Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 July 16

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 刻意 (talk | contribs) at 02:54, 18 July 2019 (→‎Shenxu). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

July 16

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 16, 2019.

Lancegate

Not mentioned in target article, and seemingly not mentioned in any other articles about Lance Armstrong. Third party search engines seem to return primarily results for Bert Lance when searching for "Lancegate". Steel1943 (talk) 22:44, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't know, User:Steel1943--it was a happening term on the TV when I wrote it up. Funny you should bring this up: Armstrong now is getting back in the mainstream, and he was interviewed as an expert by the doofy dudes on NBCSN. Drmies (talk) 23:07, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sī Dàlín

WP:FORRED. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:58, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Juana de Arco

Spanish. WP:FORRED. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:58, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Juan Sebastián Bach

Spanish. WP:FORRED. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:56, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

John Paul Ii

E.g. John Paul II and John paul ii are sufficient. We don't need inconsistencies in the capitalization of the numeral itself. (John Paul Ii gets decent traffic because it is the first search suggestion that pops up when you type in "John Paul II", as I experienced myself.) All of these were created by the same editor, who is no longer active on Wikipedia. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:56, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Yuki

No apparent connection. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:54, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mrs. Bartimus

Appears just to be the name of someone's teacher. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:53, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Early years of john f. kennedy

Ad-hoc section names do not redirects make. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:51, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Procedural keep The first situation is quite different from the second; please close this discussion and split it up so the different items can be addressed separately. Nyttend (talk) 23:33, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

St.Pauls

Spacing error. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:48, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Micheal Jordon

All double typos. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:47, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lucanius

Not mentioned in target article. There have been various Lucaniuses in history, though only one is mention on Wikipedia. Delete to encourage article creation. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mall Ze-dong

Mall and More are not variant Chinese pronunciations of 毛 (Máo). — the Man in Question (in question) 20:42, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Leonardo D.Caprio

Leonardo D. Caprio already exists separately. Therefore, spacing error in mistaken name. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:41, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Leonardo D`caprio

Leonardo D'caprio already exists separately. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:41, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Armstrong, Louis Satchmo

Implausible search term. {{R from sort name}} exists for sorting; anyone who searches on Google or types into Wikipedia's search box "Armstrong, Louis" will get where they're trying to go. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:40, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per the color of Louis Satchmo Armstrong. If "XYZ" doesn't exist, there's no good reason to have "Z, XY". Please remember, however, that there are plenty of other ways to reach an article; your envisioned autofilled search won't help anyone like me who goes places by changing the page URL. Nyttend (talk) 23:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keeuopatrai

Not clear on the meaning of these redirects. Not Greek forms. If from some other language, then WP:FORRED. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Futhaghuras

WP:FORRED. Arabic/Persian, Russian, Italian, Spanish, and what appears to be some sort of hybrid. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:34, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

M. Angelo

Since Michelangelo's name was not "Michael Angelo", this does not seem like a worthy redirect. Who's going to search for M. Angelo over Michelangelo or Michael Angelo, which already exists for those confused about that. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hello. I created this redirect 11 years ago. If you check 'what links here', you will see that the redirect was created while going through a list of red-links at Talk:Albert Memorial, specifically the composers, architects, poets, painters, and sculptors depicted on the Frieze of Parnassus that forms part of the Albert Memorial. It appears that the files at The National Archives (in the UK) include a 'historical summary' that used this form of the name to refer to Michelangelo, using a list taken from the official history (see below). The form 'Michael Angelo' is rare (it tends to be used in older sources), but is used in some places, such as the work The Life of Michael Angelo (1912). So the form M. Angelo will likely appear in some places (e.g. it is used in the official history of the memorial, The National Memorial to His Royal Highness the Prince Consort, that was published in 1873), so a redirect could be of some use. In a similar vein, the form of the name carved into the memorial is 'MICHAEL ANGELO', which you can verify for yourself in the photo here (he is the one in the middle of that side of the frieze). The same form of the name is used on the east side of the frieze (he appears twice in total). I am going to ask for some advice on how common the form 'Michael Angelo' is. Carcharoth (talk) 02:02, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Not an uncommon abbreviation in 19th-century books & earlier & worth keeping. Did you check google before nominating? Apparently not. Johnbod (talk) 02:17, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Michelange

