Discussion venue for potentially problematic redirects
- WP:RFD#ACTUAL
- WP:RFDCD
- WP:RFDCL
4 de agosto
Joan Bau
Hasta donde yo sé, nunca se hace referencia al objetivo de esta manera. Rusalkii ( discusión ) 01:48, 4 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Betty Brook (afluente de Bear Kill)
Río equivocado en desambiguación; Moví la página. Peter James ( discusión ) 00:06, 4 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
3 de agosto
Culto a Manalo
No puedo encontrar fuentes confiables que llamen a esta iglesia una secta. voorts ( charla / contribuciones ) 23:34, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Codificación médica
La codificación médica y clínica son términos para lo mismo. De nota; Cambié audazmente la redirección de codificación médica para que coincida con la codificación clínica en 2019. Se revirtió manualmente al objetivo anterior, y ahora actual, en agosto de 2023. Soy de la opinión de que apuntar el proceso (es decir, la codificación) a la profesión (codificador) es lo que un lector esperaría más que las herramientas utilizadas (clasificación), pero al menos deberían tener el mismo objetivo. Little pob ( charla ) 21:55, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Reorientar la codificación clínica a clasificación médica por nom. Mantenga la codificación médica como está. voorts ( charla / contribuciones ) 23:35, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Definitivamente estoy de acuerdo en que deberían señalar el mismo lugar. Tiendo a pensar que la clasificación médica es básicamente un sinónimo y, por tanto, un mejor objetivo. Sin embargo, ese artículo es un poco desordenado, parece discutir varias cosas diferentes. C apital S asha ~ t alk 23:59, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
pecho
Esto se creó basándose en el uso observado del término entre mujeres, pero al momento de escribir este artículo, la única referencia a la palabra en Wikipedia es sobre su uso entre personas transmasculinas, en Terminología de anatomía transgénero , que Generalísima y yo acabamos de crear. (También se menciona en Sexualidad transgénero , pero ella y yo lo estamos reescribiendo y planeamos hacer que la sección actual "Nombrar el cuerpo" sea solo un resumen del nuevo artículo). Wikcionario también ofrece un tercer significado, con respecto a los hombres cisgénero. La Búsqueda de Google favorece el significado femenino, mientras que Google Scholar está más dividido entre ese y el significado transmasculino. No hay una gran solución aquí, pero creo que lo mejor sería redirigir suavemente a wikt:chesticle ; tal vez JnpoJuwan , que ha estado haciendo un gran trabajo en Wikcionario en paralelo a mis esfuerzos y los de Generalísima en Wikipedia sobre este tema, pueda agregar el sentido transmasculino allí.
Nota al margen: sin embargo, esto está cerrado, un administrador debe recrear los Chesticles completamente protegidos para que coincidan con su resultado. - Tamzin [ se necesita cetáceo ] ( ellos|xe ) 21:53, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Montaña Baldface (condado de Herkimer, Nueva York)
Moví la página porque la montaña está en el condado de Hamilton, no en el condado de Herkimer (con el nombre de la ciudad para desambiguación, ya que hay otra en el condado de Hamilton). La redirección es engañosa y debería eliminarse; No pude encontrar una montaña Baldface en el condado de Herkimer aunque la otra en el condado de Hamilton (en la ciudad de Morehouse) está cerca. Peter James ( charla ) 17:18, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Natación artística en los Juegos Olímpicos de Verano de 2028
Demasiado pronto para esto. Probablemente tampoco sea un término de búsqueda por un tiempo. Proponer eliminar por ahora. Sportsfan 1234 ( discusión ) 01:49, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Entonces(32)
No hay contenido en este grupo específico en el destino. Podría reorientarse a la teoría de cuerdas heteróticas o artículos similares relacionados con la aplicación física. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 18:29, 26 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, ✗ plicito 01:27, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
2 de agosto
Iast
Esto pretende ser un acrónimo, por lo que debe escribirse en mayúscula. Sin embargo, el acrónimo IASST --> Asociación Internacional para la Formación en Seguridad y Supervivencia .La página del Instituto de Estudios Avanzados en Ciencia y Tecnología es nueva, aún no revisada y potencialmente no notable.El objetivo actual de Iasst ha sido redirigido debido a un cierre anterior de XfD . Significa liberdade (ella/ella) ( charla ) 22:57, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
El OG del OC
La redirección no se menciona en la página de destino, y al buscar "OG of the OC" en Google no aparece Vicki (al menos en la mente), pero sí aparecen otras cosas Significa liberdade (ella/ella) ( hablar ) 22:11, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar como WP:NOR por creador si no se puede presentar ninguna fuente. Respublik ( discusión ) 20:59, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar por nom - Lenticel ( discusión ) 00:41, 4 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
OG del OC
La redirección no se menciona en la página de destino y la búsqueda de "OG of the OC" en Google no muestra a Vicki (al menos en la mente), pero otras cosas sí. Significa liberdade (ella/ella) ( charla ) 22:04, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Hola,
- Agregué la redirección porque ese era el apodo que se le dio a Vicki Gunvalson, ya que era el miembro del elenco original con más años de servicio en The Real Housewives of Orange County . OG se refiere a su condición de compañera de reparto original; OC se refiere al escenario del espectáculo. Capricornsgroove ( discusión ) 22:20, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar como WP:NOR por creador si no se puede presentar ninguna fuente. Respublik ( discusión ) 20:58, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar por nom - Lenticel ( discusión ) 00:41, 4 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Guerrero Elegido (Mortal Kombat)
No estoy seguro de cuál es el mejor camino a seguir con estas redirecciones. Por un lado, la frase "guerrero elegido" se menciona al menos una vez en el artículo de destino, pero no necesariamente de una manera que defina el término para comprender mejor qué posibles subtemas excluye el término... lo que significa que los lectores probablemente no encontrarán cuáles son. buscando con estas redirecciones. Además, la búsqueda de "guerreros elegidos" en motores de búsqueda de terceros arroja resultados sobre temas potencialmente notables que no tienen conexión con la serie Mortal Kombat . Además, el artículo Mortal Kombat no menciona al "guerrero elegido". Chosen Warrior no existe, Chosen Warrior existió pero aparentemente fue eliminado en 2006 con un método que ahora está fuera de proceso y sería revertido (eliminado debido a que es una doble redirección) por un administrador/editor que no ha editado desde entonces. 2009, y Chosen Warrior (Mortal Kombat) es un {{ R con historia }} debido a que estuvo sujeto a un WP:BLAR en 2006; la historia del artículo parece insinuar que este tema se refiere a un grupo de personajes parecidos a protagonistas de la serie Mortal Kombat ... pero ningún artículo parece definir actualmente el término de una manera que pueda ser útil para los lectores... Steel1943 ( charla ) 21:32, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Táchelo por vago. Técnicamente es el Elegido, no el Guerrero Elegido. - Lenticel ( discusión ) 00:44, 4 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
También podría referirse a Sabor#Metálico . 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 21:13, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Dabificar . No estoy seguro de cuál puede considerarse como objetivo principal: Lenticel ( discusión ) 00:46, 4 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Travis Scott (personaje de Los Sims)
No se menciona en el artículo de destino, lo que deja a los lectores que intentan encontrar información sobre el tema de esta redirección sin nada. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 21:03, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Hermandad de la Sombra
No se menciona en el artículo de destino, lo que deja a los lectores que intentan encontrar información sobre este tema sin información en este destino. Sin embargo, hay menciones de la frase "Hermandad de las Sombras" en varios artículos sobre subtemas del objetivo, pero dado que se menciona en "múltiples", no está claro por qué se prefiere un objetivo alternativo a otro. Además, Brotherhood of Shadow es una {{ R con historia }} debido a que estuvo sujeta a WP:BLAR en 2007. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 20:05, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Ese es un nombre aparentemente recurrente para una secta que... honestamente, el único patrón real que puedo ver en ella es estar dirigida por Quan Chi . También es el nombre de una serie de juegos no relacionados que no parece tener artículo. Yo diría eliminar , ya que a casi nadie le importa este nombre, y dudo que los juegos tengan sus propios artículos. Ni siquiera estaba seguro de que a Ed le importara el culto en ese momento, ya que matar reptiles tenía prioridad.
- ¿En cuanto a cuál ortografía es la correcta? La lista de personajes de Mortal Kombat menciona y usa directamente... dos de ellos. de paso. y el culto no se menciona en absoluto en la sección de quan chi. Supongo que matar reptiles también tenía prioridad sobre decidir un nombre cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 20:24, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
La paradoja del más es menos
Ninguna mención al objetivo. Significa liberdade (ella/ella) ( charla ) 19:24, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener . Ahora mencionado en el objetivo: sin una fuente todavía, pero existe una. jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 23:12, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Paradoja de menos es más
El objetivo es otra redirección; ninguna redirección se nombra en el segundo objetivo. Significa liberdade (ella/ella) ( charla ) 19:24, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Nombrado en el objetivo. Curvas cerradas en forma de cal ( charla ) 19:34, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Omití la doble redirección que tenía la redirección nominada y actualicé el objetivo en la nominación. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 20:09, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener . "Menos es más" es casi sinónimo de "más es menos", y es fácil confundir uno con el otro. jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 23:06, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- También encontré una fuente que describe "más es menos" y "menos es más". jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 23:14, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Iconoclasia en el Reino Unido durante las protestas de George Floyd
Aunque así se llamaba este artículo, la destrucción de imágenes no suele denominarse iconoclasia a menos que dichos ataques tengan motivaciones religiosas. Esta redirección puede dejar a los lectores curiosos que escriben "iconoclasia" en la barra de búsqueda con la impresión sin fundamento de que los ataques llevados a cabo contra monumentos seculares (en nombre de causas seculares como Black Lives Matter ) pueden ser de naturaleza religiosa. – MrPersonHumanGuy ( discusión ) 18:07, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- El artículo de conservación débil se creó el 12 de junio de 2020 y se trasladó de este título el 13 de junio de 2020, por lo que no hay argumentos sólidos para conservarlo por razones específicamente históricas. Por otro lado, la comparación con la iconoclasia se ha hecho repetidamente, por ejemplo, artículo de la escuela de teología de la Universidad de Chicago, edición del Museo Maxwell de Antropología, blog De Grutyer (mi búsqueda). En general, el uso existe y no lo originamos nosotros, y no creo que sea realmente incorrecto: nuestro artículo lo define como "más frecuentemente por razones religiosas o políticas", y esta es definitivamente una razón política. Por otro lado, esta frase exacta parece un término de búsqueda poco probable y no creo que tenga un beneficio particularmente importante. Rusalkii ( discusión ) 19:17, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener . La iconoclasia puede deberse a razones políticas. Tenemos un artículo titulado Iconoclasia de la Revolución Francesa , que sería mejor titulado "Iconoclasia en la Revolución Francesa" – en cuyo caso aparecería otro ejemplo de iconoclasia política cuando uno escribe "iconoclasia" en la barra de búsqueda. Es lamentable que el artículo "Acciones contra monumentos conmemorativos..." haya sido movido de su título original, más WP:CONCISE . Ham II ( discusión ) 08:23, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Consérvelo como {{ R from move }} y por ser una descripción precisa del contenido del artículo. Thryduulf ( charla ) 10:48, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Helstinky
Esto no parece una broma lo suficientemente común como para justificar una redirección (incluso después del video del escuadrón de crueldad de pirocynical ), y tampoco "hellstinky". gracioso, pero no exactamente plausible cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 16:27, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Borrar . El mayor éxito para mí en Google es en realidad un hurón. Thryduulf ( charla ) 10:51, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Multiplicar transitivo
La acción grupal transitiva multiplicativa parece ser el concepto más general. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 16:15, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Sí, este es un caso claro para cambiar el objetivo. Charles Matthews ( charla ) 16:19, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Plantilla: cuadro de información de AFC
El título de esta redirección es extremadamente ambiguo y debería eliminarse. KingSkyLord ( discusión | contribuciones ) 15:11, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminación fuerte porque es un cuadro de navegación, no un cuadro de información Mach61 17:46, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Retarget débil para el envío de Plantilla:AfC como un objetivo plausible para los nuevos editores que intentan enviar su primer artículo a través de WP:AFC y no conocen la diferencia entre el retarget propuesto y un cuadro de información . (Sin embargo, soy "débil", ya que el envío de Plantilla:AfC no es un cuadro de información, lo que significa que reorientar el envío a Plantilla:AfC puede desanimar a los editores experimentados). Steel1943 ( discusión ) 20:15, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar para liberar para uso futuro y por nom. R move pero solo se usó durante <2 semanas. Respublik ( discusión ) 21:03, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Caine (personaje de videojuego)
con todo respeto ¿quién? no se menciona en el objetivo, y tampoco parece que haya otros caines de videojuegos que deba conocer, y este parece usarse como su propio nombre con más frecuencia que como una ortografía alternativa de "cain". , ¿Entonces lo que hay que hacer? cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 14:35, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
(personaje de videojuego)
esos son nombres. los comunes también. ¿Qué sucede si, digamos, Pokémon tiene may y drake (en los mismos juegos , nada menos), off tiene hugo, fnaf tiene freddy (sí, wikipedia simplemente agrupa esas dos grafías juntas) y hay al menos más daves? ¿Que puedo contar con un dedo? cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 14:31, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Pensándolo bien, ¿por qué los nominé? Podría haberlos redirigido yo mismo como lo hice con makoto (personaje de videojuego) 4 minutos antes de comenzar con esto. ¿Es este un buen momento para mantener/reorientar rápidamente? cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 20:29, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Nadie más ha comentado sobre esto, por lo que el retiro es una opción. mwwv converse ∫ ediciones 03:51, 4 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
TurboHD
término vago, aparentemente utilizado principalmente para cámaras cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 14:18, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- También debería mencionar hd remix , un término aparentemente vago, del cual ssf2thdr parece ser el tema principal por... mucho. aunque no lo nomine cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 16:04, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Súper Turbo
un término vago sin un tema principal claro (o al menos no uno que tenga un artículo), y no parece ser una abreviatura común para ssf2t fuera de las discusiones sobre Street Fighter cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 14:15, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
SSFII
super smash flash 2 es un juego que también existe y tiene ssf2 como redireccionamiento. déjelo como está (más o menos una nota de sombrero) ya que super Streets™ 2 es "un poco más popular" que super smash flash 2, dabify o reoriente esto a super smash flash 2 ya que parece que el acrónimo se usa más comúnmente para referirse a ¿él? Me inclino un poco por la primera opción debido al número romano, pero eh cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 14:09, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Edición Turbo
Iba a reorientarme a SF2 Turbo, pero luego me acordé... otras cosas también tienen ediciones turbo. algunos teléfonos Motorola , remasterizaciones de juegos de carreras, autos, etc. Ahora estoy dividido entre eliminar y dabificar cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 14:02, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Victoria perfecta
un término usado para ganar una ronda sin ser golpeado, usado en casi todos los juegos de lucha que no lo llaman "impecable". Sin embargo, sorprendentemente parece haber un tema principal real para este término. Lo más sorprendente es que ese tema principal parece ser Light Yagami . No estoy seguro de si debería redireccionarse a él o al juego de lucha (y agregar una mención) cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 13:28, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Borrar . Tema no mencionado en ninguna de las páginas posibles, y no creo que tenga especial peso incluirlo. Rusalkii ( discusión ) 19:28, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Borrar . Si bien Light Yagami es el resultado más común en mis búsquedas, no alcanza el nivel de tema principal. Si buscamos dónde se menciona en Wikipedia, obtenemos Kanzen Shouri Daiteioh (coincidencia parcial del título con la traducción literal del título), en medio de una larga cita en Søren Kierkegaard#Journals , Samurai Deeper Kyo' #Episodes (título del episodio 16) , Sucker Punch (película de 2011)#Trama , Darren Manning#Carrera internacional , ninguna de las cuales son más que menciones pasajeras y títulos de fuentes de Paul Collingwood , Sayo Hayakawa y Manchester United FC 9-0 Ipswich Town FC . Thryduulf ( charla ) 11:01, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Virginia y camión 11, reno
Combinación improbable de mayúsculas y puntuación Rusalkii ( discusión ) 05:49, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- borrar . las mayúsculas están bien, a quién le importa, pero no tengo idea de qué está haciendo esa coma allí cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 14:13, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener débil ya que no es ambiguo, pero es un poco improbable. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 19:44, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Fortaleza débil según Steel. Es poco probable, pero no completamente inverosímil, que esto se copie de una construcción como "el virginia & truckee 11, reno, era...". Thryduulf ( charla ) 11:04, 3 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
niña sapo
No mencionado en el objetivo. Este término tampoco se menciona en ninguna parte de Wikipedia. Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 19:06, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Débil mantener como plausible {{ R de nombre incorrecto }} . Steel1943 ( discusión ) 19:58, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Es más probable que "Girl Toad" se refiera a un sapo hembra que a un personaje ficticio de Mario . Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 20:45, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- " Niña " es una palabra antropomórfica, por lo que no es probable. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 20:50, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- No es más probable que se refiera a los Toads de la franquicia de Mario que a los sapos reales. Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 21:19, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Los personajes "Toad" de la franquicia Mario son antropomórficos; los sapos reales no lo son. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 21:32, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener : término de búsqueda razonable. C F A 💬 20:06, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Las únicas menciones de "Girl Toad" en Wikipedia son aquellas relacionadas con esta discusión, lo que sugiere que este no es un término de búsqueda razonable. Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 23:03, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eso realmente no importa. Aún podría ser un término de búsqueda razonable incluso si no se menciona en ninguna parte de Wikipedia. Alguien podría escribir "Girl Toad" en la barra de búsqueda. Ha recibido 700 páginas vistas a lo largo de su historia, lo que sugiere que se ha utilizado al menos algunas veces. De todos modos, las redirecciones son baratas. No hay razón para que esto deba eliminarse. C F A 💬 23:25, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- A menos que se pueda agregar una mención al objetivo con una fuente confiable , esta redirección debe eliminarse, ya que actualmente no hay información sobre "Girl Toad" en Wikipedia. Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 23:31, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Sigue siendo un término de búsqueda razonable, se mencione o no en el artículo de destino. C F A 💬 23:33, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Proporcione una fuente confiable que utilice "Girl Toad" en referencia a Toadette . De lo contrario, esta redirección es WP:OR y debería eliminarse. Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 23:34, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Claro, puede ser una síntesis hasta cierto punto, pero no es necesario que las redirecciones sean "correctas" o neutrales. Si busca en Google "niña sapo", el primer resultado es Toadette, lo que indica que es el objetivo correcto y un término de búsqueda plausible. C F A 💬 23:39, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Los resultados de la Búsqueda de Google para "niña sapo" no provienen de fuentes confiables. La mitad de ellos no tienen relación con Toadette. Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 23:51, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- No dije que lo fueran, pero aun así muestra que es un término de búsqueda plausible. Si realmente crees que esto es un problema, también apoyaría una página de desambiguación con Toadette y Toad (rana). C F A 💬 23:57, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- la redirección parece vaga. Hay otros sapos claramente femeninos, principalmente en los juegos de rol. Es como si "mujer humana" fuera redirigido a Hillary Clinton o algo así. Por ahora, diría que volvamos al rojo hasta que llegue a su fin. está cubierto cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 13:47, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener débil Creo que es un término de búsqueda plausible para aquellos que olvidaron el nombre Toadette. El título está en mayúscula ( WP:DIFFCAPS ), lo que indica un nombre propio, y "niña" es un término antropomórfico. Wikipedia no tiene ningún artículo sobre sapos hembra ficticios. California ¡háblame!15:12, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 04:45, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Comentar que los resultados de Google parecen estar divididos aproximadamente 50/50 entre varias ranas hembras de la vida real y Toadette. Tampoco tenemos ningún contenido de sapos hembra en particular, el más cloest es Frog#Reproduction . Rusalkii ( discusión ) 19:33, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Pueblo Sapo
No mencionado en el objetivo. Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 19:10, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener : parece usarse con frecuencia y apunta al objetivo apropiado. C F A 💬 20:19, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Redirigir términos a artículos donde no se menciona el término resulta confuso para los lectores. Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 20:41, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Que yo sepa, solo aparece con este nombre exacto en los juegos de rol (y en la película), y parece más asociado con Paper Mario que con Mario y Luigi. No estoy seguro de si merece la pena conservarlo, pero optaré por un eh cogsan abrumadoramente fuerte (regañarme) (acecharme) 13:40, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 04:42, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
turista maga
No se menciona en el artículo de destino, lo que no deja clara la conexión entre esta frase específica y el objetivo. Aunque MAGA es una frase bastante conocida, el uso de la frase de la redirección en motores de terceros no arroja resultados para "MAGA", sino que arroja resultados para el turismo en ciudades denominadas "Maga". Steel1943 ( discusión ) 19:33, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener . Este término se utiliza para ayudar a categorizar a las personas involucradas en los acontecimientos del 6 de enero de 2021 en el Capitolio de Estados Unidos. Por ejemplo, consulte Lucas, Ryan. “Dónde se encuentra la investigación de la insurrección del 6 de enero, un año después”, NPR (6 de enero de 2022): “El año pasado, el FBI y el público aprendieron mucho sobre quiénes eran los alborotadores y qué los motivó, y caen en tres categorías generales. Los primeros son los llamados turistas MAGA. Estos son partidarios de Trump que entraron al Capitolio pero no participaron en actos violentos ni destruyeron propiedades”. Si hay otros usos importantes de este término, recomendaría una página de desambiguación. Cualquier cosa que quieras ( charla ) 08:05, 25 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 04:37, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Imágenes teóricas con un alto número de píxeles
No se menciona en el objetivo y el contenido del artículo sobre gigapíxeles no contiene ninguna relevancia técnica que pueda aplicarse a imágenes de peta, exa, zetta o yottapixel. La diferencia de tamaño entre una imagen de gigapíxeles y una de yottapíxeles es enorme: impresa a 300 ppp (impresión estándar con calidad de revista), una imagen de gigapíxeles sería aproximadamente del tamaño de una cama tamaño king, mientras que una imagen de yottapíxeles tendría aproximadamente la misma superficie que Neptuno. , y (si se almacena a 24 bits/píxel) requeriría 6000 veces la capacidad de almacenamiento de todo AWS para almacenarlo como png.
Nota: Petapixel apareció recientemente en RFD y fue eliminado, pero tuvo circunstancias diferentes debido a la existencia del artículo no relacionado PetaPixel . BugGhost 🦗👻 15:50, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Estos parecen términos de búsqueda plausibles; Alguien puede tener curiosidad por ver si estas designaciones superiores existen o se utilizan para algo. jp × g 🗯️ 00:45, 16 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Continúe : sigo sintiendo lo mismo que sentí con respecto a la RfD anterior. Básicamente, si algún escritor de ciencia ficción o de otro tipo especulativo menciona un prefijo SI absurdamente grande refiriéndose al tamaño de una imagen, entonces el lector debería poder buscar el concepto de "imagen absurdamente grande" en Wikipedia, incluso si el nombre exacto El nivel de "absurdamente grande" no se menciona específicamente. Fieari ( discusión ) 00:13, 19 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,Hola, soy Josh(discusión) 14:52, 25 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Mantener . El argumento de Fieari me parece convincente. Thryduulf ( charla ) 18:46, 25 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar por WP: PANDORA y el hecho de que estas no son cosas comunes que existan en este momento. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 15:56, 26 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Les imploro que lean el ensayo de lunamann . mwwv converse ∫ ediciones 16:29, 26 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- WP:PANDORA es una tontería engañosa que contradice a WP:OTHERSTUFF y causa mucho más daño que las redirecciones que recomienda eliminar. Qué tan comunes sean estas imágenes es irrelevante; lo que importa es que las personas que quieran leer sobre ellas puedan encontrar el artículo relevante. Thryduulf ( charla ) 20:22, 26 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Volver a poner en venta el comentario:¿Conservar o eliminar?
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 04:24, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Elimine (pero mantenga Petapixel ) con una posible excepción para la imagen de Petapixel si se puede encontrar información bien obtenida sobre imágenes de petapixel (por ejemplo, 40M x 25M) en particular en cualquier lugar dentro del espacio principal. – MrPersonHumanGuy ( discusión ) 19:28, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
trazar
Redirección inútil. La redirección apunta a un párrafo inexistente. Eso podría corregirse. Sin embargo, la cadena de destino 'tracel' no se encuentra en ninguna parte de la página y no hay ninguna referencia obvia a un nombre comercial de droga. Recomendar eliminación. Robert McClenon ( discusión ) 03:48, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Juegos de Zelda en desarrollo
No existe tal lista en el objetivo. Además, la existencia de la redirección podría llevar a los lectores a creer que al menos un juego de Zelda está en desarrollo en todo momento, lo cual no se puede garantizar que sea cierto. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 01:15, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Polla (jerga)
Esto debería eliminarse. Una {{ r del sinónimo }} en este caso es engañosa, ya que el objetivo es un artículo de WP:WORDISSUBJECT que no menciona este título en absoluto, y cock tiene una etimología separada de "dick". No creo que sea deseable reorientar el objetivo al pene ; "gallo" bien puede ser una palabra notable en sí misma. Mach61 00:45, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Crear un artículo Cock (jerga) . Esto parece ser de sentido común, ya que es bastante conocido universalmente y, al igual que Dick (jerga) , tiene varios sentidos relacionados que pueden explorarse. Sólo el New Partridge Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English tiene cinco páginas completas. He redactado algunas líneas en la página. BD2412 T 02:29, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) BD2412 T 02:24, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Paraguas a prueba de viento
La palabra "a prueba de viento" no se menciona en ninguna parte del artículo de destino. Eso, y sin contexto, un tema así parece difícil de definir ya que el objetivo está destinado a proteger al usuario de varios elementos, incluido el viento... lo que significa que el paraguas en sí no es a prueba de viento... simplemente bloquea el viento... e incluso entonces, sin los arneses adecuados, puede salir volando. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 00:44, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar por nom - Lenticel ( discusión ) 02:38, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Los paraguas a prueba de viento están diseñados para resistir la destrucción de los fuertes vientos. Refinar a Umbrella#Modern use , que describe algunos de esos esfuerzos. - Eureka Lott 21:32, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Keep Una forma de paraguas muy conocida y muy utilizada. Si no hay información al respecto en el artículo, es una omisión grave que debería corregirse. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 23:37, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Agosto 1
Eli Kowaz
No mencionado en el objetivo. Había mucho (probablemente demasiado) contenido sobre él antes, que fue eliminado por Usuario:IPFcomms con el argumento de que ya no estaba en la organización. No estoy seguro de si el contenido sobre él debería estar en el artículo, pero si no es así, la redirección debería eliminarse. Rusalkii ( charla ) 23:26, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Borrar . La AfD dio argumentos para dudar de su notoriedad incluso ante el IPF; ahora que ya no está allí, no tiene sentido que la redirección sea a IPF. Longhornsg ( charla ) 23:46, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- El comentario @ CFA restauró la sección que cubre a Eli Kowaz, con la justificación "Restaurando la sección eliminada por el editor promocional". Si la sección se mantiene (lo cual creo que no debería ser así, vea, por ejemplo, LinkedIn confirmando que ya no está en la empresa), la redirección también debería mantenerse. Rusalkii ( discusión ) 19:43, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 21:29, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Apoyo de los estadounidenses blancos al presidente Donald Trump
Un par de inquietudes con la redacción de estas redirecciones:
- Es extraño que una redirección con esta frase se dirija a 1 de 4 páginas de la campaña presidencial relacionadas con la candidatura de Donald Trump a la presidencia. ¿Cómo puede haber alguna garantía de que los lectores que buscan esta frase estén buscando este objetivo?
- Específicamente para el objetivo actual, la primera redirección contiene la frase "Presidente Donald Trump"; Donald Trump no fue presidente hasta después de la campaña de 2016.
Steel1943 (discusión) 20:20, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[respuesta]
- ¿Quizás las opiniones raciales sobre Donald Trump serían un mejor objetivo? Nightscream ( discusión ) 21:59, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- No particularmente. Las redirecciones aluden a grupos de personas que apoyan a Donald Trump, no a las opiniones de Donald Trump que podrían ser potencialmente racistas. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 05:09, 25 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 21:28, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Apoyo a Donald Trump
La redirección no parece identificar ni describir al objetivo. El objetivo tiene más que ver con ideologías y no con aquellos que apoyan a Donald Trump. Puede que haya un objetivo plausible, pero no estoy seguro. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 20:16, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- El objetivo es el trumpismo , que de hecho es una descripción razonable. Nightscream ( discusión ) 21:55, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener El artículo trata sobre la ideología de Trump y la de sus seguidores. El lede deja bastante claro que los dos están inextricablemente vinculados y no parece haber un objetivo mejor. - Charla del presidente · contribuciones ( Talkback ) 15:51, 25 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Retarget to Encuestas de opinión sobre la administración de Donald Trump con una nota al trumpismo . Nuestro artículo sobre el trumpismo no trata sobre apoyar a Donald Trump, sino sobre la ideología que surgió de él. California ¡háblame!16:03, 25 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Volver a poner en venta el comentario:¿Mantener o reorientar?
