Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 15: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 14: Line 14:
*'''delete''' per nom, wasn't able to find any non-Wikipedia uses. [[User:Rusalkii|<span style="color:#259a83">Rusalkii</span>]] ([[User talk:Rusalkii|talk]]) 23:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
*'''delete''' per nom, wasn't able to find any non-Wikipedia uses. [[User:Rusalkii|<span style="color:#259a83">Rusalkii</span>]] ([[User talk:Rusalkii|talk]]) 23:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as an invented [[WP:NEO]]. I suspect it's more likely a portmanteau of [[wikt:sperg|sperg]] and [[Krugerrand]]. - [[User:EurekaLott|Eureka Lott]] 02:35, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' as an invented [[WP:NEO]]. I suspect it's more likely a portmanteau of [[wikt:sperg|sperg]] and [[Krugerrand]]. - [[User:EurekaLott|Eureka Lott]] 02:35, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
*'''delete''' per nom, wasn't able to find any non-Wikipedia uses. Never heard of it, appears to be jargon. [[User:Jtbobwaysf|Jtbobwaysf]] ([[User talk:Jtbobwaysf|talk]]) 07:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC)


====Tokyo International Airport====
====Tokyo International Airport====

Revision as of 07:18, 16 March 2024

March 15

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

Spergerrand

Not mentioned at target. In fact, I don't think the word "Spergerrand" is mentioned anywhere else on the Internet, other than a few wikipedia scrapers.(The spelling vaguely suggests to me that the word could(?) be a portmanteau of "Asperger's" and "random", but as for why one would use such a term to refer to Bitcoin is beyond me.) As far as I can tell, this word was coined for the very first time in the history of humankind when Your Lord and Master created this redirect way back in 2012. So, delete. Duckmather (talk) 21:08, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete per nom, wasn't able to find any non-Wikipedia uses. Rusalkii (talk) 23:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as an invented WP:NEO. I suspect it's more likely a portmanteau of sperg and Krugerrand. - Eureka Lott 02:35, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete per nom, wasn't able to find any non-Wikipedia uses. Never heard of it, appears to be jargon. Jtbobwaysf (talk) 07:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tokyo International Airport

It could refer to any of the two international airports in Japan. Interstellarity (talk) 18:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

NIAF

"NIAF" is not mentioned at the target, probably because it's not used commonly to mean "National Iraqi Armed Forces". It is used to mean National Italian American Foundation but we have no article about that. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:28, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Viennoise

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect redirect and the target clear unclear. The article formerly at the target title, Vienne (department), does not mention the redirect either. The closest title match I could find, and the most common match via third-party search engines, is Viennoiserie, but I'm not sure if that is correct. Steel1943 (talk) 14:37, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To Vienne (department) or Vienne, Isère?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Toadette (Let's discuss together!) 16:44, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:RFOREIGN, given that there are no incoming links from article space. If it is decided to keep the redirect, it should continue to target the existing Vienne dab page, in that it is the correct feminine form of the French demonym not only for Vienne, Isère but also for all the French villages listed on that dab page, as well as for Vienna, Austria. In response to other suggestions, the correct French demonym for Vienne (department) is poitevin; Viennoiserie are, etymologically speaking, pastries made in the style of Vienna. Also note that while viennoise is indeed the feminine form of viennois the demonym, the primary meaning of Viennois in English is not the demonym but the region around Vienne, Isère (historically known as the Duchy, County or Dauphiné of Viennois depending on the period). Accordingly, the current redirect for Viennois should almost certainly remain unchanged, but should not influence the decision on what to do with Viennoise. Rosbif73 (talk) 14:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 22:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just keep it as is then. --Joy (talk) 20:18, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Rosbif73's detailed explanations. Jay 💬 10:58, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: one more try for consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 11:54, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dchicha

