Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 10: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
→‎㌽: keep
Line 153: Line 153:
* '''Delete''' This is a Unicode 'codepoint', but it is not in any normal sense a "character"; in fact it is plainly a word - ポイント - consisting of four characters. These "block" things are a legacy typographical kludge, not a normal part of the Japanese writing system. [[User:Imaginatorium|Imaginatorium]] ([[User talk:Imaginatorium|talk]]) 04:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
* '''Delete''' This is a Unicode 'codepoint', but it is not in any normal sense a "character"; in fact it is plainly a word - ポイント - consisting of four characters. These "block" things are a legacy typographical kludge, not a normal part of the Japanese writing system. [[User:Imaginatorium|Imaginatorium]] ([[User talk:Imaginatorium|talk]]) 04:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - Wiktionary explains what this character is and how it is used, and it does so in English. We have the information, we should point to it. [[User:Fieari|Fieari]] ([[User talk:Fieari|talk]]) 02:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' - Wiktionary explains what this character is and how it is used, and it does so in English. We have the information, we should point to it. [[User:Fieari|Fieari]] ([[User talk:Fieari|talk]]) 02:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
::Strictly speaking this is not true: Wiktionary does not describe this "character" (it isn't a character), nor how it is used. For example it does not mention that in vertical writing (where I suspect such use may be more common) the four elements of the character-space, written l-r, t-b, would be ン　ポ　ト　イ (because actually they would have to be written t-b, r-l). In other words the actual appearance shown in the Unicode CJK compatibility box is not necessarily how the "character" would appear in actual use. And there is no obvious evidence of this "character" actually being in use [as opposed to "mention"] in an Internet search. If there is an established principle that WP does not provide links to Wikt for just any foreign word, the argument for needing a redirect for ''non-standard'' representations of such words strikes me as infinitely weak. [[User:Imaginatorium|Imaginatorium]] ([[User talk:Imaginatorium|talk]]) 05:07, 12 June 2024 (UTC)


====Template:WikiProject Open Access/OAFD====
====Template:WikiProject Open Access/OAFD====

Revision as of 05:08, 12 June 2024

June 10

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 10, 2024.

Factory owner

Comparing the current target of this redirect, the former targets Bourgeoisie and Means of production, and Factory which doesn't seem to mention "owner(s)" ... it does not seem that there is a specific article readers may be attempting to locate when searching this phrase. Steel1943 (talk) 23:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hummingbird Salamander (film)

Another failed WP:CRYSTAL based on Netflix acquiring rights to make a film (in 2017), but then nothing really found in third party search engines after that. Seems as though the film would have been based on the subject at Hummingbird Salamander; however, the aforementioned article currently does not contain information about a film, leaving it currently a "not-so-good" target to retarget this redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 23:35, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. We don't seem to have any relevant information to point to. Thryduulf (talk) 08:52, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dorothy & Alice

Seems like failed WP:CRYSTAL. Per third party search engines, looks as though Netflix acquired rights to produce a film by this name, but then ... not finding anything else on third party search engines. In addition, the only place where the phrase "Dorothy & Alice" is mentioned on Wikipedia is Allelon Ruggiero, but not in the content of the article but rather a reference. Steel1943 (talk) 23:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. "Dorothy and Alice" gets two uses in article space, but neither relate to a film, neither obviously primary over the other, and while both could anchor a redirect as a {{R to list entry}} neither strike me as necessary, especially given the ambiguity between them and the lack of significant information. The uses are at Itamar Moses#Works (where he is listed as the playwright of the 2001 short play) and List of shipwrecks in 1782#12 August where it is noted only that a British ship of this name was "driven ashore at Deal, Kent." Thryduulf (talk) 09:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: @Steel1943: I've removed duplicates of the same nom entries, unless there are others of the same line! Intrisit (talk) 19:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...Which I have reverted per my edit summary on my revert. Steel1943 (talk) 20:19, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nominator and Thryduulf. Checking through the page histories of both titles, they were created on this way in 2020. Four years down the line, nothing has been added or created to be noteworthy (maybe I could create them in the future, who knows?), it is to me implausible to keep this any longer. Intrisit (talk) 19:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Waffle House has found its new host

I have not found a mention of the "new host" thing in the target article, though I had first learned about it from a MatPat video a while ago. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 21:33, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I added a properly cited mention to the section. 👍 Ca talk to me! 01:41, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EMBO journal & reports

