Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 8

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 17:48, 8 July 2021 (→‎Florida building collapse). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

July 8

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 8, 2021.

Free food

No discussion of free food at the target, I think deletion is in order. signed, Rosguill talk 15:56, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2021–22 Danish 2nd Divisions

Delete this redirect, Danish 2nd Division is now a single group, 3rd Division created as new Danish 4th tier. Santiago Claudio (talk) 13:42, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:06, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sitcom, A.L.F.

Strange, malformed title. Unlikely search term, and I am not aware of any other sitcoms with this format. Averages 2 views a month so not exactly a prime target. ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 13:39, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I don't see any pageviews at all but it's possible the tool is broken. This was a separate article for 9 minutes in 2006. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 13:54, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This started out as a one-sentence sub-stub in 2006 that was redirected to the already well-developed target 9 minutes later. If created today it would be speedily deleted under A10. No other sitcoms have a page starting "Sitcom" let alone "Sitcom," (Sitcom Afterlife is an album). In terms of comparable titles: Film, Film, Film is a specific film; Movie, Movie is a redirect to the specific double feature Movie Movie; TV,_Music,_&_Candy is the title of a single that redirects to the relevant band, TV, Biwi aur Main is the exact title of an Indian sitcom; everything starting "Television," is an album/EP, location or company; Documentary Channel, Canada is a redirect to a Canadian TV channel. Thryduulf (talk) 14:10, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This kind of unusual formatting would only be worth keeping if there's significant history or pageviews. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 16:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Effective power

Google results suggest that this term is primarily used in the context of the "effective power" bug. The term "effective power" is never used verbatim at the current target, although a few similar terms are. I propose that we retarget to SpringBoard#"effective power" bug, with hatnote to current target. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 12:54, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not effective power bug. Constant314 (talk) 17:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to horsepower. Effective power is a measurement of the actual power output of an engine-driven mechanical system after engine power is lost through transmission (drivetrain, gearing, heat losses, etc.). This is described, albeit poorly, in the horsepower article. Google results being dominated by the software bug is an example of systemic bias. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 13:10, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Disambiguate per below. There may be other potential targets but none come to mind at the moment. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 17:20, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to horsepower per PEIsquirrel. A hatnote can be added to the software bug. Thryduulf (talk) 13:18, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm also fine with disambiguation per below. Thryduulf (talk) 14:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep as to alternating current Effective power is a specific electical engineering term: "effective power: In alternating-current power transmission and distribution, the product of the rms voltage and amperage, i.e., the apparent power, multiplied by the power factor, i.e., the cosine of the phase angle between the voltage and the current. ... Synonym true power." Redirecting to horsepower would clearly be an error. There's probably an article in Wikipedia that would be better to direct this to, (I'll look for one) but "alternating current" is OK, and "horsepower" would clearly be an error. North8000 (talk) 13:50, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Change to AC power which explains it more fully. "Effective power" is a lesser-used synonym for true power. North8000 (talk) 13:55, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    (edit conflict) I don't understand why redirecting to the specific mechanical engineering concept (at horsepower) would be an "error". Maybe disambiguation is in order, but I'm interested to see if you find a better supporting article for the EE topic. I'm aware of rms power and true power in transmission systems but hadn't ever seen it called effective power. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 13:59, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm with Ivanvector here. I wasn't aware of an electrical engineering usage but the mechanical engineering usage is very clearly at least as valid and no more an "error" than redirecting to the electrical engineering usage would be from an mech eng perspective. Thryduulf (talk) 14:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Maybe should be disambig? The horsepower article also does not mention the term. I think that there is a difference between a codified term and a descriptive two word sequence. I'm sure that the latter shows up in many other places but is it a codified term in any of them? North8000 (talk) 14:40, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It does, very briefly, under Horsepower#Measurement. That section is in need of improvement and references. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 15:35, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To me that looks more descriptive than that term. But either way, I didn't notice the suggested disambiguate idea and so two of us independently came up with that idea and maybe that is the best way to go. North8000 (talk) 17:12, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Radiogrill

Deleting redirect page due to Walmart. KamranBhatti4013 (talk) 04:30, 1 July 2021 (UTC) — KamranBhatti4013 (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Safi Bhatti (talk · contribs). [reply]

  • Delete Added Radio Grill. These pointed to a short-lived section in the target article: it was added to the article in July 2008, expanded somewhat thereafter, and removed in September 2008. FWIW the section was reasonably well-sourced (particularly by the standards of 2008), though pretty clearly there's no other article where it would work as a subsection, nor was there not enough material there for us to expand this redirect into its own article. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 12:45, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tagging nom as a sock. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 01:07, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:20, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Miami tower collapse

