Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 27

[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 27, 2024.

The Acolyte (upcoming TV series)

[edit]

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 delete. ✗plicit 12:54, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:UFILM. Target subject released over a month ago, no pageviews in the last 90 days (other than any I just did). Steel1943 (talk) 23:21, 27 July 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).

Senior Bush & friends

[edit]

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 keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 02:17, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Prescott Bush was also a "Sr." Also, Jeb Bush is a "Sr." Steel1943 (talk) 22:16, 27 July 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).

Dumb dubyah

[edit]

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 delete. ✗plicit 12:54, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target page. Otherwise, seems like obvious, unnecessary slander. Steel1943 (talk) 22:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was a common epithet for him. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 04:28, 28 July 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).

Live Photo

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 23#Live Photo

Cianwood Island

[edit]

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 keep. I'll add r from incorrect name. (non-admin closure) asilvering (talk) 02:20, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

the island does not have a proper name. it's just "cianwood city" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:00, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 19:53, 27 July 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).

Cianwood City (Cianwood Island)

[edit]

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 keep. (non-admin closure) asilvering (talk) 02:22, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

are there any cianwood cities this could be mistaken for? more importantly, the island it's in isn't actually known as "cianwood island" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:57, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 19:52, 27 July 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).

A trip down mammary lane

[edit]

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 nomination withdrawn. Thryduulf (talk) 19:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Redirect created by Neelix that was missed in the initial cleanup. 74.108.22.119 (talk) 19:50, 27 July 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).

Germs

[edit]

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 retarget to Pathogen. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 02:16, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gonna go on a limb here ... the WP:PLURALPT for the plural form of the word Germ, a disambiguation page, is most likely Pathogen. The singular "germ" is definitely ambiguous, especially considering the subjects about plant grains, but the plural seems to commonly refer to the terms use in microbiology, and Germ (microorganism) redirects to Pathogen, so ... retarget to Pathogen. Steel1943 (talk) 17:24, 27 July 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).

User:TalkSubject/Joe Biden

[edit]

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 delete. ✗plicit 12:55, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:TalkSubject for further details. Seems like some attempt at policy-circumnavigating WP:SEO. Delete. Steel1943 (talk) 17:06, 27 July 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).

Draft:Joe Biden

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 12#Draft:Joe Biden

Sunny (upcoming TV series)

[edit]

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 keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 02:15, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

misleading, series was released a while ago Paradoctor (talk) 15:23, 27 July 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).

Heartless Angel

[edit]

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 Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 04:25, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

