Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 18: Difference between revisions

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Extended confirmed users
4,971 edits
Line 205: Line 205:
A group of soft redirects from mathematical symbols. As they are not commonly wikified words or repeatedly recreated, a soft redirect is unneeded per [[WP:SSRT]] and so they should be deleted. Worth noting that many of the Wiktionary entries do not contain a definition ([https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E2%8B%BE example]) making the soft redirect useless. Note that given the number of redirects and how little they are used I have not tagged the pages, but will do so if requested. [[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] ([[User talk:BilledMammal|talk]]) 00:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
A group of soft redirects from mathematical symbols. As they are not commonly wikified words or repeatedly recreated, a soft redirect is unneeded per [[WP:SSRT]] and so they should be deleted. Worth noting that many of the Wiktionary entries do not contain a definition ([https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/%E2%8B%BE example]) making the soft redirect useless. Note that given the number of redirects and how little they are used I have not tagged the pages, but will do so if requested. [[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] ([[User talk:BilledMammal|talk]]) 00:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)


*'''Do not delete'''. Never delete unicode characters. Every symbol at [[Mathematical Operators (Unicode block)]] contains a link to its redirect target. Deleting any symbol will cause a red link at the table. [[User:Neel.arunabh|Neel.arunabh]] ([[User talk:Neel.arunabh|talk]]) 00:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
*'''Do not delete'''. Never delete unicode characters. Every symbol at [[Mathematical Operators (Unicode block)]] contains a link to its redirect target. Deleting any symbol will cause a red link at the table. It is better to redirect to a plausible search tem than to delete them. [[User:Neel.arunabh|Neel.arunabh]] ([[User talk:Neel.arunabh|talk]]) 00:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
**If the symbol is notable, a red link helps editors identify articles that needs to be created. If the symbol is not notable, it should not be linked as is already the case with some symbols on that table such as ⋙. [[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] ([[User talk:BilledMammal|talk]]) 01:01, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
**If the symbol is notable, a red link helps editors identify articles that needs to be created. If the symbol is not notable, it should not be linked as is already the case with some symbols on that table such as ⋙. [[User:BilledMammal|BilledMammal]] ([[User talk:BilledMammal|talk]]) 01:01, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
*'''Delete all:''' "Because it will leave a red link on a certain table" is not an acceptable rationale to keep a bad redirect. The answer is to remove the links. [[User talk:Ravenswing|'''<span style="background:#2B22AA;color:#E285FF"> '' Ravenswing '' </span>''' ]] 13:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
*'''Delete all:''' "Because it will leave a red link on a certain table" is not an acceptable rationale to keep a bad redirect. The answer is to remove the links. [[User talk:Ravenswing|'''<span style="background:#2B22AA;color:#E285FF"> '' Ravenswing '' </span>''' ]] 13:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' I am yet to come across any other non-existent unicode character in Wikipedia. Nearly, every unicode character does have some redirect. [[User:Neel.arunabh|Neel.arunabh]] ([[User talk:Neel.arunabh|talk]]) 14:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' I am yet to come across any other non-existent unicode character in Wikipedia. Nearly, every unicode character does have some redirect. [[User:Neel.arunabh|Neel.arunabh]] ([[User talk:Neel.arunabh|talk]]) 14:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
* '''Delete all''', at a spotcheck these entries are definitions that provide no info. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 15:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
* '''Delete all''', at a spotcheck these entries are definitions that provide no info. [[User:Chipmunkdavis|CMD]] ([[User talk:Chipmunkdavis|talk]]) 15:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
*I sympathize that many RfD participants would oppose deleting unicole characters. Frquent RfD participants like {{u|Thryduulf}}, {{u|Rosguill}}, {{u|Tavix}}, and {{u|Tazmin}} are welocome to participate here. [[User:Neel.arunabh|Neel.arunabh]] ([[User talk:Neel.arunabh|talk]]) 16:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Revision as of 16:29, 18 January 2022

January 18

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 18, 2022.

