Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Deacon Vorbis (talk | contribs) at 16:47, 2 November 2020 (→‎Domain name redirects: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


WikiProject iconRedirect Project‑class
WikiProject iconThis page is within the scope of WikiProject Redirect, a collaborative effort to improve the standard of redirects and their categorization on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Note: This banner should be placed on the talk pages of project, template and category pages that exist and operate to maintain redirects.
This banner is not designed to be placed on the talk pages of most redirects and almost never on the talk pages of mainspace redirects. For more information see the template documentation.
ProjectThis page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Are these redirects warranted?

I'm looking at the recent contributions by User:Duc4Wikmedia--redirects like Blue Tulip Productions, which link to Jan de Bont, but there is no mention of that production company in De Bont's article. There's dozens and dozens of those, and I'm wondering what to do about them. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 00:07, 5 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies: I've nominated two of them at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 27, let's see how the debate turns out. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:46, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that one--yeah. Thanks! Drmies (talk) 15:53, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@1234qwer1234qwer4: Since you've volunteered, perhaps it'd be best to have one RfD discussion for all Duc4Wikmedia redirects without mention. They would all be substantially identical since they'd be nominated for the same reason. -- Tavix (talk) 15:56, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tavix: I'm a bit unsure about that (partly because I had done a mass nomination recently that was closed as a trainwreck). Also, some of the redirects are of the form "John Doe productions" to "John Doe", which could be a bit more helpful. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:02, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@1234qwer1234qwer4: Yeah, those would be fine to exclude from a mass nomination. With this case, a mass nomination is fine. The only reason for someone to object to a single redirect would be if content is added to the target, in which case that redirect can be stricken at that time. For example, I did several batches back in 2017 for a particularly egregious case, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 August 21#Airspace (film) for an example. -- Tavix (talk) 16:08, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've nominated five more at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 30. I still don't think a mass nomination is that good, but if somebody goes ahead and merges them, I wouldn't argue. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:25, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
More nominations of recently created ones at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 1. I've also notified the user at their talk page about the problem with the created redirects. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:14, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to mention, I've opened an ANI topic now. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:42, 22 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've just created Category:Redirects to a century; encouraging related editors to populate the rcat. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:16, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template for +/- "The "

I've created many redirects but not paid much attention to categorising them. Now starting to try to add the templates, so I have a question: which template applies to a redirect from a version with, or without, "The "? Like the one I've just made from Public Law Project. Is it just "R from shorter name" or is there something more specific? And if it had been in the other direction, with "The " included in the article title? Thanks in advance for any advice. PamD 10:07, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'd go with "R from shorter name" and "R from modification", but I haven't consulted any other editors here about that myself. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone like deleting redirects?

Please take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Afshaarn because some of these redirects look very dodgy, especially Mother of the Nation of Great Britain for one. Up Uranus (talk) 18:24, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Up Uranus: This user currently has an open SPI case going on. I don't know what that will reveal, but in any case, these are pretty much all bad and should probably be nuked. WP:AN might be a better place to bring this up first. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 18:45, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:R from plausible term

@1234qwer1234qwer4 and Narky Blert: Template:R from plausible term was deleted. I took a stab at replacing it in the 17 redirects using it, but I don't normally use these templates, so someone is welcome to check to see if I replaced it correctly:

Frietjes (talk) 21:57, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Frietjes: Good work! I've gone through those and most look fine. I've bookmarked a few for further investigation, to check for possible better targets (and in one case, where there's no mention in the target, to see if we have a good target at all). A couple of technical points:
  1. The {{-r}} template is a useful way of listing a redirect as-such without going through it to the target.
  2. "#" only works if the bit following it points to a section title or {{anchor}}; see e.g. Georgia Legislative Leadership Institute. However, it's harmless - in the absence of one of those, it defaults to the top of the article.
  3. I DEFAULTSORTed W. Clarke Wescoe, so that it would appear in the hypothetical printed index in the correct place.
Yrs, Narky Blert (talk) 05:25, 31 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
All done. The one that looked fishy is now at WP:RFD. Narky Blert (talk) 06:49, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Search tool

Hello. Doing NPP work, I come across a significant number of redirects. Many are relatively easy to evaluate (e.g. the redirected term is boldfaced in the first paragraph of the target, or it is a variation of the name of the target). But sometimes I come across something where it redirects to a lengthy article, and while not readily apparent, it is buried in the 10th paragraph (with no # to that particular section). Is there a tool which can search within a WP article? Onel5969 TT me 16:07, 19 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Best way to convert redirect into an article?

