Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 8

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Indian#South Asia. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:25, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Indian (Asian) → Indian people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't see how the disambiguator "asian" could unambiguously refer to Indian people? I think this should be retargeted to point at the dab page at Indian, which was where this redirect used to point. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 16:14, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As opposed to American Indians. 49.198.51.54 (talk) 20:31, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You've misunderstood the point I was making - (Asian) doesn't nessasarily refer to people, it could also refer to Indian Languages or a number of other things listed on the DAB page. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 10:26, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:57, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per 49..54. It complements Indian (Americas) Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:50, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@IAmChaos That redirect targets the DAB page that I proposed retargeting this one to ... 192.76.8.78 (talk) 10:27, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Additionally, the British Isles may use "Asian" to refer to Indians. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:42, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Indian per IP. Could refer to people or to language. It doesn't seem that any of the keep !voters have addressed this. A7V2 (talk) 10:52, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Refine to Indian#South Asia. Although the redirect has no incoming links, I don't think it will be used to refer to the language. Someone looking for the language will type language of India or Indian language and go from there. Jay (talk) 11:46, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• A Delicate Balance (play)) → A Delicate Balance (play)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:UNNATURAL disambiguation error, doubled closing parentheses. The article was at this title for 6 minutes in 2008. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 15:10, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, pageviews suggest possible damage if deleted. J947 † ^edits 22:23, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The redirect has received no page views at all since December. In the seven years prior to that the redirect received a smidge over 200 page views, 40% of which occurred over two months in 2021, which looks a lot to me like someone accidentally linked to this redirect. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 23:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:21, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The multiple parens error is not a likely or useful search term. BD2412 T 22:08, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete due to malformed modifier --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:38, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:47, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as implausible. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:29, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Members of the 1st Dáil. Jay (talk) 14:09, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Antrim North (Dail Eireann constituency) → North Antrim (UK Parliament constituency)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not sure why the bot created this. If it was a person, I'd have guessed a political motivation. Maybe an unaccented title redirect creation that got out of hand? There is no such constituency and the title implies some sort of unified Ireland that doesn't currently exist. Whether it is considered harmful might depend on your standpoint on Irish issues, but it doesn't seem like a very likely search term or plausible typo. Lithopsian (talk) 14:19, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lithopsian Eubot was well known for creating incorrect redirects, we've deleted thousands of them at this point. Old bot errors can't be deleted under criteria R3 like the IP tried to do this morning but they can be G6'd as a {{db-error}}. I just tagged See article text from the same bot for deletion this morning, which was targeting a species of dinosaur. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 14:32, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete seems to be a malformed bot created redirect --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: This constituency existed during the first First Dáil so it is not incorrect to refer to such as a Dáil constituency. Information about this should be added to the target article. TartarTorte 13:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Members of the 1st Dáil, which mentions the constituency? Lithopsian (talk) 16:30, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That works for me as well. TartarTorte 17:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:18, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Members of the 1st Dáil: Per my justification above in that Antrim North was a Dáil Éireann in the fist Dáil and Lithopsian's retarget suggestion. TartarTorte 12:46, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per TartarTorte. This constituency in fact existed but was abolished later. It should not be deleted. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:31, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Jay (talk) 15:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Season 2 - San Juan, Puerto Rico → Are You the One?#Season 2 – San Juan, Puerto Rico  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This isn't a plausible search term, as it doesn't even indicate the show that "Season 2" is referring to. Correct target now would be Are You the One? (season 2) WikiVirusC^(talk) 15:00, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete implausible. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:47, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete vague and confusing at best --Lenticel ^(talk) 06:38, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unhelpful and uninformative. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:32, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Coalition (disambiguation). _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:16, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• The Coalition → Coalition (Australia)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This no longer appears to be the likely WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT given the change of government in Australia. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:26, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - They are commonly known as "The Coalition" even when not in government. Note they were not in government when this redirect was created. A7V2 (talk) 01:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Switching to weak disambiguate. On consideration, I think it's quite possible the Australian political grouping is not the primary topic, but I'm not convinced the recent election made any difference in this regard. Second preference still keep. Strongly oppose deletion as that would leave The Coalition (company) with a weird disambiguated name with nothing at the base name. I also don't think retargeting to Coalition (disambiguation) is suitable since some of the examples pointed out as being referred to as "The Coalition" are not mentioned there. Of course Coalition (disambiguation) should be on the new DAB page. A7V2 (talk) 01:03, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. In Australian politics, the Coalition says in coalition even while in opposition.

