These are not the formal sanctions discussed in the target. I haven't found a better target. 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine reactions and Government and intergovernmental reactions to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, Non-government reactions to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine could all be considered aspects of "Cancelling Russia".MB 01:17, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
The redirects have no incoming links. MB 00:56, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete trash. Super Ψ Dro 16:11, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Deleteper nomination. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 08:37, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
August 26
Hanging Man
- Hanging Man → The Hanged Man (Tarot card) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Ambiguous redirect. Title doesn't specifically refer to this tarot card. CycloneYoris talk! 08:53, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- There's the dab page The Hanged Man. Given search results, I'm inclined to retarget to Hanging man (candlestick pattern) but I'm happy to listen out for other options here. I think we should keep in mind a couple of things: the disambiguation option and that Hanging man is a red link; it as it stands should be the title of the candlestick pattern page. J947 † edits 10:32, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- I agree, and also thought about retargeting to the candlestick article. Though the search bar does yield multiple results, so disambiguating also seems like a viable option. CycloneYoris talk! 23:24, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- Move "hanging man (candlestick pattern)" to "hanging man", retarget "Hanging Man" to "hanging man", and then, to "hanging man", add a hatnote link to the disambiguation page "The Hanged Man" since it is very easy for someone to look for "hanging man" when one is actually wanting to look for one of the meanings of "hanged man". —Lowellian (reply) 19:17, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:17, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate "hanging man" to indicate the candlestick pattern, a person who is hanged (sentenced to hang, death by hanging), a person who does the hanging (executioner; the hanging man carries out the work of the hanging judge) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 22:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per the IP. BD2412 T 16:06, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Hanging Man is also the title of a play by Andrew Upton. Although not mentioned at his article, it's mentioned at Toby Schmitz who acted.
- "Hanging Man" is also referenced at Cherokee–American wars and I'm wondering if it's a typo for Hanging Maw (which has 7 mentions at the article). The reference of Hanging Man in the Cherokee–American wars article is along with Corntassel (or Old Tassel) whose article doesn't have a mention of Hanging Man, but has of Hanging Maw. Jay 💬 08:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:INVOLVED relist since consensus is slightly unclear, and the creation of a draft DAB is still pending.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:53, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate and add a See also for Hanging Maw on the page. All the above are potential targets of hanging man. Don't forget "hang man" the spelling game too. GenQuest "scribble" 17:09, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Forgive my laughter
- Forgive my laughter → Joker (2019 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- You get what you fucking deserve → Joker (2019 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Per precedent established at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 25#You'll get your rent when you fix this damn door!, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 3#Give me your rent, and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 25#Give me rent, this is a non-notable quote not mentioned on the page (WP:R#D8). InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:46, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep "You Get What You Deserve", delete "Forgive my laughter"I can understand the first of the redirects, but the second is a very-frequently heard quote from the movie. When searching for Joker 2019 on YouTube and the results are sorted from most viewed to least viewed, the scene with Murray's death and the line is the second most viewed line. It's also heard very prominently. Additionally, when typing the quote on Google, autocomplete suggests the quote (albeit without the f bomb) as the fifth suggestion when only typing "you get" into the search box.
- Moreover, while KnowYourMeme is an unreliable source when it comes to accuracy of facts and especially BLP, it does demonstrate popularity through the website's view counts. The quote's entry on KYM has over 61,416 views and is synonymous with the movie. It's not as famous as "Toto, I have a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore", but that quote is still preserved as a redirect given its popularity and would violate the precedent established as the "Give me rent" discussion. If that quote isn't removed as a redirect, shouldn't this quote "get what it deserves"? (Apologies if I insult you)InvadingInvader (talk) 02:57, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- — Note to closing admin: InvadingInvader (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:40, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- The Wizard of Oz quote is an iconic and highly well-known quote, which is mentioned at the redirect target and included at AFI's 100 Years...100 Movie Quotes. This is not the case for either of these Joker quotes. InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:12, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- Have you taken into consideration the prevalence of the KnowYourMeme page, the YouTube clip's prominence and view count (76 million views on this video is the second most out of any Joker clip on YouTube), and the KnowYourMeme page? KYM may not be good enough as a source for notability of a full article, but given the prevalence of that quote's clip on YouTube and the Google autocomplete stats I mentioned earlier, along with 60,000+ views on KYM, this should at least justify a redirect. InvadingInvader (talk) 03:27, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- Additionally, the past 30 days have had 37 hits for "You get what you deserve". Compare it to the more iconic quote ("Toto"), which only got 7 hits in the past 30, going solely on hits, "You get what you deserve" has more than six times the hits of "Toto" this month InvadingInvader (talk) 03:31, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- Plenty of memes have high viewcounts at KnowYourMeme and YouTube, but that doesn't mean they all need redirects. And more importantly, the article Joker (2019 film) makes no mention of either quote, making the redirects pointless and unhelpful to readers. InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:38, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- Just because it isn't in the article doesn't mean it pointless. There are plenty of redirects which are famous, not directly mentioned in the article, nor on an AFI list but exist, some of which are arguably less iconic than "You get what you deserve". I agree that not all memes and quotes and popular sets of materials need redirects, but I think that 76 Million views and the popularity of the Google autocomplete segment justifies its inclusion in the mainspace, even if it's an addition to the article after this discussion. Look at the redirect for You are one ugly motherfucker!; how come it's still up? It's not on AFI nor is it explicitly referred to in the Predator franchise's logo, but it's iconic to the series. "You get what you deserve" is iconic to its franchise. And do page hits not count? The more famous quote (Toto) only got 7 hits this month while "You Get what you deserve" got 37.
- I suggest you focus your deletion nominations to redirects that get less hits or are less famous than this. The numbers speak for themselves. 76 Million views. 37 Hits this month. 60K views on KYM. Heck, even 545,000 Google results, which is even more than even Toto not being in Kansas anymore. This should be more than enough to justify the redirect's retention. InvadingInvader (talk) 04:50, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- Plenty of memes have high viewcounts at KnowYourMeme and YouTube, but that doesn't mean they all need redirects. And more importantly, the article Joker (2019 film) makes no mention of either quote, making the redirects pointless and unhelpful to readers. InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:38, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- Additionally, the past 30 days have had 37 hits for "You get what you deserve". Compare it to the more iconic quote ("Toto"), which only got 7 hits in the past 30, going solely on hits, "You get what you deserve" has more than six times the hits of "Toto" this month InvadingInvader (talk) 03:31, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- Have you taken into consideration the prevalence of the KnowYourMeme page, the YouTube clip's prominence and view count (76 million views on this video is the second most out of any Joker clip on YouTube), and the KnowYourMeme page? KYM may not be good enough as a source for notability of a full article, but given the prevalence of that quote's clip on YouTube and the Google autocomplete stats I mentioned earlier, along with 60,000+ views on KYM, this should at least justify a redirect. InvadingInvader (talk) 03:27, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- The Wizard of Oz quote is an iconic and highly well-known quote, which is mentioned at the redirect target and included at AFI's 100 Years...100 Movie Quotes. This is not the case for either of these Joker quotes. InfiniteNexus (talk) 03:12, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:19, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep It doesn't matter whether the quote is in the article, it only matters if it's a possible search term and if the target answers the likely question. These two cases are both. Almost certainly anyone searching on them wants to know where they're from, and redirecting to the movie answers that. Central and Adams (talk) 18:50, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Minimally notable quotes still have a lot of reach when they are from blockbuster movies, hence could help a lot of people navigate to the article. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 23:03, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Forgive my laughter per InvadingInvader. I don't believe I have voted like this before but soft redirect You get what you fucking deserve to Wikiquote's Q:Joker (2019 film). Jay 💬 19:10, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:25, 18 August 2022 (UTC)- Soft redirect to Wikiquote. I don't think these quotes are plausible search terms for the article within Wikipedia. Most people searching these quotes probably already know where they are from and so aren't looking for the article. If they were they'd probably use a shorter search term. Even if they didn't know a redirect to Wikiquote would also answer that question. – Scyrme (talk) 17:43, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more relist...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:41, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Johnny Ware
- Johnny Ware → John Ware (cowboy) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I'm not entirely sure about this, but this seems it could refer to any article in John Ware (disambiguation). Qwerfjkltalk 21:11, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
- This redirect was created from a request I have accepted at WP:AFCRC. As for the validity of the current target, just look at a Google Search. But if anyone thinks that the redirect should be retargeted to John Ware (disambiguation), then I am fine with that too. GeoffreyT2000 (talk) 22:14, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:27, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Leaning retarget to the disambiguation page. BD2412 T 15:18, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Weak keep Absent evidence other people on the disambiguation page have been referred to as Johnny, it makes sense to favor one that was. However, the nickname should probably be added to the cowboy article, and a hatnote definitely should. If things were the other way around, it would make much more sense to provide "John" access to multiple Johnnys. --BDD (talk) 18:58, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:18, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Schism of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church
- Schism of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church → Autocephaly of the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This might be a WP:R3 but I wasn't sure it qualified. Schism of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church was moved, and redirects to, Autocephaly of the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church. The target, in turn, has been merged and redirected to Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church. "Schism of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church" is no longer useful as a redirect, because it refers to two different churches (i.e. two different articles), and to a schism that does not exist; more detail about that at Talk:Autocephaly of the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church. Gyrofrog (talk) 17:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment If the separation of Ethiopian and Eritrean churches is commonly described or referred to as a schism (correctly or incorrectly) then this should probably redirect somewhere. Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church#Recent history does use the term, and cites [11], and while the word "schism" doesn't appear on that page, the relevant section continues onto the next page (87) which is not part of the preview so I can't say whether it is verified or not. If we assume for the moment this is a useful search term, then we need to decide what the best target is - there is slightly more relevant information on the article about the Ethiopian church than the Eritrean one, but not by a lot. None of the higher level articles I've skimmed (which probably isn't all of them) have anything obviously relevant, but this is a long way outside my area of expertise so I may have missed something. Thryduulf (talk) 18:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think that article should use the term "schism", for reasons I went into at Talk:Autocephaly of the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church, but that's outside the scope of this discussion. But it is what made it harder (for me) to decide where (or whether) to redirect this, since in one of those senses, it describes a schism that did not occur. I'm also not sure if or how someone's even going to land on this redirect at this point (the incoming links, unless I've missed something, are from "recent changes" types of listings). I'm not opposed to a redirect per se, just couldn't figure out one that made sense. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:09, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- What we need to determine is whether this is an appropriate search term or not - if it is then people will find it by searching rather than by internal links (and remember whatlinkshere cannot show links from places other than the English Wikipedia, although it's unlikely there will be many at the moment given how new it is, but the longer the redirect exists the more likely they are, generally speaking). For the purposes of people searching, whether the separation was a schism matters less than whether people call it a schism. As someone with almost no subject matter expertise it seems not implausible they might, so its worth looking to see if they do. My research so far has been inconclusive. Thryduulf (talk) 18:37, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- After a bit more research, I've found there was a schism between the Ethiopian church in Ethiopia and the Ethiopian church in the United States that began in 1991, before the 1993 split between Ethiopian and Eritrean churches. This lasted until 2018 when the two Ethiopian churches reconciled but I've not been able to work out how any of this affected the Eritrean church. Overall, the lack of clear evidence I'm finding of the Ethiopian-Eritrean split being called a schism means I'm leaning towards this not being a good search term, but I'm nowhere near confident enough to bold a recommendation. Thryduulf (talk) 16:25, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- What we need to determine is whether this is an appropriate search term or not - if it is then people will find it by searching rather than by internal links (and remember whatlinkshere cannot show links from places other than the English Wikipedia, although it's unlikely there will be many at the moment given how new it is, but the longer the redirect exists the more likely they are, generally speaking). For the purposes of people searching, whether the separation was a schism matters less than whether people call it a schism. As someone with almost no subject matter expertise it seems not implausible they might, so its worth looking to see if they do. My research so far has been inconclusive. Thryduulf (talk) 18:37, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think that article should use the term "schism", for reasons I went into at Talk:Autocephaly of the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church, but that's outside the scope of this discussion. But it is what made it harder (for me) to decide where (or whether) to redirect this, since in one of those senses, it describes a schism that did not occur. I'm also not sure if or how someone's even going to land on this redirect at this point (the incoming links, unless I've missed something, are from "recent changes" types of listings). I'm not opposed to a redirect per se, just couldn't figure out one that made sense. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:09, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:05, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Uzbekistane
- Uzbekistane → Uzbekistan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Implausible misspelling. "n" and "e" are not adjacent letters on the keyboard. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 03:32, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Here I agree with the nom. Having an "e" at the end even alters its pronunciation, so better to have this deleted. CycloneYoris talk! 03:55, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. English pronunciation rules seemingly aren't well understood, aren't uniformly utilised (e.g., give), and only apply to one language. Plus, -stan spellings are pretty inconsistent at the best of times. This spelling of Uzbekistan yields 742,000 GHits, suggesting this is a plausible redirect to deal with vagarities of transliteration – especially outdated, pre-standardised ones (?). Interestingly, it looks like the Uzbek language is actually transitioning from using the Cyrillic alphabet to the Latin alphabet. J947 † edits 05:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, could also be a mistranslation (mistranscription?) from Russian, where the suffix -e conveys prepositional information. In the absence of another topic that the term could be confused with, keeping seems fine. signed, Rosguill talk 19:56, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:25, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. While there are a lot of google hits, looking at them none of them are in an English language context and, of those where the context is clear, almost all are Lithuanian or Slovakian rather than Uzbek or Russian/Soviet so I'm not seeing an obvious affinity. Given the redirect has only attracted 23 uses in the last three years (July 2019-July 2022) I'm not convinced this is a useful redirect on the English Wikipedia. Thryduulf (talk) 15:05, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Leaning keep; I could see this as an error for Uzbekistani. BD2412 T 15:19, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Currently tit-for-tat right now.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:05, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Kazakhstani redirects but Kazakhstane doesn’t. That’s as it should be. My opinion might be different if “Uzbekistane” were not a foreign spelling, but it is a foreign spelling, which suggests that people spelling it that way are looking for foreign language materials—-not looking for the English Wikipedia or other English stuff. Anythingyouwant (talk) 00:45, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
PeaBrainC/Hans Gustav Wilhelm Steinert
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Soul2Sole FC
- Soul2Sole FC → United Premier Soccer League (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, primary sources associated with Soul2Sole FC don't suggest an affiliation ([12]) to UPSL. signed, Rosguill talk 23:44, 2 August 2022 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 18:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to National Independent Soccer Association, per this which shows it is competing in the competition this year. GiantSnowman 19:02, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete until someone mentions it somewhere. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:17, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:04, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and Shhh. No mention anywhere on EnWiki. I don't think retargeting to another article would be helpful, given the lack of information on the subject. CycloneYoris talk! 04:03, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Per information provided by GiantSnowman, Retarget to one of these sections: 2022 National Independent Soccer Association season#Participating Clubs which mentions the club's state and league, or 2022 National Independent Soccer Association season#SoCal Region which has their group stage stats. Jay 💬 04:58, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Let's see if Jay's suggestions lead to consensus. Thryduulf (talk) 10:24, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 10:24, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Greatest Emperor
- Greatest Emperor → Tenno taitei (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Emperor the Great → Tenno taitei (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, does not appear to be a literal translation of the Japanese or Chinese terms at the target. Google Scholar results appear to all be about different emperors alleged to be the greatest, and not the deification of the north star. signed, Rosguill talk 17:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. As noted, the English phrases are not translations of either the Japanese or Chinese target terms. Moreover, the English phrases are used more commonly to refer to other things.
