Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 August 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 20[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 20, 2019.

She appears to be Caucasian (Metroid)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was speedy delete per nominator — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 08:01, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A nonsensical Redirect created by a user with a history of vandalizing Wikipedia with ridiculous Redirects. Should be deleted. Rorshacma (talk) 23:47, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I speedy G3'd the page because I think it qualifies as obvious vandalism but delete if it fails.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 02:05, 21 August 2019 (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.

Avdenture island 2[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:10, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirect with implausible typo, created in 2008. Tommy Kronkvist (talk) 23:23, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete implausible amount of typos.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 11:57, 21 August 2019 (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.

Shark attacks in Australia[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was restore. I'll do some tinkering to eliminate the redundancy with the existing list. --BDD (talk) 17:41, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate? The current target isn't primarily about Australia, and other possible targets can include List of fatal shark attacks in Australia or Shark attacks in South Australia. –Sonicwave talk 22:33, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Restore article (this redirect is a {{R with history}}), and possibly update to have more current information. Steel1943 (talk) 01:50, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • ...Even more interesting is that List of fatal shark attacks in Australia was created in 2014 whereas the article hiding in the edit history of this redirect was redirected in 2010. The two pages have some overlapping information, so there could be some WP:CWW issues (which would be simpler to determine if it was clearer in the history of the article in the nominated redirect's history which shark attacks listed were fatal.) Steel1943 (talk) 01:54, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'd be fine with restoring, since this article is more general than both articles that I mentioned above. –Sonicwave talk 18:46, 26 August 2019 (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.

Killer shark[edit]

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. --BDD (talk) 16:30, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Killer Shark – I'm not sure if "Killer shark" is a common enough term to warrant redirecting to the "Shark attack" page instead of "Killer Shark" (an article about a 1950 film). The only time "killer shark" is mentioned in the current target is in a citation to a news article. –Sonicwave talk 21:58, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support There is no such thing as a "killer shark", at least to the extent that wild animals can sometimes kill people. It's strictly for the movies.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 22:45, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Killer Shark per nom. Steel1943 (talk) 02:04, 21 August 2019 (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.

C19H25O10[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:10, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

C19H25O10 was created by mistake: formula of Vicianin is C19H25NO10. I have not found molecule in enWiki with formula C19H25O10. I propose to delete it. Gyimhu (talk) 19:32, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This redirect appears to have been created in error. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:56, 20 August 2019 (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.

Googollion[edit]

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. MBisanz talk 18:03, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not a real word, no use history, delete. signed, Rosguill talk 18:03, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Used as slang, just added "illon" to the word googol to which it was redirected. Crashed greek (talk) 06:08, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There is wictionary entry for that too wiktionary:googillion, with explanation of the term Crashed greek (talk) 06:11, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
According to that entry, googillion is an arbitrarily large power of ten, which is in no way the same thing as googol. As the article doesn't mention googilion (and unless there's coverage of the term in reliable sources, it shouldn't), this makes the redirect misleading, as it might suggest that the two terms do mean the same thing. We could put a soft redirect to the wiktionary article, however. signed, Rosguill talk 08:05, 21 August 2019 (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.

Lakshmi (Buddhism)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 August 31#Lakshmi (Buddhism)

What wp is not[edit]

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. There's a consensus these cross-space redirects should all be deleted. The argument for keep posed by two participants that a small number red links will be created by this is addressed well by BDD's response (the red links will lead to this deletion discussion, if context alone does not suffice). Fish+Karate 09:58, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

