Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 11

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

October 11

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 11, 2023.

Mos:BOLDAVOID and others

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 23:30, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A bundle of 4

pseudo-namespace
is "MOS:", for which these redirects all have suitable counterparts in existence.

The idea of "MoS" and "Mos" prefixes has been discussed previously in the past, most recently in 2018 here (and here for the counterpart MoS discussion, earlier discussions linked in header at either), usually under the caveat of "Keep but new ones should be discouraged". A couple key features of these 4 redirects is that they all cropped up in 2020 or 2022. Additionally, these are unlikely even AMONG the lowercase, as the capitalization shifts halfway through. If the "Mos" are utilized for "ease of typing lowercase", to me it feels unfeasible to switch casing for the rest of the title, which are rather long and niche and probably why they only came into existence these last couple years.

Additionally, these have no incoming links, and for the most part are otherwise neglected. These four have only been linked a combined total of once via an RfC message, which has since been undone. While the matter of pseudo-namespaces has often been a controversial subject, and this is not the first time this has been aired here, I don't think I'll be the last to talk about it either, as long as it remains the gray area that it is. For the four I'm bringing here, the combined use is not as helpful as the future cost they will have editor-timewise, especially when (I feel) these are the implausible among the already implausible. I'm not suggesting we delete the really-old PNRs that would have a high orphanage cost, but these are all new enough and unnatural enough that I don't think they'll need to exist by the time the next discussion occurs. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:44, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: There's an established consensus for a "MOS:" pseudonamespace for these redirects, but we do not need hundreds of capitalization-variant versions of them created. The few that do exist should be nuked to discourage the creation of more of them.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:58, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Sticking with the capitalized MOS prefix is better in such cases. Gawaon (talk) 06:49, 12 October 2023 (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
).

Kuzushiji

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 18#Kuzushiji

WikiProject Integrity

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 23:31, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Contents related to this WikiProject were removed from the target page back in February 2023, making this redirect unclear due to a lack of mention. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. (But don't speedy this as G7 - I'm not really the creator, I only recreated it after it got erroneously deleted). * Pppery * it has begun... 23:07, 11 October 2023 (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
).

SMOS:A&Q and others

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 23:30, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudo-pseudo-namespace redirects that are not listed at

complexity, and shouldn't exist without consensus and documentation. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:57, 11 October 2023 (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
).

Ligma Balls

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
talk 21:08, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

I feel like this could either be redirected to

Ligma
(which Rahul Ligma is already an entry of), or just outright removed.

The use of the punchline "Ligma Balls" predates the events surrounding '

WP:RSP). B3251 (talk) 20:14, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Keep. B3251 is right about the joke pre-dating Rahul Ligma but at the moment the Rahul Ligma page has the only explanation of it. Currently no other redirect makes more sense. Maybe the best presentation would be to have a Ligma joke page and have Rahul Ligma be a section of that? That would satisfy FormalDude's concerns about WP:SUSTAINED since 2018-2022 is even longer than the Twitter and FTX coverage. Also, edits like this: [[1]] are not helpful to having a discussion about content. I'd encourage editors to look at what the text was before FormalDude deleted huge swaths of it just a few minutes ago. BBQboffin (talk) 03:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I removed the only sentence that mentioned "Ligma Balls" at
    WP:SYNTH. ––FormalDude (talk) 03:51, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
  • Redirect Retarget to
    WP:SYNTH issues, although is quoting from a dictionary to explain to the reader what a word means doesn't seem like a policy violation to me. As for dictionary.com I couldn't find any discussion on the RS noticeboards saying this was unreliable. BBQboffin (talk) 05:31, 12 October 2023 (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
).

Casca Panzoro

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 23:31, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete due to a complete lack of notability, even on Wookieepedia itself. That's how you know its really bad. TNstingray (talk) 16:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:44, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Darker Dreams' argument is bizarre - redirects don't have standalone notability standards but they do inherit whatever standards there targets are applying. If the character doesn't meet the standards of the list, then it doesn't deserve a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:11, 11 October 2023 (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
).

Reeve Panzoro

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 23:32, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete due to a complete lack of notability, even on Wookieepedia itself. That's how you know its really bad. TNstingray (talk) 16:41, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Darker Dreams' argument is bizarre - redirects don't have standalone notability standards but they do inherit whatever standards there targets are applying. If the character doesn't meet the standards of the list, then it doesn't deserve a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:11, 11 October 2023 (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
).

