Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 17: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit
Line 16: Line 16:
:{{ping|greyzxq}} I think many west coast First Nations use at least parts of the IPA for their orthography, making this slightly more plausible. I could be totally wrong about this, though. [[User:Edward-Woodrow|Edward-Woodrow]] :) <sub><nowiki>[</nowiki>[[User talk:Edward-Woodrow|talk]]<nowiki>]</nowiki></sub> 22:26, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
:{{ping|greyzxq}} I think many west coast First Nations use at least parts of the IPA for their orthography, making this slightly more plausible. I could be totally wrong about this, though. [[User:Edward-Woodrow|Edward-Woodrow]] :) <sub><nowiki>[</nowiki>[[User talk:Edward-Woodrow|talk]]<nowiki>]</nowiki></sub> 22:26, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' – googling gets us [https://www.songheesnation.ca/community/l-k-ng-n-traditional-territory a Songhees nation website] using the exact spelling here. A valid search term as such. (Interestingly, they seem to prefer lowercasing the initial letter, but that's irrelevant for this discussion as it's automatically capitalized here.) <span style="background-color: black">[[User:Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">Skarmory</span>]] [[User talk:Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">(talk •</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">contribs)</span>]]</span> 00:36, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' – googling gets us [https://www.songheesnation.ca/community/l-k-ng-n-traditional-territory a Songhees nation website] using the exact spelling here. A valid search term as such. (Interestingly, they seem to prefer lowercasing the initial letter, but that's irrelevant for this discussion as it's automatically capitalized here.) <span style="background-color: black">[[User:Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">Skarmory</span>]] [[User talk:Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">(talk •</span>]] [[Special:Contributions/Skarmory|<span style="color: yellow">contribs)</span>]]</span> 00:36, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' – per [[User:Skarmory]].


====Political song====
====Political song====

Revision as of 02:16, 18 September 2023

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 17, 2023.

Lək̓ʷəŋən

The redirect is from the IPA on the page. I'm guessing the creator misunderstood it for something in the native language. greyzxq talk 21:25, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where else do you suggest it be redirected?
Enquire (talk) 21:37, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest it be deleted, the likelihood of anyone searching the IPA instead of the term itself is highly unlikely. greyzxq talk 22:35, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Greyzxq: I think many west coast First Nations use at least parts of the IPA for their orthography, making this slightly more plausible. I could be totally wrong about this, though. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 22:26, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Political song

Not all political ideas are about revolution. Protest song would be a better target but is still misleading e.g. conservative/anti-social movement songs would be political but not protest. — Bilorv (talk) 20:02, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invest 91-L

The later RfD at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 17#Invest 93L suggests consensus may no longer be in support of having this redirect, plus in this case, the hyphenated usage is extremely uncommon. Jasper Deng (talk) 19:06, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invest 98L

The later RfD at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 17#Invest 93L suggests consensus may no longer be in support of having this redirect. It is going to be confusing to readers looking for particular seasons. Jasper Deng (talk) 19:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invest 99-L

The later RfD at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 17#Invest 93L suggests consensus may no longer be in support of having this redirect, plus in this case, the hyphenated usage is extremely uncommon. Jasper Deng (talk) 19:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: You say that "this 93-L RfD suggests consensus leans towards the removal of this 99-L redirect". Firstly, that particular 93-L RfD is still ongoing and receiving active participation as recently as 10 minutes ago while I'm typing. Alluding that the "consensus is already there" in regards to the outcome of an unfinished RfD does not quite bode well in my opinion, especially when you're directly involved via your deletion vote and your ongoing discussion comments from a few hours ago. These redirect titles could have been easily aired within that discussion as "follow-up redirects to pursue at RfD". There is no WP:RUSH for this discussion to be happening simultaneously to the other one, as the 93-L discussion has been a "hot-topic RfD" up for 3 weeks with multiple relists, and it's still being talked about. Asking editors to juggle this alongside the other RfD that has not yet finished, under the presumption that "consensus has already been decided as delete, so the rest of the similar redirects should get nominated straight-away" is not a great practice and can create confusing contexts, in my opinion. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)As for what to do, I feel this discussion (as well as the other two new RfDs) should probably be closed for the time being to allow the Invest 93-L RfD to finish once everyone says their piece, and allow for an official result to come to pass. If it ultimately closes with a "retarget" verdict, then these extra three nominations won't serve much of a purpose once the precedent has been set (as I presume these will be treated the same way). If 93-L ends up being deleted, THEN I think is a good time to nominate the other three redirects in a bundle, rather than three different discussions. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:51, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Microsoft (version) redirects