Constituent country

I propose to retarget to

Constituent state. Heanor (talk) 15:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Wikipedia:FOAMER

Foamer apparently means an obsessive railfan, but the term is both pejorative and ambiguous. It may be inappropriate for this unused redirect. Certes (talk) 13:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (As creator). Hello, I created this redirect in a serious purpose, and in a comedic sense. I have a base for this redirect as
Foamer redirects to Railfan. I thought to myself, why not make the wikipedia redirect of foamers, and make it go to the home of railfans, which is Wikproject Trains. Since it is used in a comedic sense, I could leave a warning on the talk page or redirect saying that it can be used for more serious purposes in the future, but in the meantime, I see no reason why not to keep it. Cheers! Sea Cow (talk) 13:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]
  • Delete per
    WP:SCJARGON. This is a confusing term to most people who are not railfans. I would not necessarily say it's as pejorative as the nominator says, as I'll joking call myself one and while I'm generally loath to cite a message board for this, there is a good discussion here on the term foamer becoming less pejorative recently.[1] Having said that, generally for ALL CAPS redirects, more widespread understanding of the term is the norm. With the recency of the redirect, I do not think that people defaulting to using WP:FOAMER as a way to get to Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains is a significant problem if this were deleted. TartarTorte 13:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]

References

  1. ^ "What exactly IS a foamer?". Trainorders.com Discussion. Retrieved 18 January 2022.

Hiberno-Scots

retarget to Hiberno-Scottish mission? Heanor (talk) 12:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the current redirection seems correct. I see no material connection to the missions of the Irish to Scotland, which happened in a linguistic context of Irish (Geailge) and Scottish Gaelic (Gaidhligh) + Church Latin, and had nothing to do with the Scots language (an anachronistic concept). SeoR (talk) 12:58, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
SeoR, then maybe retarget to Irish-Scots? Hibernia is just the Latin name for Ireland. --Heanor (talk) 13:05, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Heanor, it depends on what we think the term refers to. When I hear it, I think "obscure version of the term 'Ulster Scots'" which refers to what most scholars consider to be a dialect of the Scots language (but some campaigners see as a distinct language) - and this view is discussed by Milroy, Kirk and others, if you want to dive into it. You are obviously coming from the perspective of "a group of people linked to the Scottish people / Scots" and if that is an attested meaning (I've never heard it used that way) then it is related to the terms "Irish-Scots" (Irish descent in Scotland) and "Scots-Irish" (Scottish descent in Ireland). If both linguistic and demographic meanings do exist, we need not a redirect but a disambiguation page... SeoR (talk) 13:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ulster Scots nation

retarget first to Ulster Scots people, and keep the second (which I created myself)? Heanor (talk) 12:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pachelbel's Canon In D Minor

Can this redirect be deleted. Pachelbel's Canon is written in D Major, not D Minor. Kind regards, JJK2000 (talk) 08:56, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wirye station

There are many planned stations of Wirye Line witch sometimes called as Wirye station. Local government of Seoul banned to use "Wirye station" as the name of Subway 8 station. Wirye station was never official name of Namwirye station Urirnal (talk) 07:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Farfetched

Seems more appropriate as an inter-wiki redirect to wiktionary:far-fetched. Molandfreak (talk, contribs, email) 05:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Armenian Peruvians

Delete. Not mentioned on the target page, nor at Armenian population by country. Geschichte (talk) 10:47, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 01:28, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interstate 390 (Genesee Expressway)

Unsure what the point of this redirect is, as Genesee Expressway already redirects to Interstate 390, this seems a vanishingly unlikely search term.

 (T) (The Alternate Mako) 14:11, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment Not all 3-digit Interstate numbers are unique. Someone might be clarifying which one, not realizing there is only one I-390. HotdogPi 17:58, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:36, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 01:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per
    Interstate 390 (Elgin–O'Hare Tollway) currently redirects to Illinois Route 390, so some association is made between that road Interstate 90 even though it doesn't carry the Interstate label at the moment.--Molandfreak (talk, contribs, email) 04:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Cho Jun-young

