Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 15

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Lunamann (talk | contribs) at 20:11, 16 June 2024 (→Islamic Salvation Party: reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

June 15

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 15, 2024.

Islamic Salvation Party

Delete as a dubious name — there is an Islamic Salvation Front in Algeria and encyclopedia.com claims there was another Palestinian militant entity with a very similar name (Islamic National Salvation Party) that it makes a point of distinguishing from Hamas, but I see no evidence that Hamas ever called itself by this name. Anonymous 20:01, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Islamic Salvation Party was formed in the mid-90s and is an unofficial political wing of Hamas, once led by current Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh. See academic and journalist RS: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9]. Longhornsg (talk) 20:07, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Immanuelle/Draft Staggering

Useless WP:XNR. The page obviously should have never been moved to draftspace in the first place as it is not a draft. No need to leave a redirect after moving it back to the correct namespace. (I wasn't sure if WP:G6 applied so here we are.) Nickps (talk) 19:46, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: There's at least tens of similar redirects. Assuming that this redirect gets deleted (for other reasons than G7), the other ones should presumably be deleted too, though I haven't individually checked each of them for substantial page history or pageview oddities. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 18:43, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gaza death camp

Delete for obvious severe neutrality concerns. There's also "Gaza concentration camp" and "Gaza extermination camp" which I'm too lazy to include at the moment. Anonymous 19:42, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or retarget to Gaza humanitarian crisis (2023–present). We have lots of non-neutral redirects, and some of them are indeed quite offensive. But I don't see how these ones in particular do any harm. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 21:15, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for NPOV, per nom. Longhornsg (talk) 20:09, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Retarget to Gaza humanitarian crisis (2023–present), per WP:RNEUTRAL, redirects do not need to be neutral. The term has seen some use [10][11], however I am not sure if it qualifies as common use. However my suggested retarget contains more information about deaths in Gaza strip. Ca talk to me! 08:12, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good points, I've updated my vote. —Trilletrollet [ Talk | Contribs ] 08:37, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget as per Ca. As mentioned, WP:RNEUTRAL dictates that redirects do not need to be neutral; not only are redirects much harder to see (your average reader isn't going to use the "what links here" tool), but also, if someone were to use a non-neutral search term for whatever reason (for example, "hey, I've heard this term being batted around, what the heck are people talking about?"), we shouldn't keep them from reaching the information we have on the topic.
I agree that the Gaza Humanitarian Crisis article is a better target than Gaza Strip. However, barring the retarget, I would prefer keep over deletion. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 13:10, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
However, Lunamann, in your example, the person would not actually learn anything about the term and simply be redirected to a vaguely relevant article. You are certainly right that being useful is more important than neutrality when it comes to redirects, but the fact that the redirect has had exactly one view barring yesterday, having been around for about a month, does not help its case on that end either. Anonymous 18:41, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Skymont (microarchitecture)

Delete, deprecated, WP:CBALL, check the talk pages for the complete rationale Artem S. Tashkinov (talk) 13:14, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete – this redirect is definitely 'obsolete' as "Skymont" now officially refers to the E-core architecture used in Lunar Lake, see sources here: [12], [13], which is completely different to the Cannon Lake processor series. The "Skymont (microarchitecture)" redirect is especially misleading, as Cannon Lake is a microprocessor series, not a microarchitecture, which are two highly different things. Though, I should mention that this redirect doesn't need to be deleted per se for someone to create an article about the Skymont E-core architecture; you can just simply overwrite the redirect with an article. — AP 499D25 (talk) 09:36, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_June_15&oldid=1229435553"