- By way of further context and background, this was created by a problematic editor, who is busy creating flawed machine-translated versions of content from other Wikipedias in languages that they cannot read, about subjects that they do not know. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:50, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Greatest Emperor per above, and because it's too ambiguous for a single target. Emperor the Great can be deleted or retargeted to List of people known as the Great. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 09:36, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per above. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 16:32, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget Emperor the Great to List of people known as the Great. Many of the people there were emperors, so it's plausible someone looking for one of those would search in this way if they don't know/remember the person's actual name. A7V2 (talk) 04:17, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment the current target was BLARed to Tianhuang Emperor a few hours after the most recent !vote (apart from mine). A7V2 (talk) 04:22, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For consensus on Emperor the Great.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget Emperor the Great to List of people known as the Great per A7V2. Thryduulf (talk) 20:03, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Cuschow lady
- Cuschow lady → Coccinellidae (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at target, and I'm not finding any websites that mention this term at all (aside from one Wikipedia scraper) Plantdrew (talk) 01:29, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Not even finding evidence this exists as a term at all, and definitely not a term most if any entomologists have seen to describe any Coccinellidae. While redirects are cheap, deletion seems wise when it looks like it was a made up term. KoA (talk) 05:23, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete seems to be made up --Lenticel (talk) 03:43, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- UTC)
- Delete as unrelated to ladybugs, don’t mess with ladybugs. Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:10, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Haim Romano
- Haim Romano → El Al (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, no relevant results in an internet search, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 17:37, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- As the article history indicates, Romano is the former CEO of El Al. [13] - Eureka Lott 18:36, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. As summarized by Rosguill, there isn't really any merit to having a redirect. Avigl (talk) 23:25, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:18, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Previously an article, though unreferenced and one sentence long: [14]. Definitely not a suitable redirect, and I think should be deleted as an unsourced BL(presumably)P rather than restored. A7V2 (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: without prejudice to article recreation. Haim Romano might be notable, but there is nothing on him on the El-Al page. TartarTorte 14:29, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
August 25
Color Line (SEPTA Regional Rail)
- Purple Line (SEPTA Regional Railroad) → Airport Line (SEPTA) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Lime Line (Philadelphia SEPTA) → Wilmington/Newark Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Light Green Line (SEPTA Regional Rail) → Wilmington/Newark Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Yellow Line (Philadelphia SEPTA) → Warminster Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Yellow Line (Philadelphia) → Warminster Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Yellow Line (SEPTA Regional Rail) → Warminster Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Pink Line (Philadelphia) → Trenton Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Pink Line (Philadelphia SEPTA) → Trenton Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Pink Line (SEPTA Regional Rail) → Trenton Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Green Line (Philadelphia SEPTA) → Paoli/Thorndale Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Green Line (SEPTA Regional Rail) → Paoli/Thorndale Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Red Line (Philadelphia SEPTA) → Manayunk/Norristown Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Red Line (SEPTA Regional Rail) → Manayunk/Norristown Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Red Line (SEPTA) → Manayunk/Norristown Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Brown Line (SEPTA Regional Rail) → Lansdale/Doylestown Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Orange Line (Philadelphia SEPTA) → Fox Chase Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Orange Line (SEPTA Regional Rail) → Fox Chase Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Turquoise Line (Philadelphia SEPTA) → Chestnut Hill West Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Brown Line (Philadelphia SEPTA) → Chestnut Hill East Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Light Brown Line (SEPTA Regional Rail) → Chestnut Hill East Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Brown Line (Philadelphia) → Chestnut Hill East Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Purple Line (Philadelphia SEPTA) → Airport Line (SEPTA) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Purple Line (SEPTA Regional Rail) → Airport Line (SEPTA) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
These color designation for SEPTA regional rail routes are completely unused both in Wikipedia and by anyone I can find on the internet or really anywhere else. The color names which these routes are used on the schedules for the routes, but they are not at all called by these names. Furthermore, these names present additional confusion as these colors from 2011–present[1] are in conflict with previous color systems for the trains where they had different colors.[2] TartarTorte 23:32, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, per my previous comments. Please take my comment as a blanket delete vote on any future color-based SEPTA Regional Rail redirects that turn up. Mackensen (talk) 00:23, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- weak keep per the nom's own rationale color names which these routes are used on the schedules for the routes, thus would be viable search terms. That they date from 2011 shows they were used at that time, so would be reasonable for searching when considering the era one might want to look up -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:36, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Well, the colors are in use from that time. The redirects were created in 2022, the creator has been blocked indefinitely, and color names are never used to refer to these lines. Mackensen (talk) 11:03, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- The schedules for the routes never use the colors without the route name. For example, the extent of the Airport Line's use of purple, which here is denoted as the Purple Line, is the little bit in the top right corner on the first page. TartarTorte 13:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, more JailBrokenIPODGoneWild nonsense. The lines aren't referred to by color names. If there is attestion of a line being called a color name, that would be different. -- Tavix (talk) 13:20, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all more garbage redirects from everyone's favorite redirect-spamming iPod. Just because schedules or whatever may have a color doesn't make these appropriate redirects, if the system in question does not identify its lines by colors. These cause confusion. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:24, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all per Mackensen. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 06:11, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
References
Most massive
- Most massive → List of Solar System objects by size#Most massive known objects (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Most massive known objects → List of Solar System objects by size#Most massive known objects (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Most massive objects → List of Solar System objects by size#Most massive known objects (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Could equally refer to objects outside the Solar System, including List of most massive stars, List of most massive black holes, and List of most massive exoplanets, and just "Most massive" could refer to any article describing the largest of a type of thing, e.g. Largest organisms. Too ambiguous to be good redirects and should be deleted. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: I agree. Yours aye, Buaidh talk e-mail 21:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget the two with "objects" to Orders of magnitude (mass)#1042 kg and greater which lists the most massive objects known - exactly what the search terms refer to. Thryduulf (talk) 15:19, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- But "object" need not refer to celestial objects. The most massive of most types objects are much less than 10^42 kg. Simply targeting the Orders of magnitude (mass) article (rather than a specific section) seems like it would be unhelpfully imposing a target on an inherently ambiguous redirect.
- Moreover, even celestial objects are less massive than 10^42 kg, e.g. according to the article, the most massive star is 10^32 kg. So targeting a specific section doesn't make sense, because the class of object is not defined in these search terms. Mdewman6 (talk) 22:15, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- The search term is not limited to celestial objects, but simply "objects" my suggested target lists the most massive objects known - i.e. exactly what is being searched for. Those who are looking for that will be helped, those looking for something else will be no better or worse off than at present so some people win and nobody loses. In contrast with deletion nobody wins, and in some cases (depending on multiple factors) may actually be hindered, there is no question which is the better outcome for the encyclopaedia. Thryduulf (talk) 22:43, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Well, then the question would be what an object is- few people would consider groups of stars, galaxies, etc. a single object, so targeting the 10^42 section still doesn't make any sense to me. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Readers who read that section and decide that none of the entries there meet their definition of "object" are capable of scrolling up until they reach something they consider an object. (and, to be clear, I support retargeting the redirects with "object" there). * Pppery * it has begun... 03:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- I still think we are going out of our way to bend over backwards to try to make these acceptable redirects. These partial title match redirects were recently created, and the creator supports deletion. Mdewman6 (talk) 15:32, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- So? Creators do not own pages, and these are plausible search terms with a clear target that matches exactly what is being searched. Doing our best to help people find the content they are looking for is our job, yet you propose we go out of our way to make finding content harder. Thryduulf (talk) 17:06, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- The point is that these do not have a "clear target that matches exactly what is being searched" for the reasons I have stated above. I guess we can just agree to disagree on this one (I believe you and I are more often than not in agreement, however), but I believe that few if any users who regularly work with redirects would have created these redirects, but now that they exist, we are trying to shoehorn them in somewhere rather than return to the recent status quo of their non-existence. Mdewman6 (talk) 16:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- If you think that someone searching for "most massive known objects" being taken to the heaviest section of a list of objects ordered by mass will not find what they are looking for then there really is nothing we can do but agree to disagree because I can't think of anything (whether it exists on Wikipedia or not) that could be a closer match. Thryduulf (talk) 18:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- The point is that these do not have a "clear target that matches exactly what is being searched" for the reasons I have stated above. I guess we can just agree to disagree on this one (I believe you and I are more often than not in agreement, however), but I believe that few if any users who regularly work with redirects would have created these redirects, but now that they exist, we are trying to shoehorn them in somewhere rather than return to the recent status quo of their non-existence. Mdewman6 (talk) 16:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- So? Creators do not own pages, and these are plausible search terms with a clear target that matches exactly what is being searched. Doing our best to help people find the content they are looking for is our job, yet you propose we go out of our way to make finding content harder. Thryduulf (talk) 17:06, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- I still think we are going out of our way to bend over backwards to try to make these acceptable redirects. These partial title match redirects were recently created, and the creator supports deletion. Mdewman6 (talk) 15:32, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Readers who read that section and decide that none of the entries there meet their definition of "object" are capable of scrolling up until they reach something they consider an object. (and, to be clear, I support retargeting the redirects with "object" there). * Pppery * it has begun... 03:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Well, then the question would be what an object is- few people would consider groups of stars, galaxies, etc. a single object, so targeting the 10^42 section still doesn't make any sense to me. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- The search term is not limited to celestial objects, but simply "objects" my suggested target lists the most massive objects known - i.e. exactly what is being searched for. Those who are looking for that will be helped, those looking for something else will be no better or worse off than at present so some people win and nobody loses. In contrast with deletion nobody wins, and in some cases (depending on multiple factors) may actually be hindered, there is no question which is the better outcome for the encyclopaedia. Thryduulf (talk) 22:43, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget Most massive to Category:Lists of superlatives from where someone can navigate to whatever most massive thing they are looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 15:19, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Users would need to navigate to a subcategory to reach the list articles I mention above, and neither the category nor any subcategory includes the current target. Undoubtedly there are other pages plausibly sought by users not in that category. Again, seems like we should just defer to the search function here- redirecting to a category from a partial search term seems like we are searching too broadly to try to turn a bad redirect into a good one. Mdewman6 (talk) 22:12, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- The point is that search results are less helpful for finding articles about the most massive things than the category of articles listing the most massive things, especially as search results can be several clicks away (depending on the combination of method used to navigate, device, user access levels, etc). Neither the current targets nor any of the other suggested targets are more or less related to this search term than any other so those arbitrarily highlighted articles not being directly in that category is not at all relevant. If someone doesn't want to navigate the category looking for what they want they can try searching again using a more specific search term - i.e. exactly as they could do if we deleted it so its again a choice between an outcome with some winners and no losers versus one with no winners and some significant losers. Thryduulf (talk) 22:50, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Surely we should be bringing users to a page that at least includes lists that actually use "most massive" in their titles; the links available to users reaching the target is certainly relevant to choosing a redirect target or whether we should have a redirect at all. I just don't see how bringing users to a poorly populated category is more helpful than search results to a majority of users. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- We must credit readers with some intelligence - if they are searching for "most massive" then arriving at a page of links to things which includes in its contents various things that are the "most massive" will not be a WP:SURPRISE even if the page title doesn't match their query. If it were otherwise then nearly all redirects from alternative titles would need deleting. On the other hand, as explained, if they aren't looking for that then they are either exactly as able to or more easily able to (depending on their devicem how they arrived at the target, and their access level) find what they are looking for or search again. This is especially the case as search results for "most massive" are less helpful than the category. Thryduulf (talk) 02:37, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Surely we should be bringing users to a page that at least includes lists that actually use "most massive" in their titles; the links available to users reaching the target is certainly relevant to choosing a redirect target or whether we should have a redirect at all. I just don't see how bringing users to a poorly populated category is more helpful than search results to a majority of users. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- The point is that search results are less helpful for finding articles about the most massive things than the category of articles listing the most massive things, especially as search results can be several clicks away (depending on the combination of method used to navigate, device, user access levels, etc). Neither the current targets nor any of the other suggested targets are more or less related to this search term than any other so those arbitrarily highlighted articles not being directly in that category is not at all relevant. If someone doesn't want to navigate the category looking for what they want they can try searching again using a more specific search term - i.e. exactly as they could do if we deleted it so its again a choice between an outcome with some winners and no losers versus one with no winners and some significant losers. Thryduulf (talk) 22:50, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Users would need to navigate to a subcategory to reach the list articles I mention above, and neither the category nor any subcategory includes the current target. Undoubtedly there are other pages plausibly sought by users not in that category. Again, seems like we should just defer to the search function here- redirecting to a category from a partial search term seems like we are searching too broadly to try to turn a bad redirect into a good one. Mdewman6 (talk) 22:12, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There seems to be no consensus thus far
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TartarTorte 23:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, with thanks to Mdewman6 for the detailed explanation why the suggested retargets are poor at best and harmful at worst. -- Tavix (talk) 02:15, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Watered Down
- Watered Down → Trace Adkins (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Watered Down (song) → Trace Adkins (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ] added by 06:03, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Deletion. Special:WhatLinksHere/Watered_Down The term "Watered Down" doesn't appear on the Trace Adkins page at all, though it's one of his song titles. Better to just remove this redirect. If really wanted, it should redirect to the album page, Something's Going On (Trace Adkins album). It was mentioned March 12 2018 under the discussion for Watered, but no action was proposed nor taken for Watered Down Nimbex (talk) 21:36, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep and repoint to Something's Going On (Trace Adkins album). The term did appear on Adkins' article in 2017 when I created the redirect; it was referred to as an album title, although that obviously did not eventuate and the title was changed. There's no point in deleting this when it's still a valid redirect and can just be repointed to the album. In fact, that's what should have been done instead of opening up an RfD. Ss112 05:56, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate or delete. There are multiple other WP:DABMENTIONed topics by the same name: three other songs on the albums Surfing Strange, CVA (album), and Artwork (album); two TV episodes from List of VR Troopers episodes and List of Kevin Spencer episodes; and an album mentioned at Minnie Riperton. A dab page would also be a good place to put a {{Wiktionary}} to wikt:watered down. I've also added Watered Down (song) to this nomination since it should follow whatever happens to Watered Down. None of these topics are notable and the amount of information in Wikipedia about any of them is quite minimal, so I'm not sure it's worth the effort of maintaining a dab page, but certainly this title shouldn't just be a redirect to one of those topics. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 06:03, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate at Watered Down with the draft dab below the redirect and retarget Watered Down (song) there as {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:18, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Moss green
