Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 13

< Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion | Log

February 13

edit

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 13, 2024.

Glazed ham

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 21#Glazed ham

Spartan Stadium (San Jose, California and etc.

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. It's snowing. ✗plicit 14:14, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the set of redirects, with titles ranging from S-Z, which received zero pageviews according to massviews, missing a closing parenthesis, without any substantial history, and either have a matching title in existence or not suitable for such. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:57, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(re:The Power Snap!) No argument seems to be being made for why these are to be deleted. They exist because there are websites that won't allow a closing parenthesis at the end of a URL. Ideally, this situation would be handled internally by the software, always checking if a page exists with a closing parenthesis, so as to deal with the fact that ) is not a URL-safe character. Is there any move to actually fix this issue?— trlkly 23:51, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In general Wikipedia titling, leaving off the final parenthesis is an implausible way to refer to any subject. These errors in the act of disambiguation interfere with onwiki navigation, and are both discouraged / not expected to exist generally. We shouldn't be expected to account for every website's linkage errors by creating unnecessary redirect clutter, and none of these titles are being used, per the zero viewcount. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Remove the lot, as per WP:UNNATURAL. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 01:19, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: As WP:R#D8. Clearly fall under Implausible; pageviews confirm the obvious. Nobody (talk) 12:06, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As has been mentioned before, these are work-arounds for Reddit who invalidates the end parenthesis in Wikipedia hyperlinks because Reddit hyperlinks already use a set of parenthesis between links by default. I don't know if Reddit fixed it or not. If they have then delete. If they haven't then keep. DA1 (talk) 12:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Wikipedia shouldn't be concerned with reddit. I fail to understand why need a work around, also, if someone misses part of the link, the wikipedia search feature is powerful enough to understand. So it's a delete from me on that basis. Govvy (talk) 14:44, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If I'm trying to share a link to a Wikipedia page on a messageboard then me knowing the relevant search words is besides the point, as the aim is to introduce something to others that they didn't already know about. DA1 (talk) 19:50, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, These redirects are implausible, and no one would type all these letters and forget the parentheses in the end. All of them are pointless.
InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 22:44, 14 February 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).

2020 San Jose shooting

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 21#2020 San Jose shooting

Cultural depictions of Sweyn Forkbeard

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 23:47, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect points to a section that has not existed for several years. There is no discussion of cultural references in the article. As such, this redirect is unhelpful, and I suggest deletion. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:50, 13 February 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).

First Church Congregational ( Methuen, Massachusetts)

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 Histmerge and delete. I also boldly moved the target to First Church Congregational per WP:MISPLACED and undeleted the history left buried at the original title by the above merge. These actions are done in my individual capacity and not as a result of the consensus here. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:52, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

The space between the parenthesis and Methuen makes this an implausible WP:RDAB typo to come across. This redirect seems to have duplicated history with its target, and it was later involved in an RfD that was closed as a trainwreck. The time of creation does date back further than its target, but it looks like these issues were histmerged previously(?); it's become a bit muddled. Utopes (talk / cont) 19:46, 13 February 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).

Oven Toast Grill

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 21#Oven Toast Grill

DAB page

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 21#DAB page

24 (year) (number)

