Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 January 29

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 29[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 29, 2020.

The Man Who Saw Everything[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 keep. Early closure, per WP:SNOW. There is unanimous consensus that the good-faith nomination of this redirect is a highly plausible redirect and consistent with our conventions to add redirects from authors' book titles, tagged with {{R from book}}, where the book doesn't have enough reliable, independent source coverage to merit a standalone notability. {{R with possibilities}} can be added to the redirect where the book is likely to meet our general notability guideline and other guidelines for a standalone article. (non-admin closure) Doug Mehus T·C 15:21, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Somone thought it was a good idea to redirect the title of a book to the author of the said book IMO this is a terrible idea. It misleads both readers and contributors to think that the book already has an article. One will routingly find contributors linking to both the author and the book, in the same paragraph, or sentence. It is confusing as hell, and should never be done. So I request deletion of the redirect. Geo Swan (talk) 23:38, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and tag {{R from book}} with plausible expansion to article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:35, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and tag as {{R from book}}. Standard practice for creative works which do not have (and may never have) an article. Compare {{R from album}} and {{R from song}}. Such redirects can also be useful in populating categories. Narky Blert (talk) 09:56, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – add {{R from book}} and keep the categories added by @I grieve in stereo. ➡︎If the book is notable and has sufficient sources for a stand-alone article, then also add {{R with possibilities}}. Senator2029 “Talk” 10:24, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I'm that "someone" and I'm frankly baffled by this being listed in the first place, along with Geo Swan's bizarre reasoning. Are redirects for works not standard practice? They clearly are. What's the issue? How does it "[mislead] both readers and contributors to think that the book already has an article"? Just don't link to it when the author is also mentioned. Can't the same be said for a good portion of literally all redirects? I grieve in stereo (talk) 10:47, 30 January 2020 (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.

FOLM[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) 16:57, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

FOLM does not appear to be a widely used acronym for this subject based on the results of internal Wikipedia, internet, and Google Scholar searches. N.b. that per Google Scholar, FolM with a lowercase L appears to be regularly used to refer to a compound synthesized by E coli. I would suggest deletion at this time. signed, Rosguill talk 21:45, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I sometimes work on anatomy articles, especially female anatomy articles, and I'm not aware of this acronym being standard for frenulum of labia minora. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 22:38, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In fact, I'm not aware of it being used at all for frenulum of labia minora. Flyer22 Frozen (talk) 22:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. FOLM is also the potentially-notable From Outdoors to Labour Market. Narky Blert (talk) 13:42, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • This also uses it for "Fear Of Losing Money" as contrast to FOMO (fear of missing out). But neither of these have articles to point to. Olivia comet (talk) 19:06, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Nonstandard acronym as per Flyer22. I have never heard of this being used. --Tom (LT) (talk) 06:43, 31 January 2020 (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.

Pitim[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) 16:57, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is an incorrect Hebrew plural of pita (the correct form being pitot פיתות). A Google search suggests that it is also the name of a location in Tambov, Russia. I would thus suggest deletion in order to not obstruct the creation of an article about Pitim with an unlikely redirect. signed, Rosguill talk 21:33, 29 January 2020 (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.

5-star Open Data[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) 16:56, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target except in the title of a citation ([1]), 5-star Open Data appears to refer to a schema coined by Tim Berners-Lee. Given that this isn't mentioned at Tim Berners-Lee or anywhere else on Wikipedia as far as I can tell, I'm leaning toward deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 21:09, 29 January 2020 (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.

Khîm[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) 16:56, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target article, and this form with the diacritic is not used on Wikipedia so far as the use of the search function could detect. Khim and KHIM are articles, but users looking for either of those subjects are unlikely to use the special character, so deletion is recommendable. Hog Farm (talk) 20:36, 29 January 2020 (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.

Barazantathul[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) 16:55, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target article, not discussed anywhere. Unhelpful redirect. Hog Farm (talk) 20:19, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This fictional character is mentioned nowhere on Wikipedia. Impossible to retarget anywhere helpful. BenKuykendall (talk) 03:19, 30 January 2020 (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.