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 21:28, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
brock harrison
No quiero dar más detalles sobre cuántas capas de fanon oscuro es esto, así que espero que la explicación pueda comenzar y terminar en "eso es fanmade" cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 16:13, 19 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
- Comente que aparentemente hay una vieja entrevista con el VA de Brock donde menciona esta información, pero de todos modos parece bastante trivial. Enlazando el enlace archivado de la entrevista que pude encontrar, pero admito que no estoy seguro de si esto influiría en algo de cualquier manera. ¿Se ha considerado alguna vez a Magneton? Pokelego999 ( discusión ) 18:27, 19 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- ...eh. No debatiré la canonicidad de eso (por muy discutible que sea su canonicidad, consulte la palabra de San Pablo en los tropos de televisión), pero sugeriré no arriesgarme a agregarlo para evitar habilitar ese lado del fanfic fanfic de pokémon fandom cogsan (regañarme) ( acecharme) 01:15, 21 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar como sinónimo muy oscuro incluso si es cierto - Lenticel ( discusión ) 02:42, 28 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Comentario No tengo intención de votar sobre esto, pero es plausible que el apellido se le haya dado al personaje en algunos doblajes internacionales. Al menos personalmente recuerdo que este es el caso y que, por lo tanto, la R es un término de búsqueda plausible, pero sería muy difícil de verificar ahora, debido a la necesidad de buscar posibles alteraciones distorsionadas/localizadas del nombre. Respublik ( discusión ) 21:11, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 21:22, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
2024 intento de asesinato
Demasiado general. MSMST1543 ( discusión ) 02:03, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Redirigir a Lista de asesinatos u otro artículo . No hay razón para creer que este, solo 24 horas después de que se conoció la noticia, será el tema principal y, por lo tanto, no debería haberse creado una redirección. Sospecho que también hubo bastantes intentos de asesinato en 2024 que no ocurrieron en los EE. UU., por lo que esto también podría considerarse una redirección centrada en los EE. UU. Si no se realiza una redirección, se debe eliminar -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez ( Usuario / ¡di hola! ) 02:10, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]- Como otros han señalado, en realidad no existe un buen objetivo de redireccionamiento ahora, así que aclaro mi voto para apoyar la creación de una página de desambiguación en esta página para enumerar los (intentos) de asesinato en 2024. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez ( Usuario / saluda ) 03:56, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Estoy en contra de esta redirección. El mundo no gira en torno a Estados Unidos y su política interna. Esto perpetuaría el sesgo sistémico centrado en Estados Unidos en el sitio. JDiala ( discusión ) 02:11, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Comentario : Supongo que esto podría redirigirse a Lista de personas que sobrevivieron a los intentos de asesinato , aunque en ese artículo solo figura otro intento en 2024 (un intento contra un parlamentario de Corea del Sur). El intento de asesinato de Donald Trump es claramente el tema principal en este momento del año, y se supone que no debemos especular sobre si eso cambiará en el futuro. También es un término de búsqueda muy plausible. C F A 💬 02:12, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Se supone que no debemos especular de ninguna manera. Y es obvio que llamar a algo el tema principal "en este momento del año" viola WP:RECENTISM . No cambiamos, ni siquiera creamos, redirecciones solo porque algo es lo que usted cree que es el tema principal en este momento. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez ( Usuario / ¡saluda! ) 02:17, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Claro, se podría argumentar que es recienteismo, pero el sentido común también es útil aquí. Se trató de un intento de asesinato de un ex presidente de Estados Unidos, posiblemente la persona más poderosa del mundo. Fue la primera vez que sucedió algo así en más de 40 años. Esta no es una noticia estadounidense, es una noticia internacional. De todos modos, no me opongo a una redirección a la lista. C F A 💬 02:24, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Sentido común no significa sentido común centrado en Estados Unidos. Todo su argumento aquí se basa en una visión centrada en Estados Unidos de que el único asesinato (intento) importante en 2024 es el cometido contra el ex presidente de Estados Unidos. Y es por eso que estoy votando para redirigir a otro tema o eliminarlo. Porque ese no es un argumento válido. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez ( Usuario / ¡saluda! ) 02:32, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Como señalé, solo hubo dos intentos de asesinato en 2024 (hasta ahora) lo suficientemente notables como para ser incluidos en la lista anterior. En realidad, no es un enfoque centrado en Estados Unidos porque un intento de asesinato contra un ex líder mundial (de posiblemente el país más poderoso del mundo) será inherentemente más significativo que la mayoría de otros intentos, tanto en el país de origen como a nivel internacional. Esta fue una historia que apareció en los periódicos locales de todo el mundo. Si un ex presidente de Corea del Sur y un congresista de Estados Unidos fueran objeto de intentos de asesinato, el del ex presidente sería el tema principal. Esto no tiene mucho que ver con el sesgo local. C F A 💬 02:45, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar o dabificar . Ni siquiera es el único intento con artículo propio en 2024 ( Robert Fico ). Otro ejemplo más de americentrismo. Liliana UwU ( charla / contribuciones ) 02:48, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Gracias. Sabía que había visto otro intento de asesinato de un jefe de estado o líder de un país en 2024, pero no podía precisarlo. Para mayor claridad, este hecho debe considerarse parte de mi argumento anterior. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez ( Usuario / ¡saluda! ) 02:50, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Este es un argumento válido. Extrañé a Robert Fico porque no estaba en la lista de personas que sobrevivieron a los intentos de asesinato . No hay un tema principal claro, por lo que cambio mi voto para eliminar la ambigüedad . C F A 💬 02:51, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar la ambigüedad según Liliana, ya que Trump no es el único intento de asesinato en 2024. Di (ellos-ellos) ( charla ) 03:20, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar ambigüedad : Sí, porque ha habido otros intentos contra otras personas, Trump no es el centro del universo y Wikipedia no debería centrarse tanto en la perspectiva estadounidense, etc. 72.14.126.22 ( discusión ) 03:54, 15 de julio 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminación rápida Robert Fico, Lee Jae-Myung, probablemente una docena de empresarios rusos, Volodymyr Zelenskyy y Mohammed Deif (por enésima vez), todos pueden reclamar ese título. Estados Unidos no es especial en ese sentido. Bremps ... 05:45, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar según Bremps, o dabificar en Lista de intentos de asesinato en 2024 o similar. Rosbif73 ( discusión ) 09:28, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Este RfD se refiere al destino de la página con el nombre exacto de "intento de asesinato de 2024". Una redirección se define por su nombre. No se necesita una RfD para crear nuevas páginas. Acerca de su idea para una nueva página: una página titulada "Lista de intentos de asesinato en 2024" sería una lista, no un dab. - Alalch E. 11:45, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar ambigüedad : según los comentarios anteriores Señor cerdo serio 10:11, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar o desambigificar según lo anterior. Esto es demasiado general para redirigirlo a un solo caso, el intento de asesinato de Robert Fico , el primer ministro de Eslovaquia, también ocurrió este año (lo agregué a la lista de artículos anterior, no tengo idea de por qué no estaba allí ya). . Las búsquedas en Google indican que también ha habido (eventos descritos como) intentos de asesinato de Mohammed Deif y Volodymyr Zelensky al menos. Thryduulf ( discusión ) 11:05, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mi adición se revirtió porque, a pesar del título del artículo, no es una lista de personas sino una lista de personas que no eran jefes de estado o de gobierno actuales (este último tiene una lista separada ). Véase también mi propuesta de fusión de las dos listas . Me opongo a reorientar esta redirección a cualquiera de las listas. Thryduulf ( charla ) 23:37, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar o reorientar para anclar en Lista de personas que sobrevivieron a intentos de asesinato . Creé el intento de asesinato de 2020 para ilustrar (no creo que esta redirección y otras redirecciones similares sean o serían especialmente buenas, pero esta no es una creación de WP:POINTed , ya que está dentro de límites aceptables desde mi perspectiva). Oponerse al toque . Un toque prácticamente duplicaría la lista, y WP:NOTDUP no se aplica a las páginas de desambiguación cuando el mismo contenido se muestra en una lista (no es un método de navegación diferente; el método de navegación proporcionado sería esencialmente el mismo).— Alalch E. 11 :42, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- El problema con una redirección es que hay dos listas de intentos de asesinato separadas: Lista de personas que sobrevivieron a los intentos de asesinato y Lista de jefes de estado y de gobierno que sobrevivieron a los intentos de asesinato . "Intento de asesinato en 2024" no se refiere específicamente a ninguno de los dos, por lo que una redirección sería completamente arbitraria. Thryduulf ha propuesto que se fusionen estas dos listas, lo cual apoyo, pero a menos que eso suceda, una página de desambiguación sería la mejor opción. Nada se duplica en este caso cuando hay dos listas de todos los tiempos separadas. C F A 💬 17:15, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar Estoy de acuerdo en que es demasiado genérico ya que, como se señaló, ha habido otros. Crouch, Swale ( charla ) 18:12, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar por WP:BIAS ; los resultados de búsqueda manejarían esta multa sin necesidad de compilar manualmente un índice de búsqueda separado, lo que sin duda también sufriría un sesgo sistémico basado en varios comentarios aquí. Ivanvector ( Discusión / Ediciones ) 19:04, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Retarget to Lista de personas que sobrevivieron a intentos de asesinato donde hay dos casos relevantes: Lenticel ( discusión ) 00:14, 17 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Hay un tercer caso relevante en la Lista de jefes de Estado y de Gobierno que sobrevivieron a intentos de asesinato , ninguno de los cuales es primario sobre el otro. Es por eso que (a) propuse la fusión (¡por favor dé su opinión!) y (b) me opongo a la reorientación de cualquiera de los dos. Thryduulf ( charla ) 11:38, 17 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Dabify solo entre las listas apropiadas en lugar de individuos/eventos específicos. Por nombre, el término es demasiado genérico para estimar lo que una persona podría estar buscando y, en general, un editor que desee una lista de detalles debería crear, bueno, una lista con todos los requisitos relevantes cumplidos, pero el término de búsqueda es plausible y específico. basta con tener una página DAB que les oriente hacia la localización de ese artículo específico. Respublik ( discusión ) 20:54, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : no estoy convencido de que las desambiguaciones o redirecciones propuestas sean siempre útiles para el lector, en parte debido a la vaguedad de "intento". Los resultados de la búsqueda parecen más seguros que compilar un índice conjunto ad hoc de intentos de asesinato en 2024. firmado, charla de Rosguill 19:39, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 20:39, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Eliminar o redirigir a una página dab para intentos de asesinato en 2024. - Inútilmente vago y demasiado centrado en Estados Unidos. Pregúntale a cualquier cliente habitual de PIA . - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 18:35, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Plantilla: Chilodontidae-stub
No usado. Chilodontidae es una ortografía anterior (ahora considerada incorrecta) para una familia de gasterópodos. Chilodontidae es una ortografía actual y correcta para una familia de peces. Consulte la página dab de Chilodontidae . La redirección de plantilla utiliza la ortografía de la familia de los peces para redirigir a una plantilla de clasificación de fragmentos para la familia de los gasterópodos Plantdrew ( discusión ) 02:00, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- ¿Quiso decir que Chi l odontidae es una ortografía actual y correcta para una familia de peces? jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 01:51, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Vaya, sí. Se corrigió la ortografía anterior. Plantdrew ( discusión ) 19:51, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,firmado, charla de Rosguill 19:28, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
expresionista alemán
El cine expresionista alemán es un movimiento cinematográfico que surgió a partir de un movimiento expresionista alemán en las artes visuales. Creo que las mejores soluciones serían reorientar el expresionismo , ya que se define de manera más amplia para incluir el cine y otros medios, o convertir el expresionismo alemán / expresionismo alemán en una página de desambiguación. hinnk ( discusión ) 18:51, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Esqueleto (Marvel Comics)
Sinceramente, ni siquiera nominar esto para verlo eliminado o redirigido a alguna instancia real de Skeletor en un cómic de Marvel (no encontré ninguno, pero no soy tan bueno mirando, así que eh), simplemente lo estoy haciendo. porque es divertido. No es una comparación común por lo que he visto aunque cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 18:04, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : no me sorprendería que el enemigo habitual de Taskmaster usara este nombre para insultarlo, dado que su apariencia habitual toma algunas señales de Skeletor, pero los cómics de Masters of the Universe nunca fueron hechos por Marvel, sino por DC Comics . - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 18:40, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
El cartel
Estas redirecciones deben eliminarse. El nombre del desarrollador y un error tipográfico se redirigen a su primer juego notable; el artículo en sí menciona la historia del desarrollador, pero la redirección apenas se usa fuera de los artículos de sus juegos, así como en los artículos de la lista de juegos. No creo que se use lo suficiente como para merecer una redirección propia, como la mayoría de los otros desarrolladores independientes con juegos notables con sus propios artículos. MimirIsSmart ( discusión ) 06:05, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Comentario : el artículo en sí menciona que el historial del desarrollador es una razón suficiente para mantener la redirección. Como mucho se podría discutir WP:XY porque el otro juego del estudio, Heave Ho , también tiene un artículo. No se ve ningún error tipográfico. IceWelder [ ✉ ] 10:10, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Su85b
No hay mención en la página de destino. Sin embargo, el tanque parece ser real, por lo que tal vez se podría agregar una mención al artículo. Sin embargo, la única fuente que puedo encontrar es un artículo en un sitio web llamado "Warspot" que no parece tener mucha verificación de datos. - Blaze Wolf Talk blaze__wolf 04:19, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Definitivamente existe, aunque la mayoría de los muchos éxitos en inglés se relacionan con su aparición en World of Tanks (más comúnmente representado como "SU-85b", la versión sin guiones recibe muchos éxitos), no es solo que tengamos una imagen. en Archivo:СУ-85Б.webp, lo que me llevó a descubrir que las Wikipedias rusa y ucraniana tienen artículos al respecto. Hay una mención en Lista de vehículos de combate blindados por país#Unión Soviética , pero eso no dice más que se basó en el prototipo SU-76; SU-76#Variants tiene una frase. Borrador: SU-85B se eliminó bajo G13 en 2020, pero era solo una oración "El SU-85B era un prototipo de cazacarros soviético basado en el SU-76 ". Si decidimos no eliminar esto, entonces SU-85B debería crearse como una redirección al mismo objetivo, pero no sé cuál sería ese objetivo o si sería mejor eliminarlo según WP:REDLINK . Thryduulf ( charla ) 10:55, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Vuelva a apuntar al SU-76 donde se menciona como variante. Schützenpanzer (Discusión) 13:52, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
31 de Julio
Idioma extranjero redirecciona a Kamala Harris
Eliminar según WP:R#DELETE #8 En particular, redirige en un idioma distinto del inglés a una página cuyo tema no está relacionado con ese idioma . estar8806 ( charla ) ★ 23:58, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Tenga en cuenta que he fusionado estas nominaciones relacionadas que tenían un fundamento idéntico. Thryduulf ( charla ) 10:35, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar todo por nom y WP:FORRED . Kamala Harris no tiene ninguna afinidad particular con el chino (tradicional, transliterado o simplificado respectivamente). Thryduulf ( charla ) 10:38, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar Simplemente no creamos redireccionamientos usando diferentes alfabetos. Harris no está asociado con China de ninguna forma, lo que hace que la existencia de estas redirecciones pierda aún más sentido. Charla de Keivan.f 13:16, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Continúe basándose en el razonamiento de Sun8908 en el RfD original . - Charla del presidente · contribuciones ( Talkback ) 13:56, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener La mayoría, si no todas, las fuentes en idioma chino en EE. UU., Reino Unido, Hong Kong y Taiwán utilizan 賀錦麗 como nombre de Harris. Secundando el razonamiento de Sun8908 sobre la RfD original. Charla de Bailmoney27 20:13, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Gira por el Reino Unido y Europa 2024
Nombre genérico: si bien este es un éxito común, el primer resultado de Google es una gira de Hozier y la primera página incluye varias otras giras de 2024 por el Reino Unido y Europa. Eliminar o eliminar la ambigüedad. Rusalkii ( discusión ) 23:49, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar Definitivamente hay varias otras giras por el Reino Unido y Europa, además el nombre es demasiado genérico. HorrorLover555 ( discusión ) 04:49, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Borrar . Demasiado genérico para ser una página de desambiguación útil. Thryduulf ( charla ) 10:39, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Marqués de Elmdor
Eliminar todos. Alguna vez hubo redireccionamientos a Personajes de Final Fantasy Tactics , que fueron redirigidos a Final Fantasy Tactics y ya no se mencionan en el artículo. El artículo es de clase FA, por lo que es poco probable que alguna vez se agreguen al artículo. Mika1h ( discusión ) 23:47, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Stand (arma)
...esto es confuso. Las posiciones no son en sí mismas armas inherentes. son manifestaciones físicas del espíritu de lucha que a veces tienen manos con las que se pueden señalar las cosas con tanta fuerza que explotan. algunos, como el emperador y anubis, toman la forma de armas (una pistola y una espada respectivamente), y la herencia para el futuro tiene luchadores con "puestos de armas" (aunque ese es un término mecánico, y dos de los tres puestos de los luchadores con puestos de armas son enredaderas). y una sombra), pero la mayoría de los stands no lo hacen, no se usan exclusivamente como armas y nada más, ni se consideran armas y nada más. algunos, como la mermelada de perlas y el thoth (un potenciador de alimentos y un libro respectivamente), carecen por completo de uso en combate directo. Todo esto es para decir que creo que los atriles se pueden usar más fácilmente para golpear cosas cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 19:23, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Comente, inclinándome a mantener lo primero que pensé fue que suena posiblemente plausible que alguien que busca lo que usted describe use este término de búsqueda para intentar encontrarlo, especialmente si solo lo recuerda a medias (que es una de las razones por las que podrían estar buscándolo). , que se inclina por mantener. Mi segundo pensamiento fue significa armas, el único artículo que encontré es Montaje de arma , pero no estoy seguro de que sea una excelente combinación de objetivo de búsqueda, incluso ignorando el objetivo actual (pero tampoco estoy seguro de que lo sea). No es genial; FWIW no se menciona en Stand (desambiguación) ). Thryduulf ( charla ) 21:41, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar vago. Es mejor dejar que la función de búsqueda haga lo suyo. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 19:46, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : el único objetivo real que se me ocurre es JoJo's Bizarre Adventure: Heritage for the Future , donde hay una clasificación de "Soporte de armas". Pero incluso entonces, esto no serviría de nada como redireccionamiento allí, ya que la información es demasiado detallada y el término nunca se usa en el artículo en sí. - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 18:29, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Ruvaush
No se menciona en el artículo de destino... y no estoy seguro de si debería serlo o no. Según los motores de búsqueda, esta palabra se refiere a una palabra romaní para el objetivo. Además, en los archivos de la página de discusión de la página de destino, Talk:Werewolf/Archive 1#Ruvaush se refiere a lo que posiblemente sea/significa esta palabra. Puede ser útil volver a agregar esta palabra al artículo en algún lugar, pero ni siquiera estoy seguro de si la redirección se refiere a un tema lo suficientemente similar al objetivo, además de no estar seguro de si la redirección tiene algún problema con WP:FORRED. (pero lo más probable es que no, ya que parece que el concepto de "hombre lobo" puede tener raíces romaníes). Steel1943 ( discusión ) 21:14, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, Toadette Editar! 11:33, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Vemront
Creo que se trata de un error ortográfico improbable. Espero no hacer perder el tiempo a la gente en lugar de simplemente usar R3, pero pensé que probablemente debería pecar de cauteloso. Clovermoss 🍀 (discusión) 04:11, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener : error ortográfico plausible, las redirecciones son baratas BugGhost 🦗👻 09:20, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Sorprendido por las afirmaciones a continuación de que este error tipográfico es inverosímil (es solo una simple transposición), así que lo explicaré aquí para que no parezca un razonamiento de evasión. No me siento muy convencido de esto de ninguna manera, pero con cosas como esta mi lógica es que alguien lo hizo, por lo que probablemente pensó que era útil (consulte WP:RFD#KEEP #5 -
Alguien los encuentra útiles. Sugerencia: si alguien dice que encuentra útil una redirección, probablemente así sea
). No creo que sea útil eliminarlo . Si alguien busca "Vemront", los eliminadores aquí dicen que Wikipedia debería simplemente encogerse de hombros y decir "no, no tengo idea de lo que quieres decir con eso". ¿Habría creado esta redirección? No. ¿Lo eliminaría después de que otra persona lo haya hecho? También no. No creo que los argumentos de la caja de Pandora sean muy persuasivos (ver este ensayo ). Nadie gana nada al eliminarlo: no hay un lugar competitivo para esta redirección al objetivo y no hay confusión sobre hacia dónde pretenden ir. Wikipedia no mejora al eliminarlo, deberíamos pensar un poco en esta redirección (y en otras similares), mantenerla y seguir adelante. No creo que decir "las redirecciones son baratas" deba ser controvertido, porque son baratas y, por lo tanto, eliminar cosas como "Vemront" → "Vermont" no es particularmente productivo BugGhost 🦗👻 20:18, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ responder ]
- Sigue : tiendo a estar de acuerdo con BugGhost . De hecho, creé la redirección después de haber transpuesto accidentalmente las letras mientras escribía rápidamente.
- Si fuera probable que dirigiera a un usuario a la página equivocada (donde Vemront estaba posiblemente relacionado con una página no relacionada con Vermont ), me sentiría diferente. Pero no conozco ninguna página con un nombre similar.
- Pero mis sentimientos no son muy fuertes al respecto y, con argumentos en contra razonables, no sería tan difícil convencerme de lo contrario.
- Trackerwannabe ( charla ) 16:25, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Cambiando mi opinión a Fortaleza Débil . Hay una autora llamada Ann Vremont y (lo que parece ser) una agencia inmobiliaria llamada Vremont .- Resulta que Vremont es un error ortográfico de Vemront (que, a su vez, es un error tipográfico de Vermont ). Lamentablemente, parezco ser un experto en errores tipográficos. :-/
- Trackerwannabe ( discusión ) 11:37, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminación rápida de WP:R3 , error tipográfico poco probable. También según WP:PANDORA , el número de posibles redirecciones a partir de transposiciones simples probablemente supere los 100 millones. ¿Qué hace que éste sea tan especial? 35.139.154.158 ( charla ) 16:53, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
No sé qué tan especial lo hace esto, pero las teclas E y R están una al lado de la otra en el teclado QUERTY , lo que puede haber contribuido a que lo escribiera mal. Me imagino que restringir dichas transposiciones a claves adyacentes reduciría significativamente la estimación de las redirecciones resultantes. Restringirlos a combinaciones comunes de dos letras (de las cuales ésta es una) probablemente reduciría aún más la estimación.- Ese razonamiento habría tenido sentido si estuviéramos hablando de "V re mont" → "V er mont", pero estamos discutiendo "Ve mr ont" → "Ve rm ont".
- Trackerwannabe ( discusión ) 11:50, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Borrar . Creado hace aproximadamente dos semanas, es poco probable que haya un error ortográfico, debería ser elegible para {{ Db-r3 }} si su eliminación no fue controvertida. Además, citar WP:CHEAP está empezando a convertirse en una excusa para explicar por qué algo debería conservarse, y está empezando a volverse tan controvertido como citar WP:PANDORA . (¡Lo siento, IP encima de mí!) Steel1943 ( discusión ) 17:34, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Yo distinguiría entre palabras mal escritas y palabras mal escritas . (Aunque admito que existe cierto grado de superposición entre los dos). Como a menudo se busca en Wikipedia escribiendo, yo diría que tener redireccionamientos para palabras comúnmente mal escritas es útil. Desafortunadamente, no conozco ninguna forma de determinar la probabilidad de que se produzca un error de escritura específico de una palabra.
- Trackerwannabe ( charla ) 18:28, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Quería estar seguro ahora que tengo botones 😅 Me sentí lo suficientemente seguro como para eliminar directamente una redirección similar (Lista de anfibios de Vemront). Clovermoss 🍀 (discusión) 01:47, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar como inverosímil, la búsqueda de Google entre comillas devuelve un poco el estado, pero algunos de los resultados pueden no serlo y no parece indicar que sea probable. Crouch, Swale ( discusión ) 18:07, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener débil , parece un error tipográfico relativamente común que solo se refiere al estado. Rusalkii ( discusión ) 02:18, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
30 de julio
rodando
"Trun" no aparece en ninguna parte del objetivo. ~ Tom.Reding ( charla ⋅ dgaf ) 21:18, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : redirección inverosímil a menos/hasta que el término se defina y se obtenga en el artículo del glosario. - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 23:45, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : estoy de acuerdo con Jéské, si no está en el artículo (y, a juzgar por las búsquedas de culpa, nunca estuvo en el artículo), esta redirección no debería existir ya que no es útil para el lector. BugGhost 🦗👻 16:48, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
R. Tucker
No es habitual tener una redirección de una sola inicial y un apellido sin una buena razón, y no puedo determinar cuál es esa razón aquí. "R. Tucker" es muy ambiguo: ver Tucker (apellido)#R . Shhhnotsoloud ( discusión ) 20:50, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Asesinato del hombre delgado
No se produjo ningún asesinato. Redirección inverosímil. Blethering Scot 19:58, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantenga una idea errónea o un recuerdo erróneo muy plausible; de hecho, pensé que se trataba de un asesinato. Thryduulf ( charla ) 21:52, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener por Thryduulf. Es plausible suponer que algunas personas, cuando busquen el artículo, no sabrán que la víctima sobrevivió. hinnk ( discusión ) 19:12, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Burlar
esa es una palabra común. ¿qué hacer? cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 19:03, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Este parece ser el único elemento de la enciclopedia que utiliza este título exacto. Recomiendo perfeccionar el vínculo a Neil Cicierega#Discografía y agregar una nota de sombrero a la sección de discografía del artículo de destino que vincula a OutSmart . - Eureka Lott 14:28, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
mundo pero con números!
vago como una mierda. Ni siquiera pienses que el mundo 1-1 sería un objetivo adecuado para el mundo 1 cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 18:52, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : Por ser ambiguo. Cuando vi esto por primera vez, también pensé inmediatamente en el juego Super Mario Bros. Hola hombre, soy Josh ( discusión ) 20:01, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : irremediablemente vago. "Mundo #" es un lenguaje común en los videojuegos para referirse a colecciones de niveles, incluso si el juego en sí no utiliza el término. - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 23:48, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Ni siquiera solo en los juegos. Un saludo a toda la industria del cómic y todo lo relacionado tangencialmente con ella por no poder evitar hacer un multiverso numerado cada 15 segundos cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:14, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Neckrampage rojo el juego
montón muy inverosímil de errores de escritura que comenzaron como... un ad cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:40, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
El deber llama
Esa es una frase vaga. No tengo idea de si debería redirigirse suavemente a wikt: el deber llama, o simplemente eliminarse, pero el término no parece estar asociado principalmente con Bulletstorm cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:29, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Duke Nukem cuando sea
El mismo caso que "Duke Nukem para nunca" a continuación, objetivo diferente por alguna razón. aunque parece un poco más común cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:27, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar La historia es que cada vez que los medios preguntaron sobre el lanzamiento de Duke Nukem Forever antes de su lanzamiento en 2011, el desarrollador dijo: "Cuando esté listo". pero nunca cuando sea, por lo que esta redirección no es posible. – The Grid ( discusión ) 12:56, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
punto sin sentido. cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:24, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Duke Nukem para nunca
en realidad es bastante divertido, pero aparentemente no se usa comúnmente incluso antes de que se lanzara el juego cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:20, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Duque 4
vago, y podría decirse que ni siquiera es la cuarta entrega principal (no es que eso signifique mucho con dick kickem) cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:18, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : de hecho, es inútilmente vago, pero en lo que respecta a las entregas principales, Forever es de hecho la cuarta entrega principal; Se lanzaron cuatro juegos Gaiden durante el prolongado desarrollo de Forever ( Time to Kill , Zero Hour , Land of the Babes , Manhattan Project ). - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 18:17, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Duke Nukem (¡nombres de empresas!)
dos objetivos diferentes para cada uno. No voy a entrar aquí en la confusa historia del apogeo y los reinos 3D, ¿sería el artículo de la serie el mejor objetivo aquí? cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:09, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Reorientar a Duke Nukem : sí, el artículo de la serie sería el objetivo adecuado aquí. No hay ninguna razón por la que "<franquicia> (<empresa>)" deba redirigir a la página de un personaje de esa franquicia. - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 18:20, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
policía cerdo
De manera similar a Doom, que en realidad no inventó los demonios ni las escopetas, Duke Nukem 3D no inventó el concepto de comparar a la policía estadounidense con el tocino crudo. también son un enemigo recurrente en la serie, por lo que probablemente sería mejor redirigirlo al artículo de la serie de todos modos cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:03, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Espera, encontré el tema principal, está en la lista de términos de jerga relacionados con la policía , en p, así que votaré por la reorientación allí. agradecimientos a la mención sin fuente de duki nuki allí cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:15, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : redirigir a PRST no tiene sentido aquí ya que el término del argot es simplemente "cerdo". Si bien los policías porcinos son un enemigo común en Duke Nukem , son solo uno de una multitud de enemigos diseñados en base a la jerga (otro ejemplo es el policía porcino literal en Pizza Tower ), por lo que el término es demasiado ambiguo para justificar una redirección hoy en día. . - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 23:53, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Pensé más bien en "eso sería un desambiguador sin paréntesis", y parece al menos usarse con suficiente frecuencia como para justificar no desterrar la redirección a Brasil, pero es bastante justo.