This redirect was created by means of an undiscussed move and reverted immediately after. However, it is a title that is not mentioned at the target page, and seemingly not a noteworthy alternative name. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:31, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Add mention this does seem to be an alternative name for the target based on google searches, and noting both names seems particularly common in French-language sources (e.g. the lead at fr:Chorba frik states "Dchicha" (alternatively transliterated "tchicha") was the original name). Thryduulf (talk) 12:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. If this was created as essentially an administrative error, and is not mentioned on the target page, nor is a noteworthy alternative name... then let's just get rid of it. - Dyork (talk) 14:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It does appear to be a noteworthy alternative name though. Thryduulf (talk) 14:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mention has not been added yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete There is no mention of such name in the target article (a variant of the Chorba), nor should there be. Tchicha refers to barley semolina, which is different from Frik (also known as Freekeh). M.Bitton (talk) 13:04, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shalini Bathina

Actress mentioned at several pages, including Little Voice (TV series) and Initiation (2020 film). Delete to encourage article creation per WP:REDYES. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tyrone Brown (actor)

Actor mentioned at several pages beyond just the one, including at Beat the World. Delete to encourage article creation per WP:REDYES. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:49, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doug Savan

This is seemingly an actor that played in this movie. Not synonymous with the movie by any means, and a red link seems to be more worthwhile for this purpose.

A reflection into November 2023, and wow. The history here is so egregious and I can't believe I didn't see this when the initial SPI was coming along. The creator of this redirect also created the page it points to. It was made by Crafterstar in draftspace, and was moved by their own sock into mainspace, which had earlier swindled a page mover perm out of process, and didn't leave a draftspace redirect when moving to main, for some reason. Hiding evidence that it was once a draft? Beyond me. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:35, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Meant to add that my external searches for this actor turned up exclusively Doug Savant topics. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:37, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm guessing you meant September 2023 since that's when Crafterstar/Ebbedlila made the article and then sockpuppet-shoved it into mainspace. In any case, yeah, that's... that's pretty blatant sockpuppetry. ...In any case, though, they're pretty solidly blocked indefinitely, and the case shut. So, back on topic...
Delete as per nom and WP:REDLINK seems like the way to go. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 08:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Faison

Adam Faison is mentioned on the pages of several films, including Hellraiser (2022 film) and Everything's Gonna Be Okay. Similarly to Ebbedlila's deleted actor redirects, this should be deleted to encourage article creation per WP:REDYES. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:21, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Starry Cat

Not mentioned at the target. Only bears one mention on Wikipedia, being an alternate name for Ricky Eat Acid, who is a part of this band. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:07, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Ricky Eat Acid. If the user wanted info on the band from searching up one alternate name for one of the members, the band is mentioned in the article's opener. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 08:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Starry Cat was a bunch of Teen Suicide songs that were released as a standalone project to raise money for one of the band members. It may not be reflected in the article, but I can just make that change and reference it. It wouldn’t make sense to redirect to Ricky Eat Acid — the same members who participated on the Starry Cat album are the (now-past) band members listed on the Teen Suicide page.Leggomygreggo8 (talk) 02:00, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Then... why is Starry Cat listed as one of Ricky Eat Acid's aliases on his page, if Starry Cat was an alias for the whole band?? Prolly should fix that one while you're at it, lol. Will change my vote to Keep after this change. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 02:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, you edited it before I could fix my comment. It should be redirected to the page you specified. I realized Sam recorded Starry Cat alone, and although it was released for the benefit of a Teen Suicide member, he was the solo architect of the album. My apologies. Leggomygreggo8 (talk) 02:07, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, fair enough. Keeping my own vote as Retarget, then. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 02:15, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legislative committee

Newly created redirect; using the word "legislative" in the title would seemingly imply something more specific than ending up at the general page for committees. While there is material about legislation at the target, from my point of view the more-specific operator in this title is "legislative", and due to this Legislature may be a more preferable target here. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Public Accounts

There are many titles on Wikipedia that include "Public Accounts" in the title. In regards to having the same name, Public Account (India) exists. There are many public accounts committees, and public accounts committee covers a lot of these. There is, also, a Public Accounts Commission beyond the committees, an article for Public Account without the "s", and a more general Public accounting which currently redirects to Accountant. (Perhaps Accounting is more expected there, but not the topic). Utopes (talk / cont) 07:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Industrial labor, Labor, labour