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. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:15, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This confusing redirect does not particularly accomplish anything useful. 24 (year) is a redirect to 24 AD, which is also a number, so to that end its an unnecessary disambiguation that points to a different page. I'm confused just by looking at it, and would not expect this to end up back on the disambiguation page for 24, especially when 24 (year) and 24 (number) have different targets. Utopes (talk / cont) 19:05, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete – No function. The creating editor has three edits, the last being in 2007, so may not have understood the intricacies of disambiguation, even if they had been finalised then. I would say created in error, but the edit summary suggests otherwise. Certes (talk) 19:22, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. When this redirect was created, it targetted the article that is now at 24 (TV series) (which was moved to the base title the previous day). That version of the article did have hatnotes pointing to 24 (year) and 24 (number), which makes sense of the creator's edit summary. It was created deliberately with the intent of taking someone looking for either the year or the number to a page where they could find a link to both - the disambiguation page wasn't created for another 11 days. So this was a good faith attempt to help people navigate, but it wasn't the correct solution in 2006 and it isn't the correct solution in 2024. Thryduulf (talk) 20:53, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: I strongly considered taking this redirect to RfD some months ago (as is hinted at from my edit summary in the page history) but decided to leave that task to someone else, whilst still keeping it on my watchlist. It makes a bit more sense now with Thryduulf's explanation, but even then it isn't a plausible title, merely the product of a misguided understanding of disambiguation and the purpose of redirects. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 18:55, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Thryduulf.—Alalch E. 22:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as useless. It can't be about both the year and the number itself simultaneously. JIP | Talk 19:56, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It isn't, but it could (i.e. if the target had content about both uses). It is very unlikely that we would have an article like that given our content organisation preferences, but there is no reason we couldn't have such an article if we wanted to. Thryduulf (talk) 16:27, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's entirely possible that an article can have content both about a year and about a number, but the name "24 (year) (number)" would still be invalid, because the concept of something that is both a year and a number simultaneously doesn't exist. They are two separate concepts. JIP | Talk 21:51, 18 February 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).

Betria

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 22#Betria

Super Smash Bros. DS

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! 10:11, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There was never a Super Smash Bros. game for the Nintendo DS. This could be misleading. (Oinkers42) (talk) 15:01, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Nintendo 3DS can easily be referred to as a "DS", the way the Nintendo Game Boy Color or Game Boy Advance could be referred to as a "Game Boy". In addition, this is a redirect- the fact that "Super Smash Bros. DS" gets redirected to the 3DS title, should suffice as an indicator that there is no DS title. Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 16:46, 13 February 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).

Colors Marathi Cinema

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... 17:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sole basis of creation is rumors of launch of a TV channel from unreliable websites. After 3 years, neither any channel of the name has been launched, nor any source even speculate it. No reliable source available. ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 13:24, 13 February 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).

Mazur's theorem

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 disambiguate. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous; cf. Hahn–Banach theorem#Geometric Hahn–Banach (the Hahn–Banach separation theorems). 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No objections to whatever is desired here. Pinging @SamCLowe: they requested the redirect at WP:AFC/RC. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 21:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I only knew of Mazur's theorem for elliptic curves and didn't know there were multiple theorems by that name. I'm not a very experienced Wikipedia contributor; would a disambiguation page be in order? SamCLowe (talk) 04:10, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, if there are more than two things that could go by that name, then we should have a disambiguation page. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:31, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:19, 6 February 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 related target Hahn–Banach theorem.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:15, 13 February 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).

Definition of Done

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 22#Definition of Done

Leonard Balsera

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 22#Leonard Balsera

市

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 disambiguate. signed, Rosguill talk 17:52, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kanji not mentioned at target article; this has dubious usefulness as a WP:FORRED redirect. Utopes (talk / cont) 08:31, 13 February 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).

Bingo Gokoku Shrine

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 💬 14:41, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There does not seem to be a shrine section, nor is this shrine discussed at the target page, nor anywhere on Wikipedia for that matter (besides being a list entry at Gokoku Shrines, but the only content listed is a redirect back to the page where it isn't mentioned. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:08, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Remove. Interestingly enough, even if you look through the history of Fukuyama Castle, the section didn't exist even when the redirect was made. Were they planning on adding the relevant section, and then... didn't? Lunamann 🌙🌙🌙 The Moooooooniest (talk) 07:14, 13 February 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).