- Además, los enemigos de la torre de pizza se llaman hamkuffs, no puedo creer que pases por alto un punto tan importante de la trama smh smh smh mi cabeza cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 20:26, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- A alguien que nunca haya jugado a Pizza Tower los llamaría como los ve, y ve agentes de la ley porcinos. - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 18:21, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
neonewtoniano
Esto no se explica en el objetivo. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 08:44, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : el término no se usa en ningún otro lugar de Wikipedia y veo demasiados usos variados en las fuentes como para que esté dirigido a uno específico. Este caso de uso ciertamente no es el primero que sugeriría. Si tuvieran que ir a algún lado, creo que el newtoniano tendría más sentido, pero sin el uso más amplio en el sitio, parece como conservarlos por conservarlos. QuietHere ( charla | contribuciones ) 14:23, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Reorientar al newtoniano como un término ambiguo: parece usarse ([1][2][3][4], etc.). Puede que esté justificada una mención en alguna parte. C F A 💬 20:17, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 09:25, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Wiimake
Neologismo no mencionado en el objetivo. El término no se menciona en ninguna parte de Wikipedia. Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 05:40, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Puedo verlo (y el "Wii-make" alternativo) utilizándose en algunas coberturas de noticias, sobre todo en "El caso de los Wiimakes", pero no lo suficiente como para exigir su uso en el artículo de destino ni nada por el estilo. No estoy seguro de que cause algún daño, pero el caso de uso también parece limitado. Supongo que me inclino por la eliminación, pero no demasiado. QuietHere ( charla | contribuciones ) 14:18, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- CASI sugeriría reorientar la parodia vagamente en forma de klonoa con la que fuimos maldecidos en 2008 como una media broma, ya que ese parece ser el tema principal de todo el período (no por una buena razón, claro está), pero eso' Sería barato. Tal como está, no tengo idea si sería mejor redirigirlo a alguna lista de juegos de Wii, agregar una mención allí o eliminarlo, pero seguiré agregando una mención por ahora cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 14: 35, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener : el término se menciona en fuentes confiables (Nintendo Life, Wired, eurogamer.net). No hay motivo para eliminarlo. Obviamente no es notable por sí solo, pero se justifica una redirección. Apoyaría una mención en el remake de videojuegos o en otro lugar, pero eso no es necesario para conservarlo. C F A 💬 20:13, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Vuelva a apuntar a Nintendo Wii y mencione el fenómeno en alguna parte. Es un término de jerga real que se usaba anteriormente para portar juegos a Wii y al mismo tiempo agregar controles de movimiento. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 23:36, 25 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 09:25, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Palestina
Lo más probable es que sea un error ortográfico de Palestina - CAMPEÓN ( discusión ) ( contribuciones ) ( registros ) 07:50, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Reorientar a Palestina : aparentemente un error ortográfico común: [5] Ca ¡háblame!10:07, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- @Ca :, @ Glades12 :, @ Jéské Couriano : Sólo quiero señalar que Palestina no es un artículo, sino otra redirección que apunta al Estado de Palestina . ¡CiclónYoris habla! 08:23, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Reorientar a Palestina (desambiguación) . Este es un error ortográfico plausible de Palestina (el estado), pero también es una transcripción fonética plausible para lugares pronunciados /pælɛsˈtiːn/ (pales-TEEN), como lo son al menos algunos lugares en los EE. UU. Thryduulf ( charla ) 21:58, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
ciudad baguette
Término de búsqueda improbable no mencionado en el objetivo. Clovermoss 🍀 (discusión) 06:39, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Parece un {{ r de meme }} , pero es un meme bastante pequeño. La mayoría de los usos en línea parecen referirse a restaurantes. jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 07:01, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
reorientar a Francia eliminar como una broma tan común y predecible que, de manera realista, podría referirse a cualquier lugar de Francia cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:06, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
desinfectante de arena
Pide a Joe Biden que suspenda su campaña presidencial de Estados Unidos en 2024
La lista de demócratas que se opusieron a la campaña presidencial de Joe Biden para 2024 podría ser un mejor objetivo. ‑‑ Neveselbert ( discusión · contribuciones · correo electrónico ) 18:45, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Vuelva a dirigirse a la campaña presidencial de Joe Biden 2024#Llamadas para retirarse, que explica el problema y tiene un enlace para ver también a la lista. C F A 💬 19:49, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Reorientación por CFA. Thryduulf ( charla ) 13:03, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar demasiado tiempo para que sea una redirección útil. IP75 ( discusión ) 02:02, 25 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- ¿Por qué? Si alguien está buscando información enciclopédica sobre este tema, es muy probable que utilice este término de búsqueda. Thryduulf ( discusión ) 09:18, 25 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- ... El artículo de destino también tiene un título largo, por lo que no entiendo este argumento. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 18:44, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- (involucrado) Estoy de acuerdo con cualquier opción, apóyate en mantener la redirección actual . Por contexto, la opción que sugiere la CFA era el objetivo de redireccionamiento hasta que Biden realmente se retiró. Pensé que sería una buena idea redirigir las llamadas para retirar al resultado final del retiro. Personalmente, creo que el contenido sobre las llamadas previas a la retirada de Biden también debería estar en la página sobre el resultado final. Anónimo sin nombre ( charla ) 21:02, 25 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 03:50, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Poder flor
cosas llamadas "flor de poder" han estado en tres juegos de Mario hasta ahora (aunque todos son cosas diferentes), y ninguna de ellas parece ser el objetivo principal del término cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 17:33, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 03:49, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
azul republicano
¿Eh? * Pppery * ha comenzado... 05:40, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eso suena más a fangames de Pokémon que a términos políticos. eliminar por "qué" cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 13:58, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar Busqué en duck.com y no vi fuentes que usaran este término. Lo mejor que encontré es la campaña presidencial de Ron Paul 2012 § movimiento "Republicano Azul" Ca ¡háblame!16:16, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 03:47, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Eliminar el rojo demócrata y reorientar el azul republicano a azul republicano . No tenemos artículos sobre ninguno de estos temas, ya que esos partidos políticos no usan esos colores y, a juzgar por las estadísticas, nadie los está buscando tampoco. La segunda preferencia es reorientar ambos al color político . BugGhost 🦗👻 11:37, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Los colores utilizados para las elecciones presidenciales generales de Estados Unidos cambiaron entre rojo y azul antes de las elecciones estadounidenses de 2000. Los republicanos fueron azules en las elecciones de 1980 [6] y 1976. [7] Creo que una redirección tanto a los estados rojos como a los estados azules es la versión más plausible aquí. – The Grid ( discusión ) 13:06, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Los partidos demócratas de otros países utilizan el rojo. Thryduulf ( charla ) 13:11, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Estado seguro
Primacía dudosa: la búsqueda de un "estado seguro" me está brindando muchas formas no políticas de que un estado pueda ser seguro. Sugerir su eliminación a menos que se encuentre un objetivo mejor. * Pppery * ha comenzado... 05:38, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- eliminar por vago, ya que también está sujeto a diferentes definiciones de "estado". podría referirse a un movimiento en un juego de lucha que está más bloqueado por lo que sabemos cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 14:00, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Cambiar a la página de desambiguación . Hacer un mejor servicio a nuestros lectores que señalar solo un significado o ninguno. - Matthiaspaul ( discusión ) 19:17, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Borrar . Esto es demasiado vago. De hecho, creo que es mejor para el lector no saturar la herramienta de búsqueda con una redirección potencialmente confusa. Shhhnotsoloud ( charla ) 19:25, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Borrar . Redirección vaga con posible sesgo en referencia a cualquiera de los temas del objetivo actual. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 21:16, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Comentario: La redirección se creó en 2011 para señalar el estado Swing que dice
... los estados que regularmente se inclinan hacia un solo partido se conocen como "estados seguros" (o más específicamente como "estados rojos" y "estados azules" dependiendo del tendencia partidista)
. Jay 💬 15:21, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 03:46, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Suprímase dada la ambigüedad de la propia palabra "estado". - CAMPEÓN ( discusión ) ( contribuciones ) ( registros ) 07:53, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC ) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar o desambig . Esto es vago. Lo primero que pensé fue en el contexto de la informática (cf. Modo seguro ), los resultados de búsqueda muestran que se utiliza en el contexto de la política estadounidense (y la política australiana ), hardware electrónico (por ejemplo, temporizador Watchdog , interruptor de hombre muerto ), procesos industriales (por ejemplo, Fukushima) . Planta de energía nuclear de Daiichi ), clasificación de los estados de la India según la seguridad de las mujeres , la aeronavegabilidad y otros. La ingeniería de confiabilidad parece cubrir algunos de los usos del hardware, pero el estado que es "seguro" depende en gran medida del contexto. Si alguien puede crear una desambigación para esto, lo apoyo, pero es mejor eliminarlo si no puede. Thryduulf ( discusión ) 09:30, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
deformación incorrecta
No existe ninguna mención de "deformación incorrecta" en el objetivo. Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 00:36, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Es un error de videojuego en el que una deformación te envía al lugar equivocado. La cobertura secundaria es escasa pero aceptable: Ars Technica y Kotaku tienen un párrafo y una oración respectivamente. Sin embargo , no lo conectan con la ruptura de secuencia , por lo que es difícil justificar describirlo en ese artículo. ¿Quizás podría incluirse en el Glosario de términos de videojuegos ?
- También es un episodio de Meta Runner , pero definitivamente ese no es el tema principal . jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 08:11, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- En realidad, Ars Technica dice que una deformación incorrecta permite
saltarse una gran sección del Mundo 8-4
; me suena como una ruptura de secuencia. jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 08:16, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]- es un error de interrupción de secuencia utilizado en los speedruns de Super Mario Bros 3, por lo que todos son técnicamente correctos cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 15:57, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- El término parece usarse prácticamente exclusivamente para referirse a un error de carrera rápida en Super Mario Bros. 3 , por lo que yo diría que lo reorienten . o al speedrunning si no hay espacio para agregar una mención a otros objetivos cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 11:24, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Mantener : la deformación incorrecta es una técnica/fallo en el que una deformación (por ejemplo, a través de una puerta/pantalla de carga/teletransportador/lo que sea) te lleva al lugar "incorrecto", que es utilizado por los interruptores de secuencia. Se utiliza en varios juegos de Mario (al menos SMB y SMB3 originales, probablemente otros), juegos de Pokémon, Elden Ring y otros. Debe mantenerse porque una deformación incorrecta es una forma de romper la secuencia. También estaría bien reorientar a Glitching o Speedrunning si el consenso se inclina en esa dirección. BugGhost 🦗👻 11:56, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]- Reoriente a Warp (videojuegos) según lo siguiente: mucho mejor apunte a BugGhost 🦗👻 09:22, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Vuelva a apuntar a Warp (videojuegos) y agregue algún tipo de explicación. He oído que se usa para describir numerosos fallos en los que la teletransportación hace que un personaje termine en el nivel o área equivocada. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 22:34, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Vuelva a apuntar a Warp (videojuegos) y edite el objetivo para agregar una explicación : una warp incorrecta, aunque a menudo se usa para romper secuencias, no siempre es beneficiosa (es plausible que una warp incorrecta pueda enviarlo de regreso o, como en el caso de World). 1 en Super Mario Bros. , bloquea suavemente el juego), por lo que el artículo sobre deformaciones de videojuegos es un objetivo más razonable. - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 23:57, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar a menos que se mencione en alguna parte, ya que el concepto de "deformación" ocurre en varias formas de ficción, y una de las más importantes que me vienen a la mente es Star Trek , transportar personas al lugar equivocado de un planeta o lo que sea... Steel1943 ( discusión ) 20 :52, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- De ahí que los retargets incluyan agregar una explicación al objetivo. "Wrong warp" es un término común de speedrunning para explotar un error en un sistema warp para llegar a un lugar al que se supone que no debes ir todavía. - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 18:24, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
29 de julio
Ríos de San Juan
Eliminar porque no tiene sentido, como lo señala en este resumen] por Usuario: Masato.harada Enyavar ( charla ) 18:18, 9 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar El nombre del personaje de Jane Eyre es St John Rivers. Incluso si se corrigiera el nombre de la página de redireccionamiento, no hay ninguna razón para su existencia en comparación con docenas de otros personajes de igual importancia en la novela. Masato.harada ( discusión ) 18:57, 9 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Es cierto que no estoy informado, pero diría que mantener débil es una ortografía plausible, como es el caso de " john saint john " que redirige al nombre "propio". Por otra parte, ¿hay alguna razón técnica extraña por la que la nominación tuvo un formato incorrecto? cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 19:09, 9 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener según Cogsan. No veo cómo esto es en absoluto inverosímil, especialmente si uno lo escucha auditivamente. - Charla del presidente · contribuciones ( Talkback ) 23:46, 9 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Tenga en cuenta que lo encontré mientras buscaba los distintos ríos de Saint John , y esa página de desambiguación ya enumera el personaje pero también proporciona enlaces a los significados más probables. Si lo mantenemos, cambiamos el destino a la página de desactivación. (Y si desea nominaciones con el formato adecuado, le sugiero simplificar este procedimiento de nominación bizantino). - Enyavar ( discusión ) 05:27, 10 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Re "si se escucha auditivamente": el nombre San Juan se pronuncia Sinjen, no San Juan, por lo que no debería haber confusión. Masato.harada ( discusión ) 08:00, 10 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mira, el problema es asumir que el lector sabría que esa es la pronunciación correcta. Personalmente, asumiría que sería "Saint John" de la charla del presidente de EE. UU. · contribuciones ( Talkback ) 00:27, 11 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Reorientar el objetivo a Saint John River por Enyavar. El personaje aparece allí y es un término de búsqueda plausible. Tevildo ( charla ) 17:57, 10 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Comentario Originalmente creé la redirección porque era una respuesta de cuestionario en Wikipedia: respuestas de Stanford Archive . Saludos, Jack ( discusión ) 11:08, 11 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 08:10, 17 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- "Reorientarse al río Saint John" . Mucho mejor como página de desambiguación. C F A 💬 18:31, 19 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- MANTENER . No es una tontería. "St" es la abreviatura de "santo", incluso cuando se usa en nombre de alguien. Las personas que tienen "Santo" en sus nombres casi siempre usan la versión abreviada, pero puedo señalar algunas excepciones notables. Recuerdo que Susan Saint James se ponía muy de mal humor cuando los periodistas no deletreaban "santo". Isaac Rabinovitch ( discusión ) 19:54, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Reoriente este término ambiguo a la página de desambiguación Saint John River . Shhhnotsoloud ( discusión ) 09:07, 21 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener según Isaac. No es una tontería. Todas las demás entradas en la página de desambiguación son
singulares sin la 's'; esta es la más cercana al personaje de Jane Eyre. Jay 💬 14:46, 27 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Steel1943 (charla) 23:37, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Wikipedia: SECCIÓN ACTUAL
Target no explica qué es una "sección actual". Utiliza WP:CURRENTSECTION como ejemplo de atajo, por alguna razón, pero eso no lo convierte en un buen objetivo para ese atajo. En todo caso, espero que esto explique cómo vincular automáticamente a la parte superior de la sección que estás comentando, lo que posiblemente podría ser útil si la sección es muy larga. Pero a menos que eso exista (lo cual no creo que exista), este atajo se queda sin ningún buen objetivo. jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 22:22, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar por nom. Para que exista "WP:CURRENTSECTION", de alguna manera debería tratarse del concepto de una sección actual. Tenga en cuenta que si alguien está marcando "¿Qué enlaces hay aquí?", la docena de enlaces enumerados parecen ser copias y pegados de este texto WP:REDACT y son anteriores a la creación de la redirección. Dan Bloch ( discusión ) 06:32, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
¡Vada a bordo, cazzo!
Ambos artículos tienen aproximadamente el mismo contenido sobre esta frase, al igual que el artículo de Francesco Schettino , a quien estaba dirigido el comentario. El desastre del Costa Concordia es el artículo de mayor nivel, por lo que, en igualdad de condiciones, parece el mejor objetivo. Pero es probable que alguien que lo busque busque el contexto específico de la frase. Por lo tanto, refinar/reorientar al desastre de Costa Concordia § Evacuación . Por si sirve de algo, probablemente haya suficientes fuentes sobre la frase para un artículo propio. - Tamzin [ se necesita cetáceo ] ( ellos|xe ) 21:44, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Carretera Dara Shikoh, Nueva Delhi.
Término de búsqueda improbable con todas las modificaciones y el punto al final del título. Hola hombre, soy Josh ( discusión ) 19:35, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar como libro de texto WP: redirección NO NATURAL. (También tiene menos de un mes y solo una página vista). jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 22:25, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Elimine demasiados errores para que sea una redirección útil: Lenticel ( discusión ) 00:26, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : las mayúsculas y la puntuación fallidas hacen que esto no sea práctico como redireccionamiento. - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 00:00, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Los grandes éxitos de The Hollies (álbum de Alemania Occidental de 1968)
No puedo encontrar nada en Enwiki sobre un álbum de 1968, aquí, o en la discografía de The Hollies (que en cualquier caso sería un mejor objetivo). Shhhnotsoloud ( discusión ) 09:27, 9 de junio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Retarget to Hollies' Greatest , un álbum de grandes éxitos de 1968 de The Hollies que se lanzó en Alemania. Thryduulf ( discusión ) 09:51, 9 de junio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Retarget según Thryduulf: parece que ese es el artículo previsto BugGhost 🪲👻 09:07, 11 de junio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Borrar . Hollies' Greatest es un álbum británico lanzado por Parlophone. Según el historial de edición, el álbum de Alemania Occidental fue lanzado por Hansa Records. Las listas de canciones también son diferentes, lo que prácticamente confirma que se trata de ediciones diferentes. - Tavix ( discusión ) 16:12, 11 de junio de 2024 (UTC ) [ respuesta ]
- No puedo encontrar ninguna fuente no generada por el usuario, pero estoy bastante seguro de que el álbum de Alemania Occidental y Greatest de Hollies están de hecho separados (parecen tener portadas separadas para uno), por lo que no es una buena opción de retargeting. . Reorientar la discografía sería una buena opción si estuviera allí, pero no lo está, y sé muy poco sobre el área para buscar fuentes apropiadas para agregarla a la discografía. Skarmory (discusión • contribuciones) 21:48, 16 de junio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,firmado, charla de Rosguill 18:16, 17 de junio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Volver a poner en venta el comentario:¿Reorientar o eliminar?
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 04:35, 25 de junio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- De acuerdo con Tavix y Skarmory en que no hay ningún objetivo. Restaurar y etiquetar como sin referencia. Jay 💬 17:58, 5 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Volver a publicar comentario:Un intento más...
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Steel1943 (discusión) 18:21, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Bowser de papel
Aún no hay ningún juego con ese título (dales tiempo), ¿no sería un mejor objetivo la lista de personajes de Paper Mario ? cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 20:20, 8 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Oh espera
- No hay ninguna sección específica para Bowser allí, y su artículo no lo menciona en Paper Mario más allá de "él estuvo allí". olvídese de la reorientación, voto para eliminar porque es inútil cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 20:51, 8 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Borrar . Mantenerse bajo la idea de que podrían hacer un juego con ese título es inútil y , además , infundado. Tal como están las cosas ahora, no tenemos ninguna información sobre la inclusión de Bowser en la serie Paper Mario, ni sobre ningún otro lugar donde algo pueda ser conocido como 'Paper Bowser'. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( UTC ) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar , aunque realmente debería tener una sección en la lista de personajes de Paper Mario . QuicoleJR ( discusión ) 03:26, 10 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar por nom. - Un assiolo ( discusión ) 15:13, 10 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : nos falta información sobre este tema y no deberíamos afirmar que la tenemos cuando no la tenemos. A veces la mera existencia de una redirección puede ser informativa incluso sin mencionarla, pero este no es uno de esos casos. Fieari ( discusión ) 07:28, 11 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Reorientar a Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam . Hay algo de contenido en ese artículo sobre Paper Bowser (¡como un personaje independiente para empezar, no solo "Bowser convencional en un estilo de arte en papel"!). AFAIK Paper Jam es el único juego en el que Paper Bowser es un personaje por derecho propio, lo que convierte a ese juego en un posible objetivo. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung , mello hola! ( ¡Adiós! ) 08:14, 14 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Comentario sobre cómo volver a publicar:para obtener una opinión sobre la sugerencia de reorientación.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Jay 💬 15:27, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- ¡Reorientación por Mellohi! arriba. Parece un objetivo razonable y el personaje se menciona en el artículo. C F A 💬 19:40, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Steel1943 (charla) 17:47, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Vuelva a dirigirse a la Lista de personajes de Paper Mario , donde se menciona a Bowser como un personaje importante de la serie. Sin oposición a Paper Jam si se considera un mejor objetivo. ¿Se ha considerado alguna vez a Magneton? Pokelego999 ( discusión ) 02:18, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- ¡Reorientación por Mellohi! . Por si sirve de algo, mariowiki:Paper Bowser está de acuerdo. jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 22:28, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Reorientar a Mario & Luigi: Paper Jam como la redirección más plausible; Fuera de ese juego (en lo que respecta al contexto de Paper Mario ), Paper Bowser es simplemente Bowser pero muy fino. La caracterización de Bowser en los títulos de Mario RPG es consistentemente más o menos un híbrido del Profesor Caos y Ted Baxter , siendo Paper Jam la única vez que esta caracterización cambia debido a que hay dos Bowsers separados. - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 00:07, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften
Estos términos no aparecen en el artículo de destino. Bgsu98 (Discusión) 02:33, 13 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Comentario Parece ser un subeditor de Springer Science+Business Media , que publica trabajos de sociología en lengua alemana según este artículo de dewiki. California ¡háblame!15:51, 13 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Esos títulos todavía no aparecen en ninguna parte del artículo. Bgsu98 (Discusión) 00:06, 14 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Volver a publicar comentario:esperando que alguien agregue una mención al artículo de destino.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, —Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mello hola! (¡Adiós!) 09:47, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Eliminar hasta que se agregue contenido, en cuyo caso se podrán volver a crear. Jay 💬 15:35, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Conserve una de las numerosas impresiones de Springer (ver de:Springer VS). La solución aquí es expandir el artículo, no eliminar la redirección. Headbomb { t · c · p · b } 16:08, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Comentario para volver a publicar:Parece que todavía necesitamos agregar una mención para formar consenso...
Agregue nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Steel1943 (discusión) 16:28, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Ratón veloz
Lo busqué en Google y la mayoría puede referirse a Speedy Gonzales. ¿Deberíamos reorientarnos hacia Speedy Gonzales o hacer una desambiguación? 88.235.215.238 (discusión) 06:32, 13 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Puedo respaldar la desambiguación. Sin embargo, mis búsquedas en Google no muestran de manera destacada ni los objetivos actuales ni los sugeridos; encuentro muchos ratones que resultan ser rápidos, particularmente juguetes para gatos y otras cosas aleatorias. Encuentro éxitos para las montañas rusas mencionadas en Dream World (Tailandia)#Dream Garden y Barry's Amusements# Aunque antiguas atracciones. Thryduulf ( charla ) 08:17, 13 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 08:39, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Eliminar por no tener buen target y para favorecer los resultados de búsqueda. El único contenido decente que tenemos es una entrada a la mesa en Barry's Amusements . Jay 💬 15:40, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Volver a poner en venta el comentario:¿desambiguación o eliminación?
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Steel1943 (discusión) 16:28, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Los resultados de la búsqueda no son útiles en este caso porque no incluyen algunos objetivos probables, por lo que sigo pensando que la desambiguación es significativamente mejor para los lectores que la eliminación, especialmente porque esos resultados de búsqueda inútiles pueden estar a varios clics o toques de distancia. Thryduulf ( charla ) 18:47, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Vuelva a dirigirse a una página dab según lo anterior. - Jéské Couriano v^_^v críticas de hilos 00:09, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Estos términos no aparecen en el artículo de destino. Bgsu98 (Discusión) 02:36, 13 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Borrar . Estos términos se referían a una sección que se eliminó en abril y que había estado etiquetada como sin referencia durante casi dos años. - Eureka Lott 16:36, 13 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener . El futurismo de casete arroja muchos resultados en Google, por ejemplo [8] y [9]. Y además, parece que el texto de destino ha sido restaurado, completo con referencias. El término ampliamente aceptado hoy en día para este período de retrofuturismo se conoce más comúnmente como Futurismo de Cassette , pero también se ha utilizado el término Formicapunk (aunque no se usa tan ampliamente como Futurismo de Cassette). Formicapunk se utilizó en el webcomic Bouletcorp de John Boulet. El enlace original es http://web.archive.org/web/20230623104540/https://bouletcorp.com/2011/07/07/formicapunk/ (esta es una versión de archivo de Internet ya que la URL actual no funciona) , pero aun así, Google sigue mostrando enlaces a otras páginas que utilizan ese término. Así que sospecho que todavía hay algunas personas que conocen el término Formicapunk pero no el término Cassette Fururism. Pero aun así, definitivamente mantendría la redirección para el futurismo Cassette , pero no estoy tan seguro de si la caricatura Formicapunk de Bouletcorp es lo suficientemente notable a pesar de que el término Formicapunk ha cobrado vida propia. Ae-a ( discusión ) 22:22, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 08:37, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Eliminar ambos por WP:NEO . Parece ser una invención de los editores de TVTropes y Wikipedia no es TVTropes. Sin duda, el punk de los 80 existe, pero se cita en Wikis y fuentes no confiables en un intento de hacer que la sección parezca merecida. Hasta que alguien pueda encontrar una fuente real, no debería estar allí. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 22:05, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Sólo señalar que estoy de acuerdo con esta evaluación. Las redirecciones deben eliminarse y la reintroducción del material debe revertirse debido a la falta de WP:RS . - Eureka Lott 21:25, 26 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantenga pero también considere Retarget . En el caso de que estos redireccionamientos no sean apropiados para su artículo actual, tal vez un mejor destino sería Retrofuturism#Genres y la categoría de redireccionamiento podría cambiarse a "R con posibilidades". Además, el texto en la sección Derivados de Cyberpunk#Futurismo de casete/Formicapunk podría moverse allí. Ae-a ( discusión ) 00:54, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Steel1943 (discusión) 16:27, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Plantilla: advertencia de vacío
Confuso. Al igual que {{ db-empty }} , uno esperaría que se refiriera a A3 o C1 pero no a A1, lo que explícitamente no se aplica a artículos vacíos. Nickps ( discusión ) 13:50, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminación débil Estoy de acuerdo en que es ambiguo y yo diría que C1 es más probable ya que es más probable que una categoría se considere vacía porque, aunque ahora es posible crear una página vacía (nunca solía estarlo), no lo haría. Es de esperar que se creen muchos artículos que estén completamente vacíos y, a menudo, se borran cuando G7 termina siendo el criterio utilizado para eliminar. También me gustaría señalar que Plantilla:Empty redirige a Plantilla:Db-empty, por lo que consideraría eliminarlos a ambos. Crouch, Swale ( discusión ) 19:08, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Creo que {{ vacío }} está bien tal como está. {{ db-empty }} envuelve tanto {{ db-a3 }} como {{ db-c1 }} y elige cuál servir dependiendo del espacio de nombres para que no haya ambigüedad allí. Nickps ( discusión ) 19:15, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Al leer de nuevo tu comentario, no había pensado en el punto del G7. Supongo que se puede argumentar a favor de la eliminación, pero teniendo en cuenta que {{ db-empty }} probablemente esté asociado con A3 y C1, dudaría mucho en eliminarlo. Nickps ( discusión ) 19:24, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener : los atajos de plantilla suelen ser ambiguos. Creado en 2006, luego redirigido aquí en 2012. Se incluye como un enlace en {{ Usuario:Fuhghettaboutit/Toolbox }} (que se incluye en muchas páginas de usuarios). No es necesario realizar ninguna acción. De todos modos, los atajos deben aprenderse antes de usarlos, y esto sólo afecta a nuestros editores (no a nuestros lectores). Prefiera reorientar a eliminar (si es necesario). - Godsy ( HABLAR CONT ) 10:07, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- No me convence este argumento. Es muy confuso para los editores que db-empty se refiera a C1 y A3 pero db-empty-notice se refiera a A1. Todas las demás plantillas de aviso llevan el nombre de la plantilla CSD con la que se utilizan, pero ésta por sí sola rompe el patrón. Eso todavía hace que los atajos sean más difíciles de aprender para nuestros editores sin ningún beneficio, ya que la mayoría de ellos sabrían que db-a1-notice es el aviso que deben usar junto con db-a1. Nickps ( discusión ) 10:23, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Desde entonces, hice que {{ subst:db-empty-notice }} se comportara de manera idéntica a {{ db-empty }} , es decir, devuelve {{ subst:db-catempty-notice }} si se le pasa una categoría. y {{ subst:db-nocontent-notice }} en todos los demás casos. Entonces, suponiendo que db-empty-notice RfD se cierre como "desambiguado" entre estos dos, deberíamos reorientar allí Nickps ( charla ) 10:14, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Steel1943 (discusión) 16:26, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Batman y Robin All-Star
All-Star Batman y Robin es un maldito cómic diferente de All Star Batman & Robin, el maldito chico maravilla, pero su única maldita mención significativa está en la maldita lista de cómics de Batman , y los malditos resultados parecen darle prioridad a All Star. Batman y Robin, el maldito niño maravilla. ¿Deberían reorientarse a la maldita lista de cómics de Batman, o están muy bien como están? cogsan (maldita página de discusión) (malditas contribuciones) 13:12, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- En esa maldita nota, ¿debería mencionar All Star Batman y All Star Batman (la única maldita diferencia es un maldito guión), ya que tienen diferentes malditos objetivos, o la maldita exclusión de Robin los excluye de este maldito tema? cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 00:16, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Comentario para volver a publicar:¡Demasiadas malditas preguntas!