Presumably meant to be French Michel-Ange. WP:FORRED. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:31, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Michelan

Part of a name does not make a good redirect. (And could more easily redirect to Michelin.) — the Man in Question (in question) 20:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gate bill

Fail at {{R from sort name}}. Also, could have numerous other meanings. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:29, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

III Gates William Henry

Not a useful configuration of his or anyone else's name. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:28, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sinica

Delete. Sinica redirects to a section of Names of China, but the article doesn't state that Sinica was/is a name of China. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:50, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Sinica is simply Latin referring to things associated with China - [1], e.g. Pax Sinica, and it would be under the section Sinae, Sin, which is what it redirects to. The article discusses various terms meaning China or associated with China, so it is perfectly valid redirect. Someone just needs to add the term (and Sinensis), that is all. Hzh (talk) 19:11, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Chinese culture. Compare Judaica, Americana, etc. — the Man in Question (in question) 20:22, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sinica is not used in the same way as Americana, which is a widely-used term to refer to American culture. Sinica simply pertains to China, i.e. another word for "Chinese". Sinica (or Chinese) is not the equivalent of Chinese culture. Hzh (talk) 21:13, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep; it's an adjective, similar to "Chinese" or "Cathayan", or "Monégasque" or "Liechtensteiner". Given the prevalence of Latin in the past and its continued common use in some areas (e.g. "Pax" as mentioned by Hzh), it's definitely a good idea to have this specific redirect. Nyttend (talk) 23:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sinensis

Delete. Flora Sinensis is not known solely as "Sinensis". There are, however, dozens of articles about species with "sinensis" in the title, and this redirect therefore impedes search. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:42, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(n.b. Flora Sinensis is a book. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:52, 16 July 2019 (UTC))[reply]
@BDD:, I'm not sick of the pings, keep them coming. Category:Taxonomy disambiguation pages is where most the species epithet disambiguation pages can be found (although the contents of that category include some other things).Plantdrew (talk) 19:47, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Names of China#Sinae, Sin Sinica, Sinensis, Sino are all terms in Latin referring to China [2], so a redirect to Names for China is one possibility. Another possibility is to use it as a disambiguation page because there are many things (e.g. animal and plant species) with the word Sinensis in them. Hzh (talk) 19:24, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete is my first inclination, and let the search engine do it's job. There isn't anything that would be appropriate for a dab page; all instances are partial title matches (yes, we have dab pages for some other species epithets, but I don't think we should). Sinensis started as a redirect to China, and then spent awhile as a dab page. Most species epithet disambiguation pages have been turned into redirects to List of Latin and Greek words commonly used in systematic names (which already has an entry for "sinensis"). Redirecting to that list or names of China could be appropriate. Plantdrew (talk) 19:47, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and let the search engine do it's job, per Plantdrew. Far more likely to hinder a search than help. Or red to the list. Johnbod (talk) 02:20, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Highby

Former CEO of the target, not currently mentioned at the target. Originally created as a stub and redirected as an alternative to deletion, but I don't think this redirect is useful. signed, Rosguill talk 20:39, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 18:03, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lance Armstrong/proposal

Subject is not a proposal. Redirect has no edit history that needs to be retained. Steel1943 (talk) 17:58, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I initially thought this was one of those mainspace subpages from the UseModWiki days, but it only dates to 2005 and its creation constituted a content duplication in any case. No longer has any purpose. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 04:46, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sheridan, WY, mSA