- Moss green → Shades of green#Moss green (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target article, but is a {{R with history}}. Steel1943 (talk) 20:47, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: Could not find this properly located anywhere, so I guess this should be deleted; however, if the content is restored to Shades of green or whatever shade of a color it is that's not green, I'm more than open to retargetting there. TartarTorte 02:32, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
- It was moved to Shades of chartreuse. Peter James (talk) 16:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:58, 18 August 2022 (UTC)- Note: ongoing discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Color#"Shades of" articles may result in the relevant entry at Shades of chartreuse being moved somewhere else. – Scyrme (talk) 21:04, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Shades of chartreuse#Moss green until the color discussion decides otherwise. Jay 💬 07:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Shades of chartreuse#Moss green until the color discussion decides otherwise. Anythingyouwant (talk) 01:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Modernist architect
- Modernist architect → Modern architecture (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Modernist art movements → Modernism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Modernist art → Modern art (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Modernist architecture → Modern architecture (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I feel the three should target the same topic, since something modern is no necessarily modernist. Veverve (talk) 19:20, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
I feel the four should target the same topic, since something modern is no necessarily modernist. Veverve (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
Keep* Modernist architect- While I agree that "modern" doesn't imply "modernist", the article content at Modern architecture is specifically about modernist architecture. Perhaps the article should be moved to Modernist architecture? That title is explicitly included in the lead sentence. Regardless, Modernist architect should point to that article and not the others.Retarget Modernist art- As for the other two, I think they should both target Modernism since Modern art does cover a variety of art movements. – Scyrme (talk) 19:48, 18 August 2022 (UTC)- @Scyrme: sorry, I had forgotten one redirect (I have added it at the bottom of the list). Veverve (talk) 21:20, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- My view remains the same. Modernist architect and Modernist architecture should both point to the article presently located at Modern architecture since the content in that article is explicitly about that topic. I don't object to moving the article to Modernist architecture to make things more explicit, but moving the article is beyond the scope of a 'redirect for discussion'. The other redirects should target Modernism. – Scyrme (talk) 17:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all except Modernist art movements, which should be pointed to Modern art#Art movements and artist groups. In art and architecture, the terms modern and modernist are synonymous, as noted in the first sentence of the Modern architecture article. - Eureka Lott 01:16, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I agree. The section "Art movements and artist groups" lists the Pre-Raphaelites and romanticism. Do those count as "modernism" in the artistic sense? (Maybe they do, I'm not an art expert, but I've never heard them described that way personally.) It also lists photography and feminist art. The list seems to use "modern" broadly synonymously with "contemporary" or "relatively recent" rather than in the sense of modernism. The lead of the article seems to support this, the actual content of which refers to the modern era ("period extending roughly from the 1860s to the 1970s") rather than to the art movement properly called modernism, although as the lead section notes the two are related topics. I still think Modernism is the better target. – Scyrme (talk) 17:19, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Modernism is the WP:broad concept article for the topic, covering art, literature, architecture, music, etc. Modernist art movements should direct readers to more specific material, which we have at Modern art#Art movements and artist groups. If you have concerns about what's included there (and the article explicitly draws distinctions between modern art and contemporary art), that's an issue you can raise for that article, but it isn't a problem with the redirect. - Eureka Lott 22:04, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- It distinguishes them in that it defines "contemporary art" as the era from the 1940s onwards. The distinction provided is one of time period, not art movement. I don't have any problems with what's included. My point was that what's included makes it a bad target for these redirects. However, it could work as 'r from related topic' and I now see that it could be interpreted as a search for a list. I'm changing my vote. – Scyrme (talk) 00:14, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Modernism is the WP:broad concept article for the topic, covering art, literature, architecture, music, etc. Modernist art movements should direct readers to more specific material, which we have at Modern art#Art movements and artist groups. If you have concerns about what's included there (and the article explicitly draws distinctions between modern art and contemporary art), that's an issue you can raise for that article, but it isn't a problem with the redirect. - Eureka Lott 22:04, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget Modernist art to Modernism but keep the other three. It seems to be someone looking for "Modernist art" would likely be looking specifically for Modernism rather than just any art defined temporally as "modern." Since Modern architecture lists "Modernist architecture" as an alternative name in the lede, those redirects should be kept. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:12, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Revised position:
- Keep Modernist architect and Modernist architecture;
- Retarget Modernist art movements to Modern art § Art movements and artist groups (with appropriate rcats);
- Retarget Modernist art to Modernism
- Rationale given in the above discussion. The retargets are effectively a swap. – Scyrme (talk) 00:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:41, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep three, retarget one. As described above, the art community uses the words “modern” and “modernist” synonymously and in contradistinction to the ordinary word “contemporary”. I think that’s stupid because they should have left the word “modern” with its common meaning, and doing otherwise was totally unnecessary because they had the word “modernist” to use as specialized jargon. But that’s the way it is, we shouldn’t try to right great wrongs. I don’t support retargeting Modernist art from Modern art to Modernism, because the proposed target seems more about the movement than the art itself. However, I do support retargeting Modernist art movements (notice the “s” at the end) from Modernism to Modern art#Art movements because the current target seems to emphasize the single overall movement, whereas the proposed target deals more with many sub-movements (plural). Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:04, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Darryl Perry
- Darryl Perry → 2020 New Hampshire gubernatorial election#Libertarian Party (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Darryl W. Perry → 2020 New Hampshire gubernatorial election#Libertarian Party (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This person is a perennial candidate for office and linking to the next/most recent election contested makes this a costly redirect. It seems there's no one single target that works best and thus this redirect should be deleted. TartarTorte 18:45, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment, this is the sort of person we really should have a couple of sentences on somewhere outside of a specific election as it's clear they're plausible search terms - indeed more plausible than candidates who stand only once but who are easy to redirect. In this case Libertarian Party of New Hampshire#2010s is an obvious place to consider as there is a photo of with a 1 sentence bio as the caption there. There Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darryl W. Perry has seven sources that might contain enough reliable information to expand the coverage to a second sentence. Thryduulf (talk) 19:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Libertarian Party of New Hampshire#2010s, as suggested by Thryduulf. Sal2100 (talk) 19:45, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Libertarian Party of New Hampshire#2010s for now, per above. (Of course, if he becomes more notable in the future this redirect can become an article at that time.) Fieari (talk) 05:04, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
井
- 井 → Well-field system (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This is a single character that doesn't by itself refer to any single concept (unless you count well). The only internal link that uses it, is from the XCCS code table where it clearly refers to the symbol itself and we are never going to have an article about it (it could be linked to wikt:井). It doesn't work as a search aid either, because it's ambiguous and may also refer to the Jing (surname) or the Well (Chinese constellation), yet it redirects to a tangentially related topic that wouldn't normally be referred to by a single character. – MwGamera (talk) 17:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate, obviously. Paradoctor (talk) 18:08, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment List of hexagrams of the I Ching § Hexagram 48
is named 井 (jǐng), "Welling"
Paradoctor (talk) 18:08, 25 August 2022 (UTC) - Disambig per Paradoctor. Thryduulf (talk) 18:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. I've drafted a disambiguation page below the redirect. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 10:37, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Princedom of Ongal
- Princedom of Ongal → Croatia–Serbia border dispute#Liberland and other claims (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Kingdom of Enclava → Croatia–Serbia border dispute#Liberland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Principality of Ongal → Croatia–Serbia_border_dispute#Liberland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Verdis (micronation) → Croatia–Serbia border dispute#Liberland and other claims (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Has even less sources than Verdis/Free Republic of Verdis which was declined to become a redirect. Kingdom of Enclava should also be deleted due to lack of sources.— Preceding unsigned comment added by MicroSupporter (talk • contribs) 13:24, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Note I've added the nomination templates above (and am about to tag the redirects) based on my interpretation of what MicroSupporter wrote above, I do not guarantee it is correct and have not yet formed an opinion about the redirects. The targetted section at the border dispute article is just titled "Liberland" so I'll correct that on the Princedom of Ongal redirect without prejudice to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 15:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Note I've added Principality of Ongal to this discussion because it should match Princedom of Ongal - content at the latter title was moved to the former before being redirected. I've still not formed an opinion about the merits of the redirects. Thryduulf (talk) 15:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment OK, the background here seems to be that Croatia and Serbia disagree on whether their border follows the current or former course of the River Danube, this means there are parcels of land that both claim as part of their country and parcels that both claim are part of the other country. The latter parcels have been the location subject of multiple different micronation claims. Four are mentioned at Croatia–Serbia border dispute#Liberland: Liberland, Ongal, Verdis and Enclava.
- Liberland: This one seems to have been deemed notable and has its own article at Liberland.
- Princedom of Ongal/Principality of Ongal: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Principality of Ongal was closed as speedy keep in 2015 as copyediting rather than deletion was proposed. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Principality of Ongal (2nd nomination) was closed as redirect in 2017.
- Verdis: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Free Republic of Verdis closed as delete in 2019, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Verdis closed as speedy delete and salt in 2020. Redirection was suggested in the latter discussion but did not gain consensus (although I hesitate to say there was consensus against). The nominator here, MicroSupporter created Verdis (micronation) as a redirect yesterday. Thryduulf (talk) 15:48, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Enclava: Kingdom of Enclava appears not to have been discussed at AfD at any point, Joy and Bromley86 discussed the article on the talk page in 2015 and that resulted in a redirection to Terra nullius#Land portions along the Danube river, Vyacheslav84 disagreed and reverted Joy a few times, the former saying go to AfD the latter claiming "consensus on the talk page is clear" (personally I don't think 2:1 is a clear consensus) but things have been quiet since 2015 other than MJL retargetting to the main article in 2019.
- Weak keep all as they are mentioned, and while I've not looked in detail it seems that the existence of all the claims is verifiable in reliable sources. Thryduulf (talk) 15:48, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Confederation of Autia, relating to another micronation in this area but which is not mentioned at the target. Thryduulf (talk) 16:05, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Against deletion: the article has independent significance: Kingdom of Enclava: new micro-nation settles for spot on Croat-Serb border The Guardian, Welcome to the world’s newest country — the Kingdom of Enclava The Telegraph, Will there be WAR in Europe? Newly-formed micro 'state' of Enclava ups sticks and moves 200 miles away - to territory already claimed by another new breakaway nation, Phew! Threat of war in Europe averted as newly formed 'micro states' strike deal to divide up 'no man's land' territory in the Balkans they both tried to claim and Introducing the world's newest country (but it doesn't have any citizens yet): The Kingdom of Enclava joins micronations around the globe fighting for recognition Daily Mail, Polish tourists proclaim 'Kingdom of Enclava' Agence France-Presse, ‘Kingdom of Enclava’: The tiny 100sq m country 5000 people want to become a citizen of news.com.au. --Vyacheslav84 (talk) 16:54, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- I think these exist as an alternative to littering the main space. Nobody really cares either way... --Joy [shallot] (talk) 17:39, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as redirects. The existence of these stupid micronation claims has had sufficient significant coverage that the titles should exist as redirects to the article that explains what the basis is for these stupid claims. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:50, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all as redirects. All are sufficiently cited to stay mentioned in the target page, and redirects help readers to locate that content. I have repaired the broken section link with an anchor.– Fayenatic London 18:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all per above. All are mentioned at the appropriate target page and are useful for readers looking for information about the topics. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 05:03, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment if Verdis (micronation) is to be kept, shouldn't Free Republic of Verdis and Verdis be unlocked and turned into redirects as well? They appear to be protected due to abuse but seem notable enough for the articles to be unprotected. Found numerous articles from RTL, Vecernji List, Pagina/12 and some others. MicroSupporter (talk) 07:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- If the consensus here is very clear that Verdis (micronation) is an appropriate redirect then I can see no reason not to recreate at least Free Republic of Verdis, likewise probably Verdis (It isn't quite unambiguous but based on 2 minutes looking it seems to be the best target, others may take a different view); if the consensus here is marginal it may be best to check at WP:DRV before doing so. Whether any content beyond what is there currently should be added to the target is matter for the talk page of that article, I don't have an opinion. If you are proposing an article then that would definitely require consensus - the best way to get that would be to write at draft article that clearly addresses the reasons the article was deleted and then ask to allow recreation. Thryduulf (talk) 10:17, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed. I have added a hatnote at Ongal, and suggest re-creating a redirect at Enclava, as there is more participation here than there was at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_September_11#Enclava. – Fayenatic London 07:27, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- If the consensus here is very clear that Verdis (micronation) is an appropriate redirect then I can see no reason not to recreate at least Free Republic of Verdis, likewise probably Verdis (It isn't quite unambiguous but based on 2 minutes looking it seems to be the best target, others may take a different view); if the consensus here is marginal it may be best to check at WP:DRV before doing so. Whether any content beyond what is there currently should be added to the target is matter for the talk page of that article, I don't have an opinion. If you are proposing an article then that would definitely require consensus - the best way to get that would be to write at draft article that clearly addresses the reasons the article was deleted and then ask to allow recreation. Thryduulf (talk) 10:17, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Vaanku
- Vaanku → Adhan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Vanku → Adhan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Vaank → Adhan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Baanku → Adhan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Baank → Adhan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This used to be the title for Vaanku (film). The film article was moved so the basename could redirect. But Vaanku is not mention in Adhan, so without some justification, this should be undone. MB 04:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Added Vanku, also not mentioned (WP:ASTONISH). Top search hits for this are a Chinese electronics company. MB 04:53, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Added three more similar. MB 17:18, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: IMHO a) Vanku / Vaanku is transliteration of Malayalam word വാങ്ക്. Wikipedia is not dictionary to redirect those transliterations to → Adhan. b) A good option can be to make Vanku / Vaanku as disambiguation page there Vaanku (film) and Adhan both can find mention and any other language any other article too. c) If Vaanku (film) does not find mention in Adhan#In popular culture then it is supposed to find place there.
- Thanks Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 15:14, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - Adhan currently reads
Muslims on the Malabar Coast in India use the Persian term بانگ, Banku, for the call to public prayer.
; these redirects are South Asian variants of that term. However, since these are transliterations of non-English terms, Wikipedia:Redirects in languages other than English would suggest that they all be deleted unless theyare used as the English variant word in some forms of English
. I know that the usual South Asian English term for adhan is azan, however it may be that some communities prefer to use a variant of banku. I'm not familiar enough with South Asian English dialects to know whether variants of banku are plausibly in common use. This is further complicated by one of these variants being shared with the film title, so it's not as simple as deleting. Perhaps disambiguation would be appropriate. – Scyrme (talk) 20:12, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - Adhan currently reads
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:26, 18 August 2022 (UTC)- Related Comment on side note: The rule cited from Wikipedia:Redirects in languages other than English seems to me like (avoidable) systemic bias supported by linguistic hegemony.
- Bookku, 'Encyclopedias = expanding information & knowledge' (talk) 07:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't agree about bias; there are good reasons for limiting such redirects (particularly finding the correct language Wikipedia article when you search in that language) and other language Wikipedias have similar rules for keeping to the main language. Regardless, disputes over what the guidelines ought to be are off-topic for this discussion.
