Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion‎ | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 70.24.249.16 (talk) at 04:01, 8 July 2021 (→‎Men of the Cloth). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

July 7

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 7, 2021.

Sssst (Listen)

Song title which does not appear in target article. CycloneYoris talk! 21:28, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia that I can find. Thryduulf (talk) 22:30, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Safari Software

For my mind, this page can be moved to a Safari Software (company), but only if the current page is replaced by correct disambiguation. The main problem of deleted page - poor overview of entire company; but most of company products still have a relatively well-written pages, and most products still have a links to a deleted page inside of their descriptions. 128.69.252.191 (talk) 18:26, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, thanks for user:JalenFolf for tip about source notability. And so, this was not a well-written page, but, I think, incorrect redirect is a much worse that a this deleted stub. 128.69.252.191 (talk) 18:31, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Revert to the article without prejudice to AfD per WP:BLAR and a trout for JalenFolf for bringing it here. Thryduulf (talk) 19:23, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unreleased songs

Not equivalent, a bootleg recording may be an unofficial recording of a concert, and an unreleased song may not be a bootleg. I think deletion is the appropriate course of action. signed, Rosguill talk 17:15, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Red Dead 2

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Propose retarget to Red Dead Redemption 2. There seem to be a small edit war months ago disputing the target. While technically Red Dead Redemption is the second entry in the Red Dead series, Red Dead Redemption 2 is a clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term "Red Dead 2", evidenced by Google search results. I also have seen gaming media used this term to refer to RDR2. enjoyer -- talk 10:45, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per nom. My google searches give the same results as theirs. Thryduulf (talk) 12:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom – Muboshgu (talk) 15:26, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Red Dead#Games, which gives the full timeline. I think going this route is the least confusing option overall. RDR2 is probably the current primary topic, but before RDR2 was developed, this would unambiguously refer to the second overall entry. -- Tavix (talk) 18:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I doubt that's true. Before RDR2 existed, people simply refer to Red Dead Redemption as RDR, not "Red Dead 2". enjoyer -- talk 01:46, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Red Dead#Games per Tavix. I agree a good case can be made that RDR2 is the primary topic here, but I am leaning toward using the games section as a de facto disambiguation page and not trying to predict which game is intended by searching this term. In any case, the current target is unsatisfactory and definitely should be retargeted elsewhere. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:01, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:18, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Offcut

Too general a term to redirect to the very specific machining use - a search on the word within en.wiki finds it used for fabric, meat, etc. Perhaps needs a Wiktionary link? (I created this redirect by moving the article away from this term). PamD 07:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambig I agree with the nominator that this is far too general a term to redirect to such a specific use. In addition to the current target there is the The Off Cut Festival, the Offcutts (band) and possibly others. A Wiktionary link and see-also to Cutoff (disambiguation) would also fit. Thryduulf (talk) 09:04, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The current target is more of a dictionary definition than an encyclopaedic article. --John B123 (talk) 16:06, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Men of the Cloth

I believe Minister (Christianity), where Man of the cloth redirects to, would be a more logical redirect than the television episode. AllegedlyHuman (talk) 04:52, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Agree Minister (Christianity) is where i would expect to be taken in a redirect. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:44, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Abandoned building

Abandoned buildings are not only associated with urban decay, many are in rural areas. The most similar topic I can find an article for is ruins. Peter James (talk) 23:59, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Vacancy redirects to Occupancy, so that's a potential target, but I think a better choice would be to retarget these to Abandonment (legal), which addresses the topic. We could tag abandoned buildings as a {{r with possibilities}}. - Eureka Lott 03:16, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Lost, mislaid, and abandoned property which was the target for #1 added by Gilliam, but was removed in a month by Radiojon. I don't see how the current target is better than the one it replaced. Jay (Talk) 16:08, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Disambig #1 to urban decay, ruins, abandonment (legal), occupancy, etc. Too broad to redirect to an existing page.
    Soft redirect #2 to Category:Abandoned buildings and structures. Jay (Talk) 05:08, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Occupancy (via Vacancy) as per Eureka. - The article discusses abandoned buildings (if only briefly). I guess this would be better than deletion, but deleting would be my second option, as there is no really suitable target I am aware of. I would specifically oppose redirecting to Lost, mislaid, and abandoned property, because that is a distinct topic - you cannot lose or mislay a building, and most abandoned buildings are not abandoned in the sense of abandoned personal property (there is generally still an owner with a legal ownership interest who intends to sell or otherwise get value out of the property later). ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 17:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 00:27, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

New York NOW

Not mentioned at the target. Multiple article attempts provided no external sources. Jalen Folf (talk) 00:22, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_July_7&oldid=1032550059"