Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 23

< December 22

December 24 >

December 23

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 23, 2021.

Pannonian basin before the hungarian

• Pannonian basin before the hungarian → History of Hungary before the Hungarian Conquest  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Imlausibly ungrammatical. Apparently an artefact of an error during a page move in 2008 [1], which got corrected within a few hours [2]. – Uanfala (talk) 23:31, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:40, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. MarioGom (talk) 15:31, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Little Welnetham Priory

• Little Welnetham Priory → Little Whelnetham  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This was an article and later turned into a redirect and later moved to include "Priory". Google shows almost nothing for things like "Little Welnetham Priory" (only this redirect), "Little Whelnetham Priory" (1 result), "Welnetham Priory" (5 results) and "Welnetham Priory" (3 results, 1 being the redirect). There is mention here about a priory but it could be something else. I suggest either delete or add info in the village if its appropriate and did exist. This could be restored and sent to AFD if people aren't confortable about deleting at RFD. It is listed at List of monastic houses in Suffolk but unlike others it doesn't list any sources or coordinates. Others like Kersey Priory have been improved but its not clear if this one can, some like Edwardstone Priory are covered in their location. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:43, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Fucking, Australia

• Fucking, Australia → Fugging  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is for a misspelling for Fucking, Austria which already exists and redirects to the correct target. But it's not a likely typo for someone looking for the "funny name town". Might make someone believe there's one in Aus too. Delete as confusing as unhelpful. Gaioa (T C L) 21:41, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Weak delete as confusing though possibly useful, I wandered about nominating it for RFD when I fixed it last month. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:44, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Austria, and tag with {{R unprintworthy}} , {{R from misspelling}} , {{R from incorrect name}} -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 03:17, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

  Unless there's a place named "Fucking" somewhere in Australia then I fail to see the point of such a redirect. Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:40, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

There's a place in Austria with that name, hence the {{R from incorrect name}} -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 19:51, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. MarioGom (talk) 15:31, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. A {{R from incorrect name}} that is incorrect in two separate ways is likely to be more confusing than helpful. Mdewman6 (talk) 16:28, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
  • It's incorrect in only one way ("Australia" for "Austria"). "Fucking" was the common and official name of one of the villages until just a few months ago. – Uanfala (talk) 16:46, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Ah. Well, I think an incorrect name + former name also probably points toward deletion. Mdewman6 (talk) 22:24, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

I wouldn't put much weight to a former name that was current less than a year ago when the name was the main interest about the place but the point that "Australia" is incorrect supports deletion. Crouch, Swale (talk) 10:18, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Katherine Heyman

• Katherine Heyman → Kathryn Heyman  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I recently added an article for pianist Katherine Ruth Heyman, who some sources refer to without Ruth. I am unsure if this redirect should be retargeted to her with a hatnote that she's not to be confused with Kathryn Heyman, or if the redirect should be split to a disambiguation page RoseCherry64 (talk) 21:09, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• I lean retarget, but would be okay with disambiguation too. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 07:23, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget. MarioGom (talk) 15:35, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

German bomb

• German bomb → Bomb  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• American bomb → Bomb  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Minimal discussion of specific nation's history of bombs at the target, unlikely to leave a reader feeling like they've found what they're looking for (nor would it necessarily be DUE to add such content there), delete per WP:R#DELETE #10. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:07, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

American bombing raid

• American bombing raid → Strategic bombing during World War II  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• German air raid → Strategic bombing during World War II  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• American air raid → Strategic bombing during World War II  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• German bombing raid → Strategic bombing during World War II  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• British bombing raid → Strategic bombing during World War II  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• British air raid → Strategic bombing during World War II  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Italian air raid → Strategic bombing during World War II  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Could refer to myriad incidents and conflicts that the US has been involved in, including but not limited to the current target, US bombing of Cambodia, United States bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, Kunduz hospital airstrike...I tried to draft a disambiguation page, but ran into difficulties deciding what title to give it (American bombing raid? US bombing raid? US bombing? etc.), as some titles could also be confused for bombing attacks against the US, bomb attacks not involving aircraft, etc., and there's also the issue of whether/how to include conflicts involving the US that included airstrikes but which are not specifically remembered for that aspect of the conflict (e.g. United States invasion of Panama). Given all of the complexities, I'm leaning towards deletion but am open to solid disambiguation proposals.