XY redirect. The subject is The EMBO Journal or EMBO Reports, not both. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 22:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I want to say delete, as what little content this page previously had is reflected in the current, separate articles, and the old references are broken links to the Nature website. However, I vaguely remember there being licensing reasons to keep old page histories for attribution. Retarget to European Molecular Biology Organization#Conferences and journals may be the way to go if that's right. ― Synpath 04:02, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There's nothing in that redirect's history that was ported over the other articles. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 05:19, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Taking another look, I see that now - striking retarget suggestion and delete. Thanks ― Synpath 16:32, 28 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • The history should be merged to EMBO Reports. It seems to fit cleanly there. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:12, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as ambiguous. However nothing in the redirect appears to be copied to other articles? Still, I don't know much about guidelines regarding histmerges, so I don't have any opinions of it. Ca talk to me! 14:57, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Merge history or simply delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barood (2003 film)

If this film does exist, should probably "Delete per WP:REDYES". Either way, it's a bit misleading and WP:UNDUE and WP:SURPRISEing that this film redirect targets one of potentially multiple notable people that could be associated with the film. Steel1943 (talk) 21:02, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For a while after I nominated this redirect, I was thinking this redirect may represent a WP:HOAX, but ... it seems the only source I could find about the subject of this redirect is https://letterboxd.com/film/barood-2003/watch/ . I could not find any other sources, but the subject of the redirect definitely seems to represent a different subject than Barood (2004 film). Steel1943 (talk) 21:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Terrible Secret of Space

Original page covered a non-notable meme and was redirected in a 2005 VfD to The Laziest Men on Mars, who wrote music that was a popular bit of the meme. That page was itself redirected to All your base are belong to us in 2023 ([1]). The end result is that this page for a non-notable meme now redirects to an entirely different meme. Technically this is "mentioned" on Eye Drops but given the lack of content on that page I think it's unlikely to be useful as a redirect and recommend deletion. Dylnuge (Talk • Edits) 20:20, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nominator. Intrisit (talk) 19:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I'm pretty sure the original meme was less of a meme and more of the name for the classic Something Awful shibboleth that went "Q: Do you have stairs in your house? A: I am protected." See: [2]. The closest link to All Your Base is that Something Awful was one of the first internet groups to really popularize that meme as well, which isn't really a link at all. I would alternatively support a retarget to Something Awful if and only if a WP:RS can be found discussing the shibboleth I mentioned and the information added to that article... it really is a significant and notable feature of Something Awful forum culture, but it would have to be referenced to be used, and somehow I doubt there are any reliable sources (unless that know your meme link I just provided counts?) Fieari (talk) 02:23, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Papa Emeritus 2

Papa Emeritus redirects to Ghost (Swedish band)#Papa Emeritus section and already covers Papa Emeritus II.

I wonder if the initially capitalized redirect contradicts with Papa emeritus (Bishops in the Catholic Church#Pope emeritus). LEILA FERRAZ (talk) 19:32, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:TRIVIALMENTION

Usually, people are looking for WP:TRIVIAL, which has seen more attention, has more information, and details guidelines instead of just restating them. While searching these redirects will probably include the target page as a result even without this redirect, it will not bring out WP:TRIVIAL. Thus, I think it'll be most helpful to navigation to retarget both of these redirects to WP:TRIVIAL.

I've also talked about the confusion a bit on the article creator's talk page. I believe that this is a good compromise instead of using a hatnote as I've previously advocated for. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:32, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand the request. WP:TRIVIAL is a redirect, and redirecting WP:TRIVIALMENTION there would create a double redirect. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:35, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, I mean retargetting it to where that redirect points to. Aaron Liu (talk) 15:36, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep/No Change: Currently, WP:TRIVIALMENTION is a redirect to the essay called "Wikipedia:Trivial mentions", which clearly makes sense. This redirect has been used int his way for more than a decade, and changing it would break the redirect in archived discussions. WP:TRIVIAL is a fine redirect, but doesn't discuss trivial mentions, and we shouldn't conflate the two. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:48, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Shooterwalker. Thryduulf (talk) 17:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I don't see any evidence people using these shortcuts are doing so with the expectation they're linking to the ATA section instead of the essay. There are ~725 uses of these combined across Wikipedia, and it seems worse to change intended targeting in historical discussions than potentially correct for mistakes I didn't find in spot checking those uses. Dylnuge (Talk • Edits) 20:33, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Emigration from North Korea

This may refer to multiple topics. I propose to retarget it to Category:North Korean diaspora. GZWDer (talk) 12:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carpenters