Bing Chi Ling

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. signed, Rosguill talk 05:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is not referred to by the alternative name of "Bing Chi Ling" at the target article. While I don't have the full context behind this redirect's creation, Bing Chilling is a completely separate redirect to a cited bit in John Cena's popular culture section. This title was created with the knowledge of the confusion, as the creator of the redirect in question also made a Bing qi lin redirect to this pop culture section 9 days earlier. The pronunciations are all in reference to the same thing in Mandarin (ice cream), but currently these redirects are split. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:21, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Template:R from misspelling. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 13:15, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of what? This is exactly my point, there are multiple titles that this could be a alternate spelling / misspelling of. There's Bing Chilling which is arguably closer of a misspelling than what the current target is, also Bing Qi Lin, which the q and the ch would be more similar to my understanding, and also points to the same topic. Utopes (talk / cont) 19:09, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A misspelling of Bing Ji Ling.

This is exactly my point

If that's your point (or the goal), then consider stating that in the nomination.
Bing Chi Ling cannot be an R from misspelling to Bing Chilling. That would be a double redirect. -- C. A. Russell (talk) 13:03, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Was away this weekend and didn't get a chance to say this earlier, but Template:R from avoided double redirect is also an rcat, as targeting Bing Chilling (a redirect) would be implicitly targeting its source, in this case happening to be the pop-culture section of John Cena's page. When creating this nomination I viewed "Bing Chilling" to be an equally, if not moreso, plausible misspelling of this title, without the second space and with an "l" instead. Which... I DID state in this intro did state that there were at least two other possibilities that this title could be reasonably spelled as, when I was nominating this redirect to be discussed (at Redirects for Discussion). Utopes (talk / cont) 05:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a bit more nuanced than it looks. "Ice cream" is translated differently in different varieties of Chinese. In Taiwanese Mandarin ("Guoyu"), the standard word is 冰淇淋 bingqilin. In Mainland Standard Chinese ("Putonghua"), the standard word is 冰激凌 bingjiling. "Bing Chi Ling" is the correct Wade-Giles transliteration of the Mainland Chinese word, while Wade-Giles for the Taiwanese Mandarin word would be "Bing Chi Lin" or more correctly "Bing Chʻi Lin". So weak keep I guess? —Kusma (talk) 19:50, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That doesn't really address the crux of the argument either. Bing Ji Ling is a New York musician's name which originates from the translation of "ice cream". Bing Chilling is the spelling of a 2021 meme of John Cena speaking the same word, bīngqílín. They both refer to ice cream, two targets for the same purpose, which the goal is to figure out which of these is preferable. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:56, 26 January 2024 (UTC) Struck as I may have misread. I was expecting Kusma's rationale to be more direct about why X target was more plausible than Y with reasoning, which I did not connect at first, but now see. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:11, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There isn't much clarity on what to do here, and also considering that one of the keep !votes is "weak".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I think I understand Kusma's reasoning above, but given the difference in spelling I don't think it's clear what someone who uses this search term is looking for. The most likely intended topic is probably a Chinese word for ice cream, but retargeting to Ice cream would violate our usual practice as described at WP:RLOTE. Any of these targets would imply either a significant misspelling or the use of an old-fashioned transliteration system in an unusual context. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 04:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Mx. Granger. Jay 💬 08:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 06:20, 13 February 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).

WGBH in Boston

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 WGBH. (non-admin closure) feminist🩸 (talk) 09:12, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The title is a bit ambiguous, as WGBH (FM) is a Boston radio station, and this could also refer to the WGBH Educational Foundation (the parent entity for both stations). This should point either to the foundation's article or to the WGBH disambiguation page. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:47, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:34, 13 February 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).

Wiimmfi

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 25#Wiimmfi

Dandori Issue

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 23:47, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Was recently accepted at WP:AFC/R last month; however, while "Dandori" is discussed, this particular meme does not appear at the target article, nor does "issue" come up anywhere besides a journal entry. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:32, 13 February 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).

Luigi board

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! 03:06, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Old meme, unlikely search term. 2601:883:C383:6120:0:0:0:A59B (talk) 02:03, 13 February 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_February_13&oldid=1211828342"