Delete these six odd, unnecessary, malformed, unlikely typos. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I'm unclear what is wrong with Sheridan, WY USA. Is the "U" not a "U"? Steel1943 (talk) 17:47, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    That one might be better pointed at Sheridan, Wyoming, unless there's something irregular with that U. --BDD (talk) 18:43, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep since per the article, "Sheridan County comprises the Sheridan, WY Micropolitan Statistical Area". It's been a few years since we've had one of these come up here, so here are the precedents: 27 July 2009 (withdrawn), 18 September 2010 (delete), 27 September 2010 (keep all), 13 July 2015 (keep), 8 August 2015 (keep), 12 November 2015 (keep), 20 April 2016 (keep). -- Tavix (talk) 17:59, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep most. For one thing, this needs to go to the county, not to the city — the micropolitan area embraces the whole county, even the out-of-the-way rural areas. Secondly, four of these are not typos; the use of a Greek letter "mu" is normal for "micro" (e.g. "micrometre" is commonly abbreviated "µm"), and I believe we have "µSA" redirects for every micropolitan area in the USA. If we have a large group of articles, and all of them have redirects with a similar format, deleting exactly one of them as implausible or typo doesn't make sense; if you think the idea's problematic, please start a broader discussion about trashing all of them. That being said...Delete USA and mSA. USA is a typo, and mSA is not usual I believe. If I'm wrong, and many articles of this sort have such redirects, I'll be interested in following my own advice and starting a broader discussion on their suitability. Nyttend (talk) 23:15, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    They're all going to the county right now. I only suggested retargeting the one to the city if we interpret it as "Sheridan, Wyoming, United States". --BDD (talk) 13:12, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, I hadn't thought of it that way at all: I saw it only as a mangled form of µSA, not as the country name. I don't think it's a very good redirect, since Americans won't append the country name and people from other countries probably won't know the postal abbreviation. Nyttend (talk) 21:45, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • PS, another reason for keeping — see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 September 27 where µSA redirects were discussed. DBaK produced several examples of this format being used by US state governments to indicate micropolitan areas. If a government agency is using a specific abbreviation for a specific term, our use of the same abbreviation for the same term is neither mistaken nor implausible. Nyttend (talk) 23:44, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Side comment: The difference between the identical-looking links using the Greek letter mu is currently being discussed on the Reference desk here. If any action is to be taken, it might be best to wait for at least a few days. --69.159.11.113 (talk) 04:33, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Skin turgor

Not mentioned in target article. In addition, from what I am seeing via third party engines, the subject of this redirect is probably notable enough to have its own article, aka get deleted per WP:REDLINK unless an appropriate target is found for this. For what it's worth, I found the article Turgor pressure (The target of redirect Turgor), and I could not find an appropriate location to target the nominated redirect, most likely because again, it seems like a notable subject by itself and no section of that article explains the subject of this redirect sufficiently enough. Steel1943 (talk) 06:41, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as redirect. In medical practice "skin turgor" is only of any relevance in the assessment for dehydration, of which it is a late sign. It should be mentioned in the target article and it is surprising that it isn't. COI I created the redirect almost to the day 10 years ago. JFW | T@lk 06:57, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • ...That's the issue: The redirect has no mention at the target. At the present time, readers attempting to look up this redirect who are expecting to find information about the subject of the redirect will not find what they are looking for. Steel1943 (talk) 22:41, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Jfdwolff. A commonly used medical term used to describe a finding in a dehydrated state. Would warrant a mention but should not be deleted just because presently there is no mention. --Tom (LT) (talk) 18:28, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. I thought one of the main goals of WP:MED is to be really accurate and precise, given that people will use Wikipedia as a medical reference. If we don't discuss this, we shouldn't play games and imply otherwise. --BDD (talk) 20:27, 11 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:33, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:BRRR

Many of the links are intended to go to WP:BRR; instead they go to a "humour" page that assumes bad faith. Peter James (talk) 17:10, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

USS Sheridan (1865)

USS Stettin was decommissioned in 1865 and became Sheridan. She was never "USS Sheridan". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:39, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

National Religious Affairs Administration

Target doesn't mention this organization name. From reading through the target, it's possible that State Administration for Religious Affairs may be a better target? I am not confident about that though. signed, Rosguill talk 17:50, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 15:09, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AL. Vijay-Jayam Ravi Project

Implausible redirect -- CptViraj (📧) 14:42, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ACNH

Not a widely used initialism based on internet search results. signed, Rosguill talk 14:39, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep Its predecessor became widely referred to as "ACNL" or "AC:NL". Since there is nothing else that has that acronym on Wikipedia, it seems harmless.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 14:49, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. If it's the only organisation with these initials, it makes sense to redirect the acronym there — maybe it's not commonly used, but it's unambiguous and not an error. If any other organisation with these initials gets an article, we can retarget or disambiguate the acronym, but until then, keep as is. Nyttend (talk) 23:09, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Continent