I reverted a bold change of target from Carpentry to The Carpenters, but the idea deserves discussion. A disambiguation page is also an option. What do others think? Certes (talk) 11:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disamb makes the most sense, the terms seem co-primary for this redirect. Randy Kryn (talk) 11:58, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Randy Kryn:, please embolden your "Disamb" word so as to help the closer decide the cumulative outcome of this entry. Intrisit (talk) 19:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Carpenter (disambiguation) which already covers the plural. Thryduulf (talk) 12:43, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I came here undecided but support that option. The two most likely meanings are (perhaps fortuitously) right at the top of the dab. Certes (talk) 13:32, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to disambig (if we keep it at all). It's easy to link to either Carpenter or The Carpenters, there's no need for this to be there to support one in particular as any sort of 'convenience' or 'clarity' redirect. Andy Dingley (talk) 16:51, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, based on how this is actually being used. There are currently 41 articles linking to the page, and I checked them all. Each one refers to the profession, not the musical group. The hatnote should suffice for anyone who's confused. - Eureka Lott 00:33, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's actually being used in this way because any other use would be careless and we have (mostly) diligent editors. I check daily for new links to "Carpenters" which refer to the musical duo and mend them. Others will have fixed similar errors before I spotted them, and of course we will never know how many editors considered using "Carpenters", checked where that link led, then chose a better target without publishing an incorrect link. Certes (talk) 10:28, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Eureka Lott. Steel1943 (talk) 04:43, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the above two users' assertions and is an {{R from plural}}-worthy title. Intrisit (talk) 19:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicktoons (TV network)

This title is a bit considerable considering the international versions of Nicktoons. But I'll also consider the other side of it towards deletion if the title is unmerited now. What do you think? Intrisit (talk) 11:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nicktoons (TV channel)

This title is ambiguous considering the international versions of it so it could be a DAB page. American Wikipedians may dispute this; that's why I've listed it here, since this title hasn't hasn't fallen into one before. Intrisit (talk) 11:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

㌽

Why would the English Wikipedia redirect to non-English Wiktionary entries? Fram (talk) 10:27, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eh? The target is an English Wiktionary entry. Thryduulf (talk) 11:00, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wiktionary entries for non-English words or terms. Wiktionary starts with the languages an entry is in (the heading), and the only such heading here is "Japanese". For comparison, the entry for "bread"[3] has headings "English", "Middle English", "Old English", and "Spanish", so that is an English Wiktionary entry. Fram (talk) 11:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Because English Wiktionary explains in English the meaning of the Japanese word that forms the character. I don't know that there is any exact meaning of point (disambiguation) that is represented by ㌽, so I leave the readers to find out what works in their case. --Error (talk) 11:55, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But why would we have redirects to explain words in other languages? We could add millions of redirects if we do this, for every word in every language. Fram (talk) 12:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. We have articles and redirects for characters (not words), because people want to know what they mean and look them up in Wikipedia. In this case the English Wiktionary entry is better than anything we have locally, so the soft redirect is the most helpful to readers. Thryduulf (talk) 12:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why would we allow redirects for foreign-language characters because people want to know what they mean, but not for words because people want to know what they mean? What makes characters so special? Fram (talk) 12:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because characters and words are not the same thing. The reason we don't have redirects for foreign words is expressed best at WP:RFOREIGN, those considerations don't occur for single characters. Thryduulf (talk) 12:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a non-answer if ever I saw one. Why A and not B? "A and B are not the same, and here we explain why not B". Well yes, but you argue to keep A, and don't give a reason why the arguments would be different. Further, the page you list to is about internal redirects, not about redirects to Wiktionary or the like. You also claim that "those considerations don't occur for single characters", but most of the arguments in the "Rationale" section of that page apply just as well to single characters. Fram (talk) 12:56, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
To editor Fram:: Is your objection to redirects to Wiktionary, redirects from non-Latin characters or redirects from CJK characters? --Error (talk) 14:24, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirects from characters, words, ... not in use in English and without an article here. Fram (talk) 14:33, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
is there a reason the target is a search, and not the thing that would be searched? if not, retarget to wikt:㌽. otherwise, keep cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's how interwiki soft redirects work (my guess is that it's so that you get search results rather than an error if the target page doesn't exist, but you get taken to the page if it does) so your suggested retarget is the current target. Thryduulf (talk) 21:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please wait before you create more similar redirects. You have now added ㍀ and ㍁, but if this one gets created, then adding more of the same onbly creates more work afterwards. Fram (talk) 12:16, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment There are tens of thousands of Han characters/Kanji. Is the plan to redirect all of them (or at least the reasonably common ones) to Wiktionary entries? What about characters in other scripts, or words in other languages? I actually agree that there is some value to a reader, however if you search for a Han character (arbitrary example) on Wikipedia, the corresponding Wiktionary entry will already appear in the search results on the side under the heading "Word definitions from Wiktionary". If the desire is to make the link to Wiktionary more prominent, that could be done much more efficiently with a few lines of CSS or JS instead of creating thousands of redirect entries. Just my 2¢. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 14:58, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I realize that the entry above is not Kanji but rather a "square katakana" symbol, of which Unicode has only ~100, but I think the general reasoning may still apply. 98.170.164.88 (talk) 15:49, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are some kanji categorized as Category:Kanji, Category:Kyōiku kanji. I think that Category:Simplified Chinese radicals‎ and Category:Kangxi radicals list most of the radicals. There are few redirects there, either because they don't exist or they are not categorized. Category:Specific_kana lists all of them, it seems. Picking one at random, ra has seven redirects from specific Unicode characters, all of them seem reasonable to me. --Error (talk) 16:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is a Unicode 'codepoint', but it is not in any normal sense a "character"; in fact it is plainly a word - ポイント - consisting of four characters. These "block" things are a legacy typographical kludge, not a normal part of the Japanese writing system. Imaginatorium (talk) 04:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Wiktionary explains what this character is and how it is used, and it does so in English. We have the information, we should point to it. Fieari (talk) 02:50, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strictly speaking this is not true: Wiktionary does not describe this "character" (it isn't a character), nor how it is used. For example it does not mention that in vertical writing (where I suspect such use may be more common) the four elements of the character-space, written l-r, t-b, would be ン　ポ　ト　イ (because actually they would have to be written t-b, r-l). In other words the actual appearance shown in the Unicode CJK compatibility box is not necessarily how the "character" would appear in actual use. And there is no obvious evidence of this "character" actually being in use [as opposed to "mention"] in an Internet search. If there is an established principle that WP does not provide links to Wikt for just any foreign word, the argument for needing a redirect for non-standard representations of such words strikes me as infinitely weak. Imaginatorium (talk) 05:07, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:WikiProject Open Access/OAFD

