Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 23

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kyo Aston (talk | contribs) at 12:23, 29 December 2021 (Undid revision 1062602262 by GiantSnowman (talk)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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

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)[reply]

Little Welnetham Priory

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)[reply]

Fucking, Australia

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)[reply]

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

Katherine Heyman

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)[reply]

German bomb

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)[reply]

American bombing raid

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Sheraro massacre

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

Computing reference desk

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Edaga Hibret massacre

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

Literary canon

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Carbon gas

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Sengkang Punggol

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)[reply]

Pronouncement of Lacy

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)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_December_23&oldid=1062602272"