These redirects should most likely be synchronized, but I'm not sure which target is the most proper. (Note: Capitalism#Wage labor links to Wage labor in a hatnote in that section.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:49, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 23:00, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'd suggest a retarget/refine to Industrial society#Industrial labour, but that section is already flagged as in desperate need of sources, so might be a bad retarget. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 03:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 07:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manae

implausible misspelling(?) of its japanese name, manene. also unlikely speculation, as it was also named in gen 3. results only showed an in-game trainer and an anime production staff member with this name cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or weak retarget. The top results all relate to some non-notable tiktokers/youtubers, Inanidrilus manae - longstanding consensus has repeatedly been that redirects from specific names are not useful, so I don't support targetting it here; and Manaé Feleu, a French rugby union player but I can't find any evidence that she's commonly referred to by her first name alone (searching for Manae rugby -Feleu finds only places where her surname has been misspelled) so while I don't oppose retargetting it here it's not my first choice. Thryduulf (talk) 12:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per Thryduulf's findings. Steel1943 (talk) 20:53, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:17, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 07:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate: Probably no harm in disambiguating to the articles Thryduulf dug up. Apparently it actually is a given name in Japan as well (quite a few people out there with that name as well), could be argued as futureproofing or something? idk. But the current target of Mime Jr. really isn't useful. 🔥HOTm̵̟͆e̷̜̓s̵̼̊s̸̜̃🔥 (talk・edits) 20:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tantras

It makes no sense for the links tantra and tantras go to different articles. Retarget to tantra. JIP | Talk 19:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget as per nom. Given the proposed target already has a hatnote pointing to the current target, I don't see any sort of problem with this change. (Don't forget to mark as R from plural.) Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 19:57, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oop, also, forgot to add: Apparently, this was an R from page move. Still, feels like it makes more sense to point to the singular form. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 20:00, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep since it does not seem to make sense to refer to the subject at Tantra in a plural form. (However, if a disambiguation page were to be created for "Tantra/Tantras", this redirect could be retargeted there.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:23, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Retarget to Tantra. Never mind, seems the English language defines the word "tantra", as well as the subject at Tantra, as a noun, so a plural is plausible. Steel1943 (talk) 23:26, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Tantra per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:51, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a disambig for Tantras (Hinduism) and Tantras (Buddhism). Tantras in plural refers to Tantra texts, not the Tantra system.--Redtigerxyz Talk 12:22, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 07:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Superdome (Stadium)

