Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 16

< Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion | Log

September 16

edit

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 16, 2024.

Snowball clause

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 24#Snowball clause

Häxans förbannelser

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 23#Häxans förbannelser

Lithotomic

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 Lithotomy. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:44, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could refer to lithotomy. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:41, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to lithotomy as an {{r from adjective}} Cremastra (talk) 21:47, 16 September 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!

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 24#A!

Template:MBTI Instrument

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 6#Template:MBTI Instrument

Black box (fiction)

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 27#Black box (fiction)

Multiplicity of a restricted root

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 Semisimple Lie algebra. asilvering (talk) 02:51, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"restricted root" is not mentioned at the target (and is only used a few times in the entire English Wikipedia's mainspace). 1234qwer1234qwer4 12:48, 14 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:32, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Unclear which target would be most suitable…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:19, 29 August 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, Steel1943 (talk) 20:21, 16 September 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).

Hypeicane

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. I see a consensus to Delete this Redirect. Liz Read! Talk! 21:08, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

not a word, it seems. results gave me beer and "hype hurricanes" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:50, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't know what the original intention was, but retargeting to hypercane as an {{r from typo}} seems reasonable. Paradoctor (talk) 21:04, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On a keyboard, I is three keys across from R. Not aware of any other keyboard layouts that have R and I next to eachother. mwwv converse∫edits 13:13, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not all typos come from greasy fingers. For example, some people are prone to snooperisms Paradoctor (talk) 19:15, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...nah, i think this one's just a skill issue. really hard to rationalize cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 04:32, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing to "rationalize", only for you to realize that there's more to things than the limited set of preconceptions that constitute your factory setting. Sheesh. FYI, I'm one of those for whom "typo" means more than base motor issues. Paradoctor (talk) 05:13, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i mean, if we don't even know what word this is supposed to be a typo of... cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:41, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're not hearing me. You still presume that the only possible way of producing typos is greasy fingers. Which has been refuted. Paradoctor (talk) 02:36, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i am hearing you, but i can't think of any possible case in which someone would input i instead of r. spoonerisms are out of the question since that's not what a spoonerism is (for starters, it would require that either word have an i and no r). fat fingers are out of the question unless someone theoretically has a keyboard not even half the size of their palm (in which case fair enough, but you really need a bigger one), greasy fingers are out of the question because there's a t key right next to r just begging to lick them clean, hitting your keyboard with a baseball bat is a bad idea, don't do that (also it's unlikely to land on the i and no other letter), and deliberately using different letters relative to their location on the keyboard or alphabet (but only halfway through, and presumably for one letter), because trying any form of consistent pattern only gave me hypeisfcv and hypeixefu. there's also the issue of it apparently being a "related term" (as in probably not a typo) to hyperbole, but results only gave me this redirect, and circular logic is something best kept in adult swim shows
if you have some idea of what this could theoretically be that can't be compared to calling a song in 4/4 a waltz, i would really appreciate it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:01, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i can't think
I rest my case. Paradoctor (talk) 13:32, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i rest cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:57, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cogsan: Just because you don't make that particular typo does not mean nobody does. For example, possibly the most common typo I make is "musuem" for "museum", that is not due to fat fingers or greasy fingers, but I assure you it is a typo. Additionally, QWERTY keyboards are not the only input method. Thryduulf (talk) 13:59, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
there's a difference between "musuem" and "hypeicane"; musuem just switches two letters of a word around. it's plausible if you're typing a little too fast. hypeicane, assuming it's just a typo of hypercane, which the creator seemingly did not think was the case, switches a letter for another letter that is not even normally in that word, and isn't close enough to r to justify a misinput, close enough to p to justify a... misinput (there really has to be a better word), or phonetically similar enough to justify a mishearing
as for the keyboard layouts, i checked every single layout mentioned on wikipedia to make that claim, and the only ones that have i close enough to p or r to justify any plausible form of misspelling are bépo and dvorak, and if you want to argue that an apparently obscure french layout and a layout designed with the specific intention of reducing errors (though its effectivity in that area is debated) could justify that, then go ahead, i guess cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:19, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as implausible. I get 4 (four) search results on Google for this, with two of them being on Wikipedia. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as implausible. Urhixidur (talk) 02:04, 17 September 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).