- The disambiguation page Banku already exists, and already links to adhan. Therefore, I suggest:
- – Scyrme (talk) 17:08, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further input on Scyrme's proposal...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Do what Scryme suggests. That looks to be the best all-round. Thryduulf (talk) 10:31, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Nguyen Ngọc Tho
- Nguyen Ngọc Tho → Nguyễn Ngọc Thơ (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
(Disclosure: I nominated this 6 months ago and the result was "No consensus") This is a mostly unused redirect that while WP:CHEAP is highly implausible. It would require someone to have the ability to type the ọ character, but none of the other diacritics. The only languages other than Vietnamese to use ọ in any form are Romangol, Igbo, and Yoruba. I'm arguing it's highly unfeasible someone would be able to type ọ but not any of the other diacritics. TartarTorte 00:09, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - Per the arguments at the previous discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 March 2#Nguyen Ngọc Tho. Even one of the delete votes highlights why this should be kept: "only useful if...". So we have a redirect which might be useful, gets some usage and is clearly unambiguous and harmless, so should be kept. Note also that the argument about correct use of diacritics assumes that the searcher actually knows how to spell this. A7V2 (talk) 07:46, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:53, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and WP:COSTLY/WP:PANDORA. Appealing to CHEAP doesn't work for redirects that have no plausible utility. This is an astronomically implausible typo. And even *if* someone were to manage to type it in (which they won't), they'd still get the correct page as the top search result anyway (if they don't already just get there from the dropdown list of suggestions, which this redirect is currently polluting, and probably where its scant pageviews actually come from). This redirect serves no purpose. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:04, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Could you help me understand the point about polluting the dropdown please? Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 16:54, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- See below, addressed there. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:54, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Could you help me understand the point about polluting the dropdown please? Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 16:54, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per A7V2. WP:PANDORA is nonsense - redirects are decided on their own merits and the existence of one redirect is irrelevant to whether a different one should or should not; WP:COSTLY is wrong more often than it is right. Only a subset of people use the drop-down list of articles to find the page they are looking for and, for those that do, whether they click on the article title or redirect is irrelevant as they will arrive at the same location so there is absolutely no harm (or "pollution") from the redirect appearing there (but see phab:T24251 for a related feature request). Thryduulf (talk) 20:55, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- PANDORA is hardly nonsense. You're saying redirects are decided on their own merits, but this one has no merits. It's an utterly pointless redirect, and if this is fine, then so is every combination of letters with and without diacritics. The existence of which would pollute the search dropdown box to the point where someone using it would be unable to find other similarly named articles. Even one already pushes one entry off the list. (Your phab link is a 404 by the way). That's part of how PANDORA comes into play here. And saying "COSTLY is wrong more often than it is right" is empty rhetoric. It's not wrong here, and I could say the same thing about CHEAP just as easily and meaninglessly. The point is...this is a useless redirect (and you haven't even bothered to argue otherwise). If it were created today, it would be a no-brainer WP:R3. It's not helping anyone find the article, and your stubborn insistence otherwise is just that. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:54, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed the phab link. The point about PANDORA is that whether this redirect is good or bad implies nothing about whether other redirects are good or bad - just because this one evidently helps some people find the article does not mean that any other combination of diacritics will or will not - it it is simply irrelevant to that. The list of suggested articles in the drop down is finite so every redirect prevents something else from being shown, and we don't make it harder for people to find one article just to make it easier for people to find a different article (because then we would need to do the reverse and get stuck in an endless loop), and as previously mentioned the search dropdown is far from the only way people navigate Wikipedia, removing a useful redirect inconveniences people who don't use it without significantly benefiting those who do. Thryduulf (talk) 11:17, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- But it's not helping anyone find the target article! And PANDORA applies just fine if you haven't demonstrated any plausible reason why this particular combination of incorrect diacritics would be more useful than any other combination of incorrect diacritics (spoiler: there isn't any such reason). You keep saying this is useful...but it isn't useful. I checked out that phab link, and it doesn't exactly seem like there's any rush to implement it, especially with the skepticism about unintended side effects. So if and when such a feature gets implemented, then you can appeal to it, but as it stands, it's just a unicorn and irrelevant. And just to reiterate, this is not a useful redirect; it's not helping anyone find the target article; it would be an easy R3 if it were created today; its existence is a net negative to the encyclopedia. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed the phab link. The point about PANDORA is that whether this redirect is good or bad implies nothing about whether other redirects are good or bad - just because this one evidently helps some people find the article does not mean that any other combination of diacritics will or will not - it it is simply irrelevant to that. The list of suggested articles in the drop down is finite so every redirect prevents something else from being shown, and we don't make it harder for people to find one article just to make it easier for people to find a different article (because then we would need to do the reverse and get stuck in an endless loop), and as previously mentioned the search dropdown is far from the only way people navigate Wikipedia, removing a useful redirect inconveniences people who don't use it without significantly benefiting those who do. Thryduulf (talk) 11:17, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- PANDORA is hardly nonsense. You're saying redirects are decided on their own merits, but this one has no merits. It's an utterly pointless redirect, and if this is fine, then so is every combination of letters with and without diacritics. The existence of which would pollute the search dropdown box to the point where someone using it would be unable to find other similarly named articles. Even one already pushes one entry off the list. (Your phab link is a 404 by the way). That's part of how PANDORA comes into play here. And saying "COSTLY is wrong more often than it is right" is empty rhetoric. It's not wrong here, and I could say the same thing about CHEAP just as easily and meaninglessly. The point is...this is a useless redirect (and you haven't even bothered to argue otherwise). If it were created today, it would be a no-brainer WP:R3. It's not helping anyone find the article, and your stubborn insistence otherwise is just that. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:54, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 04:44, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Philalethia
- Philalethia → Philosophy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target. While nominally overlapping a bit with philosophy, it's not synonymous with the term (Philalethia translates literally as "love of truth" in Greek), and I strongly doubt that anyone searching this term on English Wikipedia would be satisfied by the current target. Doesn't appear to be mentioned anywhere else on Wikipedia, which leads me to suggest deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 19:37, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:17, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep; synonymous overlap (since pre-Classical times): 'But history shows it revived by Ammonius Saccas, the founder of the Neo-Platonic School. He and his disciples called themselves "Philalethians" - lovers of the truth; while others termed them the "Analogists," on account of their method of interpreting all sacred legends, symbolical myths and mysteries, by a rule of analogy or correspondence, so that events which had occurred in the external world were regarded as expressing operations and experiences of the human soul'[1][2] (this (one) public domain reference/reprint is widely-available online). One of several/many modern places/groups use both/interchaneably: UK philalethians--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 07:42, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Blavatskian sources are pretty clearly fringe as far as philosophy and religion are concerned, I would only take their usage as definitive if they were the only people that use this term, which doesn't appear to be the case given its use in Greek philosophy. signed, Rosguill talk 15:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Really doesn't matter; many things are redirected to more general topics (some that don't even mention the redirects anymore) like formal reason & formal logic were redirected to reason & logic despite should've kept their own articles. This is a similar case.--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 16:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Blavatskian sources are pretty clearly fringe as far as philosophy and religion are concerned, I would only take their usage as definitive if they were the only people that use this term, which doesn't appear to be the case given its use in Greek philosophy. signed, Rosguill talk 15:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
References
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 18:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete or, failing that, retarget per Scyrme below 16:38, 25 August 2022 (UTC) The 2nd edition of the Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy doesn't mention it, and I couldn't find any English language mentions that did not derive from the Wiktionary entry. There was a shortlived 1811 German publication Philalethia, and two 18th century publications contain the word, all in a theological context. No evidence that anyone used the term as a synonym for "philosophy". Paradoctor (talk) 21:05, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Dchmelik:
synonymous
Is there a source for that? There was a similar claim on Wiktionary in 2009, but it failed verification. Paradoctor (talk) 23:16, 16 August 2022 (UTC)- Yes: updated above. Theosophy (being a Hindu-based philosophy/interreligion) is likely larger than strict & academic neoplatonism but overlaps (I know some who wrote books on these subjects) so regardless of source (derivatives of hers cited widely elsewhere) such usage is 140+ years old and I've come across it frequently... popularity is irrelevant, just that people search for it.--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 06:03, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't understand your !vote then. As Blavatsky defines the term, philalethia is not a synonym of "philosophy", but a particular school founded by Saccas. Paradoctor (talk) 06:48, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- The school of thought he founded was neoplatonism and they called themselves philosophers/philalethians; one of several/many modern places/groups use both/interchangeably: UK philalethians--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 08:23, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- This meaning of "philosophy" is not the topic of philosophy. Paradoctor (talk) 08:30, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- It's clearly a topic in philosophy (as is everything) and moreso (metaphilosophy)--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 10:13, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
a topic in philosophy (as is everything)
We don't redirect everything to "philosophy", do we? More importantly, the term is not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia, let alone defined, so there is nothing to redirect to. Paradoctor (talk) 15:13, 17 August 2022 (UTC)- The Philaletheis Society, College literary societies, etc.--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 16:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- "X" and "X society" are different things. Especially when articles about the latter merely use the word, not define it. It's not even clear if these societies use the term in the same sense as discussed here. One can attach a lot of meanings to "love of truth", considering that there is no consensus on what "truth" is. Paradoctor (talk) 17:53, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Odd to say when your links are categorized under philosophy--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 05:19, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Irrelevant. To keep the redirect, the term needs to be discussed at the target, at a minimum. It isn't, so keeping is out. Since I'm clearly not getting through to you, don't bother replying. I've made my point, the rest is up to the closer. Paradoctor (talk) 13:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Odd to say when your links are categorized under philosophy--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 05:19, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- "X" and "X society" are different things. Especially when articles about the latter merely use the word, not define it. It's not even clear if these societies use the term in the same sense as discussed here. One can attach a lot of meanings to "love of truth", considering that there is no consensus on what "truth" is. Paradoctor (talk) 17:53, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- The Philaletheis Society, College literary societies, etc.--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 16:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- It's clearly a topic in philosophy (as is everything) and moreso (metaphilosophy)--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 10:13, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- This meaning of "philosophy" is not the topic of philosophy. Paradoctor (talk) 08:30, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- The school of thought he founded was neoplatonism and they called themselves philosophers/philalethians; one of several/many modern places/groups use both/interchangeably: UK philalethians--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 08:23, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't understand your !vote then. As Blavatsky defines the term, philalethia is not a synonym of "philosophy", but a particular school founded by Saccas. Paradoctor (talk) 06:48, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Yes: updated above. Theosophy (being a Hindu-based philosophy/interreligion) is likely larger than strict & academic neoplatonism but overlaps (I know some who wrote books on these subjects) so regardless of source (derivatives of hers cited widely elsewhere) such usage is 140+ years old and I've come across it frequently... popularity is irrelevant, just that people search for it.--dchmelik☀️🦉🐝🐍(talk|contrib) 06:03, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Dchmelik:
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 03:43, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- The terms are definitely not synonyms. It could be an {{r from related topic}}, but that's a stretch; it would be like redirecting Transcendence to Philosophy, were the former not already an article, simply because it's a term that has been used in the field. Another problem is that the target doesn't mention the term, so it's not clear to readers without prior knowledge why they were sent there. It may even be misleading, as they may assume the terms are being treated as synonyms (as commenters above have), or they may assume the only reason they were sent there is because they share a common morpheme.
- The term "philaletheia" and its relatives/derivatives are attested on Wikipedia, most as passing mentions or inclusions in proper nouns. In this regard it's comparable to Philomath, except that Philomath also has an article of its own. Of the relevant terms only Philalethia has a redirect, however Philalethes exists as a list of people with that name; Philaletheia, Philalethea, Philalethean, and Philalethian do not exist in any form. Whatever the outcome of this discussion, it should also consider those terms.
- One possible solution is disambiguate between pages mentioning relevant terms, and let readers navigate to the most relevant target. If a reliable source confirms that students of Ammonius Saccas self-identified as "philalethians" then it may be included in the list, but only after relevant material has been added (with citation). Philosophy would not belong on that list. A different option would be retargeting to Aletheia, but that article is a mess and doesn't mention the target either.
- However, I lean towards a retarget of Philalethia and the redlinks above to The Philaletheis Society, which explicitly includes
Philalethean
in the lead and also includes the textNamed for the term philalethea, meaning "truth-loving"
under the heading "History". No reader being sent there would be surprised by being sent there, even if it isn't a perfect target. I would suggest tagging them with {{r from related term}} and {{r with possibilities}}. – Scyrme (talk) 16:04, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Cereal eating by humans
- Cereal eating by humans → Cereal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Another ridiculous redirect created by StrexcorpEmployee (talk · contribs) based on the GPT2 subreddit [15]. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:01, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Recently created and no reasonably likelihood of being useful. Adumbrativus (talk) 07:41, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
- Refine to Cereal#Cereals and civilization (per TartarTorte @12:33 UTC) was Keep). It sounds ridiculous, but this is one of humanity's defining topics. It could already be a list or disambiguation page given existing articles on the English Wikipedia. Louis Waweru Talk 09:31, 28 July 2022 (UTC)
- Refine to Cereal#Cereals and civilization: Per Louis above, this topic is phrased oddly but even the cereal page itself (in the section I am advocating to refine it to) says
Cereals were the foundation of human civilization. [...] The term Fertile Crescent implies the spatial dependence of civilization on cereals. [...] Numerous Chinese imperial edicts stated: “Agriculture is the foundation of this empire,” while the foundation of agriculture were the Five Grains.
TartarTorte 12:33, 28 July 2022 (UTC) - That section title has been renamed and is now Cereal#Ancient history and the Middle Ages. All the content about cereals and civilization look out of place now with the new title. I would oppose refining to "Ancient history and the Middle Ages" only for the reason that the previous section "Prehistory" also mention that humans ate cereals. Courtesy ping CactiStaccingCrane as the editor who made the changes since the time of this nomination. Jay
06:47, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Due to section reworking complications.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:13, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. May sound ridiculous, but is ultimately harmless and not implausible as users who are learning English or speak English as a second language may enter this search term. Joyce-stick (talk) 23:26, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
- Weak keep
(or "Refine to Cereal#Cereals and civilization"). Yeah, that's an odd way to phrase it ... I now want to go look for a sentient box or bowl of cereal that is eating something while nearby some humans ... but that's so far-fetched that if anyone is searching this phrase, they are most likely intending to arrive at the current target. Steel1943 (talk) 21:44, 7 August 2022 (UTC) Delete unless the target can be refined. As per my comment above, I don't see a single section for refining.Jay 💬 05:20, 9 August 2022 (UTC)- Comment: I don't have a problem with the retarget to the renamed section. It still covers cereal eating by humans as described above as the wording is still largely the same and talks about the importance of cereal eating to human history. So that's advocating the retarget to Cereal#Ancient history and the Middle Ages. TartarTorte 12:30, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- Refine to Cereal#History for still containing the most relevant information that this phrase may refer to despite the slight section rearrangement. Deletion is too extreme here IMO. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 17:07, 11 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:31, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
- Refine to Cereal#History per mellohi. signed, Rosguill talk 21:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)
- Am I the only one who thinks this is just an incredibly unlikely search term? Delete. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- No, me too, but I respected Joyce-stick's
users who are learning English
comment. Jay 💬 04:31, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- No, me too, but I respected Joyce-stick's
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:31, 25 August 2022 (UTC)- Delete - The search term
"cereal+eating+by+humans"
gives only two pages of results on Google, all of them are either this discussion and redirect, or Wikipedia clones autocopying Wikipedia. If the redirect had not been created, they would not exist at all. The only exception (unless I missed something) is the post on Reddit's r/SubSimulatorGPT2 which is itself a link to Wikipedia, as noted by the nominator. This subreddit is a simulator, so the discussion at that location is bot-generated; it's not an actual human discussion. - In light of that, I don't find arguments that this a plausible search term convincing. The arguments for keeping it are being too charitable. More plausible terms would be cereal consumption by humans, consumption of cereal by humans, consumption of cereals by humans human cereal consumption, and human consumption of cereal/cereals/cereal products. If this topic needs redirects to aid navigation, turn these phrases into redirects instead; any of them would be far more helpful. All of these return results, attesting to the use of these phrases outside Wikipedia.
- Even human cereal eating would be more plausible, if the argument is that learners may not know the word "consumption"; it returns at least one example of actual human use, although it seems to be the only real result, the others being lists of tags that happen to put these words next to each other. The term humans eating cereals may work better; it returns multiple examples of use, including some that explicitly reference historical and prehistoric consumption.