Same reason redirects like Microsoft 95, Microsoft 2000, Microsoft 7, Microsoft 8, and Microsoft 8.1 were deleted: All are implausible redirects; I don't see anyone referring to a Windows version as a "Microsoft (version)". Colgatepony234 (talk) 16:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: harmless. I'l quote from my Disjointed thoughts on RfD and redirects: Likely search terms should be kept, and borderline cases should be kept too, as potentially helpful. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 19:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, these seem like they can be likely search terms. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:00, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or make disambig pages if the multiple versioned products is a big enough concern. Windows is the most likely item to be searched with these terms. Redirects don't have a notability requirement. - Darker Dreams (talk) 01:36, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Efectul Von Restorff

Romanian-language translation of article name, which has no connection to Romania ArcticSeeress (talk) 16:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Invest 93L

Invest 93L is a common designation for tropical disturbances in the Atlantic Ocean by the National Hurricane Center. Invest designation is reused each year and year after year (cycling through 90L to 99L and then starting again with 90L). Thus there can be and always are multiple Invest 93L systems each year. This shouldn't redirect to a specific article, as that is highly misleading. United States Man (talk) 22:15, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per large media attention related to “Invest 93L. Noting, this was renamed to be “Tropical Depression 10” an hour ago, so the redirect is still useful. Sources: Florida Governor [1][2][3][4]. Googling “Invest 93L” pulls up a lot of news articles from the last 24 hours. The Weather Event Writer (Talk Page) 22:20, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Invest 93L has been and will be used many times. This redirect is misleading and will quickly become obsolete. United States Man (talk) 22:28, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:29, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:25, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Invest (meteorology) if this has become a common search/news term and we have a page related to a general topic for the subject deleting such redirects just makes information harder to find for no gain. If the "Invest" term is not going anywhere; even 80 redirects for previously used and predictably reused items all going to one article which is unlikely to move and explains the core term seems like reasonable practice. - Darker Dreams (talk) 23:40, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu language

Could also refer to the Sanskrit language used in Hindu texts like the Vedas Isla (talk) 18:45, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unimportant comment: Keep with hatnote??? But hatnote is being discussed as a redirect right above this discussion, and there hasn't been any argument to keep it... Kind of suspicious... Utopes (talk / cont) 04:59, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Most likely to be a misspelling of Hindi. Rreagan007 (talk) 15:48, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget with hatnote to Sanskrit. If someone wants to search for the "hindu language" referring to sanskrit, and they are redirected to hindi (against their choice) which has a hatnote "for the hindu language, follow this link", that is not great page design in my opinion. If I were the searcher in that situation, I feel I would be annoyed that my typo was redirected to an article I didn't want, with the actual article I correctly typed in being linked as a hatnote; it may feel like we "expect people to get the name wrong before we believe people intended to search for the hindu language".
I'm not an expert in this area so I'm not sure which is a more accurate description of "hindu language"; hindi or sanskrit. Whichever situation is the best description, I don't think we should treat this as a "typo of anything" because I feel seeking out the hindu language is a valid search term. So, whichever target is the more accurate "hindu language" should be the redirect target, with the other option being listed as a hatnote. My perspective is that sanskrit is more accurate for this task. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:18, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep, retarget, or disambiguate? I'm reading Haoreima's "keep" !vote as "disambiguate".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:20, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • disambig or Keep with hatnote. Multiple competing "right answers" suggest a disambig page is the right answer, even if some answers are less right; the fact someone may think they are right makes disambig useful for navigation and surfacing information. - Darker Dreams (talk) 23:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hatnote