Saint Boy

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 Modern pentathlon at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Women's#Criticism of the Riding discipline. Legoktm (talk) 14:56, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No mention in the target article. Pelmeen10 (talk) 18:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and add that information to the article. If neither has more info than the other, then the appropriate place to link is the event page where both competitors are listed. --Habst (talk) 13:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How can you vote "keep" if such info is not added? Info should come before redirect. Pelmeen10 (talk) 17:50, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Pelmeen10, redirect discussions are not votes; see WP:NOTAVOTE. I didn't just vote to keep, I am recommending to both keep and add the info to the article, not one without the other. I don't mind in which order it's done. --Habst (talk) 23:35, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 11:15, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Better yet, add {{Anchor|Saint Boy}} just under § 2020 Tokyo Olympics, and redirect to Annika Schleu#Saint Boy. That is how I would do it.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 16:51, 16 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why should it redirect to Annika Schleu and not Gulnaz Gubaydullina? Jay 💬 11:20, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apparently, Schleu beat the horse, and her trainer punched it. Gubaydullina, who also rode that horse, had not abused it. The abuses led to questioning whether horses should even be part of pentathlons, ultimately leading to the decision to drop horse riding from the sport. This information is covered in the Annika Schleu article, not Gulnaz Gubaydullina.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 21:41, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. It was not very clear when I read the Annika Schleu article. After your explanation, when I read it again, it became clear. I see there are some details in the trainer Kim Raisner's article which are not present in Annika Schleu. Jay 💬 07:52, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The plot thickens.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 22:54, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:38, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Surely you mean Modern pentathlon § Replacement of riding with obstacle course racing and not the current target of Modern pentathlon at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Women's which has zero content about the horse, the riders or the incident! However, the details of Annika Schleu's involvement, including the mention of the horse's name, is irrelevant to the broader subject of removing riding from the pentathlon. So its location within article Annika Schleu is appropriate since that is the horse Schleu was sanctioned for abusing. The horse itself is not notable. I'm sure there's a redirect solely for when someone wants to search... "I remember something about a horse named Saint Boy in the pentathlon. What was that?"   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 16:01, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, I meant exactly what I said. The incidents regarding Saint Boy occurred during Modern pentathlon at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Women's, so there should be a write up at that page of what happened. I am aware that has not yet been added. -- Tavix (talk) 16:01, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (or refine) now that the section has been written. Thanks Jay! -- Tavix (talk) 01:30, 22 September 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, Steel1943 (talk) 20:19, 16 September 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).

Minister for Cities

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 October 6#Minister for Cities

Bīn

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 no consensus. The discussion is roughly equally split across deletion, retargetting, and the status quo (Jay). Legoktm (talk) 00:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What the! Should redirect to Bin instead, surely. Remsense ‥ 诉 15:10, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

that's apparently a hanyu pinyin reading for... a bunch of old(?) chinese lemmas. i got nothing. delete cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:24, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I imagine the Been rendering corresponds to another orthography, but it's simply not the best redirect I don't think. Remsense ‥ 诉 15:25, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i think "been" would rely too much on one accent of one language in certain conditions, so i don't think that one would work either cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:31, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or soft redirect. This is a transcription of multiple different Chinese characters that have meanings including "visitor, guest", "in a hurry", "today", "elegant, refined", "place", "sprinting, quick" and pronunciations including "wǎng", "bin", "bin", "ban", "pîn", "kǔn", "kwan" (both a far from complete lists). I'm not seeing any obvious primary topic in English. Thryduulf (talk) 16:05, 19 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:49, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:13, 16 September 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).