Expanded comment post grouping: while the UK, Italy and Germany don't have quite as notorious a military record since the advent of aerial bombardment, they nevertheless have participated in interventions in the Balkans, Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan (among others) that included aerial raids carried out by their forces. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:59, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Ridiculous redirects - why strategic bombing (not all bombing is strategic) - why World War II - lots of other conflict involved significant use of bombing - for example for the United Kingdom - World War I, Third Anglo-Afghan War, Iraqi revolt of 1920, Ikhwan revolt, Pink's War, the Waziristan campaign (1936–1939), the Korean War, the Malayan Emergency, the Mau Mau Uprising, the Suez Crisis, the Falklands War, etc, etc. Delete allNigel Ish (talk) 21:59, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Delete why wouldn't the "babykiller" raids on London in WWI not be wanted. Or the wedding party bombing in Afghanistan. Overly ambiguous. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 03:19, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Delete – seems too broad for a redirect or disambiguation page. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 07:01, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Delete - all of these are too vague to be tied to either a time or type of bombing. GraemeLeggett (talk) 08:21, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Sheraro massacre

• Sheraro massacre → Casualties of the Tigray War#Sheraro massacre  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unused redirect. Not called from anywhere. It's target was deleted for "no sources" (citation needed). Platonk (talk) 18:40, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Delete Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:40, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Delete – not mentioned in any English Wikipedia article as far as I can tell. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 07:22, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Computing reference desk

• Computing reference desk → Wikipedia:Reference desk/Computing  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Inappropriate mainspace -> projectspace redirect. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 19:05, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

• Why does it matter? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:15, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
• Delete WP:XNR the target is not readership material, it is editorship material. The information at the target is not encyclopedic, thus should not appear in (pseudo)articlespace -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 02:48, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
• Keep It's been there for like 13 years. It helps the reader find it, since they're unlikely to remember its real name. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:59, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Readers shouldn't be using it, since it isn't an encyclopedic topic. If it were an encyclopedic topic, it would reside in articlespace. -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 13:21, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
    • Who are you to dictate to the readers how they should be using Wikipedia? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:33, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:43, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

• Delete this inappropriate cross-namespace redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:29, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
• Keep as a long-standing cross-namespace redirect getting good number of pageviews. The same user had created all the ref desk redirects: Science reference desk, Miscellaneous Reference Desk, Mathematics reference desk, Humanities reference desk, Entertainment reference desk, Language reference desk. Three of these were nominated for deletion and the outcome was Keep. See WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 December 12. Jay (talk) 17:49, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hog Farm _Talk 18:30, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Procedural keep. All these redirects (Entertainment reference desk, Language reference desk) should be handled the same way – we shouldn't delete one while keeping the others. No prejudice against renominating all of them as a batch. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 18:59, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Edaga Hibret massacre

• Edaga Hibret massacre → Idaga Hibret massacre  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unused redirect that was created by sock CITESPAMing to his own self-published work. Platonk (talk) 18:26, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom and because it is now a double redirect. --WMSR (talk) 23:39, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Template:Auhtority control

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was Speedy delete G7. Author requested deletion. (non-admin closure) –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:02, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

• Template:Auhtority control → Template:Authority control  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Rare typo. I have corrected the 8 transclusions I found. Should be safe to delete now. I think it'd be better to have this show up as a redlink, and hopefully get the person who made the typo to notice and fix it. –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:12, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Comment for this and the next nomination: editors create and do not fix roughly 50 redlinked templates per day, so choosing the "hopefully" option means making unnecessary work for gnomes. It may be better to have a bot auto-subst the corrected spelling, as is done with template quasi-redirects like {{Référence nécessaire}} and {{Edad}}. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:41, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Delete We don't keep template mispellings per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 4#Template:Cute book, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 13#Template:Cute news, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 5#Template:Reimprove, et cetera. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:40, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Comment. Speedy deleted per G7. 2405:9800:BA31:F6:2D51:E764:39B6:55EA (talk) 08:24, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Template:Authority controll

• Template:Authority controll → Template:Authority control  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Rare typo. I have corrected the 6 transclusions I found. Should be safe to delete now. I think it'd be better to have this show up as a redlink, and hopefully get the person who made the typo to notice and fix it. –Novem Linguae (talk) 12:00, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Delete We don't keep template mispellings per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 4#Template:Cute book, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 13#Template:Cute news, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 5#Template:Reimprove, et cetera. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:40, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Literary canon