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, Jay 💬 15:12, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- A los murciélagos les gustan sus malditas preguntas. les gustan mucho . cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:17, 31 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Comentario : Lamento no recibir las referencias aquí, y creo que muchos no las obtendrán. Diablos, ni siquiera entiendo la declaración de nominación. ¿Qué está pasando con estas redirecciones? Steel1943 ( discusión ) 14:27, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- asbar y asbartbw (qué bonito acrónimo) son cómics diferentes, aunque sólo este último tiene un artículo propio. el chiste es principalmente que al objetivo realmente le encanta colocar la palabra "maldito" en todas partes, hasta el punto de que " el maldito batman " es una redirección real hacia él cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 19:09, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC ) [ responder ]
Gran G
Convertirse en dab Me resulta difícil creer que Gran Géminis sea el significado principal de Gran G. En mi experiencia, se utiliza con mayor frecuencia para referirse a la constante gravitacional . Pero hay tantas cosas que son "Gran G" por ahí que no consideraría ninguna de ellas primaria. Headbomb { t · c · p · b } 13:25, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- DAB con G (podría referirse a la letra mayúscula), Constante gravitacional , Big Gemini , The Big G, Gracemere (que va a Gracemere, Queensland#Atracciones ), The Big G (también conocido como Jason Giambi ) y 2014 Commonwealth Games#The Gran G , y tal vez General Mills . Hay varias notas de sombrero preexistentes de "Big G" en esos artículos que se vinculan entre sí; hay suficientes temas para justificar una desambigación. BugGhost 🦗👻 16:15, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Dabify per Bugghost - Lenticel ( discusión ) 00:27, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
No se menciona "Metal Mario" en la página de destino. Mia Mahey ( discusión ) 05:00, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Volver al artículo en la página del historial sin perjuicio de AfD. Thryduulf ( discusión ) 08:56, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Manténgalo como término de búsqueda plausible. Sería muy fácil agregar una mención de origen: es un nombre alternativo para Mario cuando usa un "potenciador" que hace que su cuerpo parezca de metal. Fuentes como esta lo describen. Un objetivo alternativo podría ser Super Mario 64#Gameplay , donde ya se ha mencionado algo allí. Ahí es donde se originó el concepto, aunque ya se ha utilizado en muchos juegos, por lo que probablemente sea preferible su objetivo actual. Sergecross73 envíame un mensaje 12:09, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Keep as Metal Mario es un personaje recurrente importante en los derivados de la franquicia de Mario y, por lo tanto, un término de búsqueda plausible. Se debería añadir una mención al tema, pero no me opongo a una redirección a Super Mario 64 si se considera una mejor solución. ¿Se ha considerado alguna vez a Magneton? Pokelego999 ( discusión ) 02:17, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Comentario . Fire Mario redirige a Super Mario#Projectiles , Tanooki Mario a Super Mario Bros. 3 . Esos son todos los 'Marios' que conozco con seguridad. Adivinando algunos Marios adicionales, Ice Mario redirige a Super Mario , y luego Hammer Mario e Invincible Mario no tienen páginas ni redireccionamientos. ¿Esperarán los lectores ser redirigidos a páginas tremendamente dispares cuando en realidad todas son variaciones del mismo personaje? 122141510 ( charla ) 23:50, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Crisis de Biden
Siento que hay muchos tipos de cosas que uno podría esperar ver cuando buscan este término (por ejemplo, Mexico–United_States_border_crisis#Biden_administration o 2023 United States banking crisis , o se podría buscar cualquier otra "crisis" durante la administración) , y no sospecho que ninguno en particular sea el WP:PTOPIC . Creo que esto debería eliminarse o eliminarse, ya que no creo que la redirección actual pueda justificarse sin un tema principal. - Halcón de cola roja (nido) 03:39, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar : el objetivo actual huele a WP:RECENTISM y no hay una alternativa clara. Rosbif73 ( discusión ) 07:40, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener . En cuanto a la presidencia de Joe Biden, hay muchas cosas que se han llamado crisis durante su mandato y que podrían denominarse (especialmente por los oponentes políticos) como "crisis de Biden", pero este es, con diferencia, el tema principal. ¿Eso es recienteismo? ¡Es demasiado pronto para saberlo! Lo que sí sabemos es que las personas que utilizan este término de búsqueda ahora buscarán de manera abrumadora el objetivo actual. Si eso cambia en el futuro, podremos reevaluar la redirección en ese momento. Thryduulf ( discusión ) 09:02, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar demasiadas tormentas en una taza de té se llamó la crisis de Biden. No hay un objetivo claro. Headbomb { t · c · p · b } 13:27, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantenga : fuentes confiables lo llamaron "crisis de Biden", por ejemplo: NPR: "'No podemos tomar un descanso'. Cómo se ve la crisis de Biden desde adentro", Politico: "Pelosi responde en privado a los llamados demócratas en el campo de batalla mientras trabaja para abordar la crisis de Biden", Axios: "El tiroteo en el mitin de Trump trastorna la crisis de Biden de los demócratas", Canal 4 del Reino Unido: Crisis de Biden: pregunta de los partidarios El futuro del presidente promete continuar: todo en los titulares. Si amplías la búsqueda a “La crisis de Biden” aparecen aún más resultados para el mismo tema. También vale la pena señalar que la retirada de Joe Biden de las elecciones presidenciales de Estados Unidos de 2024 se creó originalmente con el nombre de "crisis de Biden" antes de que Biden confirmara la retirada. BugGhost 🦗👻 16:25, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener débil . Estuve a punto de nominar esto yo mismo hace unos días, pero luego cambié de opinión ya que aparentemente, la redirección puede ser un nombre alternativo para el objetivo según las fuentes. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 19:39, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Ministro de Ciudades
No estoy seguro de si este es el mejor objetivo ya que existe el Ministro de Ciudades (Australia) ; tampoco estoy seguro de si ese es el mejor título para ese artículo. No estoy familiarizado con la reciente reorganización del gabinete político, por lo que podría haber una bifurcación de contenido entre el objetivo actual y el Ministro de Ciudades (Australia) . Fork99 ( discusión ) 02:29, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Redirigir al Ministro de las Ciudades (Australia) ya que ese artículo ya no es un redireccionamiento en sí mismo. Aydoh8 ( discusión | contribuciones ) 02:35, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Cuando creé la redirección (Ministro de Ciudades), no sabía que la página del Ministro de Ciudades (Australia) ya existía. En ese caso, me complace que la redirección se elimine directamente o se redirija al Ministro de Ciudades (Australia) . Marc Nut 1996 ( discusión ) 03:32, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- No estoy de acuerdo: si ese es el tema principal, debería trasladarse al título "Ministro de las Ciudades", y si no es el tema principal, entonces "Ministro de las Ciudades" no debería redireccionarse allí. jlwoodwa ( discusión ) 22:38, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Tenga en cuenta que agregué el redireccionamiento en minúsculas del Ministro para las ciudades a esta discusión, ya que ambos deberían conducir al mismo lugar. Sin embargo, la sección objetivo de esa redirección ya no menciona a un ministro de ciudades. Thryduulf ( discusión ) 09:07, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Índice establecido: este y otros títulos similares parecen crearse regularmente en diferentes partes del mundo, sin que ninguno sea obviamente principal. En unos minutos buscando encontré todo lo siguiente:
- (algunos pueden estar duplicados, se me acabó el tiempo para clasificarlos y desinfectarlos). Thryduulf ( discusión ) 09:21, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Desambiguar . El Reino Unido tuvo un Ministro de Ciudades entre 2011 y 2015, antes de que el puesto se fusionara con otros ministerios; consulte Regional_minister#Developments_since_2010 . El Reino Unido también tiene un Ministro de la Ciudad con un nombre similar (2008-presente), que en realidad es responsable del distrito financiero de la ciudad de Londres, no de las ciudades, pero que podría confundirse fácilmente. Thryduulf ha encontrado varios otros puestos con nombres similares en otros países. Entonces, si bien la publicación australiana podría ser la posición existente que más se acerque a la frase de redirección exacta, sería mejor si ambas mayúsculas condujeran a una página del Ministro de Ciudades (desambiguación). Charla de genio modesto 10:33, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Sportacus 9
Hay teorías de que Robbie Rotten fue el sportacus anterior y usó el número 9, aunque tienen poca o ninguna evidencia que pueda usarse aquí. ¿Reorientar su artículo, mantenerlo como está o eliminarlo como fancruft? cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 18:03, 8 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Seguir redireccionando a sportacus. Robbie rotten y el número 9 (sportacus 9) no son la misma persona. Robbie y el número 9 estaban chocando (ver https://web.archive.org/web/20040108161211/http://www.lazytown.com/pages/about/concept/theoriginsstory.html). Más tarde, Robbie se convirtió en Robbie podrido (ver https://web.archive.org/web/20031225235205/http://www.lazytown.com/pages/about/concept/robbierotten.html). El número 9 (sportacus 9) tiene muchas más similitudes con el sportacus 10 (el sportacus actual) que con Robbie, por lo que esa redirección tiene sentido por ahora. Snævar ( discusión ) 14:47, 9 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, ✗ plicito 23:36, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- El nombre se cambió de "Sportacus" a "Sportacus 10" en la primera frase del artículo, pero no hay explicación y el título del artículo no se ha cambiado. Si no hay una explicación de "9" o "10" en el artículo, la redirección no es útil y debe eliminarse. Peter James ( charla ) 20:26, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Volver a poner en venta el comentario:¿Conservar o eliminar?
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 01:54, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
comprobar usuario
CNR. ¿Deberíamos reorientarnos a Wiki#Security ? Ahri Boy ( discusión ) 06:40, 5 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Eliminar Wiki#Security no tiene información sobre usuarios de verificación o funciones equivalentes. Los usuarios de comprobación no son algo que los editores principiantes, que tal vez no se den cuenta de la existencia del espacio de nombres de Wikipedia, busquen. California ¡háblame!11:14, 5 de julio de 2024 (UTC) Mantener En realidad, los argumentos a continuación me convencen. CheckUser es específico de Wikipedia (no hay lugar a confusión), y los nuevos usuarios pueden encontrar el término checkuser en los ejemplos que se proporcionan a continuación. California ¡háblame!16:19, 16 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener : Creo que la pregunta debería ser si se trata de una redirección potencialmente útil y si es inequívoca. Creo que lo es, en ambos sentidos. Que sea una redirección entre espacios de nombres no significa que no sea útil. Esos tipos de redireccionamientos no están cubiertos por WP:CSD R2 , lo que significa que, en ciertos casos, están permitidos. Hola hombre, soy Josh ( discusión ) 12:45, 5 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Todos los resultados de Google parecen ser para Wikipedia y no estoy seguro de si hay mucho uso fuera de Wikipedia. Crouch, Swale ( discusión ) 18:40, 5 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Tenga en cuenta que también existe Checkuser , que también debe eliminarse o reorientarse si se cierra como eliminar o reorientar. Crouch, Swale ( charla ) 18:49, 5 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,firmado, charla de Rosguill 13:09, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Eliminar según WP:NAVELGAZING : no hay fuentes confiables (que pude encontrar) que discutan el tema, por lo tanto, no hay ningún artículo para publicar. Nuestra gran cantidad de documentos de política interna con jerga no sirven de mucho para los lectores que buscan un artículo de enciclopedia sobre este tema, que no tenemos. Las páginas de proyectos no son artículos, no tienen los mismos estándares y están escritas para una audiencia completamente diferente. Si realmente queremos tener redireccionamientos entre espacios de nombres desde el espacio del lector al espacio del proyecto, deberíamos hacerlo con un redireccionamiento suave, uno que avise al lector que no tenemos un artículo de enciclopedia sobre el tema que está buscando. , pero pueden hacer clic si realmente quieren ver cómo se hace la salchicha; Simplemente arrojarlos al espacio del proyecto sin que se den cuenta es, francamente, algo cruel. Ivanvector ( Discusión / Ediciones ) 19:00, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Meh (mantenimiento débil). Veo ambos lados del argumento. Estoy de acuerdo con Ivanvector en que probablemente no hay posibilidad de que CheckUser (ya sea la extensión MediaWiki, su implementación WMF o cualquier otra cosa similar) sea un tema notable por sí solo. Pero estoy confundido por qué eso significa que debemos eliminarlo. Tenemos muchos otros CNR de Principal->Proyecto, como el tablón de anuncios de administradores (y variaciones), la confirmación automática , la página de desambiguación , el buen artículo y muchos más (puede examinar Categoría:Redirecciones al espacio del proyecto para encontrar más). A menos que haya habido una discusión previa que haya resultado en un consenso de que las redirecciones principal->proyecto no están permitidas... entonces, ¿cuál es el daño? Si el tema no es notable, existe una posibilidad distinta de cero de que alguien que, por ejemplo, esté bloqueado por checkuser, simplemente busque el término "Checkuser" en Wikipedia, y no creo que les sirva no redirigirlos a nuestro espacio de proyecto. página que lo explica. Si el tema fuera potencialmente notable por sí solo, entonces sería preferible escribir un artículo, pero no creo en el argumento de que una página en blanco/eliminada es mejor que una redirección si alguien la busca en Wikipedia. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez ( Usuario / ¡saluda! ) 21:11, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- @ Berchanhimez : se desaconsejan las redirecciones desde el espacio principal al espacio del proyecto (consulte WP:CNR para conocer los antecedentes) y se eliminan con frecuencia. Existen excepciones, más comúnmente (pero no exclusivamente) donde es deseable que la página de destino sea fácil de encontrar para usuarios muy nuevos que aún no han aprendido sobre los espacios de nombres ( el tablón de anuncios de los administradores y la ayuda de Wikipedia son ejemplos). El segundo más común es para aspectos internos de los que personas ajenas al proyecto habrán oído hablar (o supondrán que existen) y querrán consultar pero que no tienen un objetivo enciclopédico (por ejemplo, buenos artículos ). Thryduulf ( discusión ) 01:45, 16 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- No me parece razonable pensar que esas dos son cosas que un nuevo usuario probablemente buscaría, y no CheckUser , cuando CheckUser se usa como justificación para un bloque o a veces se hace referencia en esos tablones de anuncios. No estoy diciendo que no deban desanimarse, pero en mi opinión, esto es algo que realmente tiene sentido. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez ( Usuario / ¡saluda! ) 02:47, 16 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener : No hay nada intrínsecamente malo con los CNR. Nuestro objetivo es ayudar al lector a llegar a donde quiere ir. Cualquiera que escriba "CheckUser" en la barra de búsqueda evidentemente quiere acceder a la página del proyecto. Eliminarlo es simplemente eliminar una redirección útil e inequívoca sin ningún motivo. C F A 💬 16:40, 16 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar redirección a contenido que no sea de lectura. Un lector no se vería afectado por el resultado de un usuario de verificación, a menos que edite. -- 65.92.247.96 ( charla ) 08:34, 17 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener. Este es un atajo CNR útil creado por un editor bien establecido hace muchos años (2017) basado en otro atajo CNR ( Checkuser ). Éste fue creado por otro editor bien establecido muchos años antes (2006). 1) Ambos están firmemente "protegidos" en los CNR, y 2) según WP:R#KEEP , R3, R4 y R5. PI Ellsworth , ed. ponlo allí 01:41, 18 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 01:49, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
diferentes objetivos, y hay un artículo para las edades de los metales ... que a su vez está dividido en 3 edades, la última de las cuales parece denominarse "la" edad de los metales, aunque están agrupadas porque son diferentes. rieles. Votaré a favor de reorientar ambos a la edad del metal, a menos que alguien realmente sepa lo que hace cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 16:11, 5 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Elimina la ambigüedad en la Edad de los Metales y luego reorienta la Edad de los Metales allí. Supongo que sé algunas cosas y parece que "Metal Age" o "The Metal Age" (ambas en singular) podrían referirse a:
- La Edad de los Metales (Cobre, Bronce, Hierro) en el sistema tradicional de tres edades, en conjunto, pero esto es más una fraseología que un período formal [10][11][12]
- La Edad de los Metales en la prehistoria del sudeste asiático: un período formal y específico (presumiblemente porque el bronce y el hierro llegaron allí simultáneamente) [13][14][15][16][17][18]
- Edades metálicas de Hesíodo (Oro, Plata, Bronce, Hierro) [19][20][21]
- Ladrón II
- No veo un tema principal entre ellos y tampoco estoy seguro acerca de Metal Ages como artículo independiente, no hay mucho que decir sobre ellos en conjunto aparte de que todos involucraron metal. @ Iskandar323 : ¿Qué opinas? – Joe ( discusión ) 07:54, 6 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Gracias por el ping Joe. Creo que ambos deberían redirigir a la Edad de los Metales (aunque esto posiblemente debería pasar al singular, como mejor práctica estilística y aparentemente como la forma más común en la erudición (Ngrams)). Si bien la página está rechoncha, es por falta de atención, no por falta de material. La literatura académica que utiliza la agrupación de períodos conceptuales es considerable. La Edad de los Metales en el sudeste asiático puede tener una progresión ligeramente diferente, pero conceptualmente es la misma. La idea de Hesíodo dentro de una idea, afortunadamente, tiene una forma bastante diferente. Creo que el nombre del título de Thief II no es algo que deba preocuparnos, como tampoco necesitamos eliminar la ambigüedad de "resurrección" para dar cuenta de la cuarta entrega de la franquicia Aliens cuando nos dirigimos a ese tema. Si se justifica una página de desambiguación, sugeriría vincularla con una nota de la página de Metal Ages. Iskandar323 ( discusión ) 09:56, 6 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- No estoy muy seguro de combinar la Edad de los Metales del sudeste asiático y las "edades de los metales" del resto del mundo. En la mayor parte del Viejo Mundo, las Edades del Cobre, el Bronce y el Hierro son períodos firmemente distintos (los dos últimos son dos de las tres edades originales ) y referirse a ellos juntos como "la edad de los metales" o "las edades de los metales" es sinceramente algo con lo que nunca me había topado hasta hoy (aunque Google Scholar me dice que sucede). Por el contrario, los arqueólogos del sudeste asiático lo utilizan sistemáticamente como un período distinto y de nivel superior con las subdivisiones tempranas, desarrolladas y protohistóricas en lugar de cobre, bronce y hierro. Así que podríamos escribir la Edad de los Metales en el Sudeste Asiático, pero no la Edad de los Metales en Europa o la Edad de los Metales en el Sudoeste de Asia porque nadie habla realmente de eso (en cambio, tenemos la Edad del Bronce en Europa y la Edad del Hierro en Europa ). – Joe ( discusión ) 10:57, 6 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Tal vez. Pero es algo académico en este punto en el que aún no existe una página de la Edad de los Metales del Sudeste Asiático. Creo que la razón por la que la Edad de los Metales está surgiendo cada vez más como un punto de referencia es porque el sistema de las tres edades está un poco anticuado y roto y subestima el importante paso tecnológico de la metalurgia. La edad de piedra también es, en sí misma, enorme: comprende el paleolítico, el mesolítico y el neolítico, por lo que generalmente es bastante inútil e inútil agruparla con las edades del bronce y del hierro, que son muy distintas de la primera. Iskandar323 ( discusión ) 15:22, 6 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Keep "La Edad de los Metales", en concreto, se refiere claramente a Thief II. No hay otro tema principal convincente. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 10:16, 8 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- @Zxcvbnm : ¿ Cómo te das cuenta de eso? No creo que la literatura académica se refiera al juego. Iskandar323 ( discusión ) 13:41, 10 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,firmado, charla de Rosguill 13:11, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Desambiguar según Joe. -- 65.92.247.96 ( charla ) 08:32, 17 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Comentario sobre la reincorporación:Por un consenso más sólido.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 01:48, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Dabify según la idea de Joe. Parece la mejor opción. Schützenpanzer (Discusión) 14:16, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Nuzlocke
"Nuzlocke" no se menciona en el artículo de destino. La sección Nuzlocke fue eliminada del artículo en enero de 2023 y parece que nadie se opuso: [22]. En 2015, el artículo de Nuzlocke fue redirigido a Pokémon después de una AfD . Mika1h ( discusión ) 13:16, 8 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Creo que una mención de Pokémon en el juego funcionaría, pero con suerte con mejores fuentes que las eliminadas en esa diferencia. poner mi voto en espera hasta que recuerde buscar ese cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 15:54, 8 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Yo diría que vuelva a agregar la información, aunque encontrar nuevas fuentes sería una buena mejora. Al contrario del juicio del usuario:Juxlos de que el Nuzlocke Challenge no es "nada especial" porque "hay múltiples modos creados por fans": la mayoría de ellos están basados o inspirados en el Nuzlocke, y AFAIK los que no lo son provienen de la comunidad de speedrunning . 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 ( UTC ) [ respuesta ]
- Debo señalar aquí que mi eliminación de Nuzlocke es una cuestión de WP:DUE , no de WP:GNG . No tengo objeciones a su notoriedad, aunque me opuse a su inclusión en el artículo principal de la misma manera que me opondría a incluir Pokémon Sage o Pokémon Fossil Museum en el artículo principal. Juxlos ( discusión ) 03:40, 10 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener La información al respecto debe volver a agregarse al artículo, se eliminó por error. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 06:53, 9 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- WP:RETURNTORED - Nuzlocke podría convertirse fácilmente en un artículo, hay una cantidad decente de fuentes al respecto, por ejemplo: [23], [24], [25], [26], [27] y se menciona en 14 artículos diferentes de Wikipedia. . (Mi segunda preferencia sería mantener/restablecer en Pokémon ) BugGhost 🪲👻 09:37, 9 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias,firmado, charla de Rosguill 13:19, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Restaure la información previamente eliminada del artículo de destino actual en esta página, creando un nuevo artículo aquí . Puedo ver el problema de peso de WP:DUE con nuzlocke en el artículo principal, pero parece que debería pasar WP:GNG , así que dale su propio artículo aquí. Fieari ( discusión ) 07:38, 19 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Comentario para volver a poner en venta:¿Alguna otra idea?
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 01:44, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Mantener : las fuentes proporcionadas muestran que sería fácil mencionar los objetivos. Si los editores quieren intentar crear un artículo al respecto, son libres de intentar redactar algo, pero eso no nos impide conservar las redirecciones por el momento. Sergecross73 envíame un mensaje 00:06, 2 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
E610
Si bien se menciona E610 en el objetivo (era el número de serie del tanque de gasolina que se filtró y causó el desastre), esta cadena también aparece en varios otros artículos, como LG Optimus L5 , Orange SPV y South African Class 5E1, Series. 2 . Ni una búsqueda en Internet ni Google Scholar sugieren un objetivo principal, por lo que eliminarlo para permitir resultados de búsqueda internos parece lo más apropiado. firmado, charla de Rosguill 18:10, 15 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Creo que sería mejor convertirlo en una página de desambiguación que enlace a esos otros artículos. Luvcraft ( discusión ) 02:19, 17 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Desambiguar . La búsqueda encuentra estos usos entre otros resultados menos útiles: listas que mencionan el LG Optimus y varias páginas donde las referencias contienen la cadena "E610" en números de página o URL. Peter James ( charla ) 15:26, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Volver a poner en venta el comentario:¿Eliminar o eliminar la ambigüedad?
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 01:43, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- Comentario : También podría representar una sustancia química con el número E "E610", pero no parece que a ninguna sustancia química se le haya asignado este número E todavía. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 14:32, 1 de agosto de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
No está claro por qué esto debería redirigir a Plantilla: Pie de página Campeones Olímpicos Masculino C-1 Slalom y no a Plantilla: Pie de página Campeones Olímpicos Femenino C-1 Slalom que está disponible desde 2020. Ymlanter ( discusión ) 14:46, 21 de julio de 2024 (UTC ) [ responder ]
- Mantenimiento débil : este parece ser el título original de la plantilla a la que apunta. Supongo que el evento femenino se inició en 2020 o no se cubrió hasta entonces. Los atajos de plantilla suelen ser ambiguos. Como son para los editores (no para los lectores), esto no causa ningún daño. Débil porque simpatizo con el punto de vista de los nominadores. Si esto estuviera en el espacio principal, se necesitaría una desambiguación; sin embargo, dicha acción no es apropiada para una redirección de plantilla y no apoyo la eliminación (porque la ambigüedad no es motivo para eliminar un acceso directo ). Tampoco hay ningún beneficio en ocultar el historial de la página mediante la eliminación. - Godsy ( CONTINUACIÓN DE LA HABLA ) 05:52, 23 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 01:39, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Recortes de impuestos para los ricos
Probablemente debería eliminarse por no ser neutral y no coincidir adecuadamente. Si bien a veces se promueven los "recortes de impuestos para los ricos" como un método de economía de goteo , en realidad no son el mismo concepto. Reorientarse hacia la reducción de impuestos tampoco tiene mucho sentido. Jruderman ( discusión ) 09:56, 21 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantenga : es neutral (e incluso si no lo fuera, las redirecciones no tienen por qué ser neutrales) y resume bien la conclusión del artículo:
La economía de goteo se refiere a políticas económicas que favorecen desproporcionadamente al nivel superior del espectro económico, que comprende a los ricos. Los
principales ejemplos de lo que los críticos han llamado "economía de goteo" en los EE. UU. incluyen los recortes de impuestos de Reagan, los recortes de impuestos de Bush y la Ley de Empleos y Reducción de Impuestos de 2017. Los principales ejemplos del Reino Unido incluyen los recortes de impuestos de minipresupuesto de Liz Truss. de 2022
. El artículo describe el tema principalmente como recortes de impuestos para los ricos: es una buena reorientación. BugGhost 🦗👻 10:45, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Eliminar La economía de goteo no es exactamente lo mismo que los recortes de impuestos para los ricos. Debería eliminarse porque obliga a los lectores a seguir una redirección a un lugar irrelevante, se aplica WP:SURPRISE . ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 12:44, 22 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- ¿Mantener , posiblemente el enlace de la sección #Uso ? Este artículo dice "recortes de impuestos para/para los ricos" varias veces. Experto en separación de sílabas ( charla ) 00:58, 24 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. ¡Gracias, charla de CycloneYoris ! 01:39, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
28 de julio
Vuelva a dirigirse al fútbol de asociación , que se conoce más comúnmente como "fútbol masculino". ‑‑ Neveselbert ( discusión · contribuciones · correo electrónico ) 20:59, 28 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener . Existen muchos códigos de fútbol en todo el mundo, incluido el fútbol gaélico , el fútbol de rugby , el fútbol de parrilla y el fútbol australiano , entre otros. Creo que la variante masculina de cualquiera de estos podría ser un objetivo de búsqueda razonable, y que deberíamos mantenerla en el tema principal ( fútbol ) en lugar de redirigir a cualquier subartículo. - Halcón de cola roja (nido) 03:00, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- Mantener . Si bien es cierto que mis resultados de búsqueda "men's football"se refieren prácticamente exclusivamente al fútbol asociativo masculino, también lo son mis resultados para football. Acabo de mirar en Tor con dos nodos de salida diferentes, uno de geolocalización en Lyon no produjo más que resultados relacionados con el torneo olímpico en curso (algunos de los cuales se juegan cerca de Lyon), el otro de geolocalización en Alabama estuvo dominado por resultados de compras. [[tacos (zapato) #fútbol americano] para hombres (y mujeres) [[zapatos de fútbol americano]]. Por lo tanto, el tema principal depende en gran medida de la ubicación y, por lo tanto, es mejor desambiguación. Thryduulf ( discusión ) 09:10, 30 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
200 (canción)
En realidad, la canción no es un tema principal. Entonces, sugiero reorientar a 200 (desambiguación) ya que agregué 2 canciones a esta desambiguación. 88.235.215.238 (discusión) 14:21, 19 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, C F A 💬 20:54, 28 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Pokémon Oro Anochecer y Plata Amanecer
Quería argumentar que eran nombres en desarrollo, especulaciones de los fanáticos o algo así, pero ese no parece ser el caso. En el mejor de los casos, eran nombres de hacks de rom o piratas, pero solo encontré deviantart ocs cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 14:41, 19 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
- los nombres ni siquiera son consistentes entre sí, ¿por qué cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 14:49, 19 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, C F A 💬 20:54, 28 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Misty Williams
Mismo razonamiento que a continuación, carácter diferente, apellido incorrecto (aparentemente, los resultados parecen divididos entre Williams y Waterflower) cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 16:16, 19 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, C F A 💬 20:54, 28 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
- para que conste, "a continuación" se refiere a "brock williams", un nombre que aparentemente se origina en un fanfic, que puede o no haber sido mencionado coincidentemente antes por el actor de voz en inglés de Brock, cogsan (regañarme) (acecharme) 12:00, 29 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Juegos y juguetes de género neutro
Hace aproximadamente un día, como medida temporal hasta que pudiera encontrar un mejor curso de acción con esta redirección, refiné esta redirección a Toy#Gender desde Toy debido a que creía que el título base no era adecuado para explicar esto. redirigir. Sin embargo, me acabo de dar cuenta de que debido al hecho de que la palabra "juegos" está en esta redirección, el título de la redirección parece ser una conexión incorrecta con su objetivo debido a posibles problemas con WP:XY, ya que el objetivo es sobre juguetes y no juegos. En este punto, creo que eliminar es la mejor opción. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 21:11, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, C F A 💬 20:47, 28 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Angga Yunanda
Esta redirección de una persona indonesia no notable que falla en WP:NACTOR solo aparece en dos roles notables. También se citan problemas en versiones anteriores que no dependen de las fuentes de WP:BLP . 49.150.14.10 ( charla ) 03:29, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, C F A 💬 20:45, 28 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Condensado de piones
No mencionado en la página de destino. Rusalkii ( discusión ) 05:28, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, C F A 💬 20:45, 28 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Juegos y juguetes para niños.
Eliminar por WP:XY . Juegos infantiles es un redireccionamiento dirigido a Lista de juegos infantiles , un artículo sobre un tema diferente al objetivo actual de los redireccionamientos nominados. Steel1943 ( discusión ) 21:06, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Volví a cotizar para generar una discusión más profunda y un consenso más claro.