What would be the best way to convert a redirect into an article? For example, I am thinking about doing so with L'Ère du Verseau. Should I build the article in the draftspace or userspace and then request a WP:USURPTITLE? Or can I just build the article on the lines below the #REDIRECT [[Yelle#Discography]] part?  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 04:20, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would advise going the draftspace route, so there is no question that this is the proper article when it is moved to the occupied title. BD2412 T 04:29, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Your first option (drafting) works, as is drafting in your sandbox and copy/pasting over the redirect. I would not build the article under the #REDIRECT, because that's a great way to have all of your work removed. I will say, though, that if you want to just remove the redirect and replace it with enough of a stub to survive, that works too. Saves on the copy/pasting and moving.
All in all, you can kind of do whatever you want. Primefac (talk) 13:37, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd go for just overwriting the redirect with a solid little stub with adequate sourcing from the start (up to you whether you create this first in your sandbox or just go for it live - but don't hit "Publish changes" it until it has a couple of good sources or is othewise safe against relevant CSD criteria). Add {{Under construction}} if it isn't yet as polished as you're going to make it within the next couple of days. Once you've got something saved you can create any necessary incoming redirects (eg from title without the "L'"), and make interwiki links if any in the left-hand sidebar (though I see that there isn't a French wiki article about this album, though French wiki needs either a dab page at the album title or a hatnote at their article https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%88re_du_Verseau on the astrological era, to which the album title currently redirects, to refer people to the album's listing in the band's discography!), and then come back to upgrade the article. That's my process. PamD 14:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The advice above is all good, but it applies to any situation where there might be concerns about notability. Are there any here? There may or may not be. But the issue is only to do with the redirect, and the only relevant question is whether the article you intend to create is on the same topic as the redirect. It appears to have been in this case (a redirect to Yelle being replaced with an article about a Yelle album), so you just create your article over the redirect (remembering not to leave any of the redirect bits in it). There's absolutely no need to waste yours or other people's time with drafting. If you already have a draft somewhere, then it's best to ask at WP:RMT for the draft to be moved over the redirect (or you can just copy and paste it: assuming you're the only author, there's no need to leave a trail of attribution). If, on the other hand, the redirect is for a different topic than your intended article, then it's tricky. WP:DAB becomes relevant here, and often creating a dab page over the redirect may be the best course of action. If your intended article is indisputably the primary topic, then it's best to move the redirect and then create your article at the old redirect's title as above. – Uanfala (talk) 16:22, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{{R without mention}} discussion

Hi fellow redirect folks. I'd appreciate any feedback at Template talk:R to article without mention#Refining/clarifying usage. --BDD (talk) 15:51, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

R from former or historic name

{{R from historic name}} and {{R from former name}} have been nominated for merging. Your thoughts and opinions are invited at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2020 October 17 § Template:R from historic name. Thank you. Primefac (talk) 17:20, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Specific template/category for emoji redirects?

There are a lot of redirects that go from an emoji to an article (usually the article that the emoji's about, for example 🦷 redirects to Tooth. While the correctness of these redirects may be arguable (should that really redirect to Tooth, or should it go to Emoji?), my proposal doesn't really relate to that -- the thing I want to ask about here is whether they ought to have their own template. Right now it looks like they're all under {{R from Unicode character}}, which adds them to Category:Redirects from Unicode characters with approximately 28,409 members. I think that specifically having a category for emoji redirects would be useful, especially in cases like the aforementioned (what if we change our minds about what to redirect them to? How will we even know how many there are?), etc. There's a considerable number of them -- in {{Emoji (Unicode block)}} almost every one of them is wikilinked. So I think it'd be nice, perhaps, to have a {{R from emoji}}, which adds them to a new Category:Redirects from Unicode emoji. jp×g 14:56, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Makes sense. There's a tiny overlap between the two .... some emojis such as are grandfathered in from the old days, meaning that they will appear on most mobile devices as elaborate, colorful pictures like the other emojis, but are not part of the Emoji blocks. Soap 15:36, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd support this too. Besides, not all emoji are technically a singe Unicode character (skin-tone modifiers and CGJ sequences), so this category would catch those too. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:29, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dablinks

There's a proposal under way to rewrite the guidelines about links to disambiguation pages: Wikipedia talk:Disambiguation#Draft wording. This has potential relevance to situations where a redirect is retargeted from an article to a disambiguation page, or when a redirect is created that targets a disambiguation page. – Uanfala (talk) 20:26, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Domain name redirects

Hi all, I think the way we add redirects from domain names could use a little looking at. Some prelims: {{R from domain name}} populates Category:Redirects from domain names, which currently has ~4900 members. There are a handful of subcats for redirects from specific top-level domains (TLDs) which are all populated manually as far as I can tell. We should probably either kill the subcats (which I'd favor) or just have the Rcat template auto-sense and add as appropriate.

But more significantly, I think most of these shouldn't exist. Some are certainly okay: for example, we have some redirects from subdomains to TLDs, like .gov.ie redirects to .ie. And at least some of these contain information about the subdomain itself. Stuff like this is surely okay.

But after this, it starts to get iffy. The main drawback here is that domains lapse, change hands, etc. There are some reasonable cases to keep these, like when a company has some major branding with its domain or is specifically known by it or when there's information in an article about the domain/brand itself. But it seems that the vast majority of these were created in a (semi-)automated fashion with a script that pulled from a page's infobox. It would be helpful to set down some guidance on when (not) to create these, and maybe start to go through and start deleting the questionable ones. Thoughts? –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:47, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]