Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 27

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

October 27

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 27, 2021.

HAIFA

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 5#HAIFA

National Coffee Ice Cream Day

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 22#National Coffee Ice Cream Day

The Lost Boys (2020 TV series)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 5#The Lost Boys (2020 TV series)

Commonwealth kingdom

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 to make any changes. -- Tavix (talk) 22:21, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We need to discuss what to do with these redirects. Now they all have different targets. Is it OK, or should we have a common policy for them? I suggest to redirect to articles about the countries themselves, with the exception of New Zealand, since the Realm of New Zealand also includes two associated states except for New Zealand itself. I did already the same with all 16 Commonwealth realms. But I don't know if this is the best solution? I want to listen to the opinions of more experienced colleagues. Somerby (talk) 15:38, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm. I think you have the right idea. I'm tempted by the "Monarchy of" articles, just because they're more specific, but ultimately, a kingdom is a place, and a monarchy is an institution. So the right targets are the geographic areas corresponding to the realms, which in all cases but one are coterminous with the country. --BDD (talk) 21:26, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Somerby, you have only just created
    Kingdom of New Zealand. I'm curious – why did you create it? Nurg (talk) 10:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
    Nurg, this term is used in sources, where it denote the geographic area corresponding to the Realm of New Zealand. Thus I redirected it to the Realm of New Zealand. if you think that the target should be different, then let us discuss your proposal. Strictly speaking, the state is headed by a female, but there is no such word Queendom --Somerby (talk) 11:09, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Somerby. Could you give references to two of those sources please. Nurg (talk) 20:40, 5 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    No references have been provided for "Kingdom of New Zealand" so I am unable to verify what they might be referring to. In fact, I am left with the suspicion that "Kingdom of New Zealand" is just a name made up on Wikipedia. In that case such a redirect is not needed. If it is kept, it might as well redirect to Realm of New Zealand, in the absence of any information about the name. Nurg (talk) 07:34, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a United Kingdom of New Zealand group, I'm not sure exactly what it is but it isn't anything recognised by the rest of the world. The sentence "The Kingdom of New Zealand also includes the self-governing autonomous states of the Cook Islands and Niue, and Tokelau." appears on many of the different websites operated by flagtheory.com which seems to be a private organisation dealing with small businesses wanting to do business internationally. Other than that I can't find any other uses of the term. Thryduulf (talk) 10:42, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks Thryduulf. We can ignore the UK of NZ one, as that is not the redirect term. I hadn't found the flagtheory.com use in my own searches so thanks for that one. They appear to be mistakenly using "Kingdom of New Zealand" when they mean "Realm of New Zealand", so that redirect is ok as it is. Nurg (talk) 02:27, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:59, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:TRAINWRECK; each one of these is different and there's no point in discussing them together. The only really common element is that these are colonies of the British Empire which acquired responsible self-government in the 19th century while maintaining allegiance to the British Crown, but Britain used the term Dominion
    to purposefully avoid calling them Kingdoms. But since we're already here:
    • Keep Kingdom of Canada, and refine section per 85.67. That section best explains the origin and use of the term, and why it didn't become the name of the country. A see-also could be made there to Monarchy of Canada for interested readers but there really isn't a lot there on the "Kingdom of Canada" name.
    • Keep Kingdom of Australia. There is a Name of Australia article but the word "Kingdom" appears there only once, and as you would expect that instance is immediately preceded by "United"; that is, there is no information there and no apparently prominent uses of the term "Kingdom of Australia", except I did come across an anti-government and anti-vaccine Kingdom of Australia group on Facebook.
    • Neutral on Kingdom of New Zealand. This appears to be a situation like the Kingdom of Denmark redirects that came up recently, where the sovereign country consisting of the North and South islands is called "New Zealand", but there are related partially-self-governing territories which rely on the Monarchy of New Zealand for defense and foreign relations, as described in the Realm article. But I find that confusing and don't really want to give an opinion. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 15:27, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It seems that there will be benefit in further discussion on whether we ought to harmonize these redirect titles.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 17:30, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep all: Australia and Canada per Ivan, New Zealand per Nurg. Jay (talk) 17:56, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The most common language in Mexico

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 11:31, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Don't see the rationale in this redirect, the only one of its kind, no other language has a redirect like this, and with good reason, I can't imagine anyone at all is going to be searching up this instead of just the article title. Loafiewa (talk) 16:57, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete not a plausible search term and creating redirects from random questions to their answers isn't common practice. Anyone who was interested would just go to Mexico or Languages of Mexico. Hut 8.5 19:23, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Accurate, but better left for search engines, and that's not a reasonable search term as Hut 8.5 argues above me. Regards, SONIC678 21:35, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: No one would ever search for this. ―Susmuffin Talk 14:03, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, though I wouldn't go so far as to say no one would ever search for this.
talk) 02:08, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

To have and to hold

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 5#To have and to hold

Draft:Joshua Jonathan/Breast tax

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 Deleted per CSD:G7.--RegentsPark (comment) 17:03, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. Delete. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:18, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible search term.