• Literary canon → Western canon#Literary canon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 14 § Non-canonical – no consensus

Was previously nominated, but in a complex discussion about three redirects that only found consensus for what to do with the other two. This current target is too narrow and possibly a case of systemic bias, because the phrase "literary canon" is used by RSs to refer to many different literary canons: Slovene poetry, Ottoman literary canon, South African literary canon, Caribbean literary canon, Chinese literary canon, Thai literary canon, etc. I suggest retargeting to Canon (basic principle). —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 11:58, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Support in principle provided that these other literary canons are added to the list in Canon (basic principle) (which I guess means that they need at least stub articles first?). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:12, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
• Support as a redirect with possibilities. Since it has WP:SIGCOV in reliable sources, Literary canon should probably be a WP:SPINOUT page that has brief descriptions of canons that don't have enough WP:RS coverage for a full article, that also links out to canons that already have their own pages, like Western canon, Decad (Sumerian texts), Thirteen Classics, etc. That would also allow moving a fair amount of WP:OOS that's currently on Western canon to a better page. But until/unless that hypothetical article is drafted, Canon (basic principle) is the most appropriate page for it to redirect to for now. - car chasm (talk) 21:52, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
• The mention of literary canons in the article Canon (basic principle) dates to a few months ago and appears to be tacked on to it simply because it's another meaning of the same word. I don't think it belongs there. Unless the article's scoped is sufficiently broadened and its title changed, then it's not an appropriate target. If the redirect is to be retargeted, then it should probably point as an {{R from related term}} to Classic book (whose lede suitably contains a discussion of literary canons) or to a definition (yet to be added) somewhere within Literature. – Uanfala (talk) 23:46, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

  I would be happy with retargeting to Classic book. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 08:18, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Surely 'classic book' means a single particularly notable example, whereas 'literary canon' describes an exemplary collection of classics? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 10:55, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Carbon gas

• Carbon gas → Greenhouse gas  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Carbon, as there are many forms of carbon that are gaseous, or maybe Carbon cycle. 223.207.113.226 (talk) 07:36, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget gaseous carbon is a phase of carbon. Further, it is not gaseous carbon that is the greenhouse gas, nor is it particularly referring to carbon monoxide. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 03:22, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. Current target isn't the worst thing ever, because any of the common gases containing carbon are greenhouse gases, but there is no way to know what a user is seeking with this ambiguous, vague search term, so delete to defer to search results. Mdewman6 (talk) 16:12, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Carbon per nom and IPs. 2405:9800:BA31:F6:2D51:E764:39B6:55EA (talk) 08:18, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
• Comment. Some redirects from gaseous elements like Hydrogen gas → Hydrogen, Nitrogen gas → Nitrogen, Oxygen gas → Oxygen gas, Chlorine gas → Chlorine, Argon gas → Argon, and many others already exist as a proper redirect. Also the IP requested for the redirect creation of Iodine gas → Iodine too! 2405:9800:BA31:F6:2D51:E764:39B6:55EA (talk) 08:22, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

But all of those are gases in their elemental state (except for iodine). There is no allotrope of carbon that is a gas. The term "carbon gas" more likely would refer to a gas containing carbon, of which there are many possibilities (see List of gases). Mdewman6 (talk) 22:18, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

There is plenty of gaseous carbon in the universe. Stellar spectrums show that stars have it is plasma state of gas -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 22:30, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Sengkang Punggol

• Sengkang Punggol → Hougang United FC  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Have not seen "Sengkang Pungool" refer to Hougang United FC. No results for that either on Google too Nigos (talk | contribs) 06:38, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Comment turns out there was a "Sengkang-Punggol FC", but there is already a redirect for Sengkang Punggol FC. Not too sure if "Sengkang Punggol" should be kept as a redirect. Nigos (talk | contribs) 06:46, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
• Keep as {{R from former name}}. Dropping the "FC" is consistent with redirects like Manchester United, Leeds United, etc. feminist (talk) free Hong Kong 10:28, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. GiantSnowman 12:20, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Pronouncement of Lacy

• Pronouncement of Lacy → Luis de Lacy#Execution and rehabilitation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention of any pronouncement neither in the section the redirect leads to, nor in the rest of the article. Veverve (talk) 01:20, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Nigos (talk | contribs) 06:48, 23 December 2021 (UTC)