Bad XNR. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:36, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:47, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete, keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep or retarget with hatnote. "People can find" arguments against WP: space redirects or hatnotes assume experienced, educated, currently fresh users. New users or those who have taken breaks may well encounter WP jargon and not remember exactly how to get to the right WP-space article. Darker Dreams (talk) 23:44, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vixy Reinard

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:55, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:46, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Countrycore

Previous AfDs for this article:

non existent term FMSky (talk) 01:02, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Cottagecore ({{R from synonym}}). As mentioned briefly in an AfD comment, this seems to be a term that can be used at least somewhat synonymously with the proposed target. I had trouble finding many good sources that include this phrase from which to assist my judgement, but the ones I found seem to refer to the aesthetic rather than the musical genre. [5] (The interiors are more Belgravia bling than traditional countrycore); [6] (…Marine Serre, known for its crescent moon iconography, mixed and matched plaids and checks in a countrycore-inflected frenzy); [7] (Occasionally referred to as farmcore or countrycore, cottagecore romanticises the idea of living off the land.). While not a source in itself, I think it’s also worth noting that searching a stock image website for “countrycore” returns images relating to the aesthetic/country life, and none (admittedly, that I can see) relating to the term’s use as a musical genre - [8]. Finally, when I google the term ‘countrycore’, the majority of the search results I get are also referring to the aesthetic rather than the genre (I won’t link the search results page though as who knows what different results Google’s algorithm will show up at different times). A smart kitten (talk) 09:10, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I can’t see how much history the deleted page had, but if it had a non-trivial amount, I’d also support undeleting it prior to the retargeting, and also tagging any resulting redirect with {{R with history}}. A smart kitten (talk) 09:36, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Following @Shhhnotsoloud‘s comment below, if this page is retargeted to either Cottagecore or Cowpunk, I wouldn’t be opposed to adding a hatnote pointing to the other. A smart kitten (talk) 09:29, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Cowpunk where it is mentioned. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:31, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That mention was unsourced (and is now removed) --FMSky (talk) 11:53, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is not mentioned on country rap. This could work as a redirect to Matanza as it is mentioned there, but of course, if there are other artists described with this, it could be redirected to cowpunk with a small section describing this with the sources.
P.S. I did not recreate this redirect, somebody else did that, but thanks anyways for the notification. Moline1 (talk) 16:32, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If it does get redirected to Matanza or Cowpunk, then a notice informing people of the other page referred to by this term will be needed (e.g. Countrycore redirects here. For the aesthetic also referred to as countrycore, see cottagecore). Moline1 (talk) 16:36, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No it doesnt make sense to have a redirect to copwpunk as its not related to it at all -FMSky (talk) 06:28, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Kitten suggested redirecting it to cottagecore, not cowpunk. The hatnote could point to the other article if necessary 53zodiac (talk) 18:16, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 21:40, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:12, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Noting here for full transparency that I have boldly added (sometimes referred to as Countrycore or Farmcore) to the opening sentence of Cottagecore. Best, user:A smart kittenmeow 16:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep verifiability and notability are requirements for articles, not redirects. There's not really a simple standard for redirects, but redirects are cheap and retargeting them is easy; as long as they aren't actively harmful (derogatory, etc) why are we deleting them for not meeting the requirements to have a full article? If they met those requirements they would have that article, not a redirect... as for the correct target; best effort. If no one in this conversation is enough of an expert to know for sure/find a reference to state, pick something plausable and let it wait for someone that is. - Darker Dreams (talk) 01:56, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bloodbenders

Unhelpful: no mention at target. (NPP action) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 14:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, this (and Bloodbending) would link to World of Avatar: The Last Airbender, but that makes no mention of it either. It's first appearance in the show is in the third season, so Avatar: The Last Airbender (season 3) is probably the best place to link to. ArcticSeeress (talk) 15:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Attha