Stefan2 (talk) 15:09, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Fifth borough

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 11:32, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

How are the five New York boroughs ordered in this context? Plus, the term "borough" itself does not exclusively denote New York City. feminist (+) 13:26, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Syracuse County

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 11:32, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Even if "[City] County" → "[the county where City is located in]" were a generally accepted format for redirects, which is itself doubtful, Syracuse is an ambiguous term and hence there are multiple counties containing a place named Syracuse. feminist (+) 11:26, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Downtown subway

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 11:32, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous with Downtown MRT line and by extension any subway/rapid transit line that serves a downtown area. feminist (+) 11:24, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Bridges of Vancouver

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 11#Bridges of Vancouver

Bridges in Portland

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 List of bridges in Portland and retarget the rest there. -- Tavix (talk) 20:32, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is ambiguous with at least List of bridges in Portland, Maine, and it is likely that one would be able to find bridges in the various places named Portland. feminist (+) 11:11, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Oregon, Oregon

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 3#Oregon, Oregon

The TTC

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
(non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 18:13, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Ambiguous with some of the topics on TTC such as the places ending in "Center". feminist (+) 11:08, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The CTA

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
(non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 18:13, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Ambiguous with lots of topics on CTA. feminist (+) 11:07, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Findlay Airport (Pennsylvania)

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 11:33, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone who knows that there is an airport in

Findlay Township, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania will already know what the airport is named. feminist (+) 11:06, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Moon Airport

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 11:33, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The logic of this redirect is that the airport is partly situated in

Moon Township, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. However, anyone who can associate the airport with a place called Moon will already know how to search for the airport without needing this redirect. feminist (+) 11:04, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Barrow County, Alaska

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 18#Barrow County, Alaska

The GTA

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
(non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 18:11, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Ambiguous search term as this can refer to any car or hiking trail listed on GTA. feminist (+) 10:52, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to GTA: There are many different potential targets here. ―Susmuffin Talk 14:15, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

West St. Louis

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 11:33, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous search term. It can mean anything west of

East St. Louis. feminist (+) 10:47, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

New York (upstate)

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 11:33, 4 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is not how

parenthetical disambiguators work. Upstate and downstate New York are never referred to individually as just "New York", nor will anyone search for this. feminist (+) 10:42, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Kansas, Kansas

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 3#Kansas, Kansas

ST9

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, which is where this discussion is trending. Once a disambiguation was proposed, there were no objections to it. -- Tavix (talk) 21:39, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The source phrase of "ST9" does not appear in the target article. I'd propose that the redirect be deleted. —

talk) 06:33, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Delete as ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:27, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. I can't find anything in search results that could be an alternative target let alone enough for a dab page. Thryduulf (talk) 22:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: While this is an abbreviation of the film's name, it is far to vague to be useful. Furthermore, I support the deletion of ST8. ―Susmuffin Talk 15:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep - only the second through sixth Star Trek films are series numbered in their titles, but this was the ninth Trek film made. Absent any other uses, this is harmless. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 15:26, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: I am the one who made this redirect page, as well as notes on the disambiguation pages for ST3 and ST6, the redirect page ST8 and a note at the top of the page ST10 redirects to, because when I typed ST7 (expecting Star Trek Generations) that page had a note at the top redirecting me there. The disambiguation pages for ST1, ST2, ST4, and ST5 had redirects as well. I figured it would be harmless (as well as balanced) unless there was something else that was referred to by this name. --Specialsam110 (talk) 19:00, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep per creator's statement immediately above. CycloneYoris talk! 01:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate for the things which actually meet
    WP:DABMENTION (ST9 in the ST postcode area, the Sarsılmaz Arms ST9, the ST9 exam of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries) and put the current target in the "See also" section. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 00:45, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
    ]
WP:INVOLVED
relist to allow the October 7 log page to be closed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 11:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify, since this is certainly referred to as ST9 in the wider world, (ninth Star Trek film), and there are other ST9 uses. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 22:48, 21 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:46, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Te Ao Maori

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
(non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 18:07, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Wanting to have a discussion around the best target for this redirect (and the similar