I believe this to be an ambiguous term and, as such, it should be redirected to Superdome, where there are four stadiums that go by/have gone by this name. Bringing this here due to a dispute on the target with Abhiramakella. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:02, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Burswood Dome and the Sydney SuperDome are arenas, not stadiums. Abhiramakella (talk) 17:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This redirect should be kept to Caesars Superdome because that is the only stadium in which that was nicknamed "Superdome". Abhiramakella (talk) 16:54, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This in no way addresses why you capitalized the disambiguator unnecessarily, and then apparently created the redirect with proper disambiguation capitalization, Superdome (stadium), about a month later. Steel1943 (talk) 17:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Capitalization errors happen often. Just because a page name has an incorrect way of capitalization does not mean that it should not be redirected to a page. Abhiramakella (talk) 17:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Our search function automagically detects capitalization differences, and without this redirect, the search function would treat a query for "Superdome (Stadium)" as if it were a query for "Superdome (stadium)" and redirect appropriately. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 17:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Using incorrect subject capitalization on disambiguators can be problematic, considering that means the incorrectly-capitalized title can be linked (which is bad in the case of disambiguators since it doesn't hint to the editor that a correction needs to be made to the title), and it can obscure other functionalities in Wikipedia, such as assessing page views of a redirects' usage. I think Lunamann hit the nail on the head there: typing a differently-capitalized title in the search function will result in going to the closest capitalization match, which would be "Superdome (stadium)" if the nominated redirect is deleted and can validate deleting the nominated redirect over keeping it, considering all else I have stated. (Not sure if this is enough for me to advocate changing WP:RDAB to accommodate this, but it sure is leading me that direction.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think with the exception of the fact redirects not including the word "disambiguation" in the title don't interfere with disambiguation link fixes the same principals apply. In the case of Ø (Disambiguation) the title is a name not a qualifier so RDAB wouldn't apply even if it was a redirect to an article. 501(c)(3) is an example or what would not be an RDAB redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:27, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe those examples should be included in RDAB, as examples of what NOT to delete. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 00:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Steel1943 and Lunamann: Our search function automagically detects capitalization differences this is only true for some methods of finding Wikipedia content and cannot be relied on. The points about making it harder to use some tools are irrelevant - firstly we should always prioritise readers over editors and that means we fix our tools to work with the encyclopaedia rather than "fixing" the encyclopaedia (usually when it's not actually broken) to work with our tools; secondly if it were relevant it would be a reason to delete every redirect that differs only in capitalisation. When plausible miscapitalisations occur outside parentheses we keep the redirect because we recognise how valuable they are to readers, when plausible miscapitalisations occur inside parentheses we should do the same because they are equally valuable to readers. Thryduulf (talk) 01:26, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Because readers are unlikely to look for a title with incorrect capitalizations. Readers qualifying titles like Wikipedia will expect them to be the way we correctly title things. WP:UNNATURAL notes i.e. an error specific to Wikipedia titling conventions that would likely not be arrived at naturally by readers, thereby adding to the implausibility. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Readers do look for titles with incorrect capitalisations - that's why we have Category:Redirects from miscapitalizations and nobody has ever provided any evidence that they distinguish between words inside and outside of parentheses. The fact that these redirects keep getting created is yet more evidence that people do arrive here naturally and so do benefit from their existence. Also note that what you quote is referring to things like missing parentheses not capitalisation. Thryduulf (talk) 21:47, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RDAB makes reference to "(Disambiguation)". Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:57, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
RDAB is an essay expressing opinions that reflect very varying levels of consensus for it's disparate points. On this point it is harmfully wrong. Thryduulf (talk) 23:21, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...One more place where WP:COSTLY is itself costly, huh? I've already written a counterargument piece regarding WP:PANDORA lol, am waiting on an opportunity to use it 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:37, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the point is that there is a limit to redirects being cheap and creating them for incorrectly capitalized qualifiers crosses the line of not being useful while creating clutter since deleting them enables search to correct the capitalization and keeping/maintaining such redirects though not particularly costly is reduced by not having such redirects. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 07:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CinemaWins

Parody YouTube channel which seems to lack the secondary sources required to actually mention it in the article of the thing it's parodying. Talk:CinemaSins#CinemaWins? has some circular reasoning that we have to include a section about it because the redirect exists. I suggest deleting the redirect. Belbury (talk) 09:49, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete-- both the redirect AND the mention- unless someone can find secondary sources. If secondary sources are found, happily keep. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 13:45, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i found a pair of top however many lists that mention cinemawins, and nothing else
one from hidden remote, and another from study breaks. i'm not sure either of them could be considered reliable, but i guess it's proof that the channel exists cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:52, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on sources to substantiate a mention?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 07:16, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kanpachi

"Kanpachi" is not mentioned on the target page. I tried to verify this myself and got very conflicting results about whether this is the correct target. Kanpachi is definitely a Seriola, but is it this Seriola? I don't know how to evaluate which of these sources are reliable and would appreciate input from someone who does. Wikispecies agrees that this is the correct target, but of course, that's user-generated. Kanpachi is a Japanese word and in katakana is カンパチ, if this helps anyone. asilvering (talk) 21:04, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate/ The Japanese Wikipedia article ja:カンパチ is about Seriola dumerili (greater amberjack), but says (translated by Google) "S. rivoliana is very similar to this species and is sometimes confused with this species." Searching FishBase for the common name "kanpachi" only returns S. dumerili.
However, searching Google for "kanpachi" returns pages that mention the scientific name Seriola rivoliana (some calling it "Hawaiian kampachi", others just calling it "kanpachi"). And pages that don't mention a scientific name often make it clear that they are referring to a fish that is farmed (not wild-caught) in Hawaii (i.e. Seriola rivoliana). From what I'm seeing from Google, I think "kanpachi", in English, refers to S. rivoliana more often than S. dumerili.
Common names for fish eaten as seafood often refer to multiple species. The US FDA says that Lutjanus campechanus is the only species that can be marketed as "red snapper", but there is zero enforcement and I regularly see fish labelled as red snapper with a country of origin well outside the range of L. campechanus. Plantdrew (talk) 22:17, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment added kampachi, which is an alternative romanisation of the same Japanese word, pointing to the same target. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 23:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Fishbase has Kanpachi as the Japanese common name for Seriola dumerili and Hirenaga-kanpachi (longfin kanpachi) as the Japanese common name for Seriola rivoliana. While we can't use Wikipedia as a source for material in articles, the fact that editors at the Japanese Wikipedia have Kanpachi at Seriola dumerili suggests it is the primary topic. I think the redirect as is or disambiguation can both be supported, but if the article doesn't mention kanpachi then we should disambiguate. —  Jts1882 | talk  07:35, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 07:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hatnote or Dabify, as per Plantdrew.-- i.e. Kanpachi redirects here. For the species referred to as Hirenaga-kanpachi, see Longfin yellowtail. (Can one put a reference in a hatnote?) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 08:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Raspberry Ukraine