Por favor, añada nuevos comentarios debajo de este aviso. Gracias, C F A 💬 20:43, 28 de julio de 2024 (UTC)[ responder ]
Yevhen Kholoniuk
El asunto no aparece en el artículo de destino. Bgsu98 (Discusión) 22:51, 20 de julio de 2024 (UTC) [ respuesta ]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, C F A 💬 20:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Saint Boy
No mention in the target article. Pelmeen10 (talk) 18:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and add that information to the article. If neither has more info than the other, then the appropriate place to link is the event page where both competitors are listed. --Habst (talk) 13:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hum Hayn Aapkay Ghulam
Boe Jiden
This seems like an unlikely mispelling but I'm not sure it's R3 worthy. Thoughts? Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 15:36, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete not a useful redirect. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I wondered if this was a meme or parody or something, but I can't find any evidence of it so if it is then it's completely non-notable. It is the name of a musician and Mario 2 player (it's not immediately clear if these are the same person) but they are not notable either. Note there is deleted history here, but it was an unrelated 1-sentence "article" from 2017 describing Joe Biden as a former president that was correctly speedied under G3. Thryduulf (talk) 16:32, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah I'm not American and I figured seeking additional input was useful in case if there was an obvious connection here I was missing. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 19:48, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not American either! Speedy deletion is explicitly only for the most obvious cases, so if you aren't certain whether a speedy deletion criterion applies then it doesn't. Seeking additional input is not something to apologise for. Thryduulf (talk) 22:53, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Eleted. I don't see the flipping as a reasonable search term. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:44, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Samuli Miettinen
Delete redirect. There is an article for Samuli Miettinen (footballer) who is a different person than the redirect. Searching for Samuli Miettinen from wiki should point the person who has an own article rather than someone who has not. Syvä-äksy (talk) 14:18, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Looking on google there is no primary topic for people with this name with hits for the footballer, an architect (no article on enwp but the subject of fi:Samuli Miettinen) and an academic (no Wikipedia article in any language I can find) getting about equal numbers of hits on the first three pages. There were two hits for a photographer but none for the bassist. I haven't done enough research to know whether the architect or academic are notable but if they are a primary disambig may be best, if they aren't then moving the footballer to primary and adding a hatnote to the bassist is probably better (the latter does not appear to be notable, a one-line two-sentence sub-stub about him was correctly speedied as A7 a few years ago.) Thryduulf (talk) 16:45, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Symplectic action
Term is not actually used at target, but listed in Glossary_of_symplectic_geometry#S. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:39, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This is a math thing, not a physics thing, so the redirect is not correct. The topic is not notable on its own and not covered in other articles. No page history and only one incoming link. Johnjbarton (talk) 22:56, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Themes common in gay porn
No "themes" mentioned at target, and title is also a bit ungrammatical. However, since the redirect is a {{R with history}}, then I'm not sure if deletion would be appropriate. CycloneYoris talk! 07:34, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Restore history and rename. This was redirected following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Themes common in gay porn which was very low participation (nom and one other) and closed as redirect despite the only !vote being "merge and delete per nom". While at the time it might have been mostly adequately covered in the target article it isn't today. As pointed out it covers many things not exclusive to gay porn, so I suggest restoring it and renaming it to form the basis of a Glossary of pornography or similarly titled article that better reflects the content - I was expecting a list of tropes based on the current title. Thryduulf (talk) 08:13, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Washington, Maryland
This error can plausibly refer to Fort Washington or Washington County, so delete and let the search results take care of it. Queen of Hearts talk 02:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Ambiguous. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate per the fact there are multiple topics. Steel1943 (talk) 22:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]- Do not keep, do not delete per Tavix's comments. I have no opinion about disambiguation vs. retargeting anymore, but it's rather apparent that the current target is probably not helpful and that deletion benefits no one. Steel1943 (talk) 18:48, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Disambiguate. There's a general presumption that redirects are useful to at least the creator, and disambiguating is less disruptive than deleting. Jruderman (talk) 06:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Disambig per Steel and Jruderman. Thryduulf (talk) 12:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PTM unless there's evidence of the Fort or the County being referred to as simply "Washington". -- Tavix (talk) 13:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]- 1 minute on Google finds plenty of evidence of the county being referred as "Washington, Maryland" (e.g. [28], [29], [30]), hits for Fort Washington are harder to find [31] is ambiguous, but other results are getting swamped by collactions and hits for Mary L. Washington (a Maryland politician). Thryduulf (talk) 13:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure what's more impressive, the fact that your search only took one minute(!), or the fact that you thought those fringe database sources would be convincing. The Tweet isn't ambiguous, it's saying that the Governor of Maryland was speaking to reporters in Washington, DC. -- Tavix (talk) 14:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The nature of the sources is irrelevant - they demonstrate clearly that "Washington County, Maryland" is sometimes referred to as "Washington, Maryland". Thryduulf (talk) 14:05, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- ...and I disagree with that assessment. It's not a referral, it's a database regurgitation. -- Tavix (talk) 14:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget to Washington metropolitan area, which extends into Maryland. I found a use that fits the bill. -- Tavix (talk) 14:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- What? That's just confusing and potentially harmful to readers. Washington, D.C. is not a part of Maryland, and no one would refer to it as such. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- You do seem confused. I did not suggest a target to Washington, D.C. but to Washington metropolitan area. Per the article (my emphasis added):
The Washington metropolitan area...includes all of Washington, D.C. and parts of Maryland...
This redirect would be for the "Maryland part of Washington". -- Tavix (talk) 13:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]- No one calls it "the Maryland part of Washington," though. They are two separate entities. It's the equivalent of calling Newark "the New Jersey part of New York." Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not talking about the separate entities, I'm talking about the single metropolitan region of Washington which is partially located in Maryland. One prominent example is the Washington Commanders, who play in Maryland. Similarly, the New York Giants and New York Jets play in the New Jersey part of New York. -- Tavix (talk) 21:41, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:45, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I oppose retargetting to Washington metropolitan area per Presidentman. It isn't a completely implausible entry on a dab page but it would be very surprising to be redirected there. Thryduulf (talk) 08:15, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- No one refers to Fort Washington (either the CDP or the historic fort) as just "Washington". The county is rarely, but is, referred to by just "Washington" (like many counties in America). Normally only in spoke language but there are cases like [32]:
State Sen. Paul Corderman, R-Washington, sent a letter to the Hagerstown mayor and council
. I guess disambiguate? Between something like: Washington County, Maryland; Washington College (which is in Maryland); maybe History of Washington, D.C. due to the history of Maryland giving up land for Washington, DC; and maybe Washington metropolitan area (but oppose retarget here) (I'd also be fine with Fort Washington, Maryland being on the dab but I think under WP:PARTIAL it technically shouldn't be?). A retarget to Washington County, Maryland would be preferable to no change and deletion. Skynxnex (talk) 03:21, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] - Keep Today I see both "Washington, MD" and "Marlboro, MD" listed by the Google Voice app, so "no one refers..." simply isn't correct. There's a redirect for Washington, Maryland - that was really useful. There is no redirect for Marlboro, Maryland - that was a complete PITA. Keep the redirect, add another to Marlboro, Maryland. Retargeting to loosely defined urban space is utterly useless. The redirect takes people who have no idea where these boroughs are to the appropriate WP article. Yappy2bhere (talk) 18:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Yappy2bhere: Can you clarify what you think "Washington, MD" is referring to? You do say "Keep", which would imply it refers to Fort Washington, Maryland. But you also make a reference that it's a borough, but Fort Washington, Maryland is not one. Loosely defined urban space is not an article, so retargeting there is not an option (although I don't understand why it would be an option?). You also don't define what you think Marlboro, Maryland refers to. There are quite a few options, among them: Upper Marlboro, Maryland; Lower Marlboro, Maryland; Marlboro Village, Maryland; Marlboro Meadows, Maryland and what looks to be the encompassing Greater Upper Marlboro, Maryland. -- Tavix (talk) 13:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Once We Were Human
Not sure why this exists, all I get for results is a book on Amazon that has no Wikipedia page. It's not mentioned in the band page at all. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:42, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget - Retarget to Once Human (band). This site and this site both mention "Once We Were Human" as the old band name. BTW, Lauren Hart still directs to the Once Human disambiguation page. --Jax 0677 (talk) 21:47, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- See WP:R#DELETE #8. If you can find a reliable source that can be added to the article saying they were called that, then sure. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:59, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply - WP:CHEAP, both of those references are used on other Wikipedia pages, so either these are reliable, or the others need to be purged. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:09, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom, considering the retargeting option above seems WP:MADEUP. "WP:CHEAP" doesn't apply if it is shown that the redirect is inherently unhelpful and/or misleading, which seems to be the case here. Steel1943 (talk) 19:31, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:41, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sumut
There are many disambiguation links in the article Sumut (disambiguation). So I hope to move to Sumut only and not prioritize one. Whatsup236 (talk) 02:12, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Move dab over redirect per nom. My searches for "sumut" -wikipedia indicate absolutely no primary topic here, in order on the first three pages I got hits fora Greenland tour provider, Sada Sumut F.C., the Indonesian province/its government, Bank Sumut, a power station in Indonesia, a college for health workers (I think), the album (current target, but the first hit was the second last on page two), a teacher training college, Sumut Natural Park (Oman), an alternative spelling of wikt:summat, a couple of books related to (I think) the province and then some results where the subject wasn't immediately clear. Thryduulf (talk) 08:32, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
July 27
The Acolyte (upcoming TV series)
Delete per WP:UFILM. Target subject released over a month ago, no pageviews in the last 90 days (other than any I just did). Steel1943 (talk) 23:21, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom, this is indeed completely unused. Thryduulf (talk) 07:56, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 14:41, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. --Un assiolo (talk) 15:46, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Senior Bush & friends
Dumb dubyah
Not mentioned in target page. Otherwise, seems like obvious, unnecessary slander. Steel1943 (talk) 22:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It was a common epithet for him. --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 04:28, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Absolutely no one is going to enter this when looking for the article. --Un assiolo (talk) 20:48, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No google hits in anything resembling a reliable source, plus it's borderline attack page. CapitalSasha ~ talk 23:59, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. Not useful for navigation, doesn't belong on encyclopedia. "That A-hole in the White House" is also a common epithet, but we don't need a redirect for that (although I must also admit, WP:PRIMARYTOPIC discussions might be tricky). — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 16:06, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Live Photo
The Live Photo (iOS) meaning mentioned in the hatnote seems to be the prevalent one. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Seems to be? Do you have something to substantiate that? Perhaps in Olso or Berlin it's the other way around? No justifiable reason to delete. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:57, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Who suggested deletion? 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- You did. By saying this should point somewhere else, you are essentially advocating for deleting what it is now in favor of another. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I didn't say this should point somewhere else, it might as well be disambiguated. The current meaning will not be deleted, it will stay with the addition of another one. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:15, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Disambiguate At the very least, there's no primary topic here. The artist is almost certainly not primary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:46, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Assuming no primary topic, we can hatnote. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- No. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:12, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, and we're back to proving what is primary and not, without supposition. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget my searches indicate that the iOS feature is by far and away the primary topic - only two of the hits on the first five pages of search results were not about that topic, the other two were about equivalents on Android. Thryduulf (talk) 12:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:04, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cianwood Island
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
the island does not have a proper name. it's just "cianwood city" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:00, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Listed the previous RfD. Jay 💬 17:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This seems to be a very common name for the location. It not being official makes it more likely that someone will be looking up the term here. Thryduulf (talk) 19:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 19:53, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cianwood City (Cianwood Island)
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
are there any cianwood cities this could be mistaken for? more importantly, the island it's in isn't actually known as "cianwood island" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:57, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom, unnecessary modifier --Lenticel (talk) 01:21, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Listed the previous RfD. Jay 💬 17:43, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as a harmless {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}} and per my comments at #Cianwood Island. Thryduulf (talk) 19:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 19:52, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A trip down mammary lane
Germs
User:TalkSubject/Joe Biden
See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:TalkSubject for further details. Seems like some attempt at policy-circumnavigating WP:SEO. Delete. Steel1943 (talk) 17:06, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draft:Joe Biden
Not a {{R from move}}, created last month. Questionable utility ... and I thought our previous consensus about similar redirects was to delete them, but looks like WP:RDRAFT has been updated recently? We are now creating redirects from the "Draft:" namespace to the article namespace? Steel1943 (talk) 16:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - We always create and keep redirects from draft space to article space. One reason is so that an editor who has a link to the draft and wants to view or edit it will find the article after the draft is accepted. When a draft is accepted, a redirect to article space is always created, and is exempt from six-month expiration, and so is kept. There are sometimes good-faith requests to delete drafts because there is already an article. They are instead speedily redirected to the article. So, yes, there are redirects from draft space to article space. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:05, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- "
We always create and keep redirects from draft space to article space.
" No we don't, which is why I nominated this redirect in the first place since pages in the "Draft:" space created as redirects to the article space have traditionally been deleted at WP:RFD. In addition, none of what you said has anything to do with WP:RDRAFT, considering the redirect was created about a month ago, and has always been a redirect. (The redirect is not a {{R from move}}.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete contra Robert McClenon because this was never a draft. Keeping it would lead to confusion that there has been a draft on the subject, which it seems Robert fell for. -- Tavix (talk) 14:22, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Tavix: For what it's worth, apparently, the section which WP:RDRAFT targets was recently updated in a way (I'm assuming WP:BOLDly) which would have validated a "keep" for this redirect. However, this redirect was created prior to that addition, and ... since I wasn't sure what caused that addition and I do not necessarily agree with it, I reverted the change pending explanation from the editor who wrote/added the wording. (It seemed like a change that was major enough to need consensus for such a change.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I argue that a redirect created in draftspace is not a draft, thus would not validate a keep either way. -- Tavix (talk) 18:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That's fair: Seems the addition to WP:RDRAFT may have been intended for drafts converted to redirects, not pages in the "Draft:" namespace initially created as redirects to mainspace. (I suppose I should ping Godsy at this point so they can better understand why I reverted their addition.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. All of the following types of redirects from draftspace to mainspace should generally be kept imo:
- From drafts moved to mainspace
- From drafts merged with a mainspace article
- From drafts merged with another draft that was later moved or merged to mainspace
- From drafts that duplicate an existing mainspace article
- From the title of a draft that was moved within draftspace before being merged or moved to mainspace
- From titles that were never drafts but at which a draft that duplicates an existing mainspace article might reasonably be created.
- I see this as a completely harmless redirect that is an example of my final bullet. I don't know why someone would expect we don't already have an article on Joe Biden but given this redirect has been created and we definitely don't need a draft at this title, deletion seems both pointy and pointless. Thryduulf (talk) 09:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Thryduulf: Discussion started at Wikipedia talk:Drafts#Redirects from draftspace to the mainspace which are not the result of a move. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 09:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sunny (upcoming TV series)
Heartless Angel
a recurring attack for sephiroth in a lot of his appearances since his debut... but also for kefka. if both appear in a playable or boss form in any given game, heartless angel tends to go to whoever pops up first, which is usually kefka. if you want to be technical, sephiroth gets it more often overall because he gets more appearances, but results seem to associate it equally with both (give or take sephiroth being mentioned more often overall). even then, heartless angel isn't mentioned in either of their articles. if not deleted, i don't know if it should be kept there or retargeted to kefka, to final fantasy#gameplay, or to recurring elements in the final fantasy series#gameplay, because it'd be hard to cram an unsourced mention (or worse, a mention with a guide as the source) into those otherwise good or featured articles cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:43, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Soooo... the move gets a "kind of" mention in Kefka's article, as "Fallen Angel", although the actual Woolsey translation rendered it in game as "Fallen One" on the SNES (as can be confirmed by looking up a playthrough on youtube). This is the move that got commentary from a reliable source, and was worth the mention in the article. Now, I believe you're probably right that it's been updated in newer versions/releases of the game to Heartless Angel, as the Final Fantasy fandom wiki uses that term, but it doesn't seem to have garnered any commentary in reliable sources. Google, on the other hand, shows overwhelming preference to linking the term with Sephiroth instead of Kefka, likely due to the relative popularity of FFVII over FFVI... except that most if not all of these hits I'm finding are not from WP:RS. Which leaves us in the awkward position where there's clear analysis that would be interesting to discuss... that we can't use because none of it has gone through editorial publishing processes. I can't decide whether that means we should delete the redirect because we don't really have information on exactly it under that name, redirect to Kefka because the thing this redirect refers to IS directly named and described there... except under a different name (which is even incorrect, despite being published in a WP:RS!), or to keep the redirect because usage online clearly prefers Sephiroth as the WP:PTOPIC even though we don't and probably can't mention it there! Fieari (talk) 02:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The fact that the Kefka article mentioned "Fallen Angel" as the name of the move bothered me enough that I added an endnote with the correction, and a mention to the renaming of it to Heartless Angel. Not sure if this is the best way to go about it, but surely the primary source material can be used just for a correction of this sort. Fieari (talk) 03:17, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- at this point, i'd say nuke it until a reliable source decides to cover the attack (and actually get the name right)
- also yeah, i did say results preferred sephiroth, because ff7 is the only final fantasy game people can remember the existence of for more than 15 seconds. coverage of final fantasy elements kind of sucks tbh cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:14, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the talk of the target and Kefka Palazzo pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:16, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Honestly, I say delete the redirect. Kefka and Sephiroth are weirdly similar, especially with the fallen angel theming and imagery, and it's just not worth it to debate who 'gets' a redirect that sees maybe ten hits a year - especially with the lack of reliable sources (which, let's face it, isn't likely to change anytime soon). I could support retargeting to recurring elements in the final fantasy series#gameplay, but in that case I'd want to see another section on that page for recurring moves (Fallen One/Heartless Angel, Meteor, Bad Breath, etc.) and I just don't know if they're significant enough to have that kind of coverage. I mean, even Bahamut only gets a mention in the design section, despite his presence as a summon and/or plot-relevant character since the very first game. Atma/Ultima, Odin, and even Omega don't get a mention at all, so it's hard to reconcile that with keeping one weirdly-translated attack that two very famous villains use. NekoKatsun (nyaa) 20:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Големата екскурзија
Jabar
There are Many Disambiguation Links in the Word "Jabar" on Jabar (disambiguation). So for me this should not be special. Like the case of West Kalimantan where I made the word redirect Kalbar, but it was deleted because it was not only in one article. Baqotun0023 (talk) 12:12, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Move Jabar (disambiguation) to Jabar. 88.235.215.238 (talk) 15:16, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Măluț River
Completely unmentioned on the target page. With a bit of digging I found ro:Râul Măluț which just says "The Măluț River is a watercourse, a left tributary of the Talna River in Satu Mare County, Romania.". It's not the only tributary and nothing seems to indicate it is a particularly significant one so simply adding it to the article would seem a bit misleading? Thryduulf (talk) 11:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Also bundle Măluţ River. Looks exactly the same but there is a tiny difference in diacritic. Also the non-diacritic Malut River. Jay 💬 13:06, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Malut
Not sure that a variant spelling for a village with 536 inhabitants (which redirects to the commune's article) is the primary topic, given that Malut is also a commonly used shortening for North Maluku (Maluku Utara), an Indonesian province with more than a million inhabitants.Malut (disambiguation), which is currently a primary-and-one-other dab, could be moved to the base name instead. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:10, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pokemon generations 5
implausible pluralization? if kept, i'll be retargeting to the gen 5 games regardless of result cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't delete Seems plausible. Readers might see the "5" and think generation should be pluralized. Ca talk to me! 02:33, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:16, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Cogsan: Which is the gen 5 games target you're referring to? @Ca: Are you supporting cogsan with the new target, or are you supporting the current? Jay 💬 04:57, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- i'll go with bw cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:38, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Guillermo Vilas: Settling the Score
Not sure what to do about this one. The subject exists (per third party searches) and is linked at List of Netflix original films (2020) in the list of film released that year. But ... the fact that this title is a redirect and not an article seems to validate WP:REDYES deletion. However, the subject of this redirect is mentioned twice in the biographical article about its subject, Guillermo Vilas: Once in the last paragraph of the article's top section, and once in the last paragraph of Guillermo Vilas#ATP ranking No. 1 controversy. I am not sure if either of these targets are viable retargeting options for this redirect, or if the redirect should be deleted to promote the creation of an article (though my preference here is deletion.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Steel1943: I am skeptical of the value of red links in prompting article creation. I think it's better to have a red link than no link at all, where an article can potentially be written, but better to have a redirect than a red link where the article is really unlikely to actually be written. The ultimate end question is what best serves the reader looking for information on the subject. BD2412 T 23:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @BD2412: Fair enough. "WP:REDLINK" Might be another guideline and/or essay excerpt that I need to add to my "questionable utility" list. I'm just ... not sure if the current setup is adequate since the subject of this redirect has article potential, and I do not believe I've seen any other cases where a redirect representing a biographical media (book, film, etc.) redirects to the human subject of the biography rather than having an article about itself or being a redirect that targets a section in another article identifying and explaining itself. Steel1943 (talk) 19:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I think there are cases where it makes sense, where the subject is discrete and the likely topic of a writeable article, and cases where a redirect is more defensible. BD2412 T 19:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Nominator comment: To clarify on this, my stance is delete and weak retarget to Guillermo Vilas since "keep" is definitely invalid. Steel1943 (talk) 17:52, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:14, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Search results are sufficient. Jay 💬 05:03, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Fax (hair)" and "Fax (head hair)"
The word "fax" is mentioned nowhere in the target article, leaving it unclear what these redirects are meant to refer to and/or define. The only other article on Wikipedia I can find that mentions such terms in context is John the Baptist, but with the way the term "fax" is used in that article pertaining to "hair", it makes it seem as though these nominated redirects are some sort of suffix. Steel1943 (talk) 22:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:RFOR, as Middle English might reasonably be considered a "foreign language". The word may be familiar to modern readers through Shadowfax, but the Wiktionary link from Fax (disambiguation) will cover this usage adequately. Tevildo (talk) 09:53, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I have added an etymology section to the page on Hair so it is now in the target article. Fax is attestated in modern English, not only Middle English, even if its usage has since become rare. Ingwina (talk) 10:02, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- In that case, my stance (I am the nominator) is changing to retarget Fax (hair) to Hair#Etymology but still delete Fax (head hair) since the "Etymology" section does not specify anything about "head" or "head hair". Steel1943 (talk) 19:20, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This is from the page "The now broadly obsolete word "fax" refers specifically to head hair".
- I feel like if fax means hair, the word should redirect to the whole page - is there precedent for redirecting to the specific section mentioning the word if the word refers to the wider article? I don't have too strong views about this bit though - it just depends on the nuance of wikipedia policy to me! Ingwina (talk) 08:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ingwina: The reason why I'm suggesting for at least Fax (hair) to target Hair#Etymology is the section directly exposing what "fax" means in the context of the subject of the article. In this case, keeping the target as Hair with no section redirect would be if the word was immediately established to be an alternative used in present day, which it seems this word may not be. Either way, that section seems to best explain why this term redirects to any part of the Hair article's subject. Steel1943 (talk) 19:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Sure :) I'm very relaxed about it. Worst comes to worst they scroll up. I don't think it's a big problem! Ingwina (talk) 20:22, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For a stronger consensus...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:12, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Refine the first to Hair#Etymology. Fax (head hair) is not needed since we have Fax (hair). Refine or delete, I'm not particular either way. Jay 💬 05:10, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Paris Olympics
July 26
Stetson Bennett's final game
హిరోషిమా పీస్ మెమోరియల్ మ్యూజియం
Bruce Robinson (civil servant)
There is no mention of Bruce Robinson at the target article. -- Tavix (talk) 20:04, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Lyric Theatre, Belfast. -- Tavix (talk) 20:31, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak retarget per Thryduulf. Jay 💬 05:13, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
SO(32)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 3#SO(32)
Magik (film)
Situation I haven't run into here: This was a BLAR to an article that does not currently mention the subject, but restoring the article would go against WP:NFF, which means there isn't a snowball's chance in Hell that the article would survive AfD. I think the best approach is restore article but draftify, which is the better way to incubate something in development hell anyways. (Normally I wouldn't take something to RfD just to !vote restore, since anyone can do that, but if I were to unilaterally restore and draftify I feel like that would be backdoor deletion of the redirect.) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 00:56, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Restore/Draftify per nom. You make a good case for it, and I appreciate the reasoning for going through the RfD process. Fieari (talk) 01:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Although back in 2018 and 2019 it was restored twice so I think it probably should be restored and sent to AFD per WP:BLA and if it is desired to disambiguate (if the 2024 one is different) then the edit history should be moved to Magik (2018 film) and redirected to Magik (disambiguation) per WP:INCDAB. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Bundling the related redirect Magik (2015 film). Hyphenation Expert (talk) 04:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Draftify or AfD after restoration?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:05, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Well, this is really two separate issues. The draft(s) can be restored and draftified, if desired. What needs to be determined here is: Are these appropriate titles to point (i.e redirect) to targets in the mainspace? — Godsy (TALKCONT) 18:13, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete both per WP:NFF as the nom points out. This looks like a film that was shelved a long time ago. Unless there has been any recent updates there is no point in draftifying it because it'll just be deleted six months down the road. -- Tavix (talk) 20:12, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Well we can't predict now whether there will be updates in the next six months. But even if there aren't, having deleted history be at a draftspace title is helpful for if the film does get made years from now, letting a future editor know that they can have it undeleted. And if that doesn't happen and it does just get G13'd and never undeleted, then we're no worse off. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 06:03, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Given how long ago we're talking, I feel rather confident that there will be no updates in the next six months. Even if I'm wrong, I would rather deleted history be in mainspace rather than draftspace. The edit history would be less 'hidden' there because casual editors aren't as familiar with draftspace. -- Tavix (talk) 14:17, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
KBCT-FM
This was once a redirect to KWBT (FM), which used to use the KBCT call sign, but that article was redirected due to lack of notability. There is no mention of this at Infinity Sports Network, which became the target to avoid a double redirect, or at KWBT (FM)'s current target of List of radio stations in Texas. The KBCT call sign has since been reassigned to a new FM station in Missouri, but there's no notability there either (I just reverted an attempt to create a stub on it that ultimately did not overwrite this redirect). At this point I can't really see any further reason to retain this redirect in any capacity. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:27, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget to the KBCT dab page and add a mention of the Missouri station there. Thryduulf (talk) 10:10, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Added entry at dab. Jay 💬 05:19, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bionic Bunny, et al.
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
The target of all of these related redirects is a section that no longer exists in the target article. (These are all related to fictional characters or works within the fiction of the show itself — hence doubly fictional, which presumably is why the content didn't survive.) There doesn't seem to be anything relevant in the main Arthur (TV series) article, either. Nor in Marc Brown (author), our article for the author of the Arthur books. Propose deleting these unless some other appropriate target can be found. - dcljr (talk) 04:25, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
WhyOnEarthWouldIWantToContributeToaWiki
Not recently created so doesn't fall under R3, but seems entirely implausible that someone would ever actually type this into their search bar. EggRoll97 (talk) 02:51, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Worth noting that despite its CamelCase name, it's less than a year old. Some historical cross-namespace redirects are kept, but new ones are discouraged. jlwoodwa (talk) 03:05, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]- Retracted due to new evidence below. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:27, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Restore history and keep there is a lot of deleted history here, with the earliest dating back to 2002, however the earliest history is now at Wikipedia:Why on Earth would I want to contribute to a wiki after history merging. However, this title was speedily deleted under G6, apparently unprompted (the last activity on the page was two years previously), by RHaworth in 2019. The rationale given was "created in the wrong namespace" but that is incorrect since it was originally created before namespaces existed (RHaworth was later desysopped, in part due to misuse of speedy deletion). This is getting a lot of his - over 200 so far this year even with none recorded for - so it's clearly still providing a useful function. Thryduulf (talk) 10:38, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Restore history, keep, mark as historical. As per Thryduulf, this is a restoration of an old camelcase redirect that existed before namespaces was a thing. Let history remain preserved. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:17, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Restore history and keep per above. I'm not too sure how it would be marked historical though. Maybe it could be a soft redirect, or maybe {{R from historical name}} can be repurposed? Probably out of the scope of RFD. mwwv converse∫edits 16:24, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The rcat is {{R with old history}}. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:30, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Remedy as described above. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:45, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as historical with a note about the Wikipedia:Why on Earth would I want to contribute to a wiki histmerge. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:31, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Move without redirect to Wikipedia:WhyOnEarthWouldIWantToContributeToaWiki to get it out of the mainspace. No opinion otherwise about the edit history. Steel1943 (talk) 21:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It this were unused I could support that, but given the evidence of quite substantial use I have to oppose. Thryduulf (talk) 07:55, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. As the original creator of this redirect, I might as well say that I originally created this (and perhaps a few others) because I was scrolling through the list of the first 100 pages and I noticed that a few old CamelCase pages did not exist, and so I sought to fill those in. ✶Antrotherkus✶ 06:51, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Antrotherkus: Just so you know, WP:DRV is better than recreation in cases like this. It's not a problem if you didn't know about it, though. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
F. Fitzgerald
Delete. Or redirect to FitzGerald (surname). jnestorius(talk) 02:35, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Someone entering this title is probably looking for F. Scott Fitzgerald, but the omission doesn't seem to have affinity (AFAICT he was never referred to as "F. Fitzgerald"). If you search for "F. Fitzgerald", F. Scott Fitzgerald is the first result, so the redirect doesn't have much navigational value either. jlwoodwa (talk) 06:11, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Kablammo (talk) 09:25, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Very clearly the primary topic, and there are hatnotes to others who might be searched for. Thryduulf (talk) 10:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Very clearly not the primary topic in Ireland, where the name FitzGerald originates. There is currently no hatnote for F. Fitzgerald on the F. Scott Fitzgerald article. One would need to add F. Fitzgerald (disambiguation) as a redirect to Fitzgerald (surname)#F in order to pick up Fern Fitzgerald and Frances FitzGerald (disambiguation). I would oppose any such hatnote as it would clutter the article and invite the inference that "F. Fitzgerald" is a reasonably common way to refer to "F. Scott Fitzgerald" as opposed to a very rare way. jnestorius(talk) 21:58, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Thruduulf. It does not lack affinity, by the way, as excluding a middle name is a reasonable thing to do in many cases. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:41, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm confused. Isn't "this modification could just as well apply to a vast number of other titles" the definition of "lacks affinity"? jlwoodwa (talk) 04:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Jlwoodwa: Affinity applies to things like a period at the end of a title, being in quotes, etc. In other words, an error that could apply to almost absolutely any title. A title without a middle name only applies to names, and furthermore only names including a middle name. It is always reasonable to leave out a middle name for a redirect, as long as there is no ambiguity in what's covered (or there is a primary topic as in this case). I would support that every single time. I would not support every single title having a redirect from that title in quotes or with a full stop at the end and so forth. Affinity is in regard to much broader variants, not specific ones like this. This situation clearly does not apply to every title (or a vastly broad enough swath of titles). Even if it did, it would still be appropriate all the time, rendering affinity double moot. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 09:20, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Does seem to be occasionally used in product listings and non-RS. If there were usage of the term to refer to anyone else, that low-quality usage wouldn't be weighted very strongly, but the only search results I see are spurious ones about John F. Fitzgerald. (The sources still write out the entirety of "John F. Fitzgerald"; Google just includes them because the substring matches.) Limited usage trumps no usage, so keep. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 22:18, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Autogenerated listings and poorly copyedited self-publishing? I don't think is persuasive evidence that real humans are using the term other than as a slip. The term is too ambiguous to prioritise autocorrecting a slip. jnestorius(talk) 22:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Are there other instances of anyone else being called "F. Fitzgerald"? -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 02:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- "Ms F. Fitzgerald", references to Frances Fitzgerald (politician) in Dáil proceedings jnestorius(talk) 15:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I have added Fionn Fitzgerald (born 1990), Irish football player, to the surname page. BD2412 T 21:58, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
టామ్ బ్రాడీ
July 25
Stun ray
The subject of the redirect is not mentioned in the target article, leaving it unclear what subject this redirect is meant to define. From a preliminary search of Wikipedia, it seems this redirect is mentioned nowhere. Steel1943 (talk) 21:21, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak retarget to stun gun, which mentions the current target. Hesitant because 'stun weapons' are not really described at that target. Might be better to return this to red for now. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I'm legitimately befuddled that this isn't mentioned and discussed in detail at the target article, given how much a staple it is in sci-fi. Making a character sleep without actually hurting them is just such a USEFUL thing for a writer to be able to do, that even in non-scifi works you get things like that one punch that harmlessly KOs you, or chloroform, or a sleeping drug or whatever. In sci-fi, they definitely use stun guns all the time, from Star Wars to Star Trek and beyond. It's a trope for a reason. Normally, when I feel like article creation should be encouraged I !vote delete to redlink it, but here, I don't think it deserves its own article at all... I just think it should be included in this one. Err... not that I'm volunteering to write it though. Not sure what to do in this situation. Fieari (talk) 23:15, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget to Raygun - it's a scifi weapon that shoots rays, that mentions stunning:
A wide range of non-lethal functions as determined by the requirements of the story: for instance, they may stun, paralyze or knock down a target, much like modern electroshock weapons.