I don't see how this is related to soul, probably a misunderstanding for the Pāli word for soul, that is atta, without an h. (Pāli is used in Theravāda Buddhism.) Farang Rak Tham (Talk) 14:32, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. If OP's assumption is correct, leaving the redirect is still probably better than deleting it for exactly that confusion. If there is something the word is more likely to be reference to, retarget there. Deleting the redirect has no benefit, the redirect existing has no additional cost. - Darker Dreams (talk) 16:21, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dia De Los Muertos (2014 film)

The film uses Día de los Muertos as a backdrop, but it isn't mentioned as the name of the film anywhere on the page or any other language versions of Wikipedia. I cannot find this film being called Dia De Los Muertos anywhere on the internet. ArcticSeeress (talk) 10:59, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Author of redirect, without comment, blanked this discussion notification, which by default is an agreeance to this request. This does not seem to be an alternate or non-english name of this film. Additionally, there is a non-notable 2014 short film with this name.--☾Loriendrew☽ (ring-ring) 13:24, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It may just be a procedural matter, but surely all that removing a notice from your talk page signifies is that you’ve read it - not necessarily that you agree with it? Without comment from them, I don’t think it’s fair to assume Rcsprinter123 consents to the deletion. Best, user:A smart kittenmeow 20:08, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Baba Sathya Sai

Please delete this. Redirect's name is not mentioned in target. Furthermore, I would say the director has died, and the film has been cancelled. 2607:FEA8:761F:4600:B5DB:F255:BD71:3EF2 (talk) 13:18, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • A former article here indicates (with a source) that principal photography was underway in 2016, and IMDb (not reliable, I know) suggests that this film was released in 2017. I don't see any evidence that the film was cancelled, but it is a bit difficult to search for. I'd suggest that the redirect be retargeted to Sathya Sai Baba (the film's subject) as a {{R from alternative name}} if the film was cancelled, or the article restored if it was released, but either way preserves the history. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:07, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (the film is now mentioned in the target page (I did it)). Not opposed to the retarget mentioned by Ivanvector but would prefer if thist film was mentioned there.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:07, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:21, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Winde (medical symptom)

The closest connection I can fathom is "Winde" = obsolete spelling of "Wind"; "Wind" = abdominal gas; abdominal gas = abdominal gas = abdominal pain. Maybe I'm missing something, but this seems like a very unlikely search term. No evidence "Winde" was ever actually used to refer to abdominal pain. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 15:35, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to flatulence, which is the target of intestinal gas. Pain can be caused by gas but gas is a symptom in and of itself. Wiktionary indicates that "winde" is an obsolete spelling of "wind", as in "passing wind", i.e. passing gas. It's also a word for "to wind" (as in winding something up, winding a crank, etc.) in several Germanic languages, but that's not a medical symptom. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:58, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:19, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:ImplausibleTypos

Odd CamelCase redirect created in 2017. Ironically enough, this is an implausible typo. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:01, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Since both keep !votes are "weak".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:12, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • It’s a weak keep from me as well, per Utopes and Duckmather. Best, user:A smart kittenmeow 19:29, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very weak keep. Does this hurt Wikipedia? Not in any significant way. Does it help Wikipedia? Almost certainly not, though I could see this potentially being used for examples (whether we'd ever need it for an example... probably not). The net gain? Extremely slightly positive, so my keep is equally small. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 00:55, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the cost of this conversation, as trivial as that cost is, is still geater than the cost for this redirect existing. The cost for the delete record is not less than the cost for the redirect. The potential for adverse user impact from this redirect is likely zero. The potential value of this redirect existing, while trivial, is potentially non-zero. Benefit is greater than the cost. - Darker Dreams (talk) 02:04, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Multi-member university

This terminology is no longer mentioned at the target; all mentions of "multi-member university" were scrubbed and replaced with "university systems"... although even with that being said, "multi-member university" is still a vague search term and, to my understanding, not necessarily unique to universities in Vietnam. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Phoebe Russell

Delete; the name "Phoebe Russell" is not mentioned at the target article, nor in Charmed or in any of the related articles. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:47, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]