WP:XY situation: Could also refer to the WCIX TV Tower collapse in 1992. Since neither tower is actually in Miami, I think deletion makes more sense than targeting one or the other or DABbing. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 10:09, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and add a hatnote. This exact title has been very widely used in news reports about the event so even it is technically incorrect it's a very plausible search term with an overwhelming primary topic. Deletion would make it harder for readers to find the article they are looking for so would be harmful. Thryduulf (talk) 10:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep ideally as a disambiguation page, rather than adding a hatnote to this heavily read article. UpdateNerd (talk) 10:37, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't follow that logic - why is taking lots of people via a disambiguation page better than a few people going via a hatnote? Thryduulf (talk) 11:14, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and no hatnote required. Was the collapse of WCIX TV Tower known as Miami tower collapse during the time (or ever) ? Jay (Talk) 16:53, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Googling "miami tower collapse" "WCIX" produces no results so Google automatically removed the quotes. The top hit was List of catastrophic collapses of broadcast masts and towers, the second and third were news reports about the Surfside condominium by WCIA, the rest of the first page is a nearly even mix of results for the two separate events. Thryduulf (talk) 17:27, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Miami building collapse

There are four collapses in Miami listed at List of structural failures and collapses—not including the current target, which is in Miami-Dade County but not in Miami itself. As with the others, we could retarget to the list, but personally I lean toward deletion. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 10:02, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep' as the current primary topic for the highly plausible search term, but add a hatnote to the list created per the following nomination. Thryduulf (talk) 10:16, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Florida building collapse

Ambiguous. There are eight other building collapses in Florida listed at List of structural failures and collapses. We could retarget to that page, but since the information isn't collated by location, I think it would make more sense to just delete. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 09:58, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambig (or create a list or set index, whatever works best). This is a highly plausible search term, but while the current target is the primary topic at the moment it's generic enough that it's not as overwhelming so as the preceding two nominations and will most likely cease to be primary soonest. The existing list we have is not sorted or sortable by location though, so we need to create an alternative that will allow easy navigation. And yes, I would support making similar lists for other areas of the world where we have multiple articles. Thryduulf (talk) 10:21, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
i may be wrong but wouldn’t entries in a dab page titled Florida building collapse need to be known by the name Florida building collapsed and not simply be a a building that happened to collapse in Flordia.--70.24.249.16 (talk) 17:48, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

End this war

Google shows that this has been used as the title of a number of non-notable works, and someone searching for one of them is likely to be surprised by this redirect. Even if it's a phrase worth targeting to some concept, I don't think there's a clear primary target—could be the current one, could be anti-war movement or a specific subset of it, could be the war to end war. Was created with the summary "pun?"; if there is a pun here, I'm missing it. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 09:38, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - as silly. We should not have redirects for every plausible grouping of words. As noted in nom there are books/songs by this title, but none with articles. ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 13:49, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Poncho Libre

Not a plausible typo. Google shows no instances of the term being confused, just a single case of one game making a pun about it. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 09:32, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - no evidence these terms are connected or confused. "Poncho Libre" comes up with some results on the Google, but not related to Nacho Libre. ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 14:21, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2021 condominium building collapse

While a less ambiguous search term than 2021 building collapse (and thus listed separately), there are still three other shared residences listed under 2021 at List of structural failures and collapses#2020–present. I'm not sure if any would meet the definition of a "condominium building"—a term mostly used in the U.S.—but it's similar enough that I feel that these search terms are too ambiguous and should be retargeted to that list or deleted, per my rationale below. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 09:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep currently unambiguous as a search term, as it's the only notable collapse this year of a building known as a condominium. This can be revisited if another one collapses (although for obvious reasons I hope that doesn't happen). Thryduulf (talk) 10:23, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf. Jay (Talk) 16:59, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per my comments at the RfD for #2021 building collapse, though I feel (only slightly) less strongly about this one because of the additional disambiguation. General Ization Talk 17:25, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