Scenarios Inc.[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) 14:49, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be a company affiliated with GMA Network (see [2]), but it's not mentioned at the target nor is it clear that it should be. I would suggest deletion unless an appropriately sourced mention can be added. signed, Rosguill talk 19:51, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete for now. Can be recreated if considered an important acquisition to be listed at the GMA Network article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:58, 3 February 2020 (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.

Template:2013 SEC Southeastern Conference standings[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 G6, these redirects were unambiguously created in error. -- Tavix (talk) 21:30, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These are implausible and/or misleading redirects I accidentally created via typo during an effort to correct the naming scheme of a large number of college football standings templates Jweiss11 (talk) 19:45, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Misleading, and the last one appears to be completely erroneous (to wrong conference). Hog Farm (talk) 20:24, 29 January 2020 (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.

Narvi (Middle-earth)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 5#Narvi (Middle-earth)

Gondorian places[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) 14:48, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Gondor article was recently trimmed to reduce various issues, mostly involving granular detail of a fictional subject. The deletion of redirects to minor places whose references in the target article were removed was not objected to at the article's talk page. I've attempted to find retargeting points for some of the redirects, but not all have a good place for that. Hog Farm (talk) 15:15, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The trimmed Gondor article is looking a lot more balanced! If these fictional locations are too minor to mention there, then it seems unlikely that better targets exist. And since these redirects do not lead to relevant content, we should delete them. BenKuykendall (talk) 15:18, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, yes, these are the mini-places I chose to leave out. I don't think we have any need of them. Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:30, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as housekeeping. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:36, 30 January 2020 (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.

Meolo (botany)[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) 14:46, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Steel1943 (talk) 13:57, 29 January 2020 (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.

Ernst Reinhardt[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 Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 13:59, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Completely WTF redirect. Only reason I'm not sending this to speedy is to make sure there's not a weird thing at play, like a pen name or something. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 11:44, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weeelll then, that shot in the dark panned out. Withdrawn Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:20, 29 January 2020 (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.

Jani Likaveč[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 keep. signed, Rosguill talk 00:05, 6 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I move the page Jani Likaveč to Jani Likavec because the proper spelling of the name is with a "c" (See the page on the Slovenian Wiki). As a result a redirect has been created on the Jani Likaveč page. But this redirect makes no sense. A redirect from a name with a "c" to a name with a "č" makes sense, but not the other way around. Creator is not notified cause he's banned on the English Wiki. Sb008 (talk) 11:05, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete — author requests deletion or blanking. --Soumyabrata (talk • subpages) 11:23, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. There is a 'č' in Slovenian, but as OP says it's a different letter from 'c'. Not a plausible {{R from misspelling}}. Narky Blert (talk) 13:11, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I noticed the page was created at this title by a prolific creator of biographies from databases, so I figured there must be a database that uses the spelling. The only reference [3] uses a diacritic on that 'c' (it is showing as Mojibake to me, but all indications point to it being the same spelling). Since a major database likely uses this spelling, I believe it is plausible for someone to use that spelling to search for this athlete. If it is incorrect, I think the solution would be to simply tag as {{R from incorrect name}}. Either way, the article was at this title for a few years, so at the very least it should be retained to prevent link rot from external sources. -- Tavix (talk) 15:29, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per Tavix' arguments. J947 (c), at 05:01, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tavix, plausible error. It already has the right Rcats to show that it's not a proper form. --BDD (talk) 14:47, 5 February 2020 (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.

Bands/groups pointing to 2019 & 2020 music charts[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Bands/groups pointing to 2019 & 2020 music charts

DJs pointing to 2019 & 2020 music charts[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#DJs pointing to 2019 & 2020 music charts

Reünie[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Reünie

Redirects pointing to List of Gaon Digital Chart number ones of 2019[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of Gaon Digital Chart number ones of 2019

John Blek[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#John Blek

Redirects pointing to List of number-one albums of 2019 (Belgium)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of number-one albums of 2019 (Belgium)

Redirects pointing to List of number-one albums of 2019 (Finland)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of number-one albums of 2019 (Finland)

Redirects pointing to List of number-one albums of 2019 (Portugal)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of number-one albums of 2019 (Portugal)