- tl;dr - Delete this redirect; it can be replaced by better ones if needed. – Scyrme (talk) 18:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - The search term
August 24
Badami (disambiguiation)
- Badami (disambiguiation) → Badami (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Created in error (G6) and deletion requested by sole author (G7), but speedy deletion for such typos is usually contested. Certes (talk) 22:14, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per G6 and G7. I'm not sure why anyone would contest a typo like this? Thryduulf (talk) 22:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Past comments have been similar to those for "Title (Disambiguation)" below: broadly in favour of deletion (as am I), but with significant numbers arguing that the misspelling is harmless and useful. Certes (talk) 10:45, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- I supported "keep" below but ain't doing that here because miscapitalisation tendency is much higher than adding an additional letter from 26 available options into a 15-letter word. Someone may still make this mistake, but the misspelling is still pretty implausible nonetheless. Pretty sure UIK isn't a redirect to UK. But, if you look at the creations of extremely new editors, you'd find that they often create miscapitalised title for even general topics, against MOS guidelines, because they do make this mistake in the search bar. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 14:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Past comments have been similar to those for "Title (Disambiguation)" below: broadly in favour of deletion (as am I), but with significant numbers arguing that the misspelling is harmless and useful. Certes (talk) 10:45, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete: WP:RDAB (Errors in the act of disambiguation), and G6 (error), G7 (author request). —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:23, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 09:46, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete: WP:G7 and WP:G6 TartarTorte 23:16, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Sans domicile fixe
- Sans domicile fixe → No fixed abode (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Appears to be a case of WP:RLOTE, no particular affinity between French and the target topic. Unless evidence can be provided the French phrase is a formal term in English, deletion seems appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 18:12, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Retarget to Bratsch (band)#Discography:As they have an album called Sans Domicile Fixe TartarTorte 18:33, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:36, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambig - Raphaël Faÿs#Discography also has a work by this title. I note that Bratsch (band) is currently at AfD, if it is deleted then it should just be retargetted to Raphaël Faÿs. It's also worth pointing out that while the literal translation of the title is "no fixed abode" in French it has the more specific meaning of "Homeless person" according to passing mentions here and wikt:Sans domicile fixe. Thryduulf (talk) 22:33, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per Thryduulf between the Faÿs song, the Bratsch album (if not deleted), and Homelessness in France. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 07:10, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate including Homelessness in France per my reasoning above about Bratsch and also due to Thryduulf and mellohi!'s suggestions. TartarTorte 18:05, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
Needles
- Needles → The Needles (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The redirect was retargeted a couple of months ago from Needle to its current target. This redirect had been targeting Needle since 2007 without being changed. Shouldn't this redirect go back to retargeting Needle as a {{R from plural}}? Steel1943 (talk) 17:07, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment at the same time Clarityfiend changed the target, they also moved the plural entries from Needle to The Needles. So someone searching for a plural topic will find it at the current target but someone searching for an article we title in the singular will not. I guess the change was done for length reasons? (By my count 9 entries for "The Needles", 14 for "Needles", 24 for "Needle" and 1 for "The Needle", and a 23/25 split feels better than a 9/39 split) but it appears to have been done boldly. I think it might be worth first discussing how we want the dab pages organised (a single dab page is worth considering, keeping all the places together would imo be beneficial for example; maybe an alternative split) and then think about redirects once that is decided. Thryduulf (talk) 17:47, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Needle as an {{R from plural}}. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 19:42, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Needle as an {{R from plural}} and move "Needles" entries from The Needles (disambiguation) to Needle. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:05, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Needle as an {{R from plural}} and edit The Needles (disambiguation) to clarify that stuff listed there is not normally divided into components each of which is a single needle. Anythingyouwant (talk) 18:26, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Irish Internationals
- Irish Internationals → Ireland national football team (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not at title match for any of the topics at the target page. Without that connection, the use of the word "Internationals" in the redirect is potentially vague, and could refer to various topics such as any of the pages beginning with "Irish International". Steel1943 (talk) 15:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Irish Internationals are players who have played for Ireland in an international match in at least soccer, rugby, cricket, hockey, fencing and probably at least most other sports that feature one or more international teams representing Ireland (either the Republic or the whole island, depending on the sport) so the current target is definitely too narrow. Irish International is a badminton tournament, so that isn't a good target either. Thryduulf (talk) 16:43, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
Reticulating splines
- Reticulating splines → Composite Bézier curve (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
While splines are mentioned at the target, reticulation is not: "Reticulating splines" is a meme that first appeared as a loading-screen buffer message in SimCity and other games by Maxis. Readers are unlikely to find anything relevant to their intended search at the current target, and I'm not seeing anywhere else on Wikipedia where we cover this phrase in detail. Deletion thus seems appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 15:28, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Sadly delete per nom. I'm amazed we don't have any content on this, but we don't. Courtesy ping to Mortee who has this on their to do list. Thryduulf (talk) 15:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you Thryduulf, I appreciate the ping. Delete seems right to me. It doesn't quite work as a redirect. I was never sure I'd be able to write an article that would stick for the meme either, but that's the way forward if we want to have a target for this title, I think. › Mortee talk 17:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete wow this takes me back. Anyways, it's still just an obscure inside joke for Maxis games. --Lenticel (talk) 02:00, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Color Line (Philadelphia SEPTA Name of Line)
- Blue Line (Philadelphia SEPTA Media/Elwyn Line) → Media/Wawa Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Purple Line (Philadelphia SEPTA Airport Line) → Airport Line (SEPTA) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Brown Line (Philadelphia SEPTA Chestnut Hill East Line) → Chestnut Hill East Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Purple Line (Philadelphia SEPTA Cynwyd Line) → Cynwyd Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Blue Line (Philadelphia SEPTA West Trenton Line) → West Trenton Line (SEPTA) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Brown Line (Philadelphia SEPTA Lansdale/Doylestown Line) → Lansdale/Doylestown Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This is a highly unnatural disambiguator to the point of implausibility. While it is not a double disambiguator it contains the entire target's former name in it. Media/Elwyn Line goes to the same place. TartarTorte 14:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: As a note as well, it does not seem like the Media/Elwyn (recently renamed to Media/Wawa Line) is really ever referred to as the Blue Line anyways. SEPTA's regional rail lines are not given color designated names. The Blue Line with regards to SEPTA, would almost exclusively refer to the Market-Frankford Line. TartarTorte 14:43, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Recently created and implausible. SEPTA Regional Rail line are colored on maps but never textually identified as such. Mackensen (talk) 16:29, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: After Mackensen's initial delete !vote, I found 5 more redirects that follow the same pattern. I don't think a procedural relist is needed as they were bundled on the same day, but I wanted to note as the nom that the bundling happened after Mackensen's initial !vote and that !vote was specifically on Blue Line (Philadelphia SEPTA Media/Elwyn Line). TartarTorte 19:10, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as never ever going to be typed into Wikipedia. The "Purple Line" of Septa isn't any of these things, then nobody would type "Philadelphia Septa," etc. Seems to be done by a vandal and quite possibly we can speedy delete this. Sir Joseph (talk) 19:29, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment as an FYI, the redirect creator has been blocked. Sir Joseph (talk) 20:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per Sir Joseph. Icabobin (talk) 13:49, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Hyposomnia
- Hyposomnia → Insomnia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Term not mentioned at target. I suggest retargeting to Sleep disorder where it appears once, or as a soft redirect to its Wiktionary entry at wikt:hyposomnia. CycloneYoris talk! 09:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Split two articles. In insomnia, one generally fails to sleep, and even in cases they manage to sleep, they still wake up restless but with no feeling of tiredness. In case of hyposomnia, one involuntarily sleeps too little and feels restless and tired afterwards. Huge difference in how two conditions are treated. Erkin Alp Güney 10:22, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to sleep disorder. According to NIH, “Hypersomnia may be caused by another sleep disorder (such as narcolepsy or sleep apnea), dysfunction of the autonomic nervous system, or drug or alcohol abuse. In some cases it results from a physical problem, such as a tumor, head trauma, or injury to the central nervous system.” Anythingyouwant (talk) 14:51, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
"Title (Disambiguation)" redirects to disambiguation pages
- The Needles (Disambiguation) → The Needles (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Yongle (Disambiguation) → Yongle (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Pecs (Disambiguation) → Pecs (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Australian national football team (Disambiguation) → Australia national football team (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Lally (Disambiguation) → Lally (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Nightcall (Disambiguation) → Night Call (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Strawberry Shortcake (Disambiguation) → Strawberry shortcake (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Frank Hansen (Disambiguation) → Frank Hansen (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Houston (Disambiguation) → Houston (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Underworld (Disambiguation) → Underworld (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Primorsky (Disambiguation) → Primorsky (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Gash (Disambiguation) → Gash (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Ynys Môn (Disambiguation) → Ynys Môn (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- George Johnston (Disambiguation) → George Johnston (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- The Reason (Disambiguation) → The Reason (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Khanda (Disambiguation) → Khanda (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Mobile Infantry (Disambiguation) → Mobile infantry (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Andrew Duncan (Disambiguation) → Andrew Duncan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Archway (Disambiguation) → Archway (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Murphy's Law (Disambiguation) → Murphy's Law (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Coy (Disambiguation) → Coy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Rea (Disambiguation) → Rea (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- C/K (Disambiguation) → CK (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Second Avenue (Disambiguation) → Second Avenue (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Massacre (Disambiguation) → Massacre (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Boke (Disambiguation) → Boke (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Landslide (Disambiguation) → Landslide (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Dove (Disambiguation) → Dove (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- ELO (Disambiguation) → Elo (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Paternity (Disambiguation) → Paternity (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- LSA (Disambiguation) → LSA (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- CHF (Disambiguation) → CHF (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Frosty (Disambiguation) → Frosty (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- New Zealand Railways (Disambiguation) → New Zealand Railways (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Hayton (Disambiguation) → Hayton (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Ethereal (Disambiguation) → Ethereal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- The Chaser (Disambiguation) → Chaser (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Zhonghua (Disambiguation) → Zhonghua (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Cherry Hill (Disambiguation) → Cherry Hill (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Leroy Jenkins (Disambiguation) → Leroy Jenkins (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Mick Barry (Disambiguation) → Michael Barry (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- SBC (Disambiguation) → SBC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- LAX (Disambiguation) → Lax (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Groom (Disambiguation) → Groom (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- PSM (Disambiguation) → PSM (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- PPC (Disambiguation) → PPC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Stadia (Disambiguation) → Stadia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Philip Dunne (Disambiguation) → Philip Dunne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Not Without My Daughter (Disambiguation) → Not Without My Daughter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Chao (Disambiguation) → Chao (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Thomas Reynolds (Disambiguation) → Thomas Reynolds (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Tom Reynolds (Disambiguation) → Thomas Reynolds (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Red Card (Disambiguation) → Red card (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- The Wave (Disambiguation) → The Wave (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Love child (Disambiguation) → Love child (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Donna (Disambiguation) → Donna (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Malda (Disambiguation) → Malda (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- El Dorado (Disambiguation) → El Dorado (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9 to 5 (Disambiguation) → 9 to 5 (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Millions (Disambiguation) → Millions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 1% Rule (Disambiguation) → One percent (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Middle man (Disambiguation) → Middle man (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Sky Tower (Disambiguation) → Sky Tower (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Bundesrat (Disambiguation) → Bundesrat (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Six Pack (Disambiguation) → Six pack (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Apis (Disambiguation) → Apis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- EDE (Disambiguation) → Ede (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Has (Disambiguation) → Has (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Polynesian (Disambiguation) → Polynesian (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Cave lion (Disambiguation) → Cave lion (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Saint Thomas University (Disambiguation) → St. Thomas University (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Ireland national football team (Disambiguation) → Ireland national football team (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- The T (Disambiguation) → T (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- St. James' Church (Disambiguation) → St. James' Church (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Holy Roman Church (Disambiguation) → Church of Rome (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Lex (Disambiguation) → Lex (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Florida (Disambiguation) → Florida (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Witness for the Prosecution (Disambiguation) → Witness for the Prosecution (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Scott Thompson (Disambiguation) → Scott Thompson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Golden Age (Disambiguation) → Golden Age (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Fairfield (Disambiguation) → Fairfield (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Fifth dimension (Disambiguation) → Fifth Dimension (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Fifth Dimension (Disambiguation) → Fifth Dimension (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Thomas Kelly (Disambiguation) → Thomas Kelly (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Red Dragon (Disambiguation) → Red Dragon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Teeth (Disambiguation) → Tooth (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Rao (Disambiguation) → Rao (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- ICC (Disambiguation) → ICC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- The Departure (Disambiguation) → Departure (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Status Quo (Disambiguation) → Status Quo (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Sati (Disambiguation) → Sati (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Scarborough (Disambiguation) → Scarborough (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- US (Disambiguation) → Us (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Age (Disambiguation) → Age (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Goth (Disambiguation) → Goth (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Berber (Disambiguation) → Berber (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Bubble (Disambiguation) → Bubble (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Task force (Disambiguation) → Task force (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- East Of Eden (Disambiguation) → East of Eden (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- East of Eden (Disambiguation) → East of Eden (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- CASE (Disambiguation) → Case (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Uri (Disambiguation) → Uri (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- VIP (Disambiguation) → VIP (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Timpanogos (Disambiguation) → Timpanogos (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- The Border (Disambiguation) → Border (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Phenomenology (Disambiguation) → Phenomenology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Sa (Disambiguation) → SA (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Mac (Disambiguation) → Mac (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Top Gear (Disambiguation) → Top Gear (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Celtic (Disambiguation) → Celtic (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- List (Disambiguation) → List (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Ajax (Disambiguation) → Ajax (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Zildjian (Disambiguation) → Zildjian (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Task Force (Disambiguation) → Task force (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Priscilla Chan (Disambiguation) → Priscilla Chan (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- TSN (Disambiguation) → TSN (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Animal Crossing (Disambiguation) → Animal Crossing (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Marlboro (Disambiguation) → Marlboro (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- John Madden (Disambiguation) → John Madden (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Property (Disambiguation) → Property (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete per WP:RDAB due to the capitalized "D" in "(Disambiguation)", and all of the nominated redirects target disambiguation pages. Steel1943 (talk) 08:28, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all per nom, after checking that they have no meaningful incoming links (which should be fixed at the originating page). Hqb (talk) 09:26, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all. Borderline WP:G6
unambiguously created in error
. Certes (talk) 09:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC) Delete all after fixing links per Hqb. Borderline WP:G6(talk) 09:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)unambiguously created in error
. Certes- Comment: I re-verified that all of the nominated redirects have no incoming links in the "article" namespace. Steel1943 (talk) 10:00, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Weak keep all. They might not have any incoming links, but someone might hold the ⇧ Shift key for too long, which'll still get them to their destinations. Regards, SONIC678 13:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all. 1. Wikipedia:RDAB is part of Wikipedia:Redirects are costly, which is just an essay, not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines. 2. Wikipedia:Redirect, a Wikipedia editing guideline, clearly states that a major reason why deletion of redirects is harmful is: "if a redirect is reasonably old (or is the result of moving a page that has been there for quite some time), then it is possible that its deletion will break incoming links (such links coming from older revisions of Wikipedia pages, from edit summaries, from other Wikimedia projects or from elsewhere on the internet, do not show up in "What links here")". All these redirects are results of moving, and most of them are older than ten years. Their titles, although having capitalized D, are harmless. And, as Wikipedia:Redirect says, there may be incoming links that do not show up in "What links here". So, these redirects should be kept. --Neo-Jay (talk) 16:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Regarding "
...1. Wikipedia:RDAB is part of Wikipedia:Redirects are costly, which is just an essay, not one of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines
": That right there is why I created this nomination ... to test the strength of the essay. If this discussion ends with either "no consensus" or "keep", the part in WP:RDAB referencing redirects ending with "(Disambiguation)" should be removed from the essay. (WP:RDAB is very heavily cited when it comes to redirects such as these to a point where it is figuratively a guideline, though obviously technically not.) Steel1943 (talk) 16:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Regarding "
- Delete: I created this redirect a long time ago by moving a doubly-mistitled dab page to its correct title. The correct redirect with small "d" exists. PamD 16:31, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- This comment refers to The Wave (Disambiguation). Steel1943 (talk) 16:34, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all per Neo-Jay - old, harmless and potentially useful. I additionally don't see any benefits from deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 17:49, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all per Neo-Jay. There is no harm in keeping these and no benefit in deleting them. At least some (Australian national football team, Massacre and Coy, for example) have incoming links from non-article spaces and there is no benefit in needlessly turning those links red. Station1 (talk) 19:07, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all and fix incoming links if necessary. There is no point to these redirects compared to making redirects to any disambiguation page with the word "disambiguation" capitalized, which would clearly not be beneficial. Not convinced by Neo-Jay's argument as it's highly unlikely many people actually use these redirects (I spot-checked a few and they all had zero pageviews in the past month). Elli (talk | contribs) 19:19, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all. We have a very robust search bar that will take readers to the right place, even if they accidentally hold shift for too long, as Sonic678 fears. Short of blindly typing directly into the url bar, the likelihood of these redirects actually y'know redirecting someone is infinitesimal. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:34, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- People use a great variety of different ways to find content on Wikipedia, only some of them are case insensitive - indeed many people (myself included) do frequently navigate via the URL bar. People have still yet to identify any actual benefits that will accrue from deleting these. Thryduulf (talk) 22:14, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all per Neo-Jay et al. These are all harmless examples of {{R from other capitalisation}}, and they take readers exactly where they intend to go to. Absolutely no benefit would result from deletion. CycloneYoris talk! 22:46, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment XFDCloser is giving a "too many values" error due to too many pages being nominated at once. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 07:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all: Neo-Jay makes good points, and it definately seeems to me that the adage if it ain't broken, don't try to fix it applies. -- chris_j_wood (talk) 10:52, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all: Although I try to give equal weightage to CHEAP and COSTLY, I sometimes find myself more convinced by the CHEAP arguments. On mainspace R from miscapitalisation is completely accepted, only because people do make that mistake. Same people can the same mistake for dab pages. Also, the "d" of disambiguation comes right after "(", shift key issues may obviously arise. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:39, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep – CHEAP, avoid breaking possible incoming links from other websites. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 11:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