Barada (Star Wars)

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 23:32, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like I have already nominated so many foot soldiers on Jabba's sail barge for deletion. I can't believe I found yet another. Delete due to utter lack of any encyclopedic value. TNstingray (talk) 16:39, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:43, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Darker Dreams' argument is bizarre - redirects don't have standalone notability standards but they do inherit whatever standards there targets are applying. If the character doesn't meet the standards of the list, then it doesn't deserve a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:11, 11 October 2023 (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
).

Jaxxon

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 20#Jaxxon

Romba (Star Wars)

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 23:33, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Another deletion request due to utter lack of real-world notability. So many of these need to stay over at Wookieepedia. TNstingray (talk) 16:36, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:42, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Darker Dreams' argument is bizarre - redirects don't have standalone notability standards but they do inherit whatever standards there targets are applying. If the character doesn't meet the standards of the list, then it doesn't deserve a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:11, 11 October 2023 (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
).

Korr Sella

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 23:33, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not a noteworthy character at all, just a background non-speaking cameo with a slightly expanded role in the novelization and one other book. Will never be listed on this page. Delete. TNstingray (talk) 16:34, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:42, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Darker Dreams' argument is bizarre - redirects don't have standalone notability standards but they do inherit whatever standards there targets are applying. If the character doesn't meet the standards of the list, then it doesn't deserve a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:11, 11 October 2023 (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
).

Gavyn Sykes

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 23:33, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable for any reason. Will never be listed on this character page. Delete. TNstingray (talk) 16:31, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:41, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Darker Dreams' argument is bizarre - redirects don't have standalone notability standards but they do inherit whatever standards there targets are applying. If the character doesn't meet the standards of the list, then it doesn't deserve a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:11, 11 October 2023 (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
).

UMSC

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. Jay 💬 06:36, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Unionville Milliken SC article doesn't seem like the primary topic for this abbreviation, so I've created a disambiguation page UMSC (disambiguation) for this that I think would be better. BaduFerreira (talk) 15:32, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Move dab over redirect per nom. Based on my searches, if anything is primary it's the Malaysian hospital (only one hit on the first page of Google was unrelated) but from page 2 onwards its a complete mix so I'm not convinced anything is. Thryduulf (talk) 17:52, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support move into DAB. When I created the re-direct, I didn't know about the other page, since a redirect didn't exist for it, or else I would've just made it a generic DAB page. RedPatch (talk) 18:35, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move UMSC (disambiguation) to UMSC per above. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 18:49, 11 October 2023 (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
).

UGA vs TCU

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 26#UGA vs TCU

Global Mission

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 restore and AfD.
talk 21:03, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

This used to be a stand-alone article and converted to a redirect in Sept 2022, without any discussion that I can see. Problem is the target article makes no mention of this term or function that I can see. A further problem is that Global Mission is linked from Template:Billy Graham, although that has no connection with the Seventh Day Adventist mission. A poor quality disambiguation page had been created, but that was reverted. older ≠ wiser 13:34, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Restore and AfD: I don't really know if Global Mission is notable on its own, but it seems like the best plan of action here would just be to restore and AfD as the redirect as it exists currently doesn't make sense, but it does have some potentially useful history. TartarTorte 14:04, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Global Mission was a Seventh-day Adventist article that should have never been created, it is not notable and never will be. And those other Global Missions by other denominations, I doubt that they are notable. Catfurball (talk) 16:28, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore and AfD Checking the original article, it looks like advertising to me. The redirect was never discussed, but to my opinion not incorrect. The later created dab page pointed to only one organisation (with a slightly different name) and for the rest to places, not organisations. Article, redirect and dab-page are all not in the best interest of Wikipedia. The Banner talk 16:58, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore and send to AfD. If an undiscussed
    BLAR is disputed and the article was not speedy deletable (as in this case) then the redirection should be reverted and the article discussed as an article. Thryduulf (talk) 17:55, 11 October 2023 (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
).