Musical works pointing to List of number-one albums of 2019 (Spain)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Musical works pointing to List of number-one albums of 2019 (Spain)

Artists pointing to List of number-one albums of 2019 (Spain)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Artists pointing to List of number-one albums of 2019 (Spain)

Songs pointing to List of number-one club tracks of 2019 (Australia)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Songs pointing to List of number-one club tracks of 2019 (Australia)

Artists pointing to List of number-one club tracks of 2019 (Australia)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Artists pointing to List of number-one club tracks of 2019 (Australia)

Redirects pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Austria)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Austria)

Redirects pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Denmark)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Denmark)

Redirects pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (France)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (France)

Musical works pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Germany)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Musical works pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Germany)

Artists pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Germany)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Artists pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Germany)

Albums pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Italy)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Albums pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Italy)

Songs pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Italy)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Songs pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Italy)

Artists pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Italy)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Artists pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Italy)

Redirects pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Switzerland)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of number-one hits of 2019 (Switzerland)

Redirects pointing to List of number-one hits of 2020 (Germany)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of number-one hits of 2020 (Germany)

Brunori Sas[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Brunori Sas

Redirects pointing to List of number-one singles of 2019 (Finland)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of number-one singles of 2019 (Finland)

Julinho KSD[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Julinho KSD

Redirects pointing to List of number-one singles of 2019 (Spain)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of number-one singles of 2019 (Spain)

Redirects pointing to List of Oricon number-one albums of 2019[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of Oricon number-one albums of 2019

Redirects pointing to List of Oricon number-one singles of 2019[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Redirects pointing to List of Oricon number-one singles of 2019

Bella (Eva song)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 February 8#Bella (Eva song)