Keep all That type of redirect performs an important function in daily maintenance preventing unneccessary alerts to disambiguation pages (basicly fooling the maintenance bots into believing that this is not a link to a fill blown disambiguation page). The Banner talk 11:40, 25 August 2022 (UTC)- @The Banner: That's absolutely true for the version with a lowercase d, but the uppercase D variants aren't used for that purpose. Certes (talk) 12:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, I did not notice the capital. The Banner talk 12:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- @The Banner: That's absolutely true for the version with a lowercase d, but the uppercase D variants aren't used for that purpose. Certes (talk) 12:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all: Before someone sees this a justification to start creating more of these as useful. MB 15:05, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- We should not be discouraging the creation of useful redirects. That is completely contrary to the spirit of an NPOV encyclopaedia. Thryduulf (talk) 16:49, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- A keep verdict might persuade editors that (Disambiguation) redirects (big D) are useful and that more should be created. That would not seem helpful. Certes (talk) 16:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- If people find them useful then creating them would, by definition, be helpful. Thryduulf (talk) 18:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, there's about 500 of these type of redirects currently in existence on the English Wikipedia. (I ran out of UTC time to nominate them all the day I created this nomination.) From what I could tell, about 95% of them are {{R from move}}s left over from correcting or removing the disambiguator. Steel1943 (talk) 22:02, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- That's an argument for keeping them - we should always (and generally do) keep redirects from moves unless there is some specific reason the old name is harmful. Spelling "Disambiguation" with a capital letter instead of a lowercase one is not harmful. Thryduulf (talk) 22:11, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- It is not an argument for keeping or deleting. It is a statement that the titles needed to be corrected. In addition, we don't always keep {{R from move}}s, as you stated which I agree with; in this instance, I believe the harm in these redirects existing outweigh their usefulness since over the two decades Wikipedia has existed, bots and templates and other things recognize the use of "(disambiguation)", not "(Disambiguation)". In fact, the latter existing but not the former will most likely not trigger the creation of the former, which is more harmful to templates and other automated processes of Wikipedia. In fact, some saying this now has convinced me that if these redirects get deleted, there should be a title creation blacklist entry preventing titles that contain the phrase "(Disambiguation)". Steel1943 (talk) 22:31, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- There's just the one legitimate use, Ø (Disambiguation), not to be confused with the dab Ø (disambiguation). Certes (talk) 23:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Once again, as nobody has yet managed to articulate anything that stands up to even the briefest scrutiny, what harm? How can these be "corrected" when they are not incorrect in the first place - they take readers to the exact page they are looking for. If redirects with "Disambiguation" in the title cause issues for automated tools then it is those tools that are the problem and should be fixed or replaceed - benefits to readers are always more important than the convenience of editors and programmers. Thryduulf (talk) 02:27, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- This is most likely the one case where catering to bots and templates is more important than any other search functionality. In addition, the whole "disambiguation page" concept is a Wikipedia invention that should be treated as so: There really isn't a need to have disambiguators using "(Disambiguation)" with a capital "D" to exist, and there have been a good amount of points brought so far in this discussion as of why the existence of the redirects is both unnecessary and somewhat harmful. Steel1943 (talk) 02:35, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- It is not an argument for keeping or deleting. It is a statement that the titles needed to be corrected. In addition, we don't always keep {{R from move}}s, as you stated which I agree with; in this instance, I believe the harm in these redirects existing outweigh their usefulness since over the two decades Wikipedia has existed, bots and templates and other things recognize the use of "(disambiguation)", not "(Disambiguation)". In fact, the latter existing but not the former will most likely not trigger the creation of the former, which is more harmful to templates and other automated processes of Wikipedia. In fact, some saying this now has convinced me that if these redirects get deleted, there should be a title creation blacklist entry preventing titles that contain the phrase "(Disambiguation)". Steel1943 (talk) 22:31, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- That's an argument for keeping them - we should always (and generally do) keep redirects from moves unless there is some specific reason the old name is harmful. Spelling "Disambiguation" with a capital letter instead of a lowercase one is not harmful. Thryduulf (talk) 22:11, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, there's about 500 of these type of redirects currently in existence on the English Wikipedia. (I ran out of UTC time to nominate them all the day I created this nomination.) From what I could tell, about 95% of them are {{R from move}}s left over from correcting or removing the disambiguator. Steel1943 (talk) 22:02, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- If people find them useful then creating them would, by definition, be helpful. Thryduulf (talk) 18:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- A keep verdict might persuade editors that (Disambiguation) redirects (big D) are useful and that more should be created. That would not seem helpful. Certes (talk) 16:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- We should not be discouraging the creation of useful redirects. That is completely contrary to the spirit of an NPOV encyclopaedia. Thryduulf (talk) 16:49, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: In regards to all the comments above regarding "shift key issues" since the "D" is immediately after the "("; these redirects existing are actually causing an issue with Wikipedia's search function. Wikipedia's search function is only case sensitive when an exact title match exists to what was typed in. In other words, if these "(Disambiguation)" redirects are deleted, when a reader types the hypothetically deleted "(Disambiguation)" titles using Wikipedia's search function, the title that will be used will be the closest capitalization mismatch, which would be their respective existing "(disambiguation)", lowercase "d" titles. (Somewhat unrelated tangent: The same applies to hyphens versus spaces: If a hyphen is used in a search term but the title with a hyphen doesn't exist but the same title exists with a space where the hyphen was typed, the search function returns the title with a space instead. I've been looking for a page in the "Wikipedia:" and "Help:" namespaces that explains all of this, but I couldn't find one: Surprisingly, the current state of Help:Searching doesn't seem to explain what I just explained.) Steel1943 (talk) 15:40, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- You make the mistake of assuming that everybody uses the internal search engine to find the pages they are looking for, but this is not the case. Our job is to help people find the content they are looking for whatever search method they are using, not just those people using the internal search engine. Thryduulf (talk) 16:47, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- I'm making no such assumption; I'm really big on search optimization, and in my time and experience of working on the functionality of redirects and searching (experience that you have as well), my thoughts are that any other first or third-party search methods would be capitalization insensitive as well, so I don't see your point to be really valid in this case. And adding onto the claim of my aforementioned statement, the only use these redirects would have is to be linked, and there is absolutely no reason why these titles should ever be linked. Steel1943 (talk) 21:46, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- While search engines are generally case insensitive, search engines are not the only method people use to find pages on Wikipedia. Some of those methods, for example URL entry and links on other websites, are case sensitive. It is also not the case that the only use of these redirects is links - people intentionally navigate directly to disambiguation pages, for example I do it when I want to find a topic that I know or suspect is not the primary topic for the term but I don't know what the title of the article is; other people have said they use disambiguation pages to find out what topics we have for a given title. Finally, there is your statement that
there is absolutely no reason why these titles should ever be linked
- why not? I don't personally have a reason to link to them at present, but it's an extremely bold claim you are making that nobody does or will ever have a reason to link to these pages so I'd like to know on what basis you are making it. The feeling I'm getting is increasingly strained or desperate (neither quite the right word) attempts to convert a personal dislike of something harmless into some, any, justification for deletion. This is not a search optimisation question, having only one redirect offers no benefits over having both. It's a very simple question of "does anybody find this useful?" and the very simple answer to that is "yes". Keeping it costs us nothing, costs our readers nothing, and costs anybody linking to it nothing. Thryduulf (talk) 22:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)- "
Why not?
" See my last response. (Running out of real life time right now; otherwise, my response probably would have been more detailed and answered more of the statement and more of the points.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:35, 25 August 2022 (UTC) - For the record, I have now had time to read the rest of the statement, and I don't have anything to add other than what I stated previously since it seems to encompass responding to the statment fully. Steel1943 (talk) 02:40, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- "
- While search engines are generally case insensitive, search engines are not the only method people use to find pages on Wikipedia. Some of those methods, for example URL entry and links on other websites, are case sensitive. It is also not the case that the only use of these redirects is links - people intentionally navigate directly to disambiguation pages, for example I do it when I want to find a topic that I know or suspect is not the primary topic for the term but I don't know what the title of the article is; other people have said they use disambiguation pages to find out what topics we have for a given title. Finally, there is your statement that
- I'm making no such assumption; I'm really big on search optimization, and in my time and experience of working on the functionality of redirects and searching (experience that you have as well), my thoughts are that any other first or third-party search methods would be capitalization insensitive as well, so I don't see your point to be really valid in this case. And adding onto the claim of my aforementioned statement, the only use these redirects would have is to be linked, and there is absolutely no reason why these titles should ever be linked. Steel1943 (talk) 21:46, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- You make the mistake of assuming that everybody uses the internal search engine to find the pages they are looking for, but this is not the case. Our job is to help people find the content they are looking for whatever search method they are using, not just those people using the internal search engine. Thryduulf (talk) 16:47, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all The arguments for keeping are not convincing. That deletion would break external links is actually a good thing. Keeping promotes misspellings, and incoming sites do not get feedback that would allow them to know when to fix a link.
- That links from old revisions/edit summaries are broken is an issue with the Mediawiki software. When an old revision is rendered, internal links should not point to the current versions, but to the revision of the target that existed at the same time as the revision linked from. The Wayback Machine does it, no reason we can't.
- ( Why aren't dab pages in their own namespace, anyway? ) Paradoctor (talk) 16:25, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- It is not possible to get further away from a "good thing" than intentionally breaking links. As good digitial citizens it is our responsibility to avoid link rot where we can, not actively promote it. How does it benefit us, our readers or the external sites to break these links, causing extra work for all parties, than the zero effort solution of leaving them as is and them just working? Thryduulf (talk) 16:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
How does it benefit us
I hope you didn't stop reading after my second sentence above? ;) Paradoctor (talk) 18:05, 25 August 2022 (UTC)- I read everything you wrote and none of it answers the question I asked, if it did I would not have asked it. These are not misspellings, and anyway we routinely (and correctly) keep redirects from common misspellings because doing so is beneficial to the project and, more importantly, our readers. External sites that link to our redirects may or may not get feedback from the people who follow broken links, and even when they do they may or may not have any (easy) way of changing them - nor can causing unnecessary work and disruption to three parties be of greater benefit than causing no disruption to anybody. Thryduulf (talk) 18:33, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- It is not possible to get further away from a "good thing" than intentionally breaking links. As good digitial citizens it is our responsibility to avoid link rot where we can, not actively promote it. How does it benefit us, our readers or the external sites to break these links, causing extra work for all parties, than the zero effort solution of leaving them as is and them just working? Thryduulf (talk) 16:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per above. A misspelt link > a broken link. (And some of these will inevitably have pageviews from old links.) J947 † edits 01:09, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:RDAB:
User:DPL bot logs all links to DAB pages except ones precisely through a correctly-formed (disambiguation) qualifier as WP:INTDAB errors.
-- Tavix (talk) 02:03, 26 August 2022 (UTC)- We fix bots to work with the encyclopaedia, we don't break the encyclopaedia to work with bots. Thryduulf (talk) 02:25, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- I, for one, welcome our new robot overlords. -- Tavix (talk) 13:02, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- These redirects neither help nor hinder the bots, which are programmed to treat "Title (disambiguation)" (small d) specially but treat "Title (Disambiguation)" (big D) like any other page. They don't need to be kept or deleted for the bots' sake, but should go for other reasons. Certes (talk) 13:48, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- We fix bots to work with the encyclopaedia, we don't break the encyclopaedia to work with bots. Thryduulf (talk) 02:25, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep all per Neo-Jay, Thryduulf etc. No convincing benefit from deletion has been advanced. Some harm may come from deletion. A7V2 (talk) 06:19, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 12:14, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. WP:COSTLY may only be an essay but it is sound good practice. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:13, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
"Title (Disambiguation)" redirects where respective disambiguation pages do not exist
- Toby Beau (Disambiguation) → Toby Beau (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- London Gryphons (Disambiguation) → London Gryphons (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- WTPT (Disambiguation) → WTPT (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Talladega 500 (Disambiguation) → YellaWood 500 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- HTC Desire (Disambiguation) → HTC Desire (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Raised fist (Disambiguation) → Raised fist (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Authoritative (Disambiguation) → Authority (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Foot and mouth disease (Disambiguation) → Foot-and-mouth disease (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Kinesiology (Disambiguation) → Kinesiology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
WP:RDAB error due to capitalization of disambiguator. In addition, the target pages are not disambiguation pages, and their respective disambiguation pages do not exist, and either never existed or were deleted. Steel1943 (talk) 08:27, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all per nom, after double-checking the history of any incoming links. For example, 1985 NASCAR Winston Cup Series pipe-links "Talladega 500" to Talladega 500 (Disambiguation), which currently redirects to YellaWood 500, whereas Talladega 500 itself redirects to GEICO 500, and I can't immediately tell which form would be correct. (E.g., were the YellaWood/GEICO names already established in 1985?) Hqb (talk) 09:42, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Hqb: Good catch on that link to Talladega 500 (Disambiguation) in 1985 NASCAR Winston Cup Series. Seems the link in that article refers to YellaWood 500, so I fixed the link. At this point, none of these redirects have any incoming links in the "article" space. Steel1943 (talk) 09:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all after fixing links per Hqb. Borderline WP:G6
unambiguously created in error
. Certes (talk) 09:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC) - Delete all per nom and above. We don't need to have these sorts of redirects when the target isn't a disambiguation page, as it could WP:ASTONISH readers looking for some meaningful disambiguation. Regards, SONIC678 13:27, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all per SONIC678. Icabobin (talk) 14:15, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all, and, quite frankly, make this a speedy deletion reason. BD2412 T 19:02, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G14. The capitalisation is not an issue, but the targets not being disambiguation pages is. Thryduulf (talk) 19:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Thryduulf: I had originally considered doing that, but apparently, WP:G14 requires the disambiguator to be specifically spelled "(disambiguation)" with no deviations in capitalization or spacing. Steel1943 (talk) 20:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- If you were to suggest at WT:CSD making it case insensitive then I would support that. I would probably support including spacing errors (e.g. "( disambiguation)" but wording would be important). I would need to to see evidence for words other than "disambiguation". Thryduulf (talk) 20:48, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- They're rare; we usually manage to get rid of them. Blackneck (disambugation) is one example. Certes (talk) 21:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- If you were to suggest at WT:CSD making it case insensitive then I would support that. I would probably support including spacing errors (e.g. "( disambiguation)" but wording would be important). I would need to to see evidence for words other than "disambiguation". Thryduulf (talk) 20:48, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- @Thryduulf: I had originally considered doing that, but apparently, WP:G14 requires the disambiguator to be specifically spelled "(disambiguation)" with no deviations in capitalization or spacing. Steel1943 (talk) 20:06, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all per above. What even is the point of these redirects if they redirect to places unexpected. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 08:02, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete in the spirit of WP:G14 and WP:COSTLY. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:15, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per G14. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:09, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
Fukushima Fukushima
- Fukushima Fukushima → Fukushima (city) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
there is nothing in the article about the repeated name being used to refer to the city -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:10, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete This is a misspelling of Fukushima, Fukushima created yesterday. Paradoctor (talk) 05:33, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, this is in reference to Fukushima (the city) in Fukushima (the prefecture). The city is Fukushima, Fukushima. This is the same as the redirects for New York New York, Seattle Washington, Erie Pennsylvania, or any other "[city] [state]" combo you can think of. purplepumpkins (talk) 01:08, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete delete: per nom and Paradoctor. TartarTorte 14:48, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- To give an actual explanation, I don't really think that the other examples cited of place names without the comma are themselves inherently helpful redirects. They do seem to receive some usage, but it seems like if deleted it would be unlikely that someone typing "Seattle Washington" into the search bar would not get to their destination, and in terms of incoming links, they seem to be minimal. TartarTorte 20:10, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Fukushima the city is located in Fukushima Prefecture. I don't find it implausible that someone searching this would omit the comma. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 01:11, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Unless we're going to delete the redirects for every other "city state" redirect, ie New York New York, Seattle Washington, Erie Pennsylvania, Boston Massachusetts, Dallas Texas, Los Angeles California, etc -purplepumpkins (talk) 01:20, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I'm changing my vote (as nominator) after purplepumpkins explanation. I don't think that I should withdraw the nom, since there now votes on both sides. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as a valid city state (prefecture) redirect per purplepumkins. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Purplepumpkins and Presidentman. Thryduulf (talk) 10:21, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as a plausible way of searching specifically for the city. A7V2 (talk) 06:21, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep: there is no error here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:17, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
CORPSE
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 30#CORPSE
5100
- 5100 → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
disambiguate multiple uses of 5100 on Wikipedia; and the year clearly isn't the primary topic. I previoiusly boldly did that [16] but it was contested -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:35, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment There are another 185 redirects of this kind, in the range 3002 to 9899. Paradoctor (talk) 04:00, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
List of four digit numbers redirecting to Timeline of the far future
|
---|
|
- Many of these will have multiple uses already on Wikipedia, so should also be disambiguated -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 05:17, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Standard Wikipedia convention is that four-digit numbers are unambiguously years, and that it is any other topic also named by the same four-digit number that needs disambiguation. I don't see a good reason to deviate from that. So if we're going to have these at all, Timeline of the far future seems like as good a target as any. Also, which of these have other uses, for which the four-digit number alone would be an appropriate title? Name three. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:56, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Do you know something I don't?