Te ao Māori. This concept translates loosely as the Māori world, and is generally used to describe Māori concepts, beliefs, and ways of doing things moreso than Māori themselves as a group. As such, I feel like another page that relates to this, such as Tikanga Māori, Mātauranga Māori or even Māori culture might be better suited as a target. I'm not quite sure which of these however, and I'm keen to have a kōrero (talk) about it, hence putting it up for discussion. Turnagra (talk) 05:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:46, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Perhaps there's scope for an eventual article on te ao Māori? I'm not sure whether I could do such an article justice, but given the increasing importance of the concept it could be worth looking at. Turnagra (talk) 19:04, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

SuWiki

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. -- Tavix (talk) 22:00, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target, nor anywhere else on Wikipedia. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:30, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 09:45, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Wikiholic

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 soft redirect to Wiktionary. -- Tavix (talk) 22:04, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary cross-namespace redirect. Elli (talk | contribs) 04:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:38, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Triangle Strategy

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
(non-admin closure) feminist (+) 11:52, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

This also seems like it could reasonably point to

talk) 01:20, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:38, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect to Octopath Traveler#Legacy per Zxcvbnm. I believe someone can turn it into a proper article now if they are willing to do it. There should be enough coverage from RS. OceanHok (talk) 16:09, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Section du Théâtre-Français

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. -- Tavix (talk) 17:00, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I get that at one point this subject was named after the target. But does it have to redirect towards his article? I don't think he ever represented there or had any special connection to it other than it being renamed in his honor.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  00:59, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:37, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Alamo

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/Procedural close. Proposal requires a requested move discussion. Nominator requests closure, and all other participants support early closure. Involved closure to restore utility of redirect for this common term given unanimous support for close. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:33, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to

Alamo redirect simply pointed to the disambiguation page. BSMRD (talk) 02:50, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

My bad, is there a way to close this? RFD is not my forte. BSMRD (talk) 19:30, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No worries! It should probably be left open for the moment as someone has already commented, and there still could be discussion about whether the battle or the mission is the best primary topic. Someone not involved might nevertheless come along and do a procedural close. In the meantime, feel free to start an RM discussion at Talk:Alamo (disambiguation), probably a good idea to link to this discussion. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:13, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to closing this. Station1 (talk) 00:53, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I too would support a close since it's the wrong forum and the nominator and all other participants support an early close. I'm going to go ahead and close it to restore the use of the redirect. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:33, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Laura Brehm

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 speedy deleted by
(non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 09:15, 28 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

I don't think there's any good possible redirect target for Laura Brehm, so this redirect should be deleted. She's worked on multiple songs/albums. No redirect target we have provides much useful information about her that a reader would be looking for, and the current target is somewhat

WP:ASTONISHing. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:06, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:11, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Allison Young

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 11#Allison Young

Latin civilisation

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.
(non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 13:27, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Not mentioned at the target, doesn't unambiguously refer to it; a GScholar search suggests that this term often alternatively refers to the Roman Empire, the sphere of influence of the Roman Catholic Church, and/or the southwestern European region of Romance-language speaking countries and their colonies. In the absence of a clear target, deletion seems like it may be the best option. signed, Rosguill talk 16:03, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I personally made the page in reference to the work of the polish historian Feliks Koneczny, who used the term in his theory of civilisations, with the latin civilisation being characterised through its legal, ethical and cultural heritage gained from the Roman Empire and the Catholic Church (note: Koneczny did not view civilisation as inherently tied to religion, he did view it as being fundamentally tied to it. He viewed England as a country that kept much of its former Catholic heritage even when it became protestant.). His usage of the term aligns with what one would call the 'Western civilisation', with it being commonly synonymous in Poland. It also has a Polish Wikipedia page. Nonetheless I see that I failed to consider other usages of the term, as such I would propose to convert the redirect into a disambiguation page. Kanclerz K-Tech (talk) 22:10, 10 October 2021 (UTC) :[reply]
I'm liking the idea of a disambiguation page - it very clearly is an ambiguous term with multiple meanings. A disambiguation page would mean also that the reader would get some context about why they should be going to the western culture article (assuming that is where they wanted to go), even if nothing is added to that article. --Xurizuri (talk) 09:32, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that there is no obvious target (unlike, say,
Arabic civilisation, which would clearly go to Arab world). Western culture would be defensible, as would be Legacy of the Roman Empire (probably the closest to the sense Kanclerz describes). As would Roman Empire/Ancient Rome. Yeah, a most logical solution would be to have short disambig page with a longer than average write-up to explain the concept, and then links to the plausible targets. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:29, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to allow the October 10 log page to be closed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:07, 27 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_October_27&oldid=1056580400"