Discussion (Songs pointing to 2019 & 2020 music charts)[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 WP:TRAINWRECK, redirects listed here have been reorganized and relisted as separate discussions. signed, Rosguill talk 21:16, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 January 21#Gemeliers, these are redirects for musicians, bands, music groups, choirs, rappers, singers, etc, plus albums and songs, pointing to pages of charts they're listed on. There is nothing in great detail about the subjects on the target pages, just a single mention of the subject in a table. I do not believe it is sufficient to warrant a redirect. People looking for their favorite musician page on Wikipedia will most probably not want to land in some random chart page. I recommend deleting these redirects as misleading and confusing, along for encouraging creation. These are only redirects for charts of 2019 and 2020. I am yet to investigate the charts of earlier years but I suspect there may be more that I may find and list here if this request for deletion is successful. Thank you. Agenzmale (talk) 11:00, 29 January 2020 (UTC) This nomination originally consisted of multiple other sub-nominations. Per discussion below, I have separated them to the sections above. Agenzmale (talk) 21:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Agenzmale: Comment. Could you split this up into smaller batches please? I'm willing to look for possible better targets, but not in a list seven screenfuls long. Narky Blert (talk) 13:21, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Agenzmale and Narky Blert: I was sort of thinking this too, but instead, I think that there should be one nomination for songs, one for albums, and one for singers/bands/groups in order to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK. Steel1943 (talk) 13:39, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Agenzmale and Steel1943: That's definitely a good idea (the search techniques are different), but I'd still prefer to see no more than ten or so listed at a time. It's not like the Middle-Earth redirects, where the current target may be the only likely location (unless a passing Tolkien specialist knows better). Narky Blert (talk) 13:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Agenzmale and Narky Blert: I get it, but it may be more efficient to just get these all batch deleted as unmentioned, if consensus sways that way, of course (especially since no one is certain how much time one wants to spend on doing this), then if necessary, these redirects can be recreated to point to different, more precise targets, considering that if consensus is to delete them all as unmentioned in the target page, if they are created to redirect somewhere else, they would then not be eligible for WP:G4 since the newly-created redirect(s) would be considerably different. Steel1943 (talk) 13:47, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
          • @Narky Blert and Steel1943: I have split the list into categories. I hope this is good enough as it was a lot of work! Cheers. Agenzmale (talk) 14:41, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
            • Thanks, I'll tackle these in batches.
              • @Agenzmale: If you have the stamina to do any more of these: batch them up by one target article at a time; no need to divide between people and pieces. (1) That would produce lists of manageable size for discussion here. (2) I found the easiest way to work was to open the target article, its equivalent (if any) in the base language, and (possibly also) the Main Page in the base language. Swapping between one set of such reference pages to another was fiddly. Narky Blert (talk) 10:43, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
                • @Narky Blert: I could do that but it will most probably result in editors making the same comment at same discussions. Agenzmale (talk) 05:40, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
                  • @Agenzmale: The total number isn't an issue, only the number per nomination. I've seen and been involved in cleaning up after several wholly correct page moves which broke over 2,000 links to a DAB page. During the New York Wars, bd2412 fixed a minumum of 20,000 bad links (I've seen a higher figure quoted). If it needs doing, it needs doing. Narky Blert (talk) 10:36, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bands/groups. Delete all. Jubël not in Finnish WP, next two in German WP and no obvious target in English WP, Equal Love not mentioned in the English article or its equivalents. Narky Blert (talk) 14:57, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • DJs. Delete all. Mentioned in the article, no obvious notability, unlikely to be any foreigns. Let the search engine do its work. Narky Blert (talk) 15:07, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rappers. Retarget Loredana (rapper) to Loredana Zefi.
Delete the rest. I found non-English equivalents for all. Narky Blert (talk) 15:14, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget Boven de wolken to Niels Destadsbader.
Retarget Ima wa Ima de Chikai wa Emi de to Zutomayo.
Retarget Ni descanso, ni paz! to La Polla Records.
Retarget Scatola Nera and Scatola nera to Gemitaiz.
Delete the rest. Back later, Narky Blert (talk) 15:48, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget Kein Schlaf to Hava (musician).
Retarget Ostia Lido (song) to J-Ax.
Retarget Hé oh to Gambi (rapper).
Retarget Khapta to Heuss l'Enfoiré.
Retarget Puisque c'est écrit to Jean-Baptiste Guégan.
Retarget Sale mood to Booba.
Retarget Un peu de haine to PLK (rapper).
Retarget Kein Plan to Loredana Zefi.
Retarget Veleno 7 to Gemitaiz.
Retarget Reünie to Snelle.
Delete the rest. And that's the lot.
I agree with nom that redirects to list pages with bare mentions like these are unhelpful and need to go. I have indicated targets in English WP where there is some useful information relating to the redirect. I omitted three cases where I found the English article about the musician but it had no mention of the album or song in question.