- WP:NCDATES:
Pages with numeric titles 151 and above usually represent an article about a calendar year in the Common Era, up till several decades in the future
(my emphasis) - I'm not aware of any guideline or RfC that says numbers in the range 3000-10000 are presumed to be years unless proven otherwise. Neither do I know of anything overriding WP:DAB, meaning the year gets the unqualified title only if it is the primary topic. Paradoctor (talk) 06:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. The year is clearly not a primary topic; in fact it doesn't even pass WP:DABMENTION. Several entries on the reverted dab could be referred to simply as "5100". It's six years since we got AD 1 moved from 1, and we continue to make steady progress with debunking the myth that readers who type in an integer far from 2022 are looking for a year. Certes (talk) 09:39, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate and the other four-digit redirects might need DAB'd as well. Per Certes's 1st and 2nd sentence. —Danre98(talk^contribs) 10:18, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per above, continue debunking myth. MB 14:18, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Weak disambiguate as David Eppstein said, four-digit numbers are unambiguously years. However, considering Wiki might not be around by 5100, might as well make numbers in the far future disambiguation pages. Liliana (UwU) 23:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate - Even if we assume that it should refer to a year, there is nothing whatsoever about this year in particular on wikipedia. If it was just a redirect with no other valid target it should be deleted, but since there are things which can be referred to by this number there's no reason not to have a dab page. Imagine how many hatnotes Timeline of the far future would need if every 4-digit number above 3000 redirected there and they had separate disambiguation pages?! A7V2 (talk) 06:25, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
Prime Minister of Argentina
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
Colonization of Earth
![Retarget](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg/16px-Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg.png)
August 23
World Music Video Awards
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Video Awards Gala
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
La Casa de las siete tumbas
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 31#La Casa de las siete tumbas
Partido Nacionalista ng Pilipinas
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 30#Partido Nacionalista ng Pilipinas
Tinky Winkenic acid
- Tinky Winkenic acid → Cycloprop-2-ene carboxylic acid (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at target. If fact, removed from target as made-up name mentioned only in one blog and other mirror sites that picked it up from here. MB 16:34, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Weak keep - it seems that this is a neologism that has some usage on blogs and social media. Usage seems consistent, so unless there's a reason to suspect that this could confuse people I think keeping is fine. signed, Rosguill talk 16:38, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment (and voting keep, if I get to vote) - I created the redirect. Considering that it is mentioned elsewhere, I think it should stay. There is that blog you mention, and several other places also refer to it by that name. https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=43&v=v8C6qA4D-wY is one example. Since the name is out there, the redirect is potentially useful. There's also no ambiguity, and the fact that it's a "made up name", while true, doesn't seem relevant to me (most names of chemicals are made up). As for mentioning it at the target, I wouldn't go that far. It's a potential search term, but not more. Renerpho (talk) 16:47, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- Ultimately, all names are made up, as are all rules of nomenclature, and all words. We need some criterion for what to include. I found no indication that this term was in use anywhere except by one chemistry vlogger, and by two twitter users who pointed to where you added it to our article. I'll accept that you didn't intend this as vandalism, but it's not useful. I would also point out that the blog is the youtube video. "It's only in XYZ." "No, it's not, it's also in XYZ!" is not helpful. DS (talk) 13:03, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- If it is not mentioned in the target, then there is no indication of why it redirects there. WP:ASTONISH. MB 03:29, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- @DragonflySixtyseven: There is no need for allegations of vandalism. Maybe you didn't intend it to, but your response came across as unfriendly. To the point: Calling the redirect "not useful" is odd. To quote from WP:RKEEP:
Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways.
I added the redirect because I searched for the term on Wikipedia, and found nothing. I had to look up the formal (quite unwieldy) name to find it. Yes, I found it useful, and so I added it. You have not yet explained why it is "not useful". -- As for"It's only in XYZ." "No, it's not, it's also in XYZ!"
, that is not what I said. I misunderstood what User:MB meant when they mentioned "a blog", and accidentally referred to the same thing they were talking about. Renerpho (talk) 03:14, 26 August 2022 (UTC)- Please be more careful. I specifically said that I accept that your actions were not intended as vandalism. The difference between vandalism and edits which are simply unproductive is in the intent of the editor. I accept that you meant well. Also: "I misunderstood what User:MB meant when they mentioned 'a blog', and accidentally referred to the same thing they were talking about" is equivalent to my abbreviated description.
- The redirect is not useful because one chemistry blogger made it up. No one else uses it. It is not real (to the extent that any name is 'real'). We do not write articles based solely on the amused ramblings of one chemistry blogger, nor do we create redirects on that basis. I could start a youtube channel of my own and invent all the new and amusing names for molecules I wanted. Would you then advocate that every single one of my suggestions be incorporated into Wikipedia? Why or why not? DS (talk) 04:19, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- @DragonflySixtyseven: Why not? Because that would be frivolous. If, on the other hand, your Youtube channel was actually viewed by people, and those people then started to incorporate your names as redirects on Wikipedia, because they were genuinely trying to search for those terms, then yes, I would absolutely support their addition. Let me be clear, I agree with you when you recently removed the name from the main article: There is no reason for the name to be in there, for the very reason you have given above. But you seem to equate adding something to the article itself, and having a redirect. The criteria for the latter are much less strict. Basically, any redirect that can be demonstrated to be potentially useful has a good reason to exist. That is FAR from what's needed for something to actually be in the article. And as I have shown with the link posted below, people have searched for the term. There were 10 searches during the 1st half of August, and almost 40 during the 2nd half. That is way more than enough to justify the redirect. Renerpho (talk) 03:59, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- See [17] for page views of "Tinky Winkenic acid" on Wikipedia. I was not the first one to try the search term, and its usage has only increased over the past couple of weeks. Renerpho (talk) 03:18, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- "People looking for a search term based on the amused ramblings of one chemistry blogger" are not enough.
- Why not? Genuinely, the reasons for why someone uses a search term are of no relevance. What matters is what they intent to find by using it, and whether there's a redirect in place to assist them. If you personally (or even the vast majority of the community) find their search behaviour bizarre, then that is not their fault. Let me once again point to WP:RKEEP here. Renerpho (talk) 04:05, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- To be clear, there are valid reasons to delete a redirect. That's why this discussion exists. It's just that the arguments given here so far go against the policy I quoted in the previous comment. Renerpho (talk) 04:09, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- If I were a chemistry blogger who called Einsteinium as Planckium in one video and few people genuinely came here searching for the latter, would you create a redirect for that? (Also, I assume some of the recent pageview spike is due to this RfD, which is obvious because participants like me tend to open it, see its history etc.) —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:49, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- @CX Zoom: No, that "Planckium" example would probably meet the criteria at WP:RDELETE -- namely, point 2 (since "Planckium" may refer to something else like a hypothetical element yet to be officially named after Max Planck), and point 5. "Tinky Winkenic acid" doesn't have either of those problems. The only question, I guess, is whether it meets WP:RDELETE point 8:
If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects in a language other than English to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created.
And as I explained, that is handled by WP:RKEEP, point 5:However, avoid deleting such redirects if someone finds them useful.
Renerpho (talk) 18:32, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- @CX Zoom: No, that "Planckium" example would probably meet the criteria at WP:RDELETE -- namely, point 2 (since "Planckium" may refer to something else like a hypothetical element yet to be officially named after Max Planck), and point 5. "Tinky Winkenic acid" doesn't have either of those problems. The only question, I guess, is whether it meets WP:RDELETE point 8:
- If the term's usage has increased, prove it. DS (talk) 12:52, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- "People looking for a search term based on the amused ramblings of one chemistry blogger" are not enough.
- @DragonflySixtyseven: There is no need for allegations of vandalism. Maybe you didn't intend it to, but your response came across as unfriendly. To the point: Calling the redirect "not useful" is odd. To quote from WP:RKEEP:
- Delete per nominator. When you do a Google search with -Wikipedia, there's one YouTube channel and one person on Twitter [18]. Redirects, like any other Wikipedia content, need to be verifiable by reference to reliable sources, and there's no evidence of that here. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 01:35, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, thanks to IP61. I don't see that Tinky Winkenic acid is in anyway an alternate name for this chemical compound apart from just being made up by someone. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 10:05, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:R#D8 - novel and obscure name. A vlogger/youtuber made it up. If it gets more adoption, maybe it can be accepted here. Jay 💬 17:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
The midterm effect
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 30#The midterm effect
Template:Apocalypse
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 30#Template:Apocalypse
Server Sundaram (2020 film)
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
Ollywood TV
![Retarget](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg/16px-Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg.png)
Grooming conspiracy theory
![No consensus](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/40/White_equals_sign_on_grey_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_equals_sign_on_grey_rounded_square.svg.png)
Gray-asparagus
- Gray-asparagus → Shades of green#Gray-asparagus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at target article, nor does the section exist in the target article. Note though that this redirect is a {{R with history}}. Steel1943 (talk) 20:32, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment there's Laurel green section mentioning gray and asparagus— Tazuco ✉️ 02:46, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- FWIW, that section was created/restored after this discussion started. No opinion on it though since it's not a name match. Steel1943 (talk) 04:53, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- It was merged in March 6 by @Wrad. So the target existed, but the content was unsourced. — Tazuco ✉️ 15:48, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- FWIW, that section was created/restored after this discussion started. No opinion on it though since it's not a name match. Steel1943 (talk) 04:53, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:36, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment does this ever refer to white asparagus ? -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:57, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- If this is to be kept, move without leaving a redirect to gray asparagus (which was reduced via mass deletion à la the Neelix criterion). That title is plausible, whereas this one is much less so (if at all). Also noting that "grey asparagus" is nonexistent. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 06:32, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:05, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- It also appears to be the common name of the plant Asparagus stipularis as mentioned in a reference title at its target Asparagus horridus. Jay 💬 07:13, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Isosceles Lock
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
August 22
Mary Charlton (Q18762037)
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Wikipedia:EE
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
Flatiron Partners
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 29#Flatiron Partners
Donald Trump and Twitter
![Retarget](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg/16px-Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg.png)
République dominicaine
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
Gravity Wars
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Hario V60
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 29#Hario V60
No Server November
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
De Gruyter Open (formerly Versita)
- De Gruyter Open (formerly Versita) → De Gruyter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Unlikely search term. You'd search for either De Gruyter Open or Versita, not both together. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Too much effort to type in both current and former name. --Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 10:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- It was an article. Move without redirect to Versita which is currently a redirect to the same target. Jay 💬 06:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Move without redirect seems like a reasonable solution here. signed, Rosguill talk 19:08, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Admin needed because Versita has 2 edits. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 02:43, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
Giant white shark
![No consensus](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/40/White_equals_sign_on_grey_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_equals_sign_on_grey_rounded_square.svg.png)
Religious exemption (U.S.)
![Retarget](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg/16px-Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg.png)
Google Scholar and academic libraries
- Google Scholar and academic libraries → Google Scholar (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Weird X and Y redirect. Unlikely search term. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:26, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:48, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Deleteper nomination. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 06:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete unless a section about significant interactions between these two parties is written. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 21:32, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Do not delete per the BLAR comment
any content potentially wirth merging is still available under the article history
. There was a merge proposal ongoing when the BLAR was done (2016). The merge proposal closed as No consensus in 2018. Jay 💬 06:32, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Niggaracci
- Niggaracci → Snoop Dogg (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 16:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- This is an alias used in his capacity as a producer, eg: on The Big Squeeze. For all such credits, see here. I've added it to the list of aliases at the target page. - Forty.4 (talk) 23:11, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Plausible search term and redirects are cheap. Central and Adams (talk) 11:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- The "cheap” argument is completely irrelevant when a redirect is not mentioned at target and therefore becomes unhelpful for the casual reader. CycloneYoris talk! 23:53, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:58, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. No point in keeping if it's not mentioned at target. N.b. I removed the mention that was added since it was unsourced. CycloneYoris talk! 23:43, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment was able to find this from Vibe:
Gangbangin 101, produced by newcomer Terrence Martin and Snoop SU himself, collectively known as Niggaracci
[20], though for some reason the actual Google Books snippet scan shows up as blank. Not sure whose article it should go on (I'm assuming that "Terrence Martin" in that quote is a typo for Terrace Martin). 61.239.39.90 (talk) 06:17, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 05:59, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Environmental Law (Law Review)
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
Functional Ecology – journal
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
Batman 5 through 8
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Denim (color)
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
Debut issue
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 29#Debut issue
Thank
![Retarget](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg/16px-Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg.png)
August 20
Draft:5000 (year)
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Draft:Year 1 kilo
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
4570s
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 27#4570s
Tarch Maharl
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
3000s
- 3000s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3010s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3020s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3030s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3040s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3050s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3060s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3070s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3080s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3090s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3100s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3110s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3120s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3130s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3140s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3150s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3160s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3170s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3180s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3190s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3200s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3210s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3220s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3230s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3240s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3250s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3260s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3270s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3280s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3290s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3300s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3310s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3320s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3330s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3340s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3350s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3360s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3370s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3380s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3390s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3410s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3420s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3430s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3440s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3450s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3460s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3470s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3480s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3490s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3500s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3510s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3520s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3530s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3540s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3550s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3560s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3570s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3580s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3590s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3600s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3610s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3620s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3630s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3640s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3650s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3660s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3670s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3680s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3690s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3700s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3710s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3720s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3730s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3740s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3750s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3760s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3770s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3780s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3790s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3800s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3810s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3820s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3830s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3840s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3850s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3860s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3870s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3880s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3890s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3900s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3910s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3920s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3930s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3940s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3950s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3960s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3970s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3980s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 3990s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4000s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4010s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4020s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4030s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4040s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4050s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4060s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4070s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4080s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4090s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4100s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4110s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4120s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4130s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4140s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4150s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4160s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4170s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4180s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4190s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4200s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4210s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4220s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4230s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4240s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4250s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4260s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4270s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4280s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4290s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4300s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4310s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4320s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4330s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4340s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4350s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4360s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4370s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4380s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4390s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4400s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4410s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4420s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4430s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4440s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4450s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4460s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4470s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4480s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4490s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4500s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4510s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4520s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4530s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4540s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4550s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4560s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4580s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4590s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4600s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4610s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4620s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4630s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4640s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4650s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4660s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4670s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4680s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4690s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4700s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4710s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4720s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4730s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4740s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4750s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4760s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4770s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4780s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4790s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4800s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4810s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4820s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4830s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4840s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4850s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4860s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4870s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4880s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4890s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4900s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4910s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4920s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4930s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4940s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4950s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4960s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4970s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4980s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 4990s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5000s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5010s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5020s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5030s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5040s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5050s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5060s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5070s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5080s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5090s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5100s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5110s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5120s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5130s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5140s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5150s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5160s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5170s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5180s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5200s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5300s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5400s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5700s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5710s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 5720s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 8030s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 8070s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9020s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9030s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9040s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9050s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9070s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9080s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9100s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9200s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9400s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9910s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 9990s → Timeline of the far future (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Following the closure of Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_August_11#6100s, I decided to RfD the remaining decades redirects. The vast majority of these decades are not mentioned in any entry of the target, and are not likely to be searched. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaundryPizza03 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment XFDcloser errors because too many redirects were nominated. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 23:23, 21 August 2022 (UTC)