At the next election the media will continue to talk about the Coalition as the main non-Labor political grouping.

This will remain true even if Labor don't reach a majority and have to rely on the Greens or independents for confidence and supply. (i.e. the presence of a governmental coalition won't change who are refereed to as "The Coalition") Micmicm (talk) 01:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• While I do agree that The Coalition will remain the dominant topic in Australia, I don't know if it can be immediately assumed that it's the global primary topic. Several other topics at Coalition (disambiguation) can be referred to as "The Coalition", such as various other (albeit defunct) coalitions in other governmental bodies in addition to The Coalition (company). Just something to think about; my personal opinion is that the current hatnote system is probably fine as none of the other specific topics get nearly as many page views as Coalition (Australia). eviolite (talk) 04:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate as nom. To echo Eviolite, this title is far too ambiguous; though it may be the first thing that comes to mind for Australians, this can't be said to extend to the rest of the world. In the UK, for instance, "The Coalition" is commonly understood to mean the former Cameron–Clegg coalition. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 14:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• DABify as per above; or delete as extremely ambiguous. Veverve (talk) 14:05, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate - This will mean, as stated above, radically different things to different people inside of the Anglopshere as a whole. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 14:38, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Divert to Coalition (disambiguation) to broaden the range of topics. NotReallySoroka (talk) 03:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A disambiguation draft on "The Coalition" will help in the discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:33, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Divert to "coalition" as above - many countries have had coalition governments and redirecting "the coalition" to the Australian one makes little sense. Stan traynor (talk) 18:20, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Divert to Coalition (disambiguation), but not for the reasons given by the nominator: it should never be the primary target, regardless of who is in power in Australia. Besides, there is no need: taking a look at what pages use it, it is only used 4 times, and in 2 of those cases Coalition (Australia) is not even intended. So the current situation (redirect to Coalition (Australia)) is unnecessary and a source of confusion. Adpete (talk) 06:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Coalition (disambiguation), for clear absence of a primary topic. BD2412 T 06:55, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Divert to DAB The Australian coalition has yet to be demonstrated to be the primary topic, especially when considering non-Australians. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:36, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Hogwarts#Gryffindor. Note that this is actually refine, as this is a subsection of the old target. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:10, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Griphindor → Hogwarts#Houses  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Completley implausible typo of Gryffindor. Google turns up a couple of pages of results, few of which appear to be related to Harry Potter. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 22:01, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as a quite plausible misspelling for the target. All top google hits for me (in the U.S.) are as a misspelling of the target. Good redirect. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:17, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Actually, refine to Hogwarts#Gryffindor to match the redirect Gryffindor. I have added redirect categories. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:19, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  @Mdewman6 I get 47 results in total, the first page of which contains this redirect, a world of Warcraft character profile, two links to some kind of Instagram thing, two spell checking websites, some kind of fanfiction thing, a mobile game and a tiktok hashtag. Are you using quote marks "" to search for this exact string? Does google say at the top "showing results for Gryffindor"? I can't believe the US google results would be so completley different. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 02:29, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  first page of which contains this redirectOn that note, does Template:Rfd not have a __NOINDEX__ like Template:AfD? I feel like that shouldn't be. (please ping on reply) Happy Editing--IAmChaos 03:14, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I am not using quotes to search for the exact text, and it is showing results for Gryffindor, but that is exactly the point...this is a misspelling of Gryffindor and that's why this redirect exists. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't see how you can get any useful information about the prevalence or usage of this misspelling if you are looking at google search results for a completely different word. When you look for places where people have used this exact spelling search results are both a) almost non-existent and b) overwhelmingly for stuff not related to harry potter. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 19:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, it just means that Google thinks you are looking for Gryffindor, which is probably the case for the vast majority of people googling this term. None of the other things in your Ghits seem notable, or are certainly less likely to be sought than the Harry Potter proper noun. But it's not really about Google results...it's completely plausible that someone unfamiliar with Harry Potter heard the term and would take a stab at spelling it phonetically as Griphindor. A redirect brings them directly to where the thing they are seeking is described, and tells them how it is correctly spelled. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The guidelines on when we should have redirects, WP:RPURPOSE, states that they should be created forLikely misspellings. If google turns up fewer than 50 uses in the billions of websites that they have indexed then I do not think that that this meets theLikely part of the criteria. Google trends is unable to even produce any analytics on this misspelling, because so few people have used it [1]. Compared to the correctly spelled version the relative usage of this spelling is essentially zero [2]. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 20:34, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  R.E. Google automatically suggesting a meaning - google will try to do that for any term that it can't find proper results for. If you type "widsalrweac" into google (without the quote marks) it will tell you that it found no results and show you results for "warwick" as an alternative. That does not mean widsalrweac → warwick is a good redirect. If it was actually made it would quite rightly be WP:R3'd as an implausible typo without any actual uses, which is is, it was produced by me mashing my keyboard. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 20:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  We should only delete implausible misspellings, and this one is far from implausible in my view. Misspellings much less 'plausible' than this one (like, actual typos rather than incorrect spellings deliberately typed) are kept all the time at Rfd. There is no reason to delete this, and it is arguably useful for the reasons outlined above and should be kept. Google results aren't really relevant in the final analysis. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:01, 3 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:59, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - It is a implausible typo, but it is a plausible misspelling. Perhaps for someone who has only seen the movies and not read the books and only seen the name and not remembering the wording if seen throughout movies. Google results mean nothing, as the misspelling would get corrected even if something was published with it originally. WikiVirusC^(talk) 16:28, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Refine to Hogwarts#Gryffindor per Mdewman6. I too get the 47 results as nom, but it's a misspelling in blogs, discussion forums, reddit, as can be seen in pages 2,3,4,5 etc of the search results. The word clocks only 4% per https://www.how-to-spell.com/gryffindor but it's something. Jay (talk) 08:39, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Dexter McPherson → Dexter's Laboratory#Premise  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Same rationale as my previous nomination for Dee Dee McPherson. — Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 03:06, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - I don't see this full name used anyplace official. No clue where it came from, honestly. I also support deletion. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:47, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as a G3 (blatant hoax). — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 05:31, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no one knows them with this last name and only references to it are Wiki and Wikia. WikiVirusC^(talk) 15:09, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as cannot be found in official media or products. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:41, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Though the Heroes Wiki lists the surname as McPherson, I don't find any actual evidence of it being official. Hansen Sebastian^Talk 07:35, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 03:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Dee Dee McPherson → Dexter's Laboratory#Premise  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The surname McPherson is, to my knowledge, not present in any media related to the franchise. It should be deleted on those grounds alone. Possibly a hoax. — Paper Luigi ^{T • C} 03:05, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - As I stated in terms of the other case, I don't see this full name used anyplace official. Seems to have just popped up out of the wilderness. Deletion is the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:06, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete as a G3 (blatant hoax). — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 05:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no one knows them with this last name and only references to it are Wiki and Fandom, and Fandom also has another completely unreferenced last name. WikiVirusC^(talk) 15:09, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above points. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:25, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as cannot be found in official media or products. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:41, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Sure the Heroes Wiki lists her surname as McPherson, but is it really the character's official surname? No. Hansen Sebastian^Talk 07:36, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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