. BugGhost🦗👻 12:26, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- — Godsy (TALKCONT) 05:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:27, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Jerry Temporary
Andy youre a star
Quail, quail, quarry
"Joe Biden approval rating" and others
Aeris dies
Ciel (video game character)
Golem(Mega Man Zero)
List of characters in the Mega Man Battle Network seres
MEga Man X6
Bikers for Trump
Theoretical high pixel count images
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#Theoretical high pixel count images
FinalMethod
Not mentioned at the target with or without a space. Internet and Google Scholar results did not turn up anything illuminating. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 19:48, 15 July 2024 (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) 14:52, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Port Royal, Richmond County, Nova Scotia
It is not clear why this redirects here. "Port Royal" itself is ambiguous, and there's no mention of "Port Royal" in the article. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- There is such a place (not sure if linking google maps like that works), it just doesn't have an article at present. It had been a stub before being redirected and the corresponding mention of it in Isle Madame (Nova Scotia) was removed a few years ago. I've no idea if the place is notable in any way. older ≠ wiser 20:28, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It's certainly not notable enough to warrant a proper article. About 15 years ago, somebody created an article for it but it's no more than a hamlet on Isle Madame, NS. PKT(alk) 15:38, 18 July 2024 (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) 14:51, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Restore stub: I believe it is legally recognized and thus meets WP:NPLACE. An article may be warranted. C F A 💬 20:17, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Florence and Ivan Cameron, and Wilfred Johnson
Delete per previous post Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Pinging @DeFacto from previous Rfd. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:51, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Parafasciolopsis fasciolaemorpha
big rigs redirects with no space
Degi dialect
Not mentioned in any capacity at the target. Unclear how/why this redirect would make sense. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- All of my recent mass redirects of Ryukyuan languages come from the supplementary metadata of UniCog (unicog_meta_v1.xlsx) and Nakamoto (1981:459-463) (図説琉球語辞典). Degi is a subarea of Okinoerabu (though information is very obscure; but see here for a postal code number list of Okinoerabu which includes Degi). Chuterix (talk) 21:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kernel service
Digimon World Re:Digitize
that's a completely different type of colon. not sure who would write the title in english, switch to a japanese keyboard setting to add that specific colon and nothing else, and then back to a latin one to write the rest cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:40, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as implausible mixed-script redirect. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - I'm an EFL teacher to native Japanese speakers and see my students do this kind of thing all the time. Random "full-width" punctuation and spaces everywhere when they try writing in English. No comment as to whether or not that makes it keepable, but just needed to say... yes, they do this. No, I don't know why, no matter how many times I tell them not to. Fieari (talk) 04:51, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- On reflection, coming back to add: I do know why they do this. Japanese keyboards have a button to switch between hiragana/kanji, katakana, and romaji modes, as well as some other modes as well. Japanese users are very familiar with switching between modes multiple times within a single sentence in order to type the characters they need. So they are typing in romaji mode to type the less familiar English characters/words, but then they suddenly come across a character they are used to much more, the colon! So they switch back to kana input to put in the familiar character before switching back to romaji mode to continue typing the unfamiliar parts. As I said, it happens A LOT despite my best efforts to curtail it ("Just keep it on romaji while in English class!") Fieari (talk) 07:06, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- this is almost as cursed as turning caps lock on and off for each individual capital letter. still, i don't think it's plausible to do that with an originally japanese game on english wikipedia, but that's a possible wrench in the plan cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:58, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I think Fieari presented a good argument on why Japanese speakers might use this redirect. Since redirects have low maintanance burden and the subject is a Japanese game, keep. Ca talk to me! 02:46, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:44, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep given the explanation given by Fieari. Given this is close, but not identical to WP:RFOREIGN. And given this game has a strong affinity to Japanese and the Japaneses JSP cover, for example, has the title in English also, if it's not uncommon for people to mix the scripts, no reason to delete given how cheap redirects are. Skynxnex (talk) 20:40, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: If this is kept, it should probably be listed at WP:MIXEDSCRIPT as an "exception to the rule". jlwoodwa (talk) 23:59, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
missingspace too cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:15, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Likely spelling variant. Some readers may not realize it is common to put a space after the subtitle. Ca talk to me! 15:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: all have errors. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:09, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:44, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as harmless search terms. C F A 💬 20:13, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
July 24
Eli Kowaz
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 1#Eli Kowaz
1.6
Sweden incident
TrumPAC
This redirect is not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. However, it seems a topic by the name of this redirect has some sort of connection to its target: Searching for this word on third-party search engines seems to return results for a political action committee for Donald Trump that looks as though it was active only during the 2016 presidential campaign season. Steel1943 (talk) 20:49, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Trump campaign controversies
The redirect is not exclusive to the target. (There were controversies in all 3 of Donald Trump's presidential campaigns since 2016. [Not sure about the 2000 one.]) I would suspect there's a place to retargeting this redirect, sort of acting as a disambiguation page, but I'm currently not seeing it. Maybe this should be a WP:BROADCONCEPT? Steel1943 (talk) 20:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support for President Donald Trump by white Americans
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 1#Support for President Donald Trump by white Americans
Support for Donald Trump
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 1#Support for Donald Trump
Ideological neutrality of the state
The phrase "neutrality of the state" is not mentioned in the target article, leaving it unclear what in the target article the redirect is meant to define. Steel1943 (talk) 20:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The phrase "Rivet media attention" is mentioned in the target article, but it doesn't seem mentioned in a way to validate searching this phrase in any form as a way to arrive at the target article. Otherwise, this phrase is probably vague since it may refer to other topics related to Donald Trump. Steel1943 (talk) 19:54, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete This reads like a segment from a sensational news article. This is not a plausible search term. Ca talk to me! 16:09, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Trump's politics
MAGA tourist
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#MAGA tourist
List of nearest free floating planetary mass objects
Unusable and unsearchable WP:XY redirect. Also, the redirect target doesn't contain a list of the nearest free floating planetary mass objects. 21 Andromedae (talk) 18:13, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- A list by distance could be created at the target. Otherwise I agree this should be deleted. SevenSpheres (talk) 18:29, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:08, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Super Mario Wii 2: Galaxy Adventure Together
Super Mario Galaxy 2 is not known by this name. The article has only had this title for 16 minutes before being moved back. Mia Mahey (talk) 16:36, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No mention of this title in article. Never released as this. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:18, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - It is a proper title for the game in South Korea based on a few searches. Probably still a delete, though. --Super Goku V (talk) 03:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This is the official Korean name for the game, it is also listed as so on the Mario Wiki. This could be added to the Wikipedia page as well. BigManBigChange (talk) 07:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- wp:rlang applies here. same reason a korean redirect for a kirby game got deleted 10 days ago. if a source is eventually found, it could potentially be added as a piece of info in the development section, but otherwise, nah. the same rationale applies to the nomination just below this one. delete cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The odd title is the result of last-minute changes brought due to the Korean Intelletual Property Office determinination that the original title conflicted with multiple pre-existing products. Strangely I can't find any source that covers this. Ca talk to me! 09:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I thought about it for a while, and I say we keep for the Korean-English bilinguals who may not have realized this game was published under a different name in Korea. The reasoning behind WP:RLANG is that readers would be unlikely to search up topics with non-English search terms if the topic is unaffined to the language.
- However, the Korean title is a simple English transliteration of
- Super Mario Wii 2: Galaxy Adventure Together. "슈퍼 마리오 Wii 갤럭시 어드벤처" contains no Korean words and simply spells out the English title. This may lead readers to think the name is same in English releases too, just not in Hangul. Ca talk to me! 13:45, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per Ca's reasoning; this isn't the sort of foreign language redirect we avoid. It's the English translation of the Korean title of the game, which happened to be different from the name in most other places. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:38, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kangxi Radicals
Either Kangxi Radicals (Unicode block) sjhould be moved here, or it should point to Kangxi radical (where Kangxi radicals points). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:58, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget to Kangxi radicals. There is no reason why either different capitalisations or singular/plural should lead to different places. Thryduulf (talk) 12:51, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Not necessarily. See WP:DIFFCAPS. Also, Gods is the plural of God, but it redirects to Deity because the "God" article is limited to monotheism, which rejects the idea of gods in the plural. Nyttend (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- In general that's true - different capitalisations and pluralisations do sometimes appropriately lead to different places, however I was referring to this specific redirect (although I now see I wasn't clear about that): Kangxi radical, Kangxi Radical, Kangxi radicals and Kangxi Radicals should all lead to the same target. Thryduulf (talk) 00:01, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Best Year Ever
The page title could also refer to the SpongeBob 20th anniversary celebration known as "Best Year Ever". Retarget to SpongeBob SquarePants#Twentieth anniversary or disambiguate? 1033Forest (talk) 03:44, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I really see no use in keeping this. Intrisit (talk) 10:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Imperial Royalty
This term does not appear in the target article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:58, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I guess Royalty and Majesty are somewhat synonymous. Josethewikier (talk) 02:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per above, since both words are synonymous. CycloneYoris talk! 04:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. The words are not exact synonyms, and, more imporatntly, "Imperial Majesty" is a title, but "Imperial Royalty" isn't. Emperors can referred to as "His Imperial Majesty", but no ruler has ever been called "His Imperial Royalty". The redirect as it stands is misleading. If it's to be kept, Emperor would be a better target. Tevildo (talk) 17:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Imperial and Royal, Imperial–royal, Imperial and Royal Highness, Imperial and Royal Majesty, are just a small selection of targets where this could reasonably point. Unless it can be established that this term is actually used in this form for one or more topics we cover, this should likely be deleted as vague. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:54, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget to King-Emperor. They're not synonymous; in the context of monarchy, "imperial" refers to emperors/empresses, and "royalty" only to kings/queens, a lesser dignity. This article is general, not country-specific like "Imperial-royal" or "Imperial and Royal", and the redirect title is about a concept, not about a title like "Imperial and Royal Highness" or "Imperial and Royal Majesty". Nyttend (talk) 19:54, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget per Nyttend. All the other proposed targets are specific to a particular context, whereas King-Emperor is a broad concept article. Rosbif73 (talk) 11:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete it looks like the first Google hit for the term is a Pomerian dog breeder, which wasn't exactly on my bingo card. The other results seem to be mostly the kind of keyword synonym spam people use for SEO. There seems to be the occasional usage in historical contexts, e.g. an old history book or museum listing. I think they're using it to emphasize that these are imperial royals, e.g. emperors and not kings, but it doesn't seem to be a term of art. In any case, serious use of the term is rare and doesn't not appear to be a synonym for Imperial Majesty or King-Emperor. Rusalkii (talk) 20:22, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Invasion of Mexico
Overly broad term; no evidence that it is linked only to this specific war. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:47, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. If there are other wars this term might describe, this one is overwhelming likely to be the one intended. The others can be listed in a disambiguation page linked on a hat note. Shankar Sivarajan (talk) 03:25, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep or disambig. Other things referred to by this term according to my searches include United States occupation of Veracruz, Spanish conquest of the Aztec Empire (redirect from Spanish conquest of Mexico), Pastry War and Second French intervention in Mexico. If there is a primary topic then it is the current target but I'm not completely convinced there is. Thryduulf (talk) 08:29, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Disambig. The various wars listed by Thryduulf are perfect fuel for creating a dab page; while the Mexican-American war should probably be the first war listed on the page, it's not primary enough to be directly redirected to. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:40, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Disambiguate per Lunamann; obviously Mexico has been invaded several times. If I didn't know better, I'd expect this to cover the reign of Maximilian. Nyttend (talk) 19:56, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That was the invasion that came to my mind first, but I was also a French major. A disambiguation page would be totally appropriate. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:01, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Disambig or keep. Primary topic of a quick google search does seem to be the Mexican-American War by a fairly wide margin, but I think a disambig page would be helpful here given that it is a generic term for something that has occurred several times (I also found Candelaria border incursion of 1919, in addition to Thryduulf's listed pages). Funnily enough, most of the first page of google results that isn't the current target is a hypothetical modern American invasion of Mexico, which we (very reasonably) don't have a page for but does get a one-sentence callout at Mexico–United_States_relations#Biden_administration. Rusalkii (talk) 19:07, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Teemo
Not mentioned; delete unless a suitable target can be found. Queen of Hearts talk 17:48, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Before Arcane, one of the main "mascots" of League. Useful if someone wants to know where the naming of Gothus Teemo comes from for an example in wider culture of just last week. (Note that Teemo probably could be mentioned, but as a Featured Article, the League article is maintained pretty strictly, so it might be arguably under-inclusive in the name of keeping the highest level of sourcing.) SnowFire (talk) 22:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Turn into disambiguation page now that G. teemo has an article. SnowFire (talk) 20:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Disagree with this. Per WP:2DABS a redirect/hat note would be preferable. Bensci54 (talk) 12:22, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep Could probably merit a small sentence-long mention based on this article regarding League's impact on popular culture. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep given its use on Gothus teemo. Wouldn't be against it being mentioned on the main article, given that the crab is the first species to be named after a League of Legends character, although that's probably to be discussed on the talk page. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Support disambig per SnowFire. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:36, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Chaotic Enby: Why vote twice in favour in the same RFD request?! Intrisit (talk) 10:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry if it wasn't clear, it was to indicate I supported the two options (keeping the redirect, or converting it to a disambiguation page). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:41, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:04, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sonic Wiild Fire
either an implausible misspelling or an implausible pun. i don't know which outcome is worse, but the term doesn't seem to see much (if any) use in the context of sonic, with or without a space cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment/Weak Keep - Article has mention of "Sonic Wild Fire" as the game's original working title, and a single doubling of a character is a potentially plausible typo, so I don't see a need to go out of our way to delete this thing, but I'll grant that searching the original working title to begin with is a rare proposition, so it's not like I feel strongly about this one. (Entirely possible the redirect creator was making a Wii system pun) Fieari (talk) 06:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: per WP:CHEAP. The game was previously named Sonic Wild Fire so the target makes sense. I see no reason to delete. C F A 💬 21:17, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Sonic Wild Fire exists, and it does not seem as though the misspelling in the nominated redirect has wide-use, if any. Might as well scrap this thing. Steel1943 (talk) 16:16, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Steel. It was created in 2006, and the properly titled redirect was created less than 3 months later. No information on whether "Wii" was a pun or a typo. Jay 💬 17:31, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:04, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Chhota Bheem 2
All redirects were created on the same day by the same creator as a chronological search aid for theatrical films in order of release for the series. Apart from animated films, Chhota Bheem also has a live action film and is a television series. Lack of "film" in the redirect titles was a factor in the deletion of Chhota Bheem 1 and Chhota Bheem 5 at the recently closed RfD WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 25#Chhota Bheem 1. Chhota Bheem 3 redirects back to the parent article that has no listed chronology. I would recommend deletion consistent with the already deleted ones. Jay 💬 22:20, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- As I mentioned in the linked RfD, the lack of 'film' in the title wasn't my issue with Chhota Bheem 1 and Chhota Bheem 5-- the issue I had was that the redirect target was incorrect, pointing to Chhota Bheem and the Curse of Damyaan (2012 film) instead of the actual first and fifth films: Chhota Bheem Aur Krishna and Chhota Bheem: Journey to Petra. (You may notice that both of those redirect to the Chhota Bheem page itself-- that's because we don't have information on those films.)By that logic:
- 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:41, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: Delete all per nom. M S Hassan (talk) 04:15, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:33, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tone (color)
These two redirects should point to the same article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:00, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Target both to Tint, shade and tone. The Lightness article has four mentions of the word Tone according to ctrl-f: the first is a link to Tint, shade and tone that pretty much rephrases that article's title ("Tints, shades, and tones"), the second is a See Also link that also goes to Tint, shade and tone, the third is a third link to Tint, shade and tone, this time as part of the Color Topics template, and the fourth is a link to Pantone that's also in the Color Topics template. From this we can easily deduce that the information someone looking for when they search Tone (color) is *not* on the Lightness page itself, and is instead on the Tint, Shade and Tone page. Retarget as appropriate. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 17:25, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget Tone (color theory) to Color theory#Tints and shades, while altering the section heading and including a brief mention of tone. Delete Tone (color) as vague, unless a strong and unambiguous target can be presented (unmentioned at color). — Godsy (TALKCONT) 16:46, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget both to Tint, shade and tone per Lunamann. If someone wants some other meaning of tone in relation to colour they can find it from that article. Thryduulf (talk) 12:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:30, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Raymoo
raymoo hackery is a name generally only seen in shitposts, and i'd honestly be surprised if anyone not nose deep on every touhou rabbit hole knew about it. fittingly, not mentioned in the target, implausible as an actual search (unless you're me), and google gave me nothing reliable cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:03, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Tentative Keep and tag as meme. It's plausible that someone finds one of said shitposts, doesn't know how the original name is spelled, and searches "raymoo" to find info on Reimu. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Tentative Keep. I personally believe that it is a genuine misspelling or respelling, but you would probably be hard-pressed to find a reliable source that mentions it being a meme or shitpost. Honestly, I don't even remember making this redirect in 2012, but I doubt that "Raymoo Hackery" ever crossed my mind since we would be discussing a "Raymoo Hackery" redirect as well. Regardless, the outcome doesn't really matter to me, so do what you may. — Nameless(?) 13:09, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- in your defense, it's funny cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:20, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. I doubt Wikipedia would be the first place a person searching for info on Reimu would turn to. --Un assiolo (talk) 22:33, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 05:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Momentum is swinging towards deletion, but additional opinions are welcome to help clarify if there is a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Electric Turbo
The Porsche Taycan 'Turbo' models don't actually have a turbocharger, it's just a namesake for a higher-performance model of a car. In that sense, it's kinda misleading. I did a google search, and 'electric turbo' doesn't seem to be a common nickname for the Taycan Turbo models either. Now, looking at retarget options, there does exist electric supercharger (I know technically there's no such thing as an "electric turbo" but that's what {{R from incorrect name}} is for), but having a look at that article, there also exists electrically-assisted turbocharger, so I'm not sure where to retarget it to. — AP 499D25 (talk) 06:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 17:18, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Disambiguate the term can also refer to electric-motor-assist power boost (ie. hybrid vehicle with electric assist drive mode, to add power to the gasoline engine's power output) as "turbo" can just refer to a power boost. -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 07:55, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to electrically assisted turbocharger per Sable. I tried drafting a dab, but could not. Electric supercharger has electrically assisted turbocharger as a section, so I do not know if non-turbocharger superchargers are known as Turbo too. Jay 💬 05:55, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]- Struck in favour of the below. I don't know if "Electric Turbo" is used to refer to even electrically-assisted turbocharger. Jay 💬 08:29, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete at this capitalisation, which infers a proper noun. Electric turbo is red. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Shhhnotsoloud. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Revisit by the nominator: I would agree with deletion of this particular redirect, recommended by the voters above. The capitalised 'T' does make it sound more like a brand name than a noun. I ran a trademark search (e.g. [33]), and it's not registered anywhere. — AP 499D25 (talk) 05:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm still in favour of disambiguation. The term is used in the real world for multiple encyclopaedic things - disambiguation exists to deal with that exact scenario. It can be moved to the lowercase title or a redirect created from that capitalisation, whichever is preferred, as long as people using this search term don't find a red link that's what matters. Thryduulf (talk) 19:00, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- You may draft one, if you see it feasible. As I mentioned, I tried, and could not come up for your two suggested entries. Jay 💬 21:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:28, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment @Thryduulf: Why vote twice in favour in the same RFD request? Intrisit (talk) 10:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I didn't "vote twice". My second comment was responding to discussion that happened after I left my first comment, highlighting that I was aware of that discussion but explaining why it hadn't changed my mind. Thryduulf (talk) 10:29, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for now As much as I see Thryduulf as a statement to keep this title, I agree/side with Jay, Pppery, Shhhnotsoloud and per WP:TNT that this needs an overhaul for acceptance here on WP. Intrisit (talk) 10:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cunty
2009 presidential election
Red Caesar
Caesar is mentioned in the target article, but not Red Caesar. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 21:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The creation summary cites this Philadelphia Enquirer article which makes the connection to dictatorship explicit, but it's too general a target to be useful. The only mention of the term on Wikipedia is at Talk:Claremont Institute#Promotion of "Red Caesar" ideology where, citing an article in The Guardian dated four days prior to the Philadelphia Inquirer one (1 and 5 October 2023 respectively), an IP editor asked "Should we add the fact that the Claremont Institute has been promoting a "Red Caesar" ideology (i.e., a ruler who would nullify the U.S.'s traditional democratic norms)?" but got no reply. Both articles cite the Claremont Institute as the origin of the term and ideal. Given the number of search results the term gets we should probably have some content about it, but unless and until we do the redirect is not helpful so delete until some content is written. Thryduulf (talk) 00:12, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - @Thryduulf: Content already present at Caesarism#21st century (including a namedrop of the aforementioned institute) could probably be easily expanded to include this term. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 10:30, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd support a retarget there if it is expanded to include a mention but not otherwise. Thryduulf (talk) 11:20, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:02, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I see no use in keeping this here any longer. Intrisit (talk) 10:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Empire of Death (Doctor Who novel)
Move history to correct disambiguation at Empire of Death (Bishop novel). Per WP:BOOKDAB we disambiguate by author not series. See Category:Novels by Peter Darvill-Evans as one example of many. --woodensuperman 08:27, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This is a perfectly normal {{R from other disambiguation}}. We don't require readers to know our naming conventions before being able to find the article they want. In this case even if they do know that books are generally disambiguated by author they could use this search term if they don't know who wrote it. Thryduulf (talk) 12:13, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- So why do you actually object? Currently, the redirect Empire of Death (Doctor Who novel) is sitting in multiple categories, but really it should be the correctly disambiguated Empire of Death (Bishop novel) in these categories per WP:CONSISTENT. As there is a page history behind the redirected article, it would make sense for the article to be moved, rather than just de-populating the categories from one redirect and re-populating from another. --woodensuperman 12:40, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- What I am objecting to is deletion of a redirect that is useful to readers. If you actually just want to swap the redirects then that's OK, but I admit to not understanding the point. Thryduulf (talk) 13:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not advocating removal of either redirect, both are valid. Just need to move the history to the correctly disambiguated one, and make sure the correctly disambiguated one is the one populating the categories. Should have been simple maintenance, but another editor objected for no apparent reason. --woodensuperman 13:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep the history at the current location. This is a book that originates from a television series, and thus conforms across multiple naming conventions. Per WP:NCEPISODE, which primarily focuses on episode and character articles,
Where the title is the same as an episode, character, or other element from the show, disambiguate further using Article title (Show Title episode/character/element).
As per the example given, this covers all other elements; i.e. just how Serenity (Firefly episode) and Serenity (Firefly vessel) are disambiguated from each other using the same programme name, as are Empire of Death (Doctor Who episode) and Empire of Death (Doctor Who novel). Given that the article also doesn't actually exist due to the AFD related to it, note that the AFD related to the Doctor Who disambiguation, and thus the relevant history should remain at the Doctor Who disambiguation.
-- Alex_21 TALK 07:54, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a book, not a TV episode, therefore we follow the naming conventions at WP:NCBOOKS. Simple as that. --woodensuperman 10:32, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It is media from and related to a television series, thus it crosses multiple naming conventions; per the lead of NCTV, it covers the
article title for any topic related to television
. Ta. -- Alex_21 TALK 22:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]- So where is the specific part of that guideline that covers naming conventions for TV related books? I think you'll find it's still WP:NCBOOKS. --woodensuperman 18:41, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I have argued my position, and will not go in our textbook circular discussions. We'll await the consensus of this discussion. Cheers. -- Alex_21 TALK 23:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lee Min-ho (singer)
Currently redirects to the dab page because two people named Lee Min-ho are singers: one is the member of Stray Kids Lee Know and the other is a more prominent actor Lee Min-ho. Which do you think is a more suitable target, Lee Know or the K-drama actor? ScarletViolet 💬 📝 11:48, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as is: Judging by the pageviews, Lee Min-ho is nearly 6 times more visited than Lee Know. However, it seems that Lee Min-ho is more known for being an actor than a singer, while Lee Know is primarily known for his K-Pop singing/dancing. Most readers would type Lee Min-ho (actor) instead of (singer). However, Lee Know is better known by his stage name than his real name. I think there is too much factors at play here to accurate judge the reader's intention, or WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. It shouldn't be deleted per Wikipedia:INCOMPDAB, which says to redirect to the more general disamb page if there is no primary topic. Ca talk to me! 15:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as is The standard for partial disamsbiguation is extremely high and this doesn't meet it. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as is per above. I don't think the standard for partial disambiguation should be as high as it is, but even by my standards there is no primary topic here. Thryduulf (talk) 17:34, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The base name is a singer so shouldn't it redirect there if the South Korean singer has been deemed the primary topic for the base name? If there is no primary topic the DAB should be moved to the base name. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting due to Crouch, Swale's observation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:34, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Move disambiguation page to Lee Min-ho. Crouch, Swale is right. Since other editors agree there is no primary topic, the base name should be the disambiguation page and Lee Min-ho (singer) should be retargeted to Lee Min-ho as ambiguous. C F A 💬 15:00, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think other editors are arguing that the title "Lee Min-ho" has no primary topic. Judging by the pageviews, and the fact that Lee Know are known better for his screen name make me to believe that the Lee Min-ho the actor is primary topic for the title "Lee Min-ho". The nominator has said
other is a more prominent actor Lee Min-ho
. What I think ambiguous in terms of primary topic is the title "Lee Min-ho" with (singer) attached to it, for reasons I mentioned above. Ca talk to me! 15:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Draft:San Diego Clippers (NBA)
Mesopotamian language
July 23
Joe Biden's uncle who got eaten by cannibals
No mention of his uncle being eaten by cannibals at the target. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I added a sentence about the coverage of the cannibal business to the family article. pbp 17:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Amazingly to me this isn't just vandalism - Joe Biden's Uncle (Probably) Wasn't Eaten by Cannibals - but it isn't mentioned, and as far as I can tell, has never been mentioned at the target article or anywhere else on Wikipedia. It is mentioned at q:Joe Biden#April 2024 but I don't think someone using this search term is looking for the quote but rather information about Biden's uncle (Ambrose J. Finnegan Jr.) and they won't find that at Wikiquote, or indeed more than a sentence at Family of Joe Biden#Maternal. Thryduulf (talk) 23:44, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Thryduulf. Thought for sure this was an obvious hoax/attack page, but no, it was a real thing. There is no mention of this on Wikipedia, though. C F A 💬 23:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I added a sentence about the coverage of the cannibal business to the family article. pbp 03:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete both the redirect and the mention. WP:ONEWAY. We don't need to cover every single conspiracy theory. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 05:02, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The idea of Joe Biden's uncle being eaten by cannibals (or not) has received significant enough media coverage to justify a redirect. pbp 00:03, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- No amount of coverage justifies misleading people into thinking we have relevant content when we don't. The amount of coverage might justify adding content somewhere relevant, at which point we can consider the redirect, but unless and until that happens the redirect is harmful. Thryduulf (talk) 01:44, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I added a sentence about the coverage of the cannibal business to the family article. pbp 03:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. WP:Patent nonsense. WWGB (talk) 01:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @WWGB although it really does look like nonsense at first glance, it actually isn't. See the links in my and pbp's comments above. Thryduulf (talk) 02:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete for now. I don't think Joe Biden has any uncles. 88.235.215.238 (talk) 11:50, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Ambrose Biden was a real person... pbp 12:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - it sounds ridiculous, it probably is ridiculous, but it was a thing that Biden actually asserted multiple times. If someone has seen a clip of him saying it and wanted to find out more about it, searching "Joe Biden's uncle who got eaten by cannibals" is a pretty reasonable way of trying to find out more information about it. Now that it's included in the target article the redirect seems like a good one to me BugGhost🦗👻 12:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as it has significant media coverage. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 14:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above discussion. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:48, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep but refine to Family of Joe Biden#Maternal. One of the silliest titles for a redirect that is not the result of vandalism (which makes it a good candidate for my list), but the significant amount of media coverage probably justifies Purplebackpack89's short addition. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 14:07, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Wolf Man (2018 film)
"Wolfman", "Wolf man", and "Wolf-man"
Nick Demase
Ruvaush
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 31#Ruvaush
Assassination threats against Donald Trump
AAoDT
Sadalpheretz
Toad Town
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#Toad Town
Girl Toad
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 2#Girl Toad
Mr. K (film)
Autoblog
Target page uses "auto blog" (with the space) once in the lead, unsourced (source in the sentence verifies "splog" but does not use "auto". Seems like this redirect (without the space) should be going to the publication mentioned in the hatnote, and perhaps some changes should be made to the spam blog page (or at least another source found for use of the term). QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't object to deleting the redirect. It's been in place for years. As for the target page, it's using a lot of the terminology incorrectly and needs a lot of work. However, the usual "reliable sources" aren't reliable with respect to SEO terminology because there are no definitive sources of information on that terminology. An "auto blog" is not necessarily a spam blog. Not all spam blogs are auto blogs. Virtually no one in the industry uses "splog" and it was never a very popular term. It was used primarily here on Wikipedia. The word is found mostly in non-SEO glossaries and a few Web hosting companies' sites. They're either copying the Wikipedia definition or the original Wired article that introduced the term. I think this is why people like me mostly just watch the SEO pages for vandalism. They are at best borderline acceptable for Wikipedia inclusion. Michael Martinez (talk) 14:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: I don't see any reliable sources using the term. It should also be removed from the lead of the target. C F A 💬 20:09, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @CFA and Michael Martinez: did either of you consider the retargeting option I mentioned in my nomination? QuietHere (talk | contributions) 03:24, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, that is a good idea. Must've missed it the first time. I change my vote to retarget to Weblogs, Inc.#Autoblog and remove the mention from Spam blog. I imagine this would be the primary topic for "Autoblog" even if it was occasionally used to refer to spam blogs. C F A 💬 03:45, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget per nom. Jay 💬 17:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neo-newtonian
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 30#Neo-newtonian
Peter Selvaratnam
Wiimake
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 30#Wiimake
July 22
Unfallen (2017 film)
Game deck
Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the target article and the redirect unclear. Per the edit history of the redirect, seems the intent of this term was to correlate with the subject at Handheld game console. However, this term has been WP:SEO'ed on third party search engines to apparently establish that this phrase exclusively refers to Steam Deck. (This redirect is a {{R with history}}.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Deck-building game or maybe just Playing card (which is where Deck of cards also goes), or Card game. Googling "game deck" (including quotes) supports this. Steam deck doesn't refer to itself as a "game deck" (google results for "game deck" (no quotes) showing Steam Decks are just because the the Steam Deck plays/allows purchase of games. BugGhost🦗👻 10:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Video game demographics
The section where this redirect targets is not currently in the target article. The target article does mention the word "demographics" 4 times, but it does not seem as though there is a proper location/section within the article to target this redirect. Also, leaving the redirect to target the base article title Video game could be unhelpful since readers would have to hunt down in various places what they are trying to find, and even then, they may not find what they are looking for. I'm thinking this redirect may be a WP:REDLINK deletion candidate. Steel1943 (talk) 21:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Videogame type
Electronic entertainment
The concept is not exclusive to its target. First exceptions that come to mind are Television and Film. Steel1943 (talk) 21:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Game trading
Not exclusive to Video game. Could refer to any subtopic of Game with a physical (or heck, some virtual/digital in today's world) representation. Steel1943 (talk) 21:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as vague. Actually the first thing that comes to mind are trading card games --Lenticel (talk) 00:13, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Also Fixed-odds betting. Jay 💬 17:23, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Computer and video game distinction
Home computer game
Not sure if these redirects should be retained at their current target or be retargeted to Video game. Per the result of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 5#Computer game, Computer game was retargeted away from PC game and to Video game. Considering the current states of the articles Home computer and Personal computer ("PC" in the current target), it does not seem as though the usage of the phrase "home computer" exclusively refers to "personal computer". Steel1943 (talk) 21:11, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the target works with the significant home computer game history on the PC game article and is not comparable to the computer game redirect result. A disambiguation hatnote was added to the video game article by me, maybe add something similar to PC game? IgelRM (talk) 08:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Multiplayer Online Adventure Game
The word "adventure" is nowhere in the target article, leaving it unclear what this redirect is meant to refer or define. Steel1943 (talk) 20:51, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. (Also bundled in 'MOAG'.) I can't find any evidence online of usage. Seemingly just the creator's personal invention/modification of 'MOG'/multiplayer online game. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 00:11, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Tagged as {{R with history}}. Jay 💬 18:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Online multi-player gamers
This redirect seems vague/unclear, specifically since the redirect uses the word "gamers" instead of "games", as well as the word "online". Between several topics including the current target, Multiplayer video game, Massively multiplayer online game, Gamer and/or subtopics, amongst others, it does not seem clear where this redirect should target, if anywhere. Steel1943 (talk) 20:36, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Land 2
Priestess
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
Re-target to Ordination of women.