- Aye, I counted 236. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:02, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- Strong delete the vast majority of these for the reasons I and others gave at the 6100s discussion. There is no mention of any specific decades or centuries at the target so these are not helpful. I would suggest to keep 3000s, 4000s and 5000s as "R to avoid double redirects" to 4th millennium, 5th millennium and 6th millennium respectively as, on the one hand these were BLARed without much (if any) discussion so may well be restored, and on the other hand similar redirects were recently kept (Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_January_24#11th_millennium). There may be isolated others in the list that should be kept or retargeted for some other reason and my !vote should not be interpreted as necessarily advocating to delete in those cases. A7V2 (talk) 08:34, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 3030s to .30-30 Winchester to match 3030 as a {{R from plural}} -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:30, 23 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 5200s to 5200 as a {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 02:28, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 5160s to 5160 as a {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 02:32, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- 5150+5170
- RETARGET 5150s to IBM Personal Computer as a {{R from plural}} as this is the IBM 5150 -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 02:30, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 5170s to IBM Personal Computer/AT as a {{R from plural}} as this is the IBM 5170 -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 02:34, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Not sure about 5150s & 5170s. Is this plural popular enough for people to search IBM computers with it? —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:51, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Most definitely, the IBM PC and PC/AT were frequently referred to by their model numbers (though less so than by their names), and were seminal machines of their era. And especially so for the 5150, as the original PC needed to be differentiated from other IBM PCs and PC-compatibles and clones -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:56, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Not sure about 5150s & 5170s. Is this plural popular enough for people to search IBM computers with it? —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:51, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 5100s to 5100 as a {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 02:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Someone disputed my conversion of 5100 into a disambig page... so this is now listed at RfD -- RFD August 24 -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- COMMENT 5110s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:5110) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:01, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 9400s to 9400 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 9200s to 9200 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:14, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 9100s to 9100 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- COMMENT 9020s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have serveral topics for. (see DRAFT:9020) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:51, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 5700s to 5700 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 05:15, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 5400s to 5400 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 5300s to 5300 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:35, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- COMMENT 5140s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:5140) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:46, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 5130s to Nokia 5130 as {{R from plural}} -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:48, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 5120s to IBM 5120 as {{R from plural}} -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:51, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I support all of the above retarget suggestions also. A7V2 (talk) 06:49, 26 August 2022 (UTC)
- Comment there might be more of this type. I'ven't had time to go through all of them There's quite a number of redirects in this nomination -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:27, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 5050s to 5050 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:09, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- COMMENT 5030s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:5030) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:27, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 5010s to 5010 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:34, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- COMMNET I think that 3000s, 4000s,5000s should point ot their respective disambiguation pages as {{R from plural}}, 3000 (disambiguation)/4000 (disambiguation)/5000 (disambiguation) ;; the decade, century, millennium can be added as bullet points to the pages -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 10:27, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
- COMMENT 3020s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:3020) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 12:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- RETARGET 3090s to IBM 3090 as {{R from plural}} -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 13:22, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all. We do not need redirects from every possible thing someone may type. Let the search engine do its job (poor as it it does enough in this case). Also, e.g., there are several articles with 5120 in the title, redirecting to one of them will make it harder on the readers, not easier. Users know how to search (or will learn soon enough) - Nabla (talk) 22:39, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
XXXIII century
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Suisare
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
2022 evacuation of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republics
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Stonewall Heights
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Rural Canada
![Split or bespoke decisions](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7f/White_i_in_purple_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_i_in_purple_rounded_square.svg.png)
Spellbound Interactive
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Intergenerational ethics
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Butter (alchemy)
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Wikipedia:GAMESOURCES
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
Arashabbasi
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 27#Arashabbasi
August 17
Nguyen Ngọc Tho
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 25#Nguyen Ngọc Tho
Wikipedia:Be punished
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
14 Commonweatlh realms
- Succession to the Canadian throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Australian throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the New Zealand throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Papua New Guinean throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Bahamian throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Antiguan and Barbudan throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Belizian throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Grenadian throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Jamaican throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Saint Kitts and Nevis throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Saint Lucian throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Saint Vincent and the Grenadines throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Solomon Islands throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Succession to the Tuvaluan throne → Succession to the British throne (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
These re-directs are already targeted towards the Succession to the British throne page. But, I'm seeking to have these 14 redirects, re-targeted directly to a section of that page. GoodDay (talk) 14:06, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- What section do you want to retarget them to? TartarTorte 14:39, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- The "Current line of succession" section, in the Succession to the British throne page. GoodDay (talk) 14:53, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- Refine to Succession to the British throne#Commonwealth realms: This seems to be the most pertinent place to refine to. TartarTorte 16:31, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- No to Canada. It should redirect to Monarchy of Canada#Succession and regency. --₪ MIESIANIACAL 17:25, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- There is no policy or guideline requiring every realm be treated identically. There are different circumstances in different realms and different amounts of information about each; some "Monarchy of [Realm]" articles will have succession sections, others might have seprarate succession articles, still others have no information on that topic. Further, by allowing the UK to stand alone, you're gunning for symmety in asymmetry. You are trying to pound a square peg into a round hole. --₪ MIESIANIACAL 17:59, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose I think the current redirects are valid. A person looking for information on succession may not necessarily be looking specifically for the line of succession, so it's better to have these redirect to the broader article. The suggestion made by Miesianiacal in re Canada may work as well, but I would have to evaluate on a case-by-case basis. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:42, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Presidentman. If there exists a lot of info on a particular monarchy's succession, that article can be created and expanded. Peter Ormond 💬 12:56, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose for 'Succession to the Canadian throne' ... this particular redirect should point at Succession to the Throne Act, 2013; there is no mention of Canada as a discrete entity on the Succession to the British throne page, except a link to the newly proposed target. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 16:42, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- There is much more to succession to the Canadian throne than just one act of parliament. --₪ MIESIANIACAL 18:35, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe Monarchy of Canada#Succession and Regency? TartarTorte 18:44, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed, a reasonable target. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 02:43, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe Monarchy of Canada#Succession and Regency? TartarTorte 18:44, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- There is much more to succession to the Canadian throne than just one act of parliament. --₪ MIESIANIACAL 18:35, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to respective Monarchy of X articles' sections on succession'. For example Monarchy of Canada#Succession and Regency, Monarchy of Antigua and Barbuda#Succession, Monarchy of New Zealand#Succession and regency, and others at {{Commonwealth realms}}. If people are specifically searching for the succession to the throne of a particular country, they should be directed to the article on the monarchy of that country, which are usually legally distinct entities if melded together for the general public. ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 01:17, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
- I suppose, until they're made into their own pages. But of course we wouldn't be retargeting Succession to the British throne to the Monarchy of the United Kingdom page :) GoodDay (talk) 01:42, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 15:34, 10 August 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:51, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget the Canada one as suggested above, Keep the others without prejudice to discussions about retargetting specific redirects to more detailed articles/sections where they exist. It's not necessary for all these to point to the same place, but the current target is a good default in the absence of anything more specific. Thryduulf (talk) 21:13, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget Canada to Monarchy of Canada#Succession and Regency per most. Retarget Antigua and Barbuda, and New Zealand per Patar knight. Retarget these to the respective Monarchy section as well, per Patar knight:
- Monarchy of Papua New Guinea#Succession
- Monarchy of the Bahamas#Succession
- Monarchy of Belize#Succession
- Monarchy of Grenada#Succession
- Monarchy of Jamaica#Succession
- Monarchy of Saint Kitts and Nevis#Succession
- Monarchy of Saint Lucia#Succession
- Monarchy of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines#Succession
- Monarchy of Tuvalu#Succession
- Replace any self-redirects in these pages with Succession to the British throne. Australia can be History of monarchy in Australia#Monarchs of Australia (1st choice) or Monarchy of Australia#List of monarchs of Australia. Keep Solomon Islands as I didn't find anything about succession at Monarchy of Solomon Islands Jay 💬 03:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Helen Simmons
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Ææ, Öö
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
Sans domicile fixe
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 24#Sans domicile fixe
Adult oriented television
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Malcontent provider
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
AnCap Dave Smith
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Maurice Long
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
CORPSE
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 24#CORPSE
ONEREPUBLIC
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
August 15
Episode guide & Episode list
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
"Episode ####" redirects to EastEnders lists or articles
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Wikipedia:EE
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#Wikipedia:EE
Flatiron Partners
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#Flatiron Partners
République dominicaine
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#République dominicaine
יעל נעים (Yael Naim)
![Delete](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/aa/White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_x_in_red_rounded_square.svg.png)
Gravity Wars
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#Gravity Wars
Giant white shark
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#Giant white shark
Hatnote
- Hatnote → Wikipedia:Hatnote (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Hatnotes → Wikipedia:Hatnote (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Hat note → Wikipedia:Hatnote (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- HATLINK → Wikipedia:Hatnote (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Unneeded WP:XNR that could possibly redirect to somewhere else. FAdesdae378 20:26, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
- Note that Hatnotes, Hat note and HATLINK also go to Wikipedia:Hatnote. Also note that there is a redirect from Hatnote: Listen To Wikipedia, so if this redirect is not deleted, there should be a hatnote at the target page indicating that Hatnote: Listen To Wikipedia may be what the reader is looking for. SchreiberBike | ⌨ 21:15, 31 July 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Hatnote, Hatnotes, Hat note and HATLINK as unnecessary cross-namespace redirects. (Note that I added the latter 3 to this nomination today so a week's relist would be helpful). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:51, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:48, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
- Note: just added links to previous discussions. - Eureka Lott 02:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget Hatnote (and maybe Hat note) to Listen to Wikipedia since the target's full name is "Hatnote: Listen to Wikipedia", so the title "Hatnote" could refer to the subject per WP:SUBTITLES. Delete the rest per Shhhnotsoloud. Steel1943 (talk) 04:15, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget Hatnote and Hat note to Listen to Wikipedia; delete the rest. Per Steel1943. Veverve (talk) 09:15, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate at Hatnote. Cross-namespace navigation is not out of bounds for very salient wikitopics (e.g. Create article -> Help:Your first article) or for widely used wikijargon (see links to WP:DAB at DAB, or to WP:NPOV at NPOV). Hatnotes are sufficiently common to warrant such a pointer, and I'm not aware of the term being used for anything that's not related to wikipedia. With Hatnote: Listen To Wikipedia, we have an uncommon short title of an obscure topic that's still firmly inside the wikirealm, so I don't think this could be any more eligible as a target, despite being in article space. I see WP:HATNOTE as the primary topic for the term, but prefer disambiguating because 1) the context provided by a dab entry can reduce the possibility of confusion when sent straight to the project page, 2) the dab can more easily accommodate a "see also" pointer for Headnote, and 3) the project page already has a lot of hatnotes, so we have an incentive to reduce them. Hat note and Hatnotes should be retargeted to the dab, with HATLINK deleted as it's too obscure to cross the mainspace threshold. Uanfala (talk) 12:05, 9 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate at Hatnote; I endorse every element of Uanfala's comment. {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 17:53, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose retargeting any of these to Listen to Wikipedia as that is unlikely to bring anyone to the information they are looking for. The status quo or other already proposed solutions (except deletion) are superior. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 19:28, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further consideration of the rather late disambiguating proposal.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:07, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate at Hatnote per Uanfala. I think a link to WP:HATNOTE out of the article space is usefull when editing articles. Wikipedia:Hatnote is a usefull how-to page for newby editors who can use some help finding the wikipedia namespace. --Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 10:35, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per Uanfala, who I find convincing. Headnote seems the most likely target in mainspace, so I would list that first with the cross-namespace options below. Modest Genius talk 16:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per Uanfala. delete HATLINK per Uanfala. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 06:04, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget Hatnote to Listen to Wikipedia as it matches the software's github project name as well as website name, in addition to "Hatnote" being part of the application's name. Hatnote WP:Hatnote from there. Delete the other three. I don't see how we can create a disambiguation page with one entry. Modest Genius, I did attempt a draft at the hatnote redirect, and made WP:Hatnote a hatnote, and not the dab entry you suggested. At least this is how it's done in DAB and NPOV that Uanfala gave as examples. But if we have mainspace DABs having a WP page as a regular DAB entry, then you may modify the dab draft. Jay 💬 03:31, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- I was imagining the dab page has having two main entries: one for WP:HATNOTE and the other for the application. I don't see any reason why self-references should always by in hatnotes: for DAB that's probably done because of the assumption that many readers will be seeking the project page and so shouldn't be made to scroll all the way to the end of the dab page; still, there (and at NPOV), it will in my opinion be an improvement to move the WP: links to the "see also" section. If there's a dab page at Hatnote, then I prefer the link for WP:HATNOTE to be in the main body, because the term being disambiguated ("hatnote") is the proper name for the concept described there (unlike the case of NPOV and DAB, where the terms represent merely handy shortcuts). Uanfala (talk) 09:15, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- The dab page COI is a good example of how to disambiguate project and article links. Modest Genius talk 12:36, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
- Keep the first three, Delete HATLINK. "Hatnote" is Wikipedia jargon that a newbie is likely to encounter and may be confused what it means, and the redirects point to the correct place to answer the question. Due to the fact that the term is not used elsewhere, Wikipedia:Hatnote would be the overwhelming primary topic. I'm not seeing enough for a disambiguation. Wikipedia references in disambiguations are hatnoted (lol), so Listen to Wikipedia would be the only "valid" entry, even though it is a derivative use. Headnote would be in the see also, so it would look weird to me with one hatnoted entry, one main entry, and one see also entry. If anything, simply expand the current the hatnote (lol) to include both other pages. -- Tavix (talk) 18:47, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
- There's no fundamental reason why a given WP: link should be in a hatnote. If a project page is an appropriate target for a mainspace redirect, then, upon the conversion of the redirect into a dab, it would make for an appropriate main body entry. Uanfala (talk) 11:16, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- It's convention, and I'm not keen to break that convention for what is essentially a WP:ONEOTHER situation. I prefer the status quo. -- Tavix (talk) 13:20, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Is it a convention or just the contingent result of applying independent considerations? If RS has a hatnote for WP:RS, then I believe it's because someone has judged that many new editors may come across the abbreviation on Wikipedia and will look it up without knowing to use the WP: prefix, and so they'd need a way to get from RS to WP:RS: this hatnote then is like the "Not to be confused with.." hatnotes in articles. If a dab page at Hatnote, on the other hand, needs to point to WP:HATNOTE, then that's not because people may confuse the mainspace and non-mainspace uses of the term, but because the topic (which happens to be treated in a WP: page) has been deemed to be of mainspace-worthy level of relevance. That's precisely what standard dab entries are for, and I really can't see any reason why one such entry should have to be pushed into a hatnote. Uanfala (talk) 14:45, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't really see a difference, both cases would essentially be namespace confusion because I don't think there is scope for a mainspace article on hatnotes. Perhaps because "hatnote" is purely Wiki-jargon, someone would expect a navelgazy disambiguation at Hatnote but not at RS? However, that same logic is why I don't mind a cross-namespace redirect in this instance so I think it's better to bypass such a dab and go directly to the primary topic. -- Tavix (talk) 15:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Well, I see hatnotes as a topic that may potentially be covered in mainspace (within one or another of the subtopic articles for Wikipedia), and "hatnote" is the proper name for that topic (in contrast to jargony shortcuts like RS or ANI). Also, the two other ambiguous articles (Listen to Wikipedia and Headnote) are both in mainspace, and I don't like the idea of a mainspace-to-mainspace navigational path crossing into and out of projectspace. Still, your point about sticking to the primary topic is a valid one, and, though I disagree, I accept your view. Uanfala (talk) 15:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- I do agree the navigational path for someone seeking one of the other two topics is not ideal. However, I have a hard time imagining someone using the term "hatnote" to look for Listen to Wikipedia. It just seems too PTM-y since it's never referred to (AFAICT) as simply Hatnote. I can also see the confusion between hatnote and headnote, but I think that for someone to make that confusion they would have to be familiar with the Wiki-jargon so it would not be jarring to end up in projectspace. -- Tavix (talk) 16:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Well, I see hatnotes as a topic that may potentially be covered in mainspace (within one or another of the subtopic articles for Wikipedia), and "hatnote" is the proper name for that topic (in contrast to jargony shortcuts like RS or ANI). Also, the two other ambiguous articles (Listen to Wikipedia and Headnote) are both in mainspace, and I don't like the idea of a mainspace-to-mainspace navigational path crossing into and out of projectspace. Still, your point about sticking to the primary topic is a valid one, and, though I disagree, I accept your view. Uanfala (talk) 15:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- I don't really see a difference, both cases would essentially be namespace confusion because I don't think there is scope for a mainspace article on hatnotes. Perhaps because "hatnote" is purely Wiki-jargon, someone would expect a navelgazy disambiguation at Hatnote but not at RS? However, that same logic is why I don't mind a cross-namespace redirect in this instance so I think it's better to bypass such a dab and go directly to the primary topic. -- Tavix (talk) 15:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- Is it a convention or just the contingent result of applying independent considerations? If RS has a hatnote for WP:RS, then I believe it's because someone has judged that many new editors may come across the abbreviation on Wikipedia and will look it up without knowing to use the WP: prefix, and so they'd need a way to get from RS to WP:RS: this hatnote then is like the "Not to be confused with.." hatnotes in articles. If a dab page at Hatnote, on the other hand, needs to point to WP:HATNOTE, then that's not because people may confuse the mainspace and non-mainspace uses of the term, but because the topic (which happens to be treated in a WP: page) has been deemed to be of mainspace-worthy level of relevance. That's precisely what standard dab entries are for, and I really can't see any reason why one such entry should have to be pushed into a hatnote. Uanfala (talk) 14:45, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- It's convention, and I'm not keen to break that convention for what is essentially a WP:ONEOTHER situation. I prefer the status quo. -- Tavix (talk) 13:20, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
- There's no fundamental reason why a given WP: link should be in a hatnote. If a project page is an appropriate target for a mainspace redirect, then, upon the conversion of the redirect into a dab, it would make for an appropriate main body entry. Uanfala (talk) 11:16, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
Dark pink
![Retarget](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg/16px-Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg.png)
Debut album
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
Religious exemption (U.S.)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#Religious exemption (U.S.)
Rural District of Iran
![Retarget](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg/16px-Right-pointing_white_arrow_in_blue_rounded_square.svg.png)
Higher Education – Journal
![Keep](https://web.archive.org/web/20220831024902im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8c/White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg/16px-White_check_mark_in_dark_green_rounded_square.svg.png)
Google Scholar and academic libraries
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#Google Scholar and academic libraries
Functional Ecology – journal
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#Functional Ecology – journal
Environmental Law (Law Review)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#Environmental Law (Law Review)
De Gruyter Open (formerly Versita)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#De Gruyter Open (formerly Versita)
Denim (color)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 22#Denim (color)