💁‍♀️

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 20#💁‍♀️

Leetspeak redirects

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 delete all (
(non-admin closure) TartarTorte 14:07, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Leetspeak redirects are unlikely/not helpful search terms. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:17, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete all per above. estar8806 (talk) ★ 22:04, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete All - Just some of many countless unlikely, contrived redirects Alpha200807 (talk · contribs) had already received plenty of complaints and warnings about and has since been banned for along with other disruptive editing. Ubcule (talk) 14:07, 14 October 2023 (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
).

Gwynfryn and Cefndeuddwr baronet

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 19#Gwynfryn and Cefndeuddwr baronet

Sly 5: Master Of Thieves

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 💬 06:41, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the fan name for a fifth installment of the Sly Cooper series, which hasn't materialized for years (nor are there hints in the real world one is coming anytime soon). There used to be a stub article at this title until it was redirected to the franchise's main article less than four hours after it was created in June 2014, but it isn't mentioned there or anywhere else on Wikipedia (which it shouldn't be until there's official word from Sony, Sucker Punch, etc. on whether it's taking place), and it hasn't been for several years since a Waterloo, London IP removed the pertinent section two months later. Regards, SONIC678 05:17, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 12:38, 11 October 2023 (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
).

Jump and press the circle button

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 18#Jump and press the circle button

Nacht van de Lange Messen

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 💬 06:35, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch-language translation of term. Article has no relevance to the Netherlands or Belgium. ArcticSeeress (talk) 22:39, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose,
redirects are cheap, and the Netherlands is mentioned in the article. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 09:38, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
In passing, yes, but the Dutch name itself has zero relevance to the article as this event didn't take place in any Dutch-speaking area. It's like having a redirect from the Arabic name for 9/11 or the Russian name for the 1938 Yellow River flood because Saudi Arabia and the Soviet Union are mentioned in those articles. ArcticSeeress (talk) 11:31, 27 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:44, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 12:34, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete unlikely to be a search term for the English wiki, a passing mention does not warrant a redirect Yoblyblob (talk) 14:35, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Yoblyblob at
    WP:RFOREIGN. Thryduulf (talk) 18:09, 11 October 2023 (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
).

Wrong Road, The (disambiguation)

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. Three keep !votes. Per
(non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 14:59, 28 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Why? Apparently these were created for sorting reasons, but it is not clear when you would ever need to sort a disambiguation page (except perhaps in categories, but there you can add a sortkey to the category). There are a lot of these, this RfD is just for the one, the others can then be done in a next RfD if this one ends in delete. Oh, and in any case these surely aren't "printworthy" redirects?

By the way,

Fram (talk) 09:11, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Thanks, but that is a terrible use case to create redirects or categories. We can create with the same rationalization redirects and categories to help anyone who "wants a quick list" of disambiguations with the word "road" in it, or the same but for those which aren't actually about roads, or disambiguation pages where a song and a TV series episode have the same title, or a quick list of all songs with the word "wrong" in the title, or... (and that's just some ideas from this single page, the possibilities are limitless). The redirect and category system are not meant as an endless supply of groupings of all possible eventual questions anyone can think of.

Most damning perhaps is that instead of this always-incomplete, manual double set of redirects, we already have for this single use case a much easier method: this gives you a permanently up-to-date list of all disambiguation pages starting with "the".

Fram (talk) 07:41, 16 October 2023 (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
).

Asad Ali Palijo (actor)

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. Complex/Rational 12:48, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:GAMING
of the deletion process. A redirect was never brought up in the discussion, and this is simply an attempt by users to circumvent the deletion process. Note that "Asad Ali Palijo (singer)" was also originally created as a redirect, and then later changed to an article.

Given the history of abuse [2], I don't think we should make any concessions for the subject.

KH-1 (talk) 05:34, 11 October 2023 (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
).

Druisk

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 💬 06:46, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even know why it redirects to

connect 03:42, 11 October 2023 (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
).

Kirbi

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 will note that a mention was added.
(non-admin closure) - 🔥𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌)🔥 15:58, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

This title seem as if it would refer more closely to Kirby phonetically than to its current target, at which article this particular alternative spelling is not listed. Searching for "Kirbi" on google only returns results that are either in English or Serbian. (Upon translating, the Serbian mentions specifically are in reference to John Kirby). Utopes (talk / cont) 02:54, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Russian name for the village is Кирби, which transliterates to English as Kirbi. Google Maps, for example, uses this when viewing it in English. I've added the Russian name to the article. Randi🦋TalkContribs 14:01, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:12, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, mention has been added to the target. Jay 💬 04:56, 18 October 2023 (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
).