This term seems more used in fiction than in this context, and was created to refer to what looks like Essos. -- Tavix (talk) 14:39, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shenxu

Not mentioned in the target, no indication that this is an alternative spelling. signed, Rosguill talk 14:38, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The target page is linked to the Chinese page zh:肾虚, which is Shenxu. It is the fault of the target page not mentioning the alternative saying.--刻意(Kèyì) 02:54, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dirsana Qeddus Urael

One of many redirects created pointing to this target by the same editor, I don't see any justification for including the term "Qeddus" signed, Rosguill talk 14:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

God Church

Way too vague, not primarily associated with the target signed, Rosguill talk 14:25, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:BRR

Retarget to Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle#Alternatives. As explained on the talk page, "Bold, revert, revert" is listed as one of the legitimate alternatives to BRD. (Really all this would require is moving the shortcut template on the target page rather than any edits to the redirect itself, but I thought it best to discuss it here anyway.) See also the previous RfD. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 14:07, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Polyvinyl cyanide

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 keep. Solid justifications for the redirect provided, withdrawing nomination. (non-admin closure) signed, Rosguill talk 15:30, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target, searching online I couldn't confirm or refute that this is an alternative name for the subject. signed, Rosguill talk 14:02, 16 July 2019 (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.

Eurasia, The Lost Continent

This was created as an article explaining how Eurasia is not a real place and no one lives there, but for some reason was redirected instead of deleted. Eurasia is not popularly known as "The Lost Continent" and Lost continent is silent on Eurasia. -- Tavix (talk) 13:40, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Aristide Duval

Fictional character that isn't mentioned in the target article or anywhere else. —Xezbeth (talk) 12:39, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Second American Civil War (disambiguation)

The target article is not a disambiguation page, but does contain details of alternative uses of the phrase. Is that sufficient for a (disambiguation) redirect, or should the redirect be deleted? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:26, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Antwerp (Quest for Glory)

A minor fictional element that isn't mentioned in any article. Its entry at Antwerp (disambiguation) should also be removed. —Xezbeth (talk) 12:10, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Homme fatale

The term is not mentioned at the target article, in fact I don't see anything there regarding a male equivalent. PC78 (talk) 01:09, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: An extra title was added towards the end of the discussion, and there is a proposal of splitting the results, so I think we can relist for another week.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 11:01, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Androgynous characters in Final Fantasy

Unencyclopedic topic for a list, and implausible since it is not mentioned in the article. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:44, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

List of Blitzball Techniques

Delete per WP:GAMEGUIDE. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:40, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hilde Garde

Not mentioned in this article nor the article for the game in which it appears. WP:GAMECRUFT. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 08:30, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Final Fantasy bestiary

Delete per WP:NOTGAMEGUIDE. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:42, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Shiva in Final Fantasy Series

Implausible due to incorrect grammar and typos. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:37, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Beastmaster (character class)

Delete as overly vague video game terms. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:32, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Final Fantasy armor and accessories

Delete per WP:NOTGAMEGUIDE. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:29, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Unreferenced OR gameguide content is still bound by the attribution standards, and we need to be able to attribute old revisions as well as current, so anything that got merged into an extant page needs to be preserved properly. Lots of complicated merging happened, e.g. [21] merged Final Fantasy armor and accessories into Final Fantasy weapons and armor, which got merged elsewhere, so maybe content didn't actually get merged (maybe something just got redirected) so we maybe don't need to keep all of these pages. But unless someone can prove that a merge didn't happen, we need to keep these titles. Nyttend (talk) 05:03, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Understood, but we also provide access to old page revisions, and we need to have attribution for those. This is an absolute legal requirement, not something stipulated by Wikipedia policy. Of course, if you can demonstrate that no content got merged at all, that's completely different. Nyttend (talk) 21:48, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Overdrive (Final Fantasy X

Delete per WP:UNNATURAL. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:26, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GameplayofFinalFantasy

Implausible, WP:PANDORA redirect that has no spaces. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 05:23, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Zxcvbnm: Normally, we'd call those {{R from CamelCase}} but this seems to be a dupe (made way after the early 2000's as it was intended). @Steel1943: Why did you make this? –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 06:45, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mountain meadow