a recurring attack for sephiroth in a lot of his appearances since his debut... but also for kefka. if both appear in a playable or boss form in any given game, heartless angel tends to go to whoever pops up first, which is usually kefka. if you want to be technical, sephiroth gets it more often overall because he gets more appearances, but results seem to associate it equally with both (give or take sephiroth being mentioned more often overall). even then, heartless angel isn't mentioned in either of their articles. if not deleted, i don't know if it should be kept there or retargeted to kefka, to final fantasy#gameplay, or to recurring elements in the final fantasy series#gameplay, because it'd be hard to cram an unsourced mention (or worse, a mention with a guide as the source) into those otherwise good or featured articles cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - Soooo... the move gets a "kind of" mention in Kefka's article, as "Fallen Angel", although the actual Woolsey translation rendered it in game as "Fallen One" on the SNES (as can be confirmed by looking up a playthrough on youtube). This is the move that got commentary from a reliable source, and was worth the mention in the article. Now, I believe you're probably right that it's been updated in newer versions/releases of the game to Heartless Angel, as the Final Fantasy fandom wiki uses that term, but it doesn't seem to have garnered any commentary in reliable sources. Google, on the other hand, shows overwhelming preference to linking the term with Sephiroth instead of Kefka, likely due to the relative popularity of FFVII over FFVI... except that most if not all of these hits I'm finding are not from WP:RS. Which leaves us in the awkward position where there's clear analysis that would be interesting to discuss... that we can't use because none of it has gone through editorial publishing processes. I can't decide whether that means we should delete the redirect because we don't really have information on exactly it under that name, redirect to Kefka because the thing this redirect refers to IS directly named and described there... except under a different name (which is even incorrect, despite being published in a WP:RS!), or to keep the redirect because usage online clearly prefers Sephiroth as the WP:PTOPIC even though we don't and probably can't mention it there! Fieari (talk) 02:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The fact that the Kefka article mentioned "Fallen Angel" as the name of the move bothered me enough that I added an endnote with the correction, and a mention to the renaming of it to Heartless Angel. Not sure if this is the best way to go about it, but surely the primary source material can be used just for a correction of this sort. Fieari (talk) 03:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    at this point, i'd say nuke it until a reliable source decides to cover the attack (and actually get the name right)
    also yeah, i did say results preferred sephiroth, because ff7 is the only final fantasy game people can remember the existence of for more than 15 seconds. coverage of final fantasy elements kind of sucks tbh cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:14, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the talk of the target and Kefka Palazzo pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:16, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Honestly, I say delete the redirect. Kefka and Sephiroth are weirdly similar, especially with the fallen angel theming and imagery, and it's just not worth it to debate who 'gets' a redirect that sees maybe ten hits a year - especially with the lack of reliable sources (which, let's face it, isn't likely to change anytime soon). I could support retargeting to recurring elements in the final fantasy series#gameplay, but in that case I'd want to see another section on that page for recurring moves (Fallen One/Heartless Angel, Meteor, Bad Breath, etc.) and I just don't know if they're significant enough to have that kind of coverage. I mean, even Bahamut only gets a mention in the design section, despite his presence as a summon and/or plot-relevant character since the very first game. Atma/Ultima, Odin, and even Omega don't get a mention at all, so it's hard to reconcile that with keeping one weirdly-translated attack that two very famous villains use. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 20:00, 29 July 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).

Големата екскурзија

[edit]

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 delete. Jay 💬 13:10, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect should be deleted. It is not in English and thus not useful for the readers here. StephenMacky1 (talk) 13:04, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, doesn't appear to be the Bulgarian name either so doesn't fit WP:RLANG. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:17, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this event occurred in Bulgaria and concerned the Bulgarian Turks. It has nothing to do with Macedonian language. Jingiby (talk) 14:21, 27 July 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).

Jabar

[edit]

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 Move Jabar (disambiguation) to Jabar. There is no consensus primary topic. wbm1058 (talk) 00:21, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There are Many Disambiguation Links in the Word "Jabar" on Jabar (disambiguation). So for me this should not be special. Like the case of West Kalimantan where I made the word redirect Kalbar, but it was deleted because it was not only in one article. Baqotun0023 (talk) 12:12, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Move Jabar (disambiguation) to Jabar. 88.235.215.238 (talk) 15:16, 27 July 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).

Măluț River

[edit]

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 delete. --BDD (talk) 22:05, 17 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Completely unmentioned on the target page. With a bit of digging I found ro:Râul Măluț which just says "The Măluț River is a watercourse, a left tributary of the Talna River in Satu Mare County, Romania.". It's not the only tributary and nothing seems to indicate it is a particularly significant one so simply adding it to the article would seem a bit misleading? Thryduulf (talk) 11:55, 27 July 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).

Malut

[edit]

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 move. (non-admin closure) C F A 💬 04:02, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure that a variant spelling for a village with 536 inhabitants (which redirects to the commune's article) is the primary topic, given that Malut is also a commonly used shortening for North Maluku (Maluku Utara), an Indonesian province with more than a million inhabitants. Malut (disambiguation), which is currently a primary-and-one-other dab, could be moved to the base name instead. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:10, 27 July 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).

Pokemon generations 5

[edit]

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 retarget to Pokémon Black and White. might as well~ (non-admin closure) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:31, 13 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

implausible pluralization? if kept, i'll be retargeting to the gen 5 games regardless of result cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete Seems plausible. Readers might see the "5" and think generation should be pluralized. Ca talk to me! 02:33, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:16, 27 July 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).