Four Golden Princess

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. Editors are divided between deletion and keep due to its history, with one editor suggesting that a prior revision be restored and sent to AfD. signed, Rosguill talk 04:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect to M-Girls seems inappropriate given that these are two completely different music groups. Adding this as a redirect to a completely different group is misleading. Suggesting to delete and leave as empty page until more updated information can be sourced. RagnaParadise (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per reason 10: "the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject." Tevildo (talk) 17:43, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree that this is not a good redirect. The DRV was started first, so I would wait for it to be closed. The comments there may be leaning to a restore and AfD. Jay 💬 07:39, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll stick to restore and AfD as also suggested at the DRV, and because this should not be kept as a poor/incorrect redirect, nor deleted because of its history. Four Golden Princess is not known just for its collaboration with M-Girls. Jay 💬 05:10, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Waiting for the DRV to be closed...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 01:47, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • The DRV is now closed. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:04, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I’m leaning keep as an {{
    WP:R#K1), especially as the AfD closure specifically mentioned that the previous article [c]an be restored if better sources are found. As for the target…that’s tricky. Maybe retarget to the dab page at Golden Princess? On the understanding that this redirect wouldn’t exist if it didn’t have history, but - as it does - that might be the least worst target for it. However, my !vote on the target is much weaker than my !vote to keep the redirect. Best, user:A smart kittenmeow 09:07, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 21:48, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Insufficient substance at the target to warrant a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:24, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per A Smart Kitten. The insufficient substance at the target complaint is easily
    WP:SURMOUNTABLE concern. Frank Anchor 01:15, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:47, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep due to the history, at this rate I'd say. Has mention, seemingly logical target. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:29, 11 October 2023 (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
).

The Presidents of the United States of America

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. Participants seem roughly split on what to do with these. -- Tavix (talk) 13:03, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Everything must be redirected to the associated dab page shown above.

talk) 08:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 21:33, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget all to the list of presidents and add a hatnote to the dab page. Given the use of the plural it seems pretty clear to me that most people are going to be wanting a page containing information about multiple presidents of the unambiguously specified country - i.e. a list of them. Thryduulf (talk) 22:02, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep
    Presidents of the United States of America. It's likely that anyone using "The" is looking for the band, not the list; no redirects for "The states of" exist for any country, or anything similar with "regions", "counties" or "provinces", which I think would be more likely to use "the" than presidents. Peter James (talk) 12:44, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:46, 11 October 2023 (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
).

Climber (climbing)

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. signed, Rosguill talk 04:50, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Previously listed on the Climber disambiguation page as "Climber, a participant in the activity of climbing", with only the action of climbing being wikilinked.

This redirect was created to replace the word "Climber" in the aforementioned description with "

Climber (climbing)", with both the participant and the activity being wikilinked. I do not think the double-target with this particular disambiguator is needed. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:35, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply
]