Whew! Well that's over with, until the next time. Narky Blert (talk) 18:43, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment it would be more conducive for other editors to participate (as well as being easier for discussion closers) if these redirects were actually split up into different discussions, rather than just being organized into separate sublists of the same discussion. signed, Rosguill talk 07:18, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would find delete all acceptable as inappropriate redirect targets, but if Narky was willing to put in the extra effort to find actual info on some of these topics, I can live with his recommendations and anyone can renominate those individually if someone else does not agree. StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 05:30, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Concur with Rosguill completely. While I am impressed with the nom's batching of these redirect nominations into a single nomination, because there are so many, it probably would've been better to batch these into three or four batches by sub-group. I also commend Narky Blert for going through each redirect one-by-one to selectively pick out ones worth salvaging, particularly as Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars noted it probably would've been acceptable to delete them all (assuming no history worth preserving, of course) and re-create any others later. Doug Mehus T·C 15:32, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Absolute TRAINWRECK; Rosguill sums it up for me. I suggest closing and renominating in more manageable batches, perhaps not batches at all. J947 (c), at 04:55, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Rosguill, Steel1943, Dmehus, and J947: there are about 200 pages here (and probably 1,000 to 2,000 more to come). Splitting them into individual discussions or grouping by their target is going to create about 150-2000 discussions that will either be mostly ignored by RfD participants because there are too many for them comment in or cause a swamping of same comments to all of the discussions. It will be a waste of volunteer time to go through them one by one in my opinion. How should this proceed? I hope something fruitful can come of this. Agenzmale (talk) 05:51, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's already been broken up into chunks, making those separate discussions would do nicely. We could consider breaking up the extremely large sections as well. I figure it could be manageable if split into 10 or so discussions. signed, Rosguill talk 05:58, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Concur with what Rosguill said. I would just add that in your rationale for each batch, link to this discussion as evidence of consensus and that way the administrators will be more comfortable with deleting the subsequent similar batches with no or very little participation. I agree there's probably no need to relist either of the batches even once as that would be a waste of time. Thanks for the work you're doing identifying these batches! Rosguill, will an administrator have to check the page information for every redirect to ensure there are no corresponding talk pages or subpages for each one, or is there a tool one can use without having to load each in a new tab? --Doug Mehus T·C 17:11, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure about subpages, but talk pages can be set to either be deleted automatically or not in the XfD closer interface. signed, Rosguill talk 18:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Alberto Urso, Giordana Angi and Junior Cally should be removed from this list since the redirects have been transformed into articles.--Alienautic (talk) 19:08, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Split into multiple nominations. Agenzmale (talk) 21:12, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agenzmale, thanks, that's helpful. I think that if the goal is to make this more legible to newcomers to the conversation, we should also copy Narky Blert's comments to the relevant sub-sections, collapse the general discussion section here, and then relist everything as separate discussions.I'd go ahead and do this myself, but I'd like Narky's assent before moving their comments around. signed, Rosguill talk 23:23, 7 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Rosguill and Agenzmale: This nomination has been rearranged twice. I do not think that rearranging it a third time would help. The problem is that it's too big, and no amount of rearrangement will cure that. IMO a solution could be to procedural-close this discussion and to renominate in small batches. Elsewhere in this thread, I have suggested batching by target article. I would find it easy enough to copy my relevant comments here to a renomination titled (for example) "Questionable redirects to List of number-one singles of 2019 (Finland)". Copying would be better than moving, which would be laborious and would risk introducing mistakes. Narky Blert (talk) 04:23, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Rosguill: That will be great and appreciated. Thank you. Agenzmale (talk) 07:12, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Agenzmale:, @Narky Blert:, ok what I'm thinking makes sense is to relist the small sections with <10 links as is, and then mark the others as no consensus. I can also use the closing script so that the RfD tags are not removed from the pages, so all you would need to do is copy the listings to a new section. Alternatively, if you think you'd find it easier to nominate from scratch, I can have the script also remove the tags for the no consensus closes. signed, Rosguill talk 18:43, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Rosguill: I've reorganized them into smaller groups of ~15 pages. Please do the necessary. Agenzmale (talk) 21:13, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strongly oppose deletion of redirects to chart pages: The redirects to list pages are very useful indeed as they indicate a song or an album or an artist having reached number one in a certain official chart, say Switzerland, Austria, Germany, Finland, the Netherlands. More often then not, such artists don't have pages in English Wikipedia (although they may have one in a relevant language Wikipedia, say in German or Finnish or Swedish or Norwegian). But creating a page for the artist or the band is a great opportunity for many of our English language readers and further proof that we are not Anglo- and Americano-centric after all. With such redirects, we can associate that such an artist or such a band exists in the first place with a simple search, second that this artist or band does have a significant and notable single or album that has actually attained number one in a certain country's chart, most often in his own country, thus a further indication of the origin of the artist or band. This is such a great information to have. Just the fact that an artist is mentioned even as a redirect is a proof of better inclusiveness of our Wikipedia project, and renders our English project richer, and is a more than certain indication that the artist is notable even though he or she does not yet have a full article with us in English Wikipedia. English Wikipedia is certainly richer with the mention of hundreds and hundreds of (for us) unknown artists. Keep names of such artists connected to their number one achievement(s) on certain official charts, an indication of their notability, albeit with a redirect page. All you are trying to do with this proposal is to obscure their worthwhile achievements and banish these artists from our pages, thus resulting in lesser information on English Wikipedia and lesser inclusiveness. werldwayd (talk) 19:33, 8 February 2020 (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.

Compressive strength of pine[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) 14:45, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Steel1943 (talk) 03:52, 29 January 2020 (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/2020_January_29&oldid=958129313"