2021 building collapse

There have been a number of notable building collapses in 2021. I suggest retargetting to List of structural failures and collapses#2020–present, which lists all of them, although I wouldn't be opposed to deletion either. (I note that the encyclopedia has survived for 20 years without a 2001 building collapse, despite that being the year of perhaps the most notable building collapse in history.) -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 09:19, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per nom. The 2001 event has a very clear common name, the same cannot be said of this year's collapse in Miami, but regardless of why someone found this phrase useful enough to create they did and so there is no benefit to deletion over retargeting. Thryduulf (talk) 10:25, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as highly presumptuous. There are building collapses all over the world, and throughout every year. This seems to me to reflect a highly US-centric perspective, and to be an overly-broad search term that should not be rewarded by resolving to a specific article. I don't feel nearly as strongly about the other redirects to the article mentioned here, but this one genuinely bothers me. I note that Building collapse is already a redirect to Structural integrity and failure, and unless we are going to create redirects for every year I see no need to single out 2021. General Ization Talk 17:02, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I would support creating redirects for other years to the same proposed target and consider this significantly preferable to deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 17:29, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Look of Love (film)

The link should be re-targeted to The Look of Love (film) for the rather obvious reasons of consistency and lack of astonishment. Anyone looking for a film of that name should not get the right or wrong one based on whether they used the definite article or not. (The redirect is also a search suggestion.) Furthermore, the redirection name is only the working title of the current target film (per The Look of Love disambiguation) and is not even mentioned anywhere on the current target page. 84.250.167.86 (talk) 08:07, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per nom. Thryduulf (talk) 10:26, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom. Common sense, could probably be done without RfD, especially since the current target article doesn't mention the alternate title. Also, @84.250: Please remember to tag redirects with {{subst:rfd}} when nominating them. I've done that for you here. Thanks. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 11:01, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed carbon

This originally targeted Carbon fixation but was boldly retargeted to its current target relating to coal. First, I am not sure fixed carbon and char are true synonyms, and the term seems most used in the context of Coal analysis, where it is defined. Retargeting could be considered, but I believe there is no primary topic here and I favor the creation of a disambiguation page. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:02, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:31, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Molecular ion

This term is rarely used as a synonym for the current target (though it is correct) but instead is typically used in the context of mass spectral interpretation, where it was originally targeted until it was boldly retargeted to its current target. I think mass spectral interpretation is the primary topic here and should be retargeted there with hatnotes on both pages. Ideally, the term would be disambiguated at Molecular ion (disambiguation) as well. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:59, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if retargeted, I'd be happy to go through all the incoming links and adjust as necessary. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:04, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support re-targetting to the MS meaning as likely PRIMARYTOPIC. Not sure we need a (dab) page that doesn't already exist if there are only two meanings and the primary one has a hatnote to the other. DMacks (talk) 02:31, 22 June 2021 (UTC) ...or create own article (see my comment below). DMacks (talk) 06:23, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
But EI is merely one ionization technique, and in fact is one where it is difficult to observe a molecular ion for many compounds (e.g., alcohols) due to extensive fragmentation. Softer ionization techniques such as electrospray ionization more consistently yield a molecular ion. Thus I think a broader target for the MS meaning is needed, and the term is fairly well defined and discussed at mass spectral interpretation, but I'm open to other suggestions. Mdewman6 (talk) 16:54, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at other methods, we often also see [M±X] ions as the immediate ionization result (not simply fragmentation of an initially-formed M+/M–). For example, electrospray can give [M+H]+ or [M+Na]+ not just M+. Our MALDI article calls these "quasimolecular ions", a possibly ill-defined or archaic term (see doi:10.1002/jms.4700). I agree with Mdewman6 that an article that provides the general context/defintion of this thing, rather than one type of apparatus that forms it, is a better redirect target. However, it's a flaw in Mass spectral interpretation that it is only described in terms of EI and only in the positive mode. Maybe we need to off-load it to its own sub-article? GoldBook has three related definitions. DMacks (talk) 06:23, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I would support a stand-alone article, but another approach would be to expand the interpretation article to discuss more forms of MS. Right now it is really Electron impact mass spectral interpretation, which is logical as those mass spectra require the most interpretation. But probably best to broaden the scope of the article, while keeping all the EI-specific details in appropriate sections. Also, I note that Base peak doesn't even exist, though there is Base peak intensity, which targets Mass chromatogram. I can deal with these in an appropriate manner after this RfD is closed. Also we need more incoming links from mass spectrum and mass spectrometry to these other articles (of course, getting beyond the scope of RfD). Mdewman6 (talk) 20:01, 28 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 10:46, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Process note: the only thing that the closer can do is decide among the redirect targets. Creating an actual article (replacing the redirect) is not one of their choices, but instead can be done regardless of RFD outcome. DMacks (talk) 18:19, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:30, 8 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_July_8&oldid=1032636595"