This is for consistency with Female priest, as agreed upon at Talk:Priestess_(disambiguation)#Requested_move_25_August_2023. Discussion of the other redirect occurred at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_September_15#Female_priest.
There are concerns about the appropriateness of the current target to house a section for the target of this redirect. See Talk:Priest#Priestesses. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 19:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. A priestess is a female priest, therefore the topic is clearly the covered by the article at priest. I've never heard the term used in connection with the origination of women, and would be frankly rather WP:ASTONISHed if the redirect went there. — Amakuru (talk) 20:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It's ordination, not origination. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I nominated the other redirect Female priest in case we want to change it to Priest for consistency.
- @Amakuru: You "never heard the term ... the origination of women, and ... WP:ASTONISHed"?
Keep per Shhhnotsoloud - if someone prepends "female" to this then the topic is most likely to refer to ordination of women
— User:Amakuru 15:08, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
FYI, I created this RfD while dealing with Draft:Priestess, and related articles' history might be useful. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 21:09, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I might support a split of Ordination of women, with some of it being split off to Priestess and the rest moved to Ordination of women in Christianity. These appear to be 2 separate notable concepts that don't have to be combined. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:12, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you. That is what I've been attempting to accurately do.
- Personal bias disclosed: I use the title. And it is legally valid in my region.
- Whilst I am a minority to use it in my particular faith tradition, I know many other women in ministry of different faiths, who also sincerely use it for official purposes. As well
- As historically. Any woman in many countries, that worked as a ceremony lead in any kind of temple, often was called a Priestess. Priestess Noel Ann (talk) 18:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- In favour of making the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Draft:Priestess its own page, linked to Ordination of women.
- Priestess Noel Ann (talk) 14:51, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Super Mario Bros. 35"
Assassination of Donald Trump
This has twice been deleted as an attack page, once by Liz and once by Isabelle Belato. While it does impute a motive to the gunman, it also strikes me as a plausible redirect. Hence my taking it here for further discussion as to a correct outcome. If deletion is decided to be appropriate I would suggest the page be salted. Barkeep49 (talk) 19:09, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Plausible search term redirect. C F A 💬 19:15, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It's a blatant WP:G10 violation. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- "Blatant" is quite the stretch here. It is a plausible search term. Who is it targeting as an attack page? C F A 💬 19:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It meets this criterion as it is inherently negative and misleading. Redirects implying the death or assassination of a living person can have serious reputational impacts. In the case of a high-profile individual like Donald Trump, such implications can be considered defamatory and harmful. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:26, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete and WP:SALT per WP:G10. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:15, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see who this disparages, at least in any way that the actual title of the page it redirects to does. Indeed, it grants the perpetrator a success that the directed page doesn't. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 19:18, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Hence it disparages the target, Donald Trump. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:20, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not seeing how that is a disparagement. An inaccuracy, yes, but it says nothing about his character, and if followed, the situation is quickly revealed. -- Nat Gertler (talk) 19:24, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Even if the redirect does not disparage character, its misleading nature and potential to cause harm align with the reasons for which similar pages have been deleted. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Neveselbert who is the living person being attacked? Can you explain a bit further how they're being attacked? I'm entirely willing to admit I might be missing something (and indeed did a sanity check before declining and bringing it here given that two admins I respect had already deleted it as G10). Barkeep49 (talk) 19:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- We have a responsibility to present accurate and neutral information. A title like this fails to meet these standards by presenting a false and sensational version of events. Two respected administrators have already deemed the redirect a violation, indicating a consensus that it constitutes an attack page. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:30, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I am also someone who regularly patrols and deletes G10s and so knowing what the community consensus was felt like an appropriate step to take. For me, it seems like WP:RNEUTRAL would allow this title to me if it wasn't a BLP violation. So far it's not clear how Trump is harmed by someone saying he was assassination any more than Obama is harmed by the listed example around his being a Muslim in our redirect guideline. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Even if not a direct attack, implying false events about living persons can contribute to defamation and misinformation. The potential harm is in the misinformation and the sensational nature of the title. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 20:48, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- You lost me. What misinformation? and what sensational title? The way the redirect works is that the article Attempted assassination of Donald Trump would pop up. Is there any misinformation in that article? Is the title of that article sensational? The Mountain of Eden (talk) 21:27, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It suggests that an assassination occurred, which is not true, creating an initial impression that can confuse readers before they even reach the accurate target article. This misinformation arises from the misleading nature of the redirect itself, causing unnecessary alarm. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 23:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a big exaggeration. It is not going to confuse or alarm anyone. If they visit the redirect, they will be sent to the appropriate page which clarifies what actually happened. C F A 💬 23:18, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- People might see the redirect title in search results or links without visiting the page, leading to the spread of the misinformation that his assassination took place. The mere existence of such a redirect title can propagate false information. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 23:39, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see how this title is a G10 any more than its target's is. —Cryptic 19:18, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- He was not assassinated. It's no different to having a Death of Donald Trump redirect. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:19, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It is different. Where would Death of Donald Trump redirect to? Assassination of Donald Trump simply eliminates a word and brings you to the accurate page. He was very nearly assassinated. If anything, it's better to have this redirect to clarify any confusion about what happened. C F A 💬 19:29, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The search function can achieve that without the use of a fictional redirect. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - it's a shortened version of the the target page. The fact that the attemptted assassination was not successful does not make it an invalid redirect. I think it's in compliance with WP:SHORT.
The Mountain of Eden (talk) 19:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC) The Mountain of Eden (talk) 19:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] - I would say Delete as "Assassination of Donald Trump" would imply an actual assassination; But I could also got for Keep with caveat to mark the redirect with {{R from non-neutral name}} →AzaToth 19:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not non-neutral, it's just wrong. —Alalch E. 21:55, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. A clear and obvious term under which someone might search for this event. — Amakuru (talk) 20:44, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - I don't think it falls under G10 (Assassinate Donald Trump would be a blatant G10 violation, not sure about this title), but it is very misleading and inaccurate, does not seem to fall under WP:RPURPOSE, and does appear to fail WP:R#DELETE #2... as Neveselbert already said, it is as plausible of a search term for the event in question as Killing of Donald Trump or Death of Donald Trump... he was not assassinated, no one that has heard anything about the event is going to think he was assassinated, thus no one is likely to be searching for the Assassination of Donald Trump... and I think I also agree with it being SALTed, until (if) it is ever a true statement, at which point we would obviously need to create a new article using this title... - Adolphus79 (talk) 21:06, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Not an attack page. Valid member of Category:Redirects from incorrect names. Falls under WP:PURPOSE: Serve content to readers matching their query. We know what topic they want to read an article on, so we serve them that article. That is the purpose. They misidenfied the nature of the thing or used imprecise words to refer to the thing—they land at the correctly titled article about the thing where they can get knowledge. What else is the purpose?—Alalch E. 21:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- About WP:R#D2: That's for redirects that can cause confusion in the scenario that the wrong idea about what something is persists or is reinforced after reading the title of the page you land on and its first sentence as well, at least. Here, there is no such confusion, because if someone thinks that Trump was killed (esoteric scenario) they will be told in the first sentence that he survived, and "Attempted assassination" is clear enough in itself. If someone was to use imprecise words, failing to distinguish between an assassination and an attempted assassination, while knowing that Trump was not killed in the event (the actual, real, scenario), there would be no confusion to begin with. So that reason to delete a redirect does not apply. It's for more ambiguous cases where the redirect title denotes an incorrect idea that can plausibly get reinforced after arriving at the page, because the start of the page does not directly contradict and dispel the idea. —Alalch E. 22:44, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, very plausible search term, not at all an attack page unless I'm missing some article history in the deleted versions. I don't think people will always slide in "attempted" when searching for events. We have the 2024 Bolivian coup redirect as a recent example. CMD (talk) 01:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as a plausible search term. To get things out of the way, it did not meet G10 as it does not disparage Donald Trump, nor is it defamatory, so I don't understand how it was deleted twice by different administrators as that. Also, to imply that this title is somehow equivalent to "Attempted of Donald Trump" is highly inappropriate – that title would not make grammatical sense and would not be a plausible search term. (As a full disclosure, I found out about the G10s from an off-wiki discussion; I was not asked to vote one way or the other and I wasn't selectively notified). Sdrqaz (talk) 03:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, obviously plausible abbreviation of a search term. Same with Trump assassination. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 09:46, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Also noting the Reagan assassination RfD result: "Keep". Hyphenation Expert (talk) 15:45, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Very clearly a plausible search term and not even close to being a G10 candidate and I'm shocked that two experienced administrators would think otherwise. In addition to the points made above it's plausible for a non-native speaker not to realise that "assassination" refers specifically to an event that resulted in the targetted person's death rather than an attempt whether successful or otherwise. Thryduulf (talk) 13:02, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak keep agree with Thryduulf its not a G10 and that people might not now that the intended victim survived so while its arguably inaccurate its not completely as it was still an attempt. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. 1) It's ghoulish and harassing. 2) Trump and the unsuccessful assassination attempt are too well-known for this to be a plausible search term. 3) It's also superfluous. If someone does search for it, they'll get this result on WP and on Google Attempted assassination of Donald Trump as the top search result. Space4Time3Continuum2x🖖 17:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- From WP:REDIRECT: "
Redirects aid navigation and searching by allowing a page to be reached under alternative titles.
" The redirect would therefore eliminate this unneeded search result. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 19:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] - And who exactly does this redirect harass? The Mountain of Eden (talk) 19:39, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Trump, being declared dead. He's sued for less, not that I expect him to be reading WP redirects or WP. Alternative titles would be "feline" and "cat" but only Schrodinger's cat can be both alive and dead. "Assassination" is not another term for "attempted assassination", it's another term for killing or murder. Space4Time3Continuum2x🖖 20:47, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I have to admit, your response made me laugh. I can't imagine the indivuduals listed in the article List of prematurely reported obituaries having felt harassed for making the list. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 21:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Most of the people on the list are dead now, so they're past feeling anything, and I wouldn't worry about complaints from people who faked their own deaths, such as the fugitive sex offender under 'A'. Maybe I should switch my comment to "keep" since Trump's description of the aftermath has a distinct biblical Easter vibe (
When I rose surrounded by Secret Service, the crowd was confused because they thought I was dead. And there was great, great sorrow
) — nah. Space4Time3Continuum2x🖖 12:21, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, this search term is actually more likely than with "attempted" in front --FMSky (talk) 21:31, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - plausible search term. I don't see this as eligible for G10 and I don't agree that the existence of the redirect means, in any way, that Wikipedia is saying the assassination was successful. For those who think there was an "assassination of Donald Trump," the redirect to the article about the attempted assassination will educate them. Misleading and inaccurate redirect titles that redirect the reader to accurate articles are helpful. It's just like "Trump assassination" or other variations. Levivich (talk) 03:59, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks as though we have another candidate for deletion. Space4Time3Continuum2x🖖 12:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- If you think it should be deleted then nominate it, but I will recommend keeping that for exactly the same reasons as I am recommending keeping this one - it's useful and not at harmful. Thryduulf (talk) 16:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I deliberately searched this, expecting a redirect, because I didn't want to bother adding "attempted". A redirect can be inaccurate (e.g. any {{r from misspelling}} and still be a useful search term Mach61 15:58, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep for the reasoning from @CFA, @Amakuru, @Thryduulf, @Hyphenation Expert, and probably many others. Coulomb1 (talk) 21:47, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. This is indeed an incorrect title. But {{r from incorrect name}} does exist, and it exists precisely for the sorts of situations where a reasonable search term is factually incorrect. I have myself searched this in the searchbar, expecting it to come to the page on the attempted assassination, and was brought here as a result; the redirect is clearly useful. I also do not see how this is an attack page. I simply do not think it can reasonably read to
disparage, threaten, intimidate, or harass
any particular person—the application of the {{r from incorrect name}} tag makes this all quite clear—and the usefulness for search renders the idea that the redirect serve no other purpose
than disparagement, threat, intimidation, or harassment to be untenable. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 01:29, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] - Delete and salt per Adolphus, unless we have precedent for creating similar redirects for failed assassination attempts. Jay 💬 18:19, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sącz dialect
Not found at target article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:08, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete and speedy. This whole region is very complicated dialectally and in terms of terminology, and so things had to change. Vininn126 (talk) 19:11, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lebanese Forces Cross
Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 30#Calls for Joe Biden to suspend his 2024 United States presidential campaign
Vocal minority
Varsity (upcoming film)
I have no idea what the idea is behind this redirect but in my opinion it is useless The Banner talk 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I created Varsity (upcoming film), someone else separately created Prime Target (TV series). It is my understanding that these are for the same production, and Prime Target is the correct title for broadcast. Hildreth gazzard (talk) 17:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep but move to Varsity (TV series) since the subject is not a film per se, and the word "upcoming" is unnecessary IMO; also mention that "Varsity" was the original title of the series before production began. CycloneYoris talk! 01:25, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:33, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Move to Varsity (TV series) per Cyclone. 88.235.215.238 (talk) 18:36, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Power flower
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 30#Power flower
North West Leicestershire by-election, 2010
Never happened. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 22:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak refine to the "Standing down" section where it gets explained the most. There are a few hits dotted around the web as a by-election was expected. Thryduulf (talk) 23:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- In which case it should be renamed Planned North West Leicestershire by-election, 2010, without leaving a redirect. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- If this were an article I could support moving but only retaining a redirect, as a redirect I can only oppose. The current title is the plausible search term, given that's how UK by-election articles are titled. Thryduulf (talk) 08:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not at all plausible, it's a fictional event. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 04:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Not it's not fictional. It was an expected event that ended up not happening because it turned out to be a rare exception to the norm of by-elections happening within ~four months of a vacancy arising. Given that norm and the rarity of exceptions, it is very plausible for someone seeing the MP for North West Leicestershire died in late December 2009 to expect there to have been a by-election in the constituency in the first quarter of 2010. Thryduulf (talk) 10:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, it is ultimately fictional, as it never happened and can never happen, as it's no longer 2010. Like I said, the redirect can be moved to serve the same purpose. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Did the preparations for the by-election actually start? The Banner talk 11:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- AIUI formal preparations can only start once the writ for the election has been issued (which it never was), but it is very likely that at least some informal ones were. Given that those same preparations would have just become preparations for the general election when that was called, and most of them wouldn't have been newsworthy I'm not sure how you'd go about ascertaining, especially at this distance. Thryduulf (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The by-election should have been within four months after vacating the seat, if I read it correct. That would bring the by-election to the end of April 2010 (roughly). That makes it more than likely that the by-election was effectively cancelled due to the upcoming general election. So in my opinion, it makes sense to retarget to 2010 United Kingdom general election The Banner talk 18:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, C F A 💬 17:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mystic Ruins
either vague, or more closely associated with sonic adventure cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:20, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the target talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:26, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I was surprised to see this term has a clear primary topic - Sonic Adventure. Normally that would result in a recommendation to retarget, but the phrase is not mentioned in that article or anywhere else in article space (other than two passing mentions that would not make a good target). Thryduulf (talk) 13:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This used to be an article. Tagged as {{R with history}}. Jay 💬 18:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Simbad link
Active worlds in the Solar System
not the biggest volcano nerd out there, so sorry in advance for any uninformed claims, but from reading the target and other related articles, there seem to be no other celestial bodies that meet the criteria of being a "world", currently having volcanic activity, and being in the solar system, though mercury is a strong "maybe". on another note, i'm not entirely sure "active world" is a term used to refer to volcanic activity, and the creator of the redirect (who seems to have made it as an essay) seemed to have also been referring to geysers, and counting moons as "worlds". for results. wikipedia gave me an mmo (shoutouts to hitomi fujiko), google gave me assorted apps and brands, and wiktionary gave me nothing. unless there's a detail i'm missing or this is a scientific term that refers to celestial bodies with volcanic activity, i'll vote for deletion cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:07, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- on this note, i should mention "volcanically active worlds", a redirect that specifies the type of activity it refers to and does not specify the location. jury's still out on the definition of world though, but it's a step in the right direction cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Is there a better redirect at this time as is this not a redirect with potential.?
- Jury is out on definition of volcano as noted in the article itself and presumably meaning of world. Planet and moon are more accurate terms. Many "worlds" are active in some way as they are above absolute zero and may have internal or external entropy sources that disturb their surface however that is defined. Someone could get a good article out of this so my vote is to retain in hope someone will do the job, unless there is a better redirect. ChaseKiwi (talk) 17:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- drifting into personal opinion territory by now, but wouldn't returning to red be better for that? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:05, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I think "Active worlds" is too ambiguous to justify keeping "Active worlds in the Solar System" as a redirect to Volcano#Volcanoes on other celestial bodies. I also have not found any other suitable redirect targets because the problem is the lack of meaning in the redirect's title rather than a problem with any targets of the redirect. I recommend delete. GeoWriter (talk) 11:49, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:42, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The term is despite limited google results not novel, see this graphic which seems to go beyond volcanoes, "volcanically active world in our solar system" is also used. This abstract refers to "active worlds" as anything "geophysically" active. The current redirect does seem to not encompass the full scope, but it's also not the most strictly defined term. Perhaps Lists of geological features of the Solar System may be better, but deleting it may also be an option. CMD (talk) 03:53, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Vice President Vance
Scared Silly
normally a little vague, but as a name, it seems more primarily associated with an open season movie cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak DABify - This is the title of the first episode of The Wacky Adventures of Ronald McDonald, and also for the movie Open Season: Scared Silly. I'm uncertain if the Open Season movie is the WP:PTOPIC for the phrase "Scared Silly" specifically, and google shows that it's the title of more things as well, such as a children's novel by Elizabeth Eulberg (no wiki-page), a picture book by Marc Brown (author) (very famous author), a stage play by Peter Bloedel (probably not notable), and likely many more... as this is a common English expression as well! Google does show the movie a bit more prominently than the other entries, mind you, so the PTOPIC argument can certainly be made, but that's why my DABify !vote is weak. Although I will say, if a PTOPIC is established, a disambiguation page should probably be made alongside it and hatnoted. Fieari (talk) 06:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:45, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Disambig per Fieari - no clear target BugGhost🦗👻 14:42, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Paper Bowser
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 29#Paper Bowser
FX (African TV channel)
The Economic Times (India)
All-Star Batman and Robin
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 29#All-Star Batman and Robin
Bullitt (album)
Leica MD-2
Republican blue
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 30#Republican blue
Safe state
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 30#Safe state
Apple reinvents the phone.
Unlikely search term. This appears to be the official slogan of the iPhone. Mia Mahey (talk) 05:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as {{r from slogan}}. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 10:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete for trailing full stop. From Search, the slogan (or rather press release headline) appears to have been "Apple Reinvents the Phone with iPhone". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong keep, as this is the product's slogan. Even if "Apple Reinvents the Phone with iPhone" is the full phrase, strictly speaking, "Apple reinvents the phone" is the concise form which became arguably more popular, and which also gets many search hits. As can be seen from the edit summary, the user who requested the deletion has withdrawn the application anyway.--Maxeto0910 (talk) 13:42, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Apple reinvents the phone may be their slogan and therefore a viable redirect, but Apple reinvents the phone. is not. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]- Among the main purposes of a redirect is that users who can't remember something's name exactly can still find it nonetheless when they type something similar in Wikipedia's search bar. That's also why likely or frequent misspellings are allowed as redirects. Therefore, I see no problem in having a period here since users may assume that this slogan ends with a period since it's a complete sentence. Maxeto0910 (talk) 18:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as slogans are valid encyclopedic entries for historically interested people. We usually link to the corresponding product or company, tagging the redirect with
{{R from slogan}}
, unless the slogan became so commonly known that we have a dedicated article about it. (Not an iPhone fan at all, but anyway.) --Matthiaspaul (talk) 17:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Shhhnotsoloud. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] - Weak delete The slogan is unnecessarily long and clearly promotional. Instead something like Phones by Apple Inc. might be useful. IgelRM (talk) 13:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It's not the full slogan, there's the malformed period at the end, it includes the company name (so at best only marginally useful for "hey, I remember that slogan, but not what it's about, let's ask Wikipedia"), and it's not targeted at "an article or section of an article about the slogan" like {{R from slogan}} says it is. Too many things wrong here. Search is sufficient; it'll find the mention in IPhone (1st generation)'s infobox without this redirect's help. Delete. —Cryptic 16:21, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I explained why I don't think it's a problem that the slogan is not the exact official one and includes a period.
- Also, I don't see it as a problem that the redirect includes the name of the company of the product since there are many iPhone models and the slogan could potentially apply to many of them. Maxeto0910 (talk) 18:39, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This may be a case of WP:CITOGENESIS as a similar term "iPhone Apple reinvents the phone." was added to the target in 2011, and then changed to the redirect term under discussion in 2012 by 66.121.52.2. Later, external websites may have picked it up. Fix the slogan at the Infobox or keep the redirect. Jay 💬 18:56, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Exactly. And since the slogan in the shortened, unofficial form has arguably gained more media coverage and popularity (probably because it is more concise), the redirect should be kept. Nonetheless, the slogan in the infobox should be corrected to the arguably less popular full version and get a redirect as well, simply because it's the official one. Maxeto0910 (talk) 21:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
July 21
Donald Kettl
Unreal engine
we should probably delete most of the other ones at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Special:WhatLinksHere?target=Unreal+Engine&namespace=&hidetrans=1&hidelinks=1
but I will open a rfd for them later — Preceding unsigned comment added by J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk • contribs) 17:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Tagged every single one of these redirects since they weren't tagged by the nom. CycloneYoris talk! 22:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @J2UDY7r00CRjH: Why? These all appear to be entirely typical redirects. Tollens (talk) 18:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- None of these redirects are used. "Unreal Engine Technology" is not a typical redirect. Neither is Draft:Vengeance Engine, which makes no sense at all. We should use WP:COMMONNAME, not Unreal Engine technology or Unreal Engine Technology. We should not use misspelled links links like "Unreal engine" or UnrealEngine. "Unreal Engine (game engine)" does not make any sense as there is no other unreal engine to disambiguate it with. It also leads to editors actually using this awful redirects. For example see: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mare_Nostrum_(video_game)&diff=prev&oldid=1235798234 which was using [[Unreal Engine technology#Unreal Engine 2.5|Unreal Engine 2.5]] instead of just [[Unreal Engine 2.5]](Unreal Engine 2.5). why should we support this kind of usage? What benefit is there to having all these inaccurate redirects? J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 18:21, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Looking at WP:RFD#DELETE, some of these fall under "The redirect might cause confusion." Specifically Unreal Engine Technology, Unreal Engine technology and Unreal technology which are not WP:COMMONNAME and are not terms I have seen any RS or Unreal Engine itself use to describe Unreal Engine. Additionally Draft:Vengeance Engine is misleading at best as it is not a real engine. UnrealEngine is also misleading as one might think that is how it is spelled, and to a lesser extent Unreal engine as well. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 18:28, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Just as further proof that these redirects are confusing people, I found this wikilink in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_banned_video_games_by_country&oldid=1235709794:
- >a court found that [[Silicon Knights]] had plagiarized [[Epic Games]]' proprietary [[Unreal Engine|Unreal engine]].
- If editors are purposefully changing Unreal Engine to Unreal engine (incorrect), then we should definitely not support that usage with a redirect as it will further this inaccurate usage. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 19:11, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Another example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/X-Men_Origins:_Wolverine_(video_game)
- The game was developed primarily by [[Raven Software]] through the use of [[Unreal Engine#Unreal Engine 3|Unreal Engine technology]].