no mention on target page. I have no idea what this means, tried a quick google, nothing immediately obvious. Redirect should be deleted unless someone can add supporting content at Ukrainians in Kuban. asilvering (talk) 17:16, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it's based on a weird historic name and subsequent wonky translation of 'Malynovyi Klyn' see Klyn. Sorry it seems that i forgot to get rid of the pipe on that page when i made the redirect—blindlynx 17:41, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Renaming Ukrainians in Kuban to Malynovyi Klyn in line with other Klyn pages might be a solution—blindlynx 18:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Besides the nom's concern, for some reason, this redirect made me think of Raspberry Pi, and that's not right. Steel1943 (talk) 22:46, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on blindlynx's suggestion? Klyn has similar instances.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 07:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support for Blindlynx's suggestion. Seems correct to me? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 07:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Website previously known as Twitter

Requesting deletion for unencyclopedic search terms that are unlikely to be frequently sought after or helpful as most readers looking for Twitter would just search for that and go from there, plus it is still largely called Twitter on the site and by many media and news outlets. Trailblazer101 (talk) 01:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom, plus no mainspace links to either one. GSK (talk • edits) 01:55, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per WP:UNHELPFUL, a test search for "Website previously known as Tumblr" had Tumblr as the very first result. Presumably, if we removed this redirect, the same would still hold for Twitter. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 02:58, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep both as per a smart kitten and Thryduulf, who are right on all counts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lunamann (talk • contribs) 14:04, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ...I... what???? That was supposed to be an edit of the comment above it. It displayed correctly in the past. How in the name of sanity did THIS happen??? ...Why does nonsense like this keep happening to me specifically? First Discussions stuffed the entirety of RtD into my collapsible, then Twinkle stole my reply meant for one discussion and put it under a different one, and now this nonsense. It's like these bot scripts have it out for me or something, lol Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 14:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lunamann: I'll explain this further on your talk page. Steel1943 (talk) 14:22, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both. Variations of the phrase [the website] formerly known as Twitter have been used (& are being used) by a number of reliable sources - e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7] - thus making this a likely & potentially helpful search term (engaging WP:R#K3); with no other target that it could be ambiguous with (as far as I can tell at a glance). Redirects are cheap, and - notwithstanding my problems with the WP:COSTLY essay - I don't believe WP:UNHELPFUL/WP:PANDORA apply in this instance, due to this specific phrase being used by reliable sources. A lack of incoming internal links is not a reason for deletion - especially so with redirects such as these ones, which can validly exist as search terms. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 13:26, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I feel like these should use “formerly”, rather than or at least as well as “previously”, as these quotes are usually worded in that way. –Gluonz talk contribs 13:59, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair point (I must have skimread the exact wording of the redirects too quickly!). My opinion would be that both forms could exist as redirects, given that previously is a synonym of formerly. (For what it’s worth, at a search, I’ve found sources also using previously - e.g. [8], [9], [10]) All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten[meow] 14:14, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both per a smart kitten. These are highly plausible search terms, given that phrases like this are how many people are referring to the website previously known as Twitter. The longer it becomes since it was known as Twitter the more likely it will be that people don't know what is being referred to, and even those who do won't know the title of our article given how ambiguous "X" is. Thryduulf (talk) 13:35, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep per the third reply; the second reply brings my opinion slightly towards ‘delete’ but still within the ‘keep’ range. –Gluonz talk contribs 14:00, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unlikely search term. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Both redirects show evidence of being used, getting 12 (Website) and 40 (The website) hits between October and February. The latter particularly is evidence these are not actually unlikely. Thryduulf (talk) 19:24, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Unlikely doesn't mean never. Should we make redirects for animal that barks, country shaped like a boot, and playwright who wrote Romeo and Juliet next? These belong on Jeopardy!, not Wikipedia. InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The issue with that is that WP:PANDORA, which seems to be the only citeable essay or guideline or policy that I can find that attempts to put into words why we don't and shouldn't have such "sentence redirects"... is, as Thryduulf put it at one point, 'WP:OTHERSTUFF nonsense'. Like, the core idea-- that we shouldn't make or keep redirects that amount to a user typing an entire sentence or question into the searchbox-- seems sound to me, but the 'pandora's box' argument used renders the essay... dare I say it? Renders it WP:UNHELPFUL. (And this is coming from a relatively new user that has been trying to wrap my brain around this for the past couple of weeks, and also, who tried to cite that very argument earlier on in this very discussion.)