Montane and mountain meadows are apparently synonyms for each other. Alpine tundra is a mountain meadow, but many mountain meadows aren't alpine tundra at all; this is particularly significant in the southern Appalachians (USA), e.g. the large Big Meadows or the tiny GW Jeep Site both consist of grassland surrounded by woods, far below where the treeline would be. If I ran across one of these terms and wanted to learn more, I'd assume that a mountain meadow is always alpine tundra, so this pair of redirects unfortunately causes confusion. Delete unless someone can find a better target. Nyttend (talk) 02:42, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:CPP

I would like to propose reassigning the redirect WP:CPP from Wikipedia:WikiProject Cal Poly Pomona to Wikipedia:Civil POV pushing. This shortcut is hardly used for the project, but would be a natural shortcut for the highly linked essay about civility. Some points to consider:

I had good luck on one prior occasion (I forget which) in requesting a group relinquish a shortcut that was not used much, in favor of another target where it made good logical sense. I simply approached the group on their talk page and asked; as I recall there was a brief discussion, and that was that. I had planned to do the same in this case, but I doubt that raising a discussion on a page that hasn't been touched in four years would make much sense, so I'm bringing the discussion here instead. I'll notify the project, but don't imagine that will draw a lot of people here.

Question: should WP:CPP be retargeted to Wikipedia:Civil POV pushing? Mathglot (talk) 01:13, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

In general, I'm opposed to "stealing" redirects and retargeting them to somewhere else, even when they haven't been used as long as this one has. On the other hand, this one really doesn't seem to have been used any time recently, so it's not clear to me that anyone would be inconvenienced. In fact the most recent case I'm aware of, is this edit, which is the one that got me here in the first place. As it turns out, that use of the shortcut WP:CPP was in error, the author having intended the essay as the actual destination of that shortcut.

As the essay is quite popular and, I believe there would be a significant overall benefit to the project by retargeting the shortcut; and as there has been very little or no valid recent use of the shortcut, I see very little downside to retargeting it. Mathglot (talk) 01:13, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • No, I don't think that's wise. The appearances of CPP = POV pushing are separated by several years: Hijri used it recently, while its other appearance at User:Raul654/archive16 dates from 2008. These are completely independent uses, while the university usage comes from a blocked sockpuppeteer (not likely to use it again) and DGG's the only one using CPP = close paraphrase. Nyttend (talk) 05:08, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Mathglot's opening comment basically sums it up (although I was a bit more succinct in describing my own feelings on the matter here). The one thing I would add is that the Aconymfinder results are not really relevant for our purposes, since the real-world acronym doesn't have "WP:" attached to it: we have a disambig page at CPP to list off-wiki topics that are known by this acronym. Hijiri 88 (聖やや) 15:10, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Ha-ha, no one ever accused me of being succinct. Guess I need to work on that... Good job linking the CPP disambig page; didn't even think to look there, and I should've. Btw (and this is slightly o/t here) but I think I've seen helpful hat-notes in namespace before, where an article might be named similarly to a policy or other project page someone might be looking for instead, and I wonder if it would be appropriate to add a few CPP-policy links to that page, such as the two mentioned above. Mathglot (talk) 20:07, 16 July 2019 (UTC) Ah, here's an example: see hat-note at Civility. Mathglot (talk) 20:11, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I used this for close paraphrase because it is what I use in my set of macros for expanding abbreviations when typing and it must accidentally for one of several reasons not have gotten expanded. I do however think its logical, but not worth confusing with other existing redirects, even though those redirects should beoe deleted as not useful. DGG ( talk ) 05:01, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    I don’t believe I understood what you just said. If it’s important, could you restate it in other words? Mathglot (talk) 05:29, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    See Macro (computer science). DGG has set up his computer so that when he types WP:CPP, his computer automatically replaces those characters with Wikipedia:Civil POV pushing (it expands the link from six characters to twenty-seven) before the edit is saved. However, for some reason his computer failed to replace the shorthand with the full text, so he ended up providing a link to Cal Poly by accident. Nyttend (talk) 21:52, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_July_16&oldid=906766004"