Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 12

August 12

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 12, 2023.

Kreekcraft

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 00:40, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No longer mentioned at the target article. ❤︎PrincessPandaWiki (talk | contribs) 23:05, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Early dynastic iiia period of mesopotamia

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 Early Dynastic Period (Mesopotamia)#Periodization. Refined current target. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 06:09, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The "iiia" makes this a totally implausible search term. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 23:01, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

M City

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 21#M City

Crashstappen

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 20#Crashstappen

Alonsomania

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 20#Alonsomania

Incriminating evidence

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 20#Incriminating evidence

B.A.

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 20#B.A.

Russian bond

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was no consensus. (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 00:47, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Russian bond(s) just refers to bonds backed by the Russian government, whether pre-Revolution or post-USSR. They're briefly mentioned at Economy of Russia, but not to a degree likely to satisfy a reader searching for this term. I'm thus leaning towards deletion to allow for internal search results and as WP:REDYES over redirection to that page signed, Rosguill talk 18:33, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete WP:EGG Dronebogus (talk) 17:18, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on set indexifying?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:46, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 12:18, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Set indexing sounds good to me. signed, Rosguill talk 16:32, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more time due to still being somewhat split in consensus...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:55, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Set index of the different Russian government bonds as suggested above. Maybe that can eventually be expanded into a broad-concept article. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 05:24, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and make Russian bonds (or List of Russian bonds) a set index. That way, the reader who searches up this specific, ambiguous term (though it is more likely to refer to monetary bonds), is faced with search results that comprise the set index and some James Bond articles to follow. Best solution IMO. J947 † edits 02:00, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mostly clearing the old log. A draft of the set index, or creation of J947's proposal would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, A7V2 (talk) 01:46, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Last try...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 21:36, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Batillipes acaudatus

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. A snowy summer day. ✗plicit 06:43, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is unhelpful – it just redirects right back to the species list. It could maybe be expanded, but other users shouldn't have to clean up after one user's unhelpful redirects. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 20:41, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Every bluelink in Batillipes is like this, except for B. mirus and B. lusitanus. See also: this discussion. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 20:45, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
checkY Bundled. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 21:30, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The problem with the circular linking is a problem with the genus article, Batillipes, which shouldn't be linking these species. The purpose the redirects is to take someone searching for the species to the genus article as there is no species article and this is the most relevant article. While I think this is a legitimate use of redirects, I don't think it is particular helpful. The genus article doesn't provide much information, other than that there are other species in the genus, and someone knowing the scientific name of the species can easily search for the genus if the species isn't found. It would be more helpful if the genus article contained redlinks to indicate that there are species that could be appropriate subjects for new articles. So I support the deletion because redlinks would be more useful than the redirects. —  Jts1882 | talk  08:51, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Exactly. Even if they weren't linked from the genus article, they would still be misleading, because someone searching the species name would be led to believe there was an article on, say, B. crassipes, when they would in fact be redirected to the article, which contains no useful information. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 13:41, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Talk:Zionism, race and genetics/Archive 2

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 Tagged with G7. (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 21:33, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mistaken archive created, needs to be deleted for the bot to work. Onceinawhile (talk) 18:39, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per WP:G6. Uncontroversial deletion for technical reason. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 19:01, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also ber WP:G7, since the creator of the redirect is requesting it be deleted, and nobody else has made changes to it. I've added a speedy tag thusly. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:46, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Garrett Nelson

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 00:40, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We do not redirect players to single-season team articles in the football project. Additionally, he now plays for the Miami Dolphins so redirecting to the 2022 Nebraska Cornhuskers makes even less sense. BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:24, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Eternal death

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 21#Eternal death

Mixed Latin and Greek/Cyrillic scripts, A

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 14:26, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Red = Cyrillic; Pink = Greek