Cross namespace redirect that existed for 22 minutes. Gonnym (talk) 10:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Template → Wikipedia CNRs are uncommon but only problematic if transcluding the target would be harmful in some way (or it conflicts with something else). In this case it's not harmful (transclusion works fine) and it doesn't appear to be in the way of anything else. That said it isn't transcluded anywhere and I can't think of a reason why it would be transcluded (unlike {{OAFD}}). Ultimately I think I'm neutral. Thryduulf (talk) 11:08, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Druisk

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

This redirect is simply incorrect. It stems from a misinterpretation of a redirect in a paper encyclopedia printed over 100 years ago. Druysk is an agrotown in Vitebsk Oblast, Belarus, near Braslaw. It is situated over 200 km away from Kaunas, Lithuania. The mixup arose because the Jewish Encyclopedia (1906) contains the following entry:

DRUISK. See Kovno.

However, this just refers to the fact that Druysk belonged to the Kovno Governorate of the Russian Empire, an administrative division which covered a fairly large area, including Braslaw and its environs. For confirmation of this fact, one may consult this 1864 map of Kovno Governorate. Druysk (Друйскъ) is in fact the easternmost labelled locality on the whole map, found within the yellow-green (i.e., primarily Orthodox) region centered around Braslaw (Браславъ).

The Jewish Encyclopedia does this with other localities as well. For example, the entries for Dusyaty (Dusetos; Russian: Дусяты Dusyaty) and Eiragoly (Ariogala; Yiddish: אייראַגאָלע Eyragole) also redirect the reader to Kovno, and the entry for Eishishki (Eišiškės) points to Wilna.

What's even more confusing is the online version of the Jewish Encyclopedia hosted on StudyLight.org, cited in the previous RfD discussion, which includes full entries for these redirect entries that just transclude the content of the redirect target, without any indication that this is what's happening. Thus, the entry for Druisk is identical to the entry for Kovno, except for the header; the same applies to Eishishki and Wilna, and so forth.

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, I would like to solidify the argument for deletion by showing that other written sources that talk about “Druisk” are in fact referring to the city in present-day Belarus and not using it as a synonym for Kaunas.

  • Cholawsky, Shalom (1998). The Jews of Bielorussia During World War II. Routledge. ISBN 9057021935.
    "Druisk" is mentioned alongside other towns in Belarus (e.g. Braslav, Glebokie, Dolhinov) and eastern Lithuania near the Belarusian border (e.g. Swienciany, Podbrodzh). None of these locations are near Kaunas.
  • Lokotko, Aleksandr; et al. (2013). Tourist Mosaic of Belarus. Belaruskaya navuka. ISBN 978-5-457-63663-7.
    “Druisk” is described as being in the region of Braslaw, listed alongside other nearby Belarusian localities such as Opsa and Ukolsk. Again, this description definitely does not apply to Kaunas.

By the way, in the course of researching this, I also noticed that Eiragoly → Eiguliai is probably another incorrect redirect. As mentioned above, this refers to Ariogala (here's a source to support the identification), not the Eiguliai neighborhood of Kaunas whose name is pretty different anyway. I hypothesize that the author of this redirect also created it based on the Jewish Encyclopedia, but in that case tried to make sense of it by finding a part of Kaunas with a somewhat similar name.

98.170.164.88 (talk) 07:37, 10 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_June_10&oldid=1228608131"