Guillermo Vilas: Settling the Score

[edit]

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 Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 04:25, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what to do about this one. The subject exists (per third party searches) and is linked at List of Netflix original films (2020) in the list of film released that year. But ... the fact that this title is a redirect and not an article seems to validate WP:REDYES deletion. However, the subject of this redirect is mentioned twice in the biographical article about its subject, Guillermo Vilas: Once in the last paragraph of the article's top section, and once in the last paragraph of Guillermo Vilas#ATP ranking No. 1 controversy. I am not sure if either of these targets are viable retargeting options for this redirect, or if the redirect should be deleted to promote the creation of an article (though my preference here is deletion.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Steel1943: I am skeptical of the value of red links in prompting article creation. I think it's better to have a red link than no link at all, where an article can potentially be written, but better to have a redirect than a red link where the article is really unlikely to actually be written. The ultimate end question is what best serves the reader looking for information on the subject. BD2412 T 23:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @BD2412: Fair enough. "WP:REDLINK" Might be another guideline and/or essay excerpt that I need to add to my "questionable utility" list. I'm just ... not sure if the current setup is adequate since the subject of this redirect has article potential, and I do not believe I've seen any other cases where a redirect representing a biographical media (book, film, etc.) redirects to the human subject of the biography rather than having an article about itself or being a redirect that targets a section in another article identifying and explaining itself. Steel1943 (talk) 19:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I think there are cases where it makes sense, where the subject is discrete and the likely topic of a writeable article, and cases where a redirect is more defensible. BD2412 T 19:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator comment: To clarify on this, my stance is delete and weak retarget to Guillermo Vilas since "keep" is definitely invalid. Steel1943 (talk) 17:52, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:14, 27 July 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).

"Fax (hair)" and "Fax (head hair)"

[edit]

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 Refine the first to Hair#Etymology, delete the second. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:24, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The word "fax" is mentioned nowhere in the target article, leaving it unclear what these redirects are meant to refer to and/or define. The only other article on Wikipedia I can find that mentions such terms in context is John the Baptist, but with the way the term "fax" is used in that article pertaining to "hair", it makes it seem as though these nominated redirects are some sort of suffix. Steel1943 (talk) 22:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I have added an etymology section to the page on Hair so it is now in the target article. Fax is attestated in modern English, not only Middle English, even if its usage has since become rare. Ingwina (talk) 10:02, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In that case, my stance (I am the nominator) is changing to retarget Fax (hair) to Hair#Etymology but still delete Fax (head hair) since the "Etymology" section does not specify anything about "head" or "head hair". Steel1943 (talk) 19:20, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is from the page "The now broadly obsolete word "fax" refers specifically to head hair".
    I feel like if fax means hair, the word should redirect to the whole page - is there precedent for redirecting to the specific section mentioning the word if the word refers to the wider article? I don't have too strong views about this bit though - it just depends on the nuance of wikipedia policy to me! Ingwina (talk) 08:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ingwina: The reason why I'm suggesting for at least Fax (hair) to target Hair#Etymology is the section directly exposing what "fax" means in the context of the subject of the article. In this case, keeping the target as Hair with no section redirect would be if the word was immediately established to be an alternative used in present day, which it seems this word may not be. Either way, that section seems to best explain why this term redirects to any part of the Hair article's subject. Steel1943 (talk) 19:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure :) I'm very relaxed about it. Worst comes to worst they scroll up. I don't think it's a big problem! Ingwina (talk) 20:22, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For a stronger consensus...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:12, 27 July 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).

Paris Olympics

[edit]

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 withdrawn. Because recentism is okay now. (non-admin closure) LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 04:04, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a clear and obvious case of recentism. It should be disambiguated to also link to the 1900 and 1924 Olympics. See also pages like Los Angeles Olympics. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 03:16, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: leave it (and Paris Olympic Games) until at least the end of the Olympics. It is obviously the primary topic at the moment and has received nearly 25 000 page views in the past 30 days. There is a hatnote at the top of 2024 Summer Olympics for the few people who want the previous events. Disambiguating, and even listing it here in the first place, is making this unnecessairly complicated for readers trying to get to the page. At the end of the day, we just need to remove the deletion notice, and as soon as possible. C F A 💬 03:41, 27 July 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_July_27&oldid=1241817978"