    That said, WP:COSTLY nonsense notwithstanding, I wouldn't mark this as one of those redirects. As smart kitten and Thryduulf have pointed out, this phrase (or at least, a variant of it) gets used in reliable sources all the time to refer to Twitter/X, and has been ever since the name change. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 19:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    If you can find evidence that people are searching Wikipedia for those terms, especially if they are frequently used in multiple independent sources, then they would likely make useful redirects (although "animal that barks" is ambiguous - Bark (sound) notes that dogs, wolves, coyotees, foxes, seals and other animals all make that noise)). However as Lunamann points out, whether they are or are not useful search terms is completely irrelevant to whether these redirects are useful search terms. Thryduulf (talk) 19:55, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I meeeaaan, if you put animal that barks -> dog up on RfD, I'd recommend retargeting to Bark (sound). But we're getting into the weeds. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 20:11, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Y'all must be cat people... InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    shoutouts to pokémon for having cats that bark cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:PANDORA, we could otherwise end up with things like Country previously known as Swaziland or Parish previously known as Halstead Rural. There is no merits that I can see that we would treat this one differently than all the other things that have been renamed. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What makes this different is that multiple sources frequently refer to it as "(the) website previously known as Twitter" as a name, not just as temporary clarification, in the same way "The artist formerly known as Prince" was used. Also, once again, WP:PANDORA is just WP:OTHERSTUFF + WP:CRYSTAL - we judge redirects on their own merits, not on the merits of other redirects that someone might theoretically create at some point in the future (and there isn't even evidence to support the underlying assumption that it will encourage such creations). Thryduulf (talk) 20:17, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    ...Prince-mind? Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 20:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "Website previously known as Twitter" only gets around 529 Google hits most of which are from Wikipedia. It doesn't appear to be a common term unlike "The artist formerly known as Prince" which is mentioned in the target and has about 135,000 hits, similarly "Country previously known as Swaziland" has about 528 hits. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:54, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    More like 9 news results, three of which are invalid. I guess that must be some users' definition of "widely used by reliable sources". InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I mean, if the country of Swaziland were only recently renamed to Swaziland, still regularly referred to as Swaziland by most people, and kept getting referred to with the phrase "Country previously known as Swaziland" in reliable publications, then yeah, I could see us ending up with Country previously known as Swaziland. ...It's a bit like The Artist Formerly Known as Prince. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 20:18, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that's the point, it seems Prince is sometimes actually named as "The artist formerly known as Prince" which "Country previously known as Swaziland" is just a sentence so is not a plausible redirect. In other words the "Country previously known as" is just a modifier rather than a name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:01, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Ehhh. I mean, during the time period where Prince was referred to as 'The artist formerly known as Prince', his name was actually File:Prince logo.svg. (You can probably see why people referred to him as 'The artist formerly known as Prince') In that case, I'd argue that 'The artist formerly known as' would also just be a modifier. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 23:53, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete per "no one refers to it as x". aside from elon and organization 13
on a more serious note, i think the "previously" would require that the target article not be named "twitter" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:24, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
We don't require readers to know what our article is titled before they can read it, indeed that's the point of redirects like this. "no one refers to it as x" would be a valid argument against moving the article but is completely irrelevant here - rather it's a reason why this redirect is useful. Thryduulf (talk) 14:02, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Admittedly involved relist on my part, going to IAR in order to close the subpage. No prior relists with 6 !votes delete and 5 !votes keep.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 07:13, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Implausible search term. Why would somebody search this instead of just searching for Twitter instead? StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 15:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per A smart kitten. -- Tavix (talk) 19:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Idioprothoraca