April 8, 2024 (Monday)

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 23:36, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unused, unlikely search term since April 8, 2024 exists and points to the same place. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 19:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget or delete: I am in favor of either changing the target back to where I originally had it (I had it there for the purposes of the hatnote which I have just removed because someone retargeted it to the eclipse article) or deleting the redirect. Entirely up to you; I’ll back either option. Hurricane Clyde 🌀my talk page! 19:19, 16 September 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).

Casey Simpson

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) 18:44, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RETURNTORED "If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject." applies. Name is listed but no information about the subject is in the current target and in the many potential alternative targets that just list had an acting role. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:35, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This kind of link is unhelpful and misleading for the reader. Reasonably expecting that the link will deliver some general information about the subject, the reader instead finds only that the subject was an actor in a particular film, with no explanation of why that film was selected. This is a counter-intuitive and bad user experience. Tobyhoward (talk) 22:04, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Tobyhoward has summarized the main points well enough, but I would highlight WP:REDLINK too:

    It may be possible to turn the red link into a redirect to an article section where the subject is covered as part of a broader topic (see Notability – Whether to create standalone pages). But please do not "kill" red links by redirect because their red color (annoying to some readers) seems to scream for a fix. It is easy to turn any red link blue by creating a redirect, but valid red links exist for a reason, and they are the "buds" from which new Wikipedia articles grow.

    I would also refer interested parties to the discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Film#Redirection_of_actor_to_film, where redirects are discussed in the particular context of actors. Betty Logan (talk) 21:17, 18 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, the individual is in multiple movies covered on Wikipedia, including Escape from Mr. Lemoncello's Library (film). Utopes (talk / cont) 00:18, 20 September 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?

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 24#A?

The five sauces

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 French mother sauces. (non-admin closure) Cremastra (talk) 19:43, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

refers to the french mother sauces (as there's currently 5 of them). was going to retarget there and call it a day, but there's a non-zero chance that there's another instances of five sauces i'm missing. opinions? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:49, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

on a semi-related note, grand sauce is also a redirect to sauce. gonna be a naughty bold boy and do with it whatever is done with this one cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:53, 16 September 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).

Living Marxism (US)

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 23#Living Marxism (US)

Weaner

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. Jay 💬 16:45, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Would this be better directed to Wiener as a misspelling? Hey man im josh (talk) 14:17, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weaner was an orphan, but I found "weaner" used in a dozen agriculture articles and wikilinked them to Weaner.   ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 19:14, 17 September 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).

Dr. Paisley

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. Jay 💬 16:17, 25 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't imagine this common of a name would be unambiguously affiliated with the target, who doesn't appear to have actually been a physician. They did have an honorary doctorate, but I don't believe that's enough for this to be a valid redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:48, 16 September 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).

Histionotophorus

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 13:31, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Linked exclusively from its target: a WP:REDYES situation where a circular link does no good. Cremastra (talk) 12:21, 16 September 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).

Second attempted assassination of Donald Trump

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 27#Second attempted assassination of Donald Trump

Donald Trump shooting

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 find consensus that the Pennsylvania incident is primary topic, whatever that article's name (and as of this writing, it's the same as during the nomination). --BDD (talk) 17:36, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Security incidents involving Donald Trump as there have been multiple gun incidents concerning Donald Trump listed; which are listed in this suggested target article. There's the Pennsylvanian incident at Attempted assassination of Donald Trump (July) and the one from today in Florida Trump International Golf Club shooting (September) amongst other incidents -- 64.229.88.34 (talk) 05:03, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Left guide: You can use 
 {{subst:rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectName2|target=TargetArticle2}}
to add additional entries to this section. On the redirects, you need to use 
 {{subst:rfd|1=< section header >|days=N|content= < redirect contents go here > }}
to place the RFD banner on those pages. The "N" parameter is how many days prior to today is the nomination located at. -- 64.229.88.34 (talk) 22:40, 18 September 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).

Over by over

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 September 23#Over by over

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_September_16&oldid=1250010680"