All are mixes of Latin + other scripts. Unlikely search terms. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 23:52, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all except Alan Γoa per J947 as implausible mixed script redirects, per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Common outcomes#Mixed-script redirects. 192.76.8.65 (talk) 00:16, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Go through and keep those that are actually used, such as Alan Γoa. J947 † edits 00:38, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That isn't used. And if the Greek was used for the last name, somehow, that would be Alan Γοα, not Γoa. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:57, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ok, I've digged a bit more, and yeah the mixed script is used. It's a correct search term. Look on the 4th line from the bottom, first paragraph: [1]; the only difference is capitalisation, and it's capitalised in English. Yes, it's a German text but it does show it's actually in use, in addition to the fact that this was the original article title. And in French: [2]. J947 † edits 04:47, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems like Γ is a rare transliteration. I'll withdraw that one. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:07, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've fixed incoming links from articles to the redirects marked [Links fixed] above, as the wikitext was incorrect. Certes (talk) 21:14, 19 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm inclined to delete all except ones that were {{r from move}}s (or merges/ones that have history), unless specific opposition is brought up (like with Alan Gua). There should be no reason for there to be any incoming external links to these redirects. It might be worth checking pageview numbers first, however. I'll wait until later in the nom to officially !vote (mainly because I do want to check these individually for page history, and also check pageviews eventually, but I'm tired and don't feel like it this instant). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skarmory (talk • contribs) 00:49, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep Aarne Michaёl Tallgren, Al. С. Calotescu-Neicu, All Star Musіc, Alеna Vinnitskaya, Andrѐy V. Sinitsyn, Antόnio Gomes, Antόnio Gomes (footballer), and Anti-Сommunist University Students Committee as {{R from move}}s from titles that the article held in mainspace for at least several months, up to several years. Struck several per reply. 03:42, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
    • Antіn Holоvaty has notable history, though it might be from a cut-and-paste move. That needs to be figured out before deletion.
    • Move without redirect Akadо̄ Suzunosuke: Mitsume no chо̄jin to Akadō Suzunosuke: Mitsume no chōjin; Al. С. Calotescu Neicu to Al. C. Calotescu Neicu; Alexandru С. Calotescu-Neicu to Alexandru C. Calotescu-Neicu; and Alexandru С. Calotescu Neicu to Alexandru C. Calotescu Neicu to keep edit history (or delete and create at the new title, not a big deal, just trying to preserve edit history; I would do this myself if we weren't in the middle of an RFD).
    • Neutral on Delete Andгeas Sofocleous as an implausible typo that resulted from a move from a long-standing title. updated 01:18, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
    • Delete Abdulaziz Kоmilov, Abdullah Gϋl, Agraw Imaziγen, Al-Khansa᾽, Ali Saїdi-Sief, Altanоchir, Anaїs Holly, Antonov Аn-124, Antonov Аn-24B, Averroёs, Aziz Haydarоv and Azizbek Haydarоv. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:19, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      Why would we want to move any of those redirects to preserve the edit history? None of them seem to have any history apart from being a redirect? per WP:MOVEREDIRECT moving redirects isn't done because it makes a mess of the page history - it's better to just make a new redirect at the correct title. 192.76.8.65 (talk) 08:39, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      I don't think MOVEREDIRECT covers this scenario; these are redirects that I can only assume are intended to be created at the title in full latin script, and therefore moving without leaving a redirect behind leaves the original creator in the edit history with their original intent being preserved, while placing the redirect at the correct title. One of the major concerns brought up there as well is with the redirect left behind; as we're not leaving one behind, that's not a problem. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 21:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      The only useful content a redirect has is its title and its target, so by moving the page you end up with a confusing page history with editors appearing to redirect titles they didn't actually redirect. If we moved Alexandru С. Calotescu-Neicu to Alexandru C. Calotescu-Neicu we would end up with it looking like Biruitorul created the correct character set redirect when they didn't. For misspelled redirects normal practice is to delete the incorrect redirect and make a new one at the correct title. A 1/2 revision redirect really isn't worth moving for the sake of preserving the history - the only time it really makes sense to move a redirect when it has significant non-redirect history. 192.76.8.65 (talk) 21:56, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      The confusion in the edit history can be fixed by using an edit summary – that's what edit summaries are for.
      I'm not aware of this practice, but I don't think it should apply to typos/etc. where the original intent is clear and the creator just made a mistake, and a redirect doesn't exist at the correctly-spelled title. If there is an established consensus I'll back down, but I don't agree with it. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 22:55, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 15:57, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to get rid of the July 5 logpage. Which ones should we keep or move, and which ones should we delete? (And is this discussion still actionably closeable, or is it becoming a trainwreck?)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 00:43, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is closable, just there hasn't been much discussion after my analysis of which ones were actually in use. I don't think anyone's voted !keep on anything I said !delete for. There just haven't been many comments that make a stand versus other comments here. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 00:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

List of monsters in Kirby: Right Back at Ya!

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. I did not find the arguments to keep or send to AFD particularly compelling, as there is not sufficient evidence to suggest this unsourced content was merged into an article. This relieves the attribution aspect, leaving "delete" as the best option here. ✗plicit 14:33, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are no monsters from Kirby: Right Back at Ya! on the list. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:49, 17 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:56, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment – I can't find any evidence that a merge took place. If it did, whether later deleted or not, then as far as I know attribution is necessary. J947 † edits 23:49, 1 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree with J947 that no merge took place. The R from merge tag was added by Pokechu22 probably erroneously, in 2022, for a redirect (BLAR) that happened in 2007. The BLARer TTN did a merge to List of characters in Kirby: Right Back at Ya! 3 minutes after the BLAR, but that content came from a different article Kirby: Right Back At Ya! Guest Characters. That might explain if Pokechu22 thought it was a merge-and-redirect and not a BLAR. The BLAR comment was... remove unneeded plot summaries. Do to the "villain of the week" nature of the show, this stuff would easily be covered in the episode list. That is one editor's opinion. Restore and AfD to discuss what happens to the really big content. I wouldn't say it was unsourced. It had a source, and assume the whole of the list was based off that source. Jay 💬 09:45, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I believe what happened was I went through all redirects that should have gone to List of Kirby characters but instead went to Kirby (series) due to List of Kirby characters temporarily being redirected. There's a larger than normal quantity of those (Kirby: Right Back At Ya! Guest Characters, Kirby: Right Back at Ya! Minor Characters, Minor characters in Kirby: Right Back at Ya!, and List of characters in Kirby: Right Back at Ya!) due to some old moving before merging. While chasing that down, I must have also seen the longer history on List of monsters in Kirby: Right Back at Ya! and assumed it was also merged in some way, but it's possible that's incorrect. Note that the same moving happened at List of Demon Beasts/Monsters in Kirby: Right Back at Ya!; if the "List of monsters in Kirby" redirect is deleted that redirect should be deleted to. I have no opinion on this matter. --Pokechu22 (talk) 17:42, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further input and to close an old log page...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:58, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to get rid of the July 5 logpage. Keep, restore and AfD, or just delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 00:42, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_August_12&oldid=1171613128"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 12, released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.