Terms that are only linked from Sociality as their only mentions on Wikipedia, and neither are mentioned at their respective targets. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:37, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can vouch for the fact it was only used for the taxonomic families with redlinks. I don't really care that much about my enwiki articles, as most of them were made for redlink fixing. I didn't do much research on the names too. So, Delete. RiggedMint (talk) 14:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Peach Tree

Peach tree is currently a redirect to Peach. While this title differs in caps from the general tree redirect, this war is never referred to as "Peach Tree" just by itself. I don't think the need is here to warrant a WP:DIFFCAPS variant for a shortened version of "Peach Tree War" (that is only used once throughout the article). Utopes (talk / cont) 06:20, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will mention, this redirect seems to have been created as a mistake when moving Peach Tree War to Peach War, and apparently not an intentional pointage here. But, figured I'd bring this here to discuss the diffcaps redirect that was created as a result. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per nom. This isn't necessary, and if left, might generate quite a bit of WP:SURPRISE for anyone who was simply wanting an article on peach trees. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 06:28, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I am not opposed to instead retargeting to Peach. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 13:34, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect would have been created when I accidentally moved Peach Tree War to Peach Tree. Immediately reverted this move then moved Peach Tree War to Peach War. Peach War is the more common usage, although a few secondary sources use Peach Tree War. Griffin's Sword (talk) 14:10, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Railway Approach

Not a topic mentioned at the target article. The only time the word "approach" is ever said at the target is in the sentence: "New approach tracks have also been built." Appears to possibly be a general topic, without any context at the target. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete my search results are overwhelmed by street names in England. Thryduulf (talk) 14:49, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rutland Quadrant

No mention of "Rutland" or "Quadrant" at the target article. The only mention that "Rutland Quadrant" has on Wikipedia is within a table on Route 1 (Hong Kong), not wikilinked. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:15, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ho King Toi

Topic is not covered at the target article, no mentions of the subject, nor anywhere on Wikipedia. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sahrang

"Sahrang" has no mention at the target article, and the three mentions it has on Wikipedia are within the same citation used three times, not related to Iran. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:13, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Back when the redirect was created, the article did list that "sahrang" (Persian for 'tricolor') was an alternate name for the flag. This was changed in January of this year, and now simply states that Tricolor (not the Persian word, the English word, which is a little odd to me considering this is literally Iran, aka Persia, we're talking about) is the alternate name of the flag. Gonna attempt to flag down the editor who made that change, maybe they have some input here... 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 06:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

5:-)

An emoticon not mentioned at the target, and no longer mentioned at List of emoticons either. The five is supposed to indicate Elvis Presley's haircut, presumably. Utopes (talk / cont) 04:13, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Elvi5 Pre5ley has left the building, this should too. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 05:37, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is pretty darn cute to see in this day and age. Delete 🔥HOTm̵̟͆e̷̜̓s̵̼̊s̸̜̃🔥 (talk・edits) 20:52, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ghanaians in Sweden

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 Speedily deleted. The redirect was speedily deleted by User:Whpq per my request under WP:G7. (non-admin closure) Luke10.27 (talk) 03:55, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, I think this is a fine redirect. However, the target article doesn't talk about Ghanaians (or Ghana) at all. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:52, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, thanks for catching that! I'll double-check these demographic redirects in the future. Can I just tag it for speedy deletion? Luke10.27 (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Hoothi

Delete. The initial target was Love and War (Cornell novel), which made sufficient mention of the Hoothi, until it was redirected to Paul Cornell, which makes no such mention. Someone typing this will not be satisfied with the new target, and it is possible that they misspelled Houthi. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 01:05, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_March_15&oldid=1213976929"