  • Keep (or fix so it doesn't redirect to a disambiguation page). As per
    runner), or leave as is (which is better than redirecting climber to a disambiguation page). 10:57, 16 September 2023 (UTC). Aszx5000 (talk) 10:57, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]
What is the purpose of the redirect? Is it for people who come to WP and type in "Climber (climbing)"? What sort of people would they be? Or is it so there can be WLs like "Fred was a [[Climber (climbing)|climber]] who enjoyed baseball", rather than just WLinking "climber" to "climbing"? Imaginatorium (talk) 11:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is the latter, and the fact that a lot of IPs (who do most of the climbing editing these days), just put in climber and leave the disambiguation in place. In addition, the redirect is used to link the WikiCommons category:climber to the Wikipedia climbing article, and to the Wikidata entry for climber. Aszx5000 (talk) 08:48, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not seeing how this redirect is "for the IPs", to be honest. I get that you were the one who created the page and naturally you made it because you found a "gap" to be filled, which in my opinion was a gap that already had a working solution and didn't really exist. You ask about how "Runner" redirects to "Running", but what about climber? From my point of view, it's purely a matter of
WP:PTOPIC
. When in comes to the two verbs, Running receives 5x the pageviews as climbing does, and none of the other disambiguations come close. Climbing, on the otherhand, and particularly "climber", has competition, as the article for "Vine" (referred to as a "climber") receives 3x more pageviews as climbing does. To that end, because to my knowledge there is no primary topic for "Climber" necessarily, I think the disambiguation page is appropriate to exist there.
As for what I don't buy about the explanation, is that this article was not linked anywhere before you created it. In my opinion, nobody would ever think to use this particular disambiguator unless that person had insider knowledge that it existed. Because there is no article called Climber which talks about climbing, the natural solution is to just link to Climbing instead rather than typing in the redundant "action doer (present participle version of verb)". The solution that every other verb-article uses is just "[[X-ing|X-er]]", or "[[Climbing|Climber]]" to get the job done. This redirect has a very strange disambiguator that nobody would think to use as it's more complicated than the status quo.
Checking the
Mountaineer to Climber in the lead, it seems to me like the solution for all of these would be to change the redirect target to target the main article itself. This redirect's creation seemed to just add a middle step for the sake of having a redirect called "climber", when there didn't need to be. Any further use besides this, I'm unsure. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:21, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
(Also it seems as if you imported from Wikidata to the redirect after the RfD was up. On this topic, and based on what I've said above, I don't think I agree that the Wikidata or Commons should be attached to this particular title, as it is quite unintuitive for any interested person to find this item if they didn't know which redirect this Wikidata entry was associated with. Unless they looked for the Wikidata entry first, and upon accessing that page, they'd find a redirect containing no further context towards its entry besides "this is a redirect to climbing".) Utopes (talk / cont) 20:28, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikidata entry for "climber" has existed since 24 Feb 2020, and I added the link from Wikidata to
climber (climbing) all three are linked. Not an expert in these matters, but is not this not a good thing? Given that redirects are relatively inoffensive, why would we break this link? thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 23:21, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
As for what I don't buy about the explanation, is that this article was not linked anywhere before you created it. As the entering of "climber" threw up a disambiguation error, someone would have to come along an fix it. Obviously, if
runner), this would not be a problem, but for some reason that was not considered acceptable? Regardless, even if that was fixed (and it probably should be) I think having climber (climbing), allows the Wikidata-Wikicommons-WikiPedia articles to link which is useful (per my comment just above). thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 23:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
For what it's worth, I completely agree with your sentiment here. I think as a whole, the linking of Wikidata and Commons for a topic of a "Climber", if it exists as an article, is likely for the betterment of Wikipedia and adds information, depending on the circumstance. Additionally, linking to climber in pages about the activity is not great, because links to disambiguation pages should be avoided where possible in order for an accurate wikilink. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that, in its execution, I don't know really understand how this redirect "for the sake of wikilinking what type of 'climber' it is" is more helpful than simply wikilinking to the base page of Climbing. Disambiguators should be about distinguishing a particular title from the rest, whereas this doesn't really do that at all, I think. For vines called "climbers", it can potentially be said that they are also "climbing".
While I'm not advocating for these necessarily,
Climber (climbing) says the same thing twice. This referral to the activity is clear via the Category:Climbers that exists and is already attached to the Wikidata & Commons, but it isn't particularly clear via the current title of the redirect, I think. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:33, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply
]
Thanks for that. Obviously, I am a relatively new editor (did some IP editing myself in my time) so I am open-minded about what is the best way forward. Now that I have explained my reasons for creating it, hopefully that will help the discussion to the right resolution. thanks. Aszx5000 (talk) 13:54, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 20:01, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Doesn't actually disambiguate anything - if "climbing" had some other meaning then people doing it would be called climbers too. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:15, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:54, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. It looks unusual but it's a perfectly valid search term and takes people to the most directly relevant content we have. Thryduulf (talk) 21:37, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per SnowFire. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:22, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or move There should be a disambiguated "climber" redirect, and although "climbing" is possibly ambiguous there is a primary topic, making it suitable for disambiguation. There is also
    real estate developer. Peter James (talk) 13:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply
    ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:44, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep or move My main concern is also
    climbing plant (which should have its own article & not redirect to vine). Johnbod (talk) 04:43, 12 October 2023 (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/2023_October_11&oldid=1194631144"