I mildly support limited use of cross-namespace redirects, like How to edit a page, How to start a page, How to move a page, How to rename a page, and How to cite Wikipedia, because they may help potential new editors break in. But WP:What Wikipedia is not is hardly an entry search, and WP:NOT is an appropriate shortcut for editors, who know better than to go looking for WP in the article namespace. — the Man in Question (in question) 04:22, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This was kept in the past, so it is at least worth a relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 23:05, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given the relist and lack of participation so far, I've gone and added the other mainspace redirects to this discussion. Wikipedia is not appears to have been deleted several times before. PC78 (talk) 09:51, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • And since I'm not the nom, delete all per nom (in case that wasn't clear). PC78 (talk) 23:09, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom and XNR. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 13:32, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per WP:R#DELETE No. 6: It is a cross-namespace redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace.—Bagumba (talk) 18:43, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep those starting with Wikipedia is not, not doing any harm, lots of incoming links from talk pages, no point in breaking these. —Kusma (t·c) 19:48, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete NOTSOCIALNETWORK per nom. Keep the rest per the Kusma and previous consensuses to keep - nothing has changed since then. Thryduulf (talk) 09:52, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep those starting with "Wikipedia is not". I think a valid usage of a WP:XNR are specific inquiries about Wikipedia's guidelines for newbies who may not be familiar with namespaces. These redirects take those people to the relevant sections and I can't imagine someone finding this set-up confusing. Delete the others. -- Tavix (talk) 18:21, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. It's not that I can't envision some good coming of these, but I think it's more likely that it results in readers using the search box going off in a direction that looks curious, and suddenly they're backstage. We can expect better from editors. --BDD (talk) 19:03, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:48, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I have recreated Wikipedia is not a soapbox. I agree its use is very limited and I am ready to vote for deletion of it, along with all other listed redirects -- but NOT BEFORE they are actually made useless! As I wrote in the edit summary a year ago, it has 27 (now even more!) incoming links not resolved for 11 years (requested 2007 in Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 11#Correct obsolete 'not a soapbox' links). It doesn't matter if this is a likely search phrase - it simply is actually still in use, and as long as it is I oppose deletion. --CiaPan (talk) 20:43, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Well intentioned, but careful. That's refactoring others' comments, and editors could still follow the red links to this discussion, if the context isn't already obvious. --BDD (talk) 01:49, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "NOTSOCIALNETWORK" and "What wp is not". NOTSOCIALNETWORK is a rather cryptic term that shows up when entering "no social" or "nonsocial" into the search box, which can be confusing for readers. The only incoming links are related to this deletion discussion.
"What wp is not" is only used to link to the actual policy on Talk:The Hour (2011 TV series); all of the other incoming links are related to current or past deletion discussions. While "WP" is frequently used as an abbreviation for Wikipedia, that will probably not be obvious for readers, especially if the "wp" is in lowercase; What Wikipedia is not also redirects to the same place and is clearer. –Sonicwave talk 23:49, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all This shouldn't be in mainspace and should be under the Wikipedia namespace. Otherwise it makes little sense.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 12:54, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more to see if consensus can be formed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:41, 20 August 2019 (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.

LEGO ムービー[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:10, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The film's Japanese title, not an appropriate redirect per WP:FORRED. Delete. signed, Rosguill talk 17:26, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per WP:FORRED.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 02:07, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Lots of films, especially animations, tend to be Japanese, but the string japan doesn't even appear in the target article, so clearly it has no particular relationship with Japan. Nyttend (talk) 01:47, 26 August 2019 (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.

Stalked by a Movie Star[edit]

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:10, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target or its sources, no indication that this is an alternative name for the subject. I suggest deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 17:21, 20 August 2019 (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.

He Never Dies[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 August 31#He Never Dies

Template:Bodyguard character map[edit]

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. MBisanz talk 18:03, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not a character map template anymore. In fact, character map templates should not even exist. Kailash29792 (talk) 07:22, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. This redirect has transclusions that need to be resolved/bypassed prior to action being taken on the redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 20:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • After reviewing ... Keep as a harmless "Template"-namespace {{R from move}}. Steel1943 (talk) 22:57, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 16:25, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I dealt with the existing transclusions. Now this will only be misleading. --BDD (talk) 16:15, 27 August 2019 (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.

House of Swabia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 August 31#House of Swabia

C29H35FO10[edit]

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. --BDD (talk) 16:01, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

C29H35FO10 was created by mistake: formula of Triamcinolone is C21H27FO6. (Originally, in 2009 it linked to triamcinolone diacetate but this link was wrong too: its formula is C25H31FO8.) I have not found molecule in enWiki with formula C29H35FO10. I propose to delete it. Gyimhu (talk) 13:07, 20 August 2019 (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.