Not mentioned at the target with this spelling or a few other plausible alternatives that I tried. Nothing illuminating came up in an internet search. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 20:55, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Jo Joon-Young (Cho Jun-Young; 조준영) is an actor signed to SM [1] -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 10:04, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I disagree in the deletion of Cho Jun-young, as he is a new actor signed under SM Entertainment. It may not currently appear on search engines unless it is typed in Hangul: 조준영. For reference: [2] ReVeluv02 (talk) 12:46, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment added Cho Junyoung. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 00:12, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The change was reverted immediately with comment Seriously search results as references??? Provide primary source or secondary news source instead. Jay (talk) 04:47, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jay: I think you meant this as a reply to someone else? To clarify my comment, I mean that I added Cho Junyoung to this nomination, since they should both be deleted or point to the same target. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 00:57, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought you meant you added Cho Jun-Young to SM Entertainment artists. I did not realize that it was IP 103.111.143.33 who added it, and which was reverted. Jay (talk) 05:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is he the same as Young Sky or Sky of the One Way (South Korean band)? See this Wikipedia mirror. Jay (talk) 04:47, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • No @Jay:. The one you were referring to was born in 1988. The one currently discussed was born on 2002. However the one born on 2002 is notable rather than the 1988 and he doesn't use Cho Junyoung as he uses his stage name. ReVeluv02 (talk) 14:41, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you are adding a mention to SM Entertainment artists of the artist being discussed, then we can retarget there. Jay (talk) 16:38, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:05, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 01:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: no mention at the target. Veverve (talk) 13:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orthodox civilization

The expression is too vague and broad, as Orthodox can designate many things.
I recommend deletion. Veverve (talk) 02:10, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete way too broad, and the assertion of an Eastern Orthodox 'civilization' feels POV to me. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  02:43, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as vague --Lenticel (talk) 07:58, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I first also wanted to delete, but then User:SmokeyJoe give me the link [3] and then I found other mentions. Now I think that it is ok to keep it. --Heanor (talk) 08:42, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed. “Orthodox civilisation” is the historic POV of the founders of the Eastern Orthodox Church. SmokeyJoe (talk) 11:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Heanor and SmokeyJoe: In any case, on WP to refer to those churches and what is related to them, the expression "Eastern Orthodox" is used, not simply "Orthodox". Veverve (talk) 15:13, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the above. The entire point of redirects is to take phrases that would be used by people and redirect them to what Wikipedia calls them. See
    Roman Catholic Church as an example of a redirect going the opposite way. No reason to delete. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:59, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 01:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Orthodox Church of Byzantium

I am not sure what this redirect is supposed to designate. Does anyone have any idea? In any case, this expression seems unlikely to be searched. Veverve (talk) 02:14, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:45, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 01:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

⋾

A group of soft redirects from mathematical symbols. As they are not commonly wikified words or repeatedly recreated, a soft redirect is unneeded per

WP:SSRT and so they should be deleted. Worth noting that many of the Wiktionary entries do not contain a definition (example) making the soft redirect useless. Note that given the number of redirects and how little they are used I have not tagged the pages, but will do so if requested. BilledMammal (talk) 00:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Do not delete. Never delete unicode characters. Every symbol at Mathematical Operators (Unicode block) contains a link to its redirect target. Deleting any symbol will cause a red link at the table. It is better to redirect to a plausible search tem than to delete them. Neel.arunabh (talk) 00:54, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • If the symbol is notable, a red link helps editors identify articles that needs to be created. If the symbol is not notable, it should not be linked as is already the case with some symbols on that table such as ⋙. BilledMammal (talk) 01:01, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all: "Because it will leave a red link on a certain table" is not an acceptable rationale to keep a bad redirect. The answer is to remove the links. Ravenswing 13:42, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I am yet to come across any other non-existent unicode character in Wikipedia. Nearly, every unicode character does have some redirect. Neel.arunabh (talk) 14:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all, at a spotcheck these entries are definitions that provide no info. CMD (talk) 15:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I sympathize that many RfD participants would oppose deleting unicole characters. Frquent RfD participants like Thryduulf, Rosguill, Tavix, and Tazmin are welocome to participate here. Neel.arunabh (talk) 16:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_January_18&oldid=1066490896"