- permalink https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=X-Men_Origins:_Wolverine_(video_game)&oldid=1223802693
- I think these examples show that these links are confusing to editors and we should not use them as per commonname. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 21:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep UnrealEngine, Unreal engine, and Unrealscript. These are common mistakes in editing (WP:RKEEP point 2). They are also common mistakes or shortcuts in searching (point 3) and in navigating by typing URLs (which should be mentioned in point 3 but isn't). Jruderman (talk) 01:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I want to emphasize that WP:RKEEP point 2 considers the prevention of red links to be a net benefit. J2UDY7r00CRjH, if you're concerned about the effects on typo longevity, I suggest categorizing the redirects, then working in other venues to leverage certain rcats such as
{{R from misspelling}}
for making encyclopedia-wide improvements. See e.g. this feature request and this archived bot request. Jruderman (talk) 01:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] - Comment: Unrealscript and Draft:Vengeance Engine are actually redirects to sections of pages. I have updated the nomination above to show the full targets. Jruderman (talk) 01:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: On Unreal Engine (game engine), I added
{{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}
. There are over 30,000 such redirects, so I suspect this isn't a reason for deletion by itself. Jruderman (talk) 01:35, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply] - @J2UDY7r00CRjH: I'd encourage you to have a look at WP:RPURPOSE. You've made a pretty convincing argument for keeping several of these redirects here above. WP:CNAME applies to articles themselves, not redirects, and the fact that people are using several of these terms, even if they are incorrect, is reason to keep the redirects as they are useful, not to delete them. I see four groups in the list presented:
- I would suggest to the closer that a new RfD be held on Vengeance Engine to discuss if that redirect be retargeted to Unreal Engine#Unreal Engine 2 or to Unreal Engine 2 should the draftspace redirect be deleted as a result of this discussion. Then again, NOTBURO. Hamtechperson 02:25, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This is my first time in the redirects forum and you're right, being a new contributor, I'm not familiar with a lot of the rules. In fact, I initially just blanked these pages and asked someone to delete the page in the comment history, which I now understand is not allowed. Reading these rules, I take issue with some of them. I wouldn't call any of these alternative capitalizations: they are typos. And I don't see why we should make redirects for every typo. That implies that every page should have a redirect with various capitalizations of the entry name. If nobody is using these redirects then I don't see a need for them to fix non existing typos. In any case I think it is better to have a redlink than have a typo because 1. someone will see the red link and fix it 2. Some people will see the blue link with a typo and think it is correct. This is in line with the reasoning given here: "The redirect might cause confusion." Also, I disagree that Unreal technology, Unreal Engine Technology, and Unreal Engine technology are plausible search terms. Looking at Google Trends, it doesn't seem anyone is using these search terms. I'm not aware of any such term being used by reliable sources or unreal itself or really anyone at all using it. I certainly don't see why we need a redirect for a misspelling of a possible search term for this page. J2UDY7r00CRjH (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- To get a sense of which variants are usually considered redirect-worthy and which aren't, you can check the examples in WP:RTYPO and WP:RCAPS. Jruderman (talk) 03:55, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The line between
{{R from alternative capitalization}}
and {{R from incorrect capitalization}}
can be blurry sometimes. In "Epic Games' proprietary Unreal engine", perhaps the author is treating "Unreal" as a name and "engine" as a generic noun. But the distinction doesn't really matter at RfD because the reasons for having the redirect are similar: helping users reach the article they intend to reach. Jruderman (talk) 04:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Meh on Draft:Vengeance Engine as drafts aren't indexed by search engines and it isn't in mainspace, don't care either way (side note: Vengeance Engine and Vengeance engine currently go different places which certainly shouldn't be the case), as well as Unreal Engine (game engine) as typically redirects from unnecessary disambiguation pages have a base title that could reasonably refer to more than one thing but the redirect certainly isn't harmful. Keep the rest as either alternative capitalizations or reasonable search terms. Tollens (talk) 04:29, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Good gods we have a mess with Vengeance Engine, don't we? Three redirects including the draftspace one, all of which go to different (and yet still plausible) targets. I think we need to have a separate discussion about how to clean it up, but I think I'll wait until this RfD is closed, at least as concerns the draftspace redirect. A read over the Vengeance engine target, Ghost Story Games, indicates that it's a continuation/successor to the Irrational Games target of Vengeance Engine, plus we have the section at Unreal Engine#Unreal Engine 2 and the split article Unreal Engine 2 all as candidates. Hamtechperson 17:41, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep all besides Draft:Vengeance Engine which is just a maintenance cleanup thing. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:42, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Draft:Vengeance Engine per WP:RDRAFT; though it was not moved, it was pointed to a section where it is/was covered. No benefit is derived from getting rid of it. Neutral on the rest. This seems headed towards trainwreck territory. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 06:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 29#Template:Footer Olympic Champions C-1 Slalom
Tax cuts for the rich
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 29#Tax cuts for the rich
Spend more money on public education
Roman Palestine (disambiguation)
Flesh engine
Sharp Willcom D4
Article was blanked and redirected, but target does not seem to mention this. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Revert and send to AfD per WP:BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 18:04, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:32, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Shadow Mario
Washington, Maryland
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 28#Washington, Maryland
July 19
"Fax (hair)" and "Fax (head hair)"
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 27#"Fax (hair)" and "Fax (head hair)"
Mario Circuit
Bolsover (borough)
Delete, neither the current non-metropolitan district at Bolsover District nor the previous district Bolsover Urban District hold/have held borough status. Yes Google searches in quotes for "Bolsover Borough Council" will return results but the same is the case for "Braintree Borough Council" and "Harlow Borough Council". This is different to Chesterfield (borough) and Chesterfield Borough Council that go to Borough of Chesterfield that does have borough status along with the previous district Municipal Borough of Chesterfield. Its normal for districts that have borough status to have redirects from "Foo (district)" but not redirects for "Foo (borough)" when the district doesn't have borough status. Yes there are links to the redirect but they can be changed to the correct target and it appears to only have been at this title for a few weeks in 2004 when it was corrected and moved. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Simply the result of an error I made briefly over a little over 20 years ago. Seems entirely reasonable to delete. Morwen (talk) 00:10, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Given the internet hits for "Bolover borough" and "Borough of Bolsover" this is a common enough error to merit a {{R from incorrect name}} redirect. See e.g page 11 of this PDF where the local Conservative Party calls it "Borough of Bolsover". We educate people making this sort of mistake by taking them to the content they are looking for that explains the correct situation rather than making them jump through hoops to find it. Thryduulf (talk) 08:04, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as an attested error that someone might search. The existence of the redirect will correct them effectively enough. Fieari (talk) 00:14, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:06, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Guillermo Vilas: Settling the Score
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 27#Guillermo Vilas: Settling the Score
Bigflo & Oli: Hip Hop Frenzy
Not sure what to do about this one. The subject exists (per third party searches) and is linked at List of Netflix original films (2020) in the list of film released that year. But ... the fact that this title is a redirect and not an article seems to validate WP:REDYES deletion. In addition, the article for the group mentioned in the title of his redirect, Bigflo & Oli, seems to make no mention or reference of the subject of this redirect anywhere in that article. Steel1943 (talk) 21:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Jay 💬 17:02, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Running with Sherman (film)
Yet another story which Netflix bought the rights in 2019 to create a film, but nothing came out of it since. The base title Running with Sherman is a redirect that targets Christopher McDougall#Works (after I retargeted it last month), the article about the author of the "Running with Sherman" story, but that article contains no information about a film adaptation of the "Running with Sherman" story. Steel1943 (talk) 21:28, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Jay 💬 17:04, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lady Business (film)
Seems this was a story which Netflix bought the rights in 2019 with the intent to make a film, but it does not seem as though the film ever went into production. Also, it seems the film was to star Brie Larson; online searches for the "Lady Business" turn up nothing at the present time 5 years later ... well, while also distinguishing that the "Lady Business" film is a subject separate from Unicorn Store. Steel1943 (talk) 20:41, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. If anyone else thinks this feels familiar, you're probably (like me) thinking of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 11#Lady Business, which turns out to be unrelated, although if this is to become an article the parenthetical will not be needed. Thryduulf (talk) 11:02, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Jay 💬 17:12, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
VSTA
AlphaDeltaNationalFraternity
Closed discussion, see
full discussion. Result was:
Speedy delete per
WP:CSD#G6 - created when fixing an unambiguous error.
Return to the Palace
Closed discussion, see
full discussion. Result was:
redirect converted to an article Pokemon generations 5
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 27#Pokemon generations 5
Misty Williams
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 28#Misty Williams
Brock Harrison
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 1#Brock Harrison
PKMN R
Cianwood Island
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 27#Cianwood Island
Cianwood City (Cianwood Island)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 27#Cianwood City (Cianwood Island)
PKMN SS
HeartSilver and GoldSoul
Pokémon DuskGold and DawnSilver
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 28#Pokémon DuskGold and DawnSilver
Galar
200 (song)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 28#200 (song)
M-Block
Pokémon incident
extremely vague. requires that "pokémon" and "incident" be defined in a way that somehow narrows it down to only this particular episode of the anime generation that also featured jynx and hypno, while excluding every other controversy the franchise has seen cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- should mention that i would favor retargeting it to an article or section of an article detailing most controversies, no such thing exists (yet). the closest i found was pokémon episodes removed from rotation, but even then, that's only for the anime cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as far too vague. When seeing the title I assumed it was some sort of (political) scandal or other real-world incident related to Pokémon in some way. A politician making a gaffe and exposing their ignorance while trying to appear to be a "man of the people" or something like that would have been my first guess. Thryduulf (talk) 17:30, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- isn't that the plot of swsh cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I wouldn't have a clue! I've never watched, read or played Pokémon. Thryduulf (talk) 20:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - contrary to the above (and a whiny fan base) this is by far the most consequential incident related to the series. This actually ahead real world implications, that reliable sources wrote articles about. Sergecross73 msg me 23:54, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as WP:PTOPIC. This incident was/is overwhelmingly more impactful than any other. Fieari (talk) 00:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete - It certainly was a "pokémon incident", probably the biggest one, but it doesn't really go by the name "pokémon incident". Googling "pokémon incident" does lead to lots of reference to this event, but also to other unrelated events. It could also reasonably relate to Pokémon Go to the polls, which is pretty much exactly the hypothetical poltician gaffe scenario that @Thryduulf: dreamt up (see this and this for more details). BugGhost🦗👻 12:05, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Maybe a disambiguation between:
- But I'm not sure if there's enough traffic to Pokémon incident to warrant this disambiguation. BugGhost🦗👻 12:12, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- at this point, i'm gonna change my vote to a strong listify (preferrably with a different name), since there's also the 80 quadrillion times the franchise was accused of being satanic, and the 0 times it was accused of being satanic because of giratina cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete per the ambiguity of this redirect caused by the existence of a list of incidents at Pokémon Go#Criticism and incidents. Not saying the current target is not notable, but it's not the only notable "incident" related to Pokémon. Steel1943 (talk) 15:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Biographies of living persons
This should be a CNR to WP:BLP. All of the 304 links to this redirect are in reference to the Wikipedia policy, rather than the Biography article. It seems unlikely that anyone searching for this would be looking for the encyclopedic article, especially considering the term is never mentioned. It was retarted to Biography from a CNR in 2009. C F A 💬 18:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I suppose this could also be retargeted to an encyclopedia article about Wikipedia, like Wikipedia#Policies_and_content, Vandalism on Wikipedia, or List of Wikipedia controversies (Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident), though a project redirect would make the most sense in my eyes. C F A 💬 18:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget (or add encyclopaedic content) This is a very high profile policy that does get referenced frequently off-site so I'm surprised we don't have some encyclopaedic content about it that could host a hatnote to the policy, although finding sources will be tricky due to the large number of Wikipedia mirrors and many other sites that have policies/guidelines with the same title. If we don't have encyclopaedic content then a cross-namespace redirect is the way to go - this is something that needs to be very easy to find, particularly by prospective editors and article subjects who shouldn't have to learn about namespaces first. Thryduulf (talk) 20:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I was wondering if there would be enough coverage to write a separate article on the policy. I found it surprising that even the Policies and content section in the main Wikipedia article only briefly mentioned the policy (in reference to the Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident). If someone is willing to do that and they can find enough coverage, then that (with a hatnote) would be my preferred outcome over retargeting. C F A 💬 21:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Its not really a Wikipedia specific term but all Google results are for the policy. Maybe it should be kept as with a link on the DAB page to the BLP policy as well as the current MOS page. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:23, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- That's what I was considering doing before listing it here, but I decided against it. Do you really think anyone typing "Biographies of living persons" into the search bar is looking for Biography? It is obviously directly referencing the policy and the term isn't even mentioned in the article. C F A 💬 03:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete promotes incorrect linkage, and making a CNR would not be for readership content. -- 65.92.247.96 (talk) 03:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:RETURNTORED. There's no way BLP isn't notable and we should really have some encyclopedic content about it. Nickps (talk) 19:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unless an alternative article space target is found. Biographies are about people, but not all biographies are about living people. (And, morbidly enough, all biographies in existence today will eventually all not be about living people...) Steel1943 (talk) 22:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I notified WT:WPWP of this discussion Nickps (talk) 22:42, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I searched around a bit, and I do not think there is enough in the way of external sources covering this to support an article. Perhaps an article could be written on Wikipedia policies and guidelines, with a section on BLP. BD2412 T 23:04, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. There's no justification for a WP:CNR: "most newly created cross-namespace redirects from the main (article) namespace to the Wikipedia (project) namespace should be deleted, ... very old ones might retain their value for extra-Wikipedia links" (not inter-Wikipedia links). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:00, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Note the key word there is "most" not "all" - there are exceptions and this is one of them per my comments above. Thryduulf (talk) 11:18, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Skeltal
that's the "doot" meme. doesn't seem like a plausible misspelling of "skeletal" otherwise, as e is just close enough to t where it'd be hard to forget to type one letter cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: per WP:CHEAP. C F A 💬 19:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Skeltal is a variant name of a popular internet meme [34]. Our article on skeleton lack information about this meme, neither do any other article. The intro of WP:REDIRECT, a guideline says
Redirects are used to help people arrive more quickly at the page they want to read
. A generic article about skeletons are not what readers would want to see when they are searching about a meme. Ca talk to me! 05:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]- It seems pretty obscure. I doubt there's enough coverage to write an article on it, but I suppose someone could try. I imagine most people searching "Skeltal" on Wikipedia are looking for "Skeletal," which is also a redirect to Skeleton. C F A 💬 15:01, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - it's a phonetic mispelling of "skeletal" that's only one letter removed. No harm in keeping it. BugGhost🦗👻 17:20, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
One PIece
that's an uppercase i cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:54, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Implausible misspelling. Our search function automatically handles different capitalizations. I tend to agree that effort of listing redirects with minor errors can be used elsewhere, but we might as well delete them as they are listed to reduce maintance work for useless redirects. Ca talk to me! 05:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- WEak keep per sticky shift key typo error, a very plausible sort of error you see in online forums all the time. -- 65.92.247.96 (talk) 08:40, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Highly unlikely someone is going to capitalize the "i" in "Piece" but not the "n" in "One". In addition, this redirect should not be linked in articles. Also, if this redirect is deleted, trying to search "One PIece" in Wikipedia's search function will return One Piece. Deletion of this redirect seems to have more benefits than harm. Steel1943 (talk) 22:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Steel. This is not a redirect from a page move from a typo. We don't know what made Amidamaru89 create this redirect in 2007, but it had a good run for an year in 2002-23. Jay 💬 15:50, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Suiattle tribe
July 18
Heartless Angel
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 27#Heartless Angel
Magical underwear
User:Carlinal/Favorite quality articles
Kit 2
Stun ray
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 25#Stun ray
Jerry Temporary
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 25#Jerry Temporary
VF2
Andy youre a star
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 25#Andy youre a star
Distribution Center Management System
Bigrigs
Super Smash Bros. 6
Not mentioned in the target. No information about a video game named Super Smash Bros. 6 exists in the target article or in Super Smash Bros. Mia Mahey (talk) 22:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- delete as wrong. ultimate is the 5st installment cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Cogsan see below. Some call it the sixth. Not arguing that's correct, but it's plausible at least. Sergecross73 msg me 23:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- that's if you ignore the fact that smash for 3ds and that other console are both commonly referred to as "sm4sh", and clumped together as two different flavors of the same installment by pretty much everyone less pedantic than me. ironically, nintendo considers them to be separate, but even the article reduces that to note c, accompanied by "but who cares about those guys, most sources say they're both smash 4" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- None of that changes that its a plausible search term, with sourcing and notes to clear up confusion. Again, I'm not saying its the sixth title. I'm not arguing anyone should think that. I'm saying its a plausible redirect because some people think that, and some sources outline it. Sergecross73 msg me 13:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - it is the sixth entry in the Smash Bros if you consider the 3DS and Wii versions separate games, which some developers/sources do. Sergecross73 msg me 23:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- The target does not state that it is the sixth entry in the series instead of the fifth. This redirect will be misleading when a sixth Super Smash Bros. game is released. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- A reliably sourced mention of how some consider it the sixth entry could be very easily implemented. Additionally, there's no need to right now future-proof the article for a future game that hasn't even been announced to exist yet. Sergecross73 msg me 23:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- People searching for Super Smash Bros. 6 are most likely looking for information on a successor of Super Smash Bros. Ultimate. No information on such game exists in the target article, or for that matter, anywhere on Wikipedia, so the redirect is harmful and should be deleted per WP:COSTLY. Mia Mahey (talk) 00:57, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I strongly disagree with that notion. Why would people be searching for an unannounced game that currently isn't know to exist with this search term? And if someone was knowledgeable enough to use a relatively rare search term like "Smash Bros 6" in a search bar, they'd be knowledgeable enough to understand what Smash Bros Ultimate is. So your confusion scenario feels rather far fetched to me, I don't know what sort of person this would apply to. Doubly so since I've maintained the Ultimate page since its inception and thus has not been a common issue. Sergecross73 msg me 02:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Usually only major video games in a series are numbered, and Super Smash Bros. Ultimate is only the fifth major Super Smash Bros. game. If Super Smash Bros. 6 redirects to Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, on the basis of the 3DS and Wii U releases being treated as separate games, I think we should probably also have Mario Kart 9 redirect to Mario Kart 8#Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which we don't and we shouldn't. Mia Mahey (talk) 04:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- by that logic, which one would be 5 anyway? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This is irrelevant. There's never been any discussion or consensus that Mario Kart is handling it correctly either, so it's no standard to aspire to. It's just an WP:OSE-violating comparison. Sergecross73 msg me 13:17, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Super Smash Bros for 3DS and Super Smash Bros for Wii U are both Smash 4, and neither are Smash 5. They did release on separate days, with Wii U being released after 3DS, but they were released literally two months apart, were clearly developed together, and they have several methods of transferring data between the two platforms; it's highly probable that they only released separately due to delays. They also share a Wikipedia page, shared advertising space, pretty much everywhere you go they're talked about as one unit instead of two separate games-- much like, for example, Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Blue Rescue Team and Red Rescue Team, another instance of one game with two names on two different Nintendo consoles with different capabilities. (If you throw out the 'two different consoles' thing, pretty much any first-of-the-gen Pokemon game in the history of ever, from Pokemon Red and Blue all the way to Pokémon Scarlet and Violet are examples of this in action. (Like, what, are you saying that Pokémon Emerald is Pokemon 13 or something???) Because of this, Smash Ultimate is clearly Smash 5, and thus, Smash 6 would logically be the next entry of the series after Smash Ultimate, a game that does not exist. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 18:45, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- no, let's make it worse
- red + green (jp) > blue (jp) > stadium (jp) > yellow > red + blue (not jp) > hey you, pikachu > tcg (game boy) > snap > pinball > "stadium" (actually stadium 2) > gold + silver > dance! pikachu > puzzle challenge > puzzle league > "stadium 2" (actually stadium gold and silver) > crystal > pikachu's great surfing adventure > tcg 2 > crayon kids > party mini > zany cards > pinball mini > puzzle collection > tetris > breeder mini (wait what) > puzzle collection vol. 2 > race mini > catch the numbers > pichu bros. mini > togepi's great adventure > ruby + sapphire > box r&s > channel > pinball r&s > channel > pinball r&s > some hiragana and katakana education game > colosseum > firered + leafgreen > pico for everyone > emerald
- thus, emerald is the 46nd installment in the pokémon franchise, or the 14st mainline installment cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Is that jan Misali reference I'm seeing? :D Ca talk to me! 01:09, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- a what cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:22, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm getting into WP:NOTFORUM territory, but they published a video exploring a similar question but for Super Mario mainline series. Ca talk to me! 06:38, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- oh, that one. my dumb brain forgot it wasn't from summoning salt. whoops cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Again, you're both arguing what's "correct" instead of arguing what's plausible. Whether it's the correct numbering is irrelevant. Some people (not me) believe it to be true, and the alternative is a game that doesn't even exist. We don't need to future proof for scenarios that may not ever even happen. It can be easily and quickly fixed as things potentially change someday. Sergecross73 msg me 00:55, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Super Smash Bros.#2015–2021: Super Smash Bros. Ultimate - only mention of "Smash Bros. 6" on Wikipedia is from that article, talking about a Bandai Namco recruitment page stating:
The recruitment page consisted of a listing for programmers for "Smash Bros. 6", which was expected to be released in 2015 for both the Wii U and Nintendo 3DS"
, which is likely why the redirect exists in the first place. It being mentioned there is just a happy coincidence though - the main reason why I am saying it should go to Super Smash Bros.#2015–2021: Super Smash Bros. Ultimate rather than Super Smash Bros. Ultimate directly is because the lengthy discussions above shows that there is ambiguity that SB6 would refer to Ultimate or some future/non-existent game, and Super Smash Bros.#2015–2021: Super Smash Bros. Ultimate is directly above a "Future" section, so this redirect would cover both bases. As an aside, I don't think the above discussions need to be continued - regardless of anyone's views, I think the outcome is obvious that there's no clear primary topic - we now just need to find the best way of disambiguating. BugGhost🪲👻 08:43, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 13:34, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- while this discussion goes nowhere, i should note ssb6 and ssb 6 also exist, and could be added here cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled with the other two redirects as suggested above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete the SSB redirects, Keep "Super Smash Bros. 6". From the above discussion, it appears that "Smash Bros. 6" has been used to refer to "Ultimate", and it's a plausible search term. The fact that it's wrong shouldn't be relevant - otherwise, we'd need to delete Me109. Tevildo (talk) 17:29, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget to Super Smash Bros. without a section redirect. Quite frankly, anything after the "4" designation is up for debate since some people consider the Wii U and 3DS versions "4" collectively, but others consider them "4" and "5" collectively. Let the readers try to figure out what the heck they are trying to find if searching these terms because we are not mind readers. Steel1943 (talk) 00:13, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Would also support this BugGhost🦗👻 08:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Closed discussion, see
full discussion. Result was:
Delete the International Battlefield redirects created from the botched moves. There was minimal participation, but there is agreement that the current target is not optimal. July 16
Werewolves in fiction
Red Caesar
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 24#Red Caesar
Anoushka Sunak, Krishna Sunak, Usha Sunak and Yashvir Sunak
2025 FIVB Men's Volleyball Nations League
No mentioned at the target page and per WP:FUTURE. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 04:56, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Better be recreated as an future article if reliable sources exist. Withdrawn. Ahri Boy (talk) 05:50, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - A draft is now pending review. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:12, 8 July 2024 (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) 17:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
2025 FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League
Pignas
The two Johns
Brown hat
Draft:San Diego Clippers (NBA)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 24#Draft:San Diego Clippers (NBA)
Nationalparken
Shawn "Source" Jarrett
Yogu
Fruit bottom
Draft Al Gore
Lee Min-ho (singer)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 24#Lee Min-ho (singer)
Shinespark
Tighten
Notorious Software Patents
Acoustic punk
Moscow City
Geometric Shapes
Youre disgusting head
July 15
Sportacus 9
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 29#Sportacus 9
Goerdel's theorem
Wikipedia:INLINE
FinalMethod
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 25#FinalMethod
How the sausage gets made
Galaxy 2
Demolition Ranch
E610
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 29#E610
Theoretical high pixel count images
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 25#Theoretical high pixel count images
Nuzlocke
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 29#Nuzlocke
Hardcore Gamer (website)
Harry Patterson
Siddiqui
Rajeshwari Vilas Coffee Club
SportAccord
Removal/deletion of current redirect as it creates misleading impression. The redirect page reflects the name of a separate organization with its own initiatives whereas the target page reflects another organization that is now dissolved. In the current target page there's even a proposal on the Talk page from someone addressing this confusion. There should be a separate page and information about the redirect page of SportAccord JennyAnderson 2 (talk) 14:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Hard to say, maybe we can just rename that GAISF article again to be SportAccord? Notified both WP:SPORTS and WP:Switzerland. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- It is hard, indeed. But I feel there would be value to having a separate SportAccord page as these are entirely different entities and it's tricky to combine them into one article efficiently as they have different structures, activities, missions. JennyAnderson 2 (talk) 09:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Indeed, that's why that SportAccord has its own Wikidata item just because of entirely different entities, but then it meets own notability for separating? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep since it is mentioned at the target, so I honestly see no reason for deletion. This is clearly a plausible redirect, and a valid {{R from move}}. CycloneYoris talk! 21:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 02:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Even though it seems there's a connection between the two pages and organizations, SportAccord seems to have very different initiatives and a strong user following from people who attend the SportAccord events so there will be a benefit to distinguishing clearly the two organizations.
- Thomson.janet101 (talk) 10:49, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 13:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I did some little digging into this.
- The website mentioned in GAISF infobox https://gaisf.sport currently redirects to https://sportaccord.sport However it only has links to some summits and does not mention of any list of member federations.
- Another website https://gaisf.org which is linked from some member federations' website (such as https://www.ilsf.org/about/recognition/gaisf/) says on its homepage "DISSOLUTION OF GAISF APPROVED AT EXTRAORDINARY GENERAL ASSEMBLY, RECORD ATTENDANCE OF MEMBERS, NEXT STEPS CLARIFIED". Opening the link takes us to [35] which explains the development in details including the role of SportAccord. Also, its history page says the following:
- 2003: GAISF in collaboration with the Association of Summer and Winter Olympic International Federations (ASOIF and AIOWF) launch the first SportAccord International Convention to answer a need from the IF’s which were looking to have a “one stop shop”, where they could all hold their annual meetings, be encouraged to network and share their knowledge.
- 2017: SportAccord is renamed GAISF (Global Association of International Sports Federations)
- 2022: Members approve dissolution of GAISF at Extraordinary General Assembly
- Honestly, I cannot construct a coherent history from this. If GAISF "launched" SportAccord, how did the latter also become "GAISF". Were there two bodies by the name of GAISF since 2017? If SportAccord was already remnamed in 2017, what is the SportAccord that functions currently? If someone knows more about this, it would be easier to make a decision. Thanks! —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 20:04, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @CX Zoom Indeed, I sent an email to SportAccord's staff to clarify their details of member structure, maybe less possible to wait for their reply. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply: Good point! I also did some digging and found a very helpful article that explains this confusion: [36]https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1049005/sportaccord-changes-name-to-global-association-of-international-sports-federations
- A quote from this link:
- "Adopting the Global Association of International Sports Federations name better represents the nature of the organisation and makes a clear distinction from the SportAccord Convention and any other commercial activities carried out under and on behalf of SportAccord/GAISF," GAISF said in a statement.
- Basically I think this shows why this current redirect is not accurate and SportAccord needs its own Wikipedia article - GAISF has always been a separate organization (which is now dissolved and doesn't exist) , whereas SportAccord Convention (now known as just SportAccord) is a separate thing too - a popular annual event with editions for over 20 years now. JennyAnderson 2 (talk) 15:04, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Given such response, I support re-write it as a sane article, if the potential contents meet the notability. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Liuxinyu970226: Did you get any email response? —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 18:02, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @CX Zoom Still nothing. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:29, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 29#metal age
Grand Duke of Hum redirects
Extension to bio's name in the article tile is misnomer in form of implausible noble title. ౪ Santa ౪99° 01:59, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - Article leads specify that they are Grand Dukes (of Bosnia), and have holdings in Hum... heck, Vlatko is specified to be a Duke of Hum. Seems plausible to me that someone would mash the two facts together when searching for this person. A redirect doesn't have to be accurate, and mistakes and misunderstandings are perfectly acceptable reasons to have a redirect. The target is also unambiguous here. Doesn't really matter if there actually is a "Grand Duke" title for Hum or not. Fieari (talk) 23:27, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- A cursory Google Books search for "grand duke of hum" and "veliki vojvoda humski" don't turn up these people, but it does turn up some other people, Stjepan Vukčić Kosača, Miroslav, Vojislav. Santasa99 what is the actual significance of this title, if any? --Joy (talk) 23:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, guys! Duke of Hum exists as a title, Grand Duke of Hum does not/did not, and there is very clear record about every known/recorded local nobleman and how he used to title himself - so no mystery there. In case of Vlatko Vuković and Sandalj Hranić they did not use title Duke of Hum either, they always signed themselves or were mentioned in charters as Grand Duke of Bosnia only. Many other local noblemen, even of lesser status than Vuković, Hranić, and later Vukčić (all members of Kosača clan) wore the Duke of Hum title - such as Sankovićs, Nikolićs, Vlatkovićs, etc. - simply there was no such title as Grand Duke of Hum, there was only Grand Duke of Bosnia as a title. Of all Kosača members, only Stjepan Vukčić wore both titles, the Duke of Hum and Grand Duke of Bosnia, and also Knez of Drina and of Primorje, and he almost always used full title. There was also nobility from earlier periods, but as far as I know nobility in pre-Bosnian medieval state era mostly wore title of knez (knyaz/prince) and župan. In short, title Grand Duke of Hum never existed. ౪ Santa ౪99° 00:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I should have said from Early Middle Ages instead of pre-Bosnian state. ౪ Santa ౪99° 00:24, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- You can see every single recorded title in Konkordancijski rjecnik cirilskih povelja srednjovjekovne Bosne. ౪ Santa ౪99° 00:51, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. --Un assiolo (talk) 14:57, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 13:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Kirby DS
CheckUser
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 29#CheckUser
Boss Brain
2024 assassination attempt
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 1#2024 assassination attempt
Template:Chilodontidae-stub
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 1#Template:Chilodontidae-stub
July 14
Donald Trump's ear
Bails
Double dual
These should probably point at the same target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- These are similar, but there's an important difference: the double dual is purely algebraic and completely general (basic linear algebra), while the bidual requires a topology and is much more specific, namely in functional analysis. They should reference and linked to each other as related and confusingly similar, but distinct.
- —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 18:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. It seems that "bidual" and "double dual" are used synonymously, although I have never heard of "double dual". However, there are two notions of biduals corresponding to two notions of duals: the algebraic dual formed by the linear forms and the topological dual formed by the continuous linear forms. So, I suggest to transform Bidual into a dab page with two entries and to redirect Double dual there. The entries could be labeled "in linear algebra" (for the present target of bidual) and "of a topological vector space" (for the present target of double dual). D.Lazard (talk) 18:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Note that these terms can occur in many notions of duality, see e.g. also Dual_cone_and_polar_cone#Properties. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- This is a further reason fora dab page. D.Lazard (talk) 20:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- A disambiguation page seems in order, given the multiple meanings of "double dual". I've drafted one at [37], linking to Bidual, and added a link from (the target of) Bidual back to Double dual at [38]. WDYT?
- I've heard the term "Double dual" used widely in linear algebra, group theory, etc., but this is the first I've heard of "Bidual", and it seems specific to the Topological Vector Spaces (though used specifically for normed spaces, Locally convex topological vector space, etc.). A quick check of Wikipedia and Google agrees.
- If someone more familiar with biduals wants to expand that to a dab too, no objections, but given the distinct uses, "double dual" and "bidual" aren't generally used synonymously and shouldn't be merged, despite the similar meaning ("dual of dual, in some context"). Notably algebraic duals or Pontryagin duality don't generally use the term "bidual".
- —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 05:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- At the very least "bidual" is still ambiguous between a subset of the meanings of "double dual". 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- I’ve now drafted a dab at Bidual too, linking to the Topological Vector Space uses.
- —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 21:39, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Instead of a relist, I was looking to close this. @1234qwer1234qwer4 and D.Lazard: what do you think of the two drafted disambiguation pages? Jay 💬 11:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- They seem fine if one takes only into account the links that have been provided before. However, none of the drafts link to Duality (mathematics)#Dual objects, were a general concept is defined, called there bidual, that includes as special instances all examples given in the two drafts. I do not know how to link it in either dab page without increasing confusion. So, I remains convinced that the best solution is to merge the dab pages with a primary meaning linking to Duality (mathematics)#Dual object. Again it seems that this is the best way to solve the terminology problem that the general concept called bidual has its most elementary instances called double dual. D.Lazard (talk) 13:22, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Sounds like there are two questions: whether to have a DAB page or a page section, and whether to have separate pages/sections for the two terms. If using DAB, it seems clearer to have separate ones, given different uses. However, given that this is a simple definition, best is probably to link both to a section that says "dual of dual, called bidual/double dual, examples", rather than DABs.
- Some text at Duality (mathematics) seems in order anyways; I'll try drafting something.
- —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 02:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
List of most massive exoplanets
List of nearest free floating planetary mass objects
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 24#List of nearest free floating planetary mass objects
Super Mario Wii 2: Galaxy Adventure Together
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 24#Super Mario Wii 2: Galaxy Adventure Together
Super Mario Wii: Galaxy Adventure
Kangxi Radicals
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 24#Kangxi Radicals
Best Year Ever
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 24#Best Year Ever
QTPOC
Crows in popular culture