Ai Mori[edit]

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 move Ai Mori (climber) over the redirect. --BDD (talk) 15:53, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deleting. Ai Mori is a young Japanese rockclimber, all the mainspace incoming links come from climbing articles where people haven't noticed the redirect. Her notability is boarderline at the moment, but I suspect someone will make her an article soon (especially once her name becomes redlinked) Spacepine (talk) 12:12, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: @Ryulong: couldn't edit your talk page, so pinging you here instead --Spacepine (talk) 12:19, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ryulong is no longer an active editor. Anyhow if you can wrote about a new Ai Mori, I'm fine with having that be about the rock climber and then having a disambig link to Law of Ueki from that. WhisperToMe (talk) 12:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: no need to delete a redirect just to recreate it with a different subject, and hard to justify simply deleting it for no other reason. Still, I suggest creating an article about the rock climber under a different title, either in draftspace or disambiguated, rather than immediately stamping on a longstanding redirect. Then argue about which if either is the primary topic for "Ai Mori". Having a (presumably) substantial article in place makes the case for it much stronger. Lithopsian (talk) 15:30, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Lithopsian:. FYI: Thanks to good work by DanielV, there's an article at Ai Mori (climber). I suspect an article about an athlete is the Primary Topic over a redirect to a fictional character. -- Spacepine (talk) 22:46, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment While that sounds like a reasonable plan, I think we should wait until this RfD is closed before overwriting Ai Mori. If you want to get a head start, you can develop Ai Mori (climber) and move the content to Ai Mori later on if we implement your suggestion. Pichpich (talk) 19:14, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I reverted this to the tagged redirect, pending the outcome of this discussion. Lithopsian (talk) 20:08, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough and all-sensible, except that there is no substantive discussion, only an initial page deletion request misunderstanding. The climber has trailblazing ascents and garners at least a couple of magnitude more interest. The thing the fictional character has going for her is that the climber might be named after her. Daniel Vallstrom (talk) 09:33, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Also, before this, there were wiki links linking to "Ai Mori" meant to link to the climber, while there are no links meant to go to the fictional character. Daniel Vallstrom (talk) 19:33, 20 August 2019 (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.

C5H9NO2S[edit]

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. --BDD (talk) 15:51, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

C5H9NO2S was created by mistake: formula of Tiopronin is C5H9NO3S. I have not found molecule in enWiki with formula C5H9NO2S. I propose to delete it. Gyimhu (talk) 10:13, 20 August 2019 (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.

C10H16N2O12P2[edit]

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. --BDD (talk) 15:50, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

C10H16N2O12P2 was created by mistake: formula of Thymidine diphosphate is C10H16N2O11P2. I have not found molecule in enWiki with formula C10H16N2O12P2. I propose to delete it. (C10H16N2O11P2 is in the list of redirs to create by bot so I didn't create it manually.) Gyimhu (talk) 09:48, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. Hughesdarren (talk) 11:31, 20 August 2019 (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.

C10H9Cl4O6P[edit]

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. --BDD (talk) 15:50, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

C10H9Cl4O6P was created by mistake: formula of Tetrachlorvinphos is C10H9Cl4O4P. I have not found molecule in enWiki with formula C10H9Cl4O6P. I propose to delete it. (C10H9Cl4O4P is in the list of redirs to create by bot so I didn't create it manually.) Gyimhu (talk) 02:30, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. Hughesdarren (talk) 11:32, 20 August 2019 (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.

C14H24NO[edit]

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. --BDD (talk) 15:50, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

C14H24NO was created by mistake: formula of Tapentadol is C14H23NO. I have not found molecule in enWiki with formula C14H24NO. I propose to delete it. Gyimhu (talk) 01:45, 20 August 2019 (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.

C23H25N3O[edit]

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. --BDD (talk) 15:49, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

C23H25N3O was created by mistake: formula of TAN-67 is C23H24N2O. I have not found molecule in enWiki with formula C23H25N3O. I propose to delete it. Gyimhu (talk) 01:27, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_August_20&oldid=916729563"