Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 7
May 9 >

May 8[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 8, 2020.

Viktor Tikhonov (ice hockey, b orn 1988)[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. — Wug·a·po·des​ 05:26, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This thing only got 27 pageviews since July 2015 compared to its target which got a whopping 121,006 during that timespan, possibly because of the space in the spelling of "born," left over when it was moved in 2014. It kind of seems like search bar clutter now... Regards, SONIC678 23:25, 8 May 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.

Fenugreek (dollop)[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. — Wug·a·po·des​ 05:28, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that this disambiguator makes any sense. Full disclosure, the first line of Hilbah originally read ...is a condiment or dollop, with dollop linked to the Wiktionary entry for the word. That having been established, I think that this is an incorrect usage of the word, as dollop is a quantity, not a class of objects, so I changed the article and am now proposing that this redirect should be deleted. signed, Rosguill talk 21:46, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Rosguill. If you look here at the definition of "dollop," you'll find that it means: "A large, shapeless mass of something, especially soft food." I have actually seen it written somewhere concerning the Hilbah dip (condiment) that it is a dollop. Perhaps the word is not the most familiar word to some English speakers, as it is to others. Feel free to select a better parenthetical word for a disambiguation, since "fenugreek" alone is not sufficient to describe the condiment made from these seeds. Perhaps a better suggestion would be to make a redirect entitled "Fenugreek (condiment)".Davidbena (talk) 22:05, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm aware of the definition for dollop, and I maintain that it was being used inaccurately at Hilbah--it may be served in dollops, but that doesn't make the dish itself a dollop (what would you call a bowl or tupperware full of hilbah? Certainly not a dollop). An additional issue is that there's other dishes that use fenugreek as a condiment (or as a paste, or in dollop-form). Fenugreek (condiment) would be a good redirect pointing at Fenugreek#Cooking, where Hilbah is mentioned alongside a few other dishes. signed, Rosguill talk 23:54, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure that I understand you. Are you saying that there is no equivalent English word for the ground Fenugreek seeds put to water and used as a condiment in foods? Hilbah is an Arabic word, now used as a loanword in Hebrew and English for this condiment. The Hebrew word for the fenugreek seed is Tiltan. When describing the condiment that comes from Fenugreek, it is still proper English to call it a Fenugreek dollop. That is precisely what I saw written in a certain publication which is no longer with me. However, "Fenugreek (condiment)" seems to be a better word and fits the definition of Hilbah.Davidbena (talk) 00:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Rosguill, how do you understand this usage here? Or here?Davidbena (talk) 00:32, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing: as for your suggested "redirect", Hilbah is not only used for cooking, but is eaten just as it is --- without cooking. In fact no cooking is required when preparing Hilbah, and it is often eaten with a sop without the need of any cooking whatsover.Davidbena (talk) 00:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think those links to uses of the word dollop demonstrate my point. Try swapping "dollop" with "scoop" or "tablespoon" and you'll see that they still make perfect sense. Fenugreek#Cooking also lists other dishes which could be served as dollops, such a çemen. Pointing Fenugreek (dollop) to to Hilbah makes about as much sense as pointing Chickpea (dollop) to Hummus or Rye (shot) to Whiskey. As for Fenugreek#Cooking, hilbah is listed there, notwithstanding that it isn't technically cooked. We could rename the section to "Food" or "Culinary" to be more accurate. signed, Rosguill talk 00:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Aha. Now I see it. You're right. A "dollop" is simply a small serving of something, like a "spoonfull" of Hilbah, rather than the batch itself. So, this leaves us with only one option and that is to make the redirect for Hilbah "Fenugreek (condiment)." What do you think?Davidbena (talk) 00:49, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think that it would be better to point that at the food-related section in the article Fenugreek. At a glance, a handful of entries listed there seem to plausibly be condiments. signed, Rosguill talk 01:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:45, 8 May 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.

Eritrean Autonomous State[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 16#Eritrean Autonomous State

Yankee Dime[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 soft redirect to Wikt:Yankee dime. — Wug·a·po·des​ 05:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Slang term not mentioned anywhere, not sure if the action(s) by User:CopyToWiktionaryBot in the page history led to a transwiki that would create WP:ATT issues or not though. I'm not sure how things worked in 2006 with transwiki. Hog Farm (talk) 22:45, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep, or possibly soft redirect to the wiktionary entry. A Scholar search does suggest that this phrase means "kiss" in the American South. signed, Rosguill talk 20:25, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 16:01, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:44, 8 May 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.

Dunbar's Guerillas[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. signed, Rosguill talk 21:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target article, only seems to be mentioned on the WP at a dab page. Not a suitable target, a company-sized irregular warfare group is out of the scope of a summary page for an entire army. Hog Farm (talk) 15:43, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:43, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not mentioned in WP, and "guerrillas" may be misspelt. Narky Blert (talk) 05:52, 9 May 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.

T52 class[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 15#T52 class

First Secretary of the Communist Party Party of Cuba[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 although I agree with J947 that deletion discussions like this are not a particularly productive use of our time. signed, Rosguill talk 21:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This type of wording is plausible in some cases (e.g., if it was the party's name, or if a searcher forgot a dash that appears in an official party name), but I'm not sure in this case, since this communist party doesn't seem to have used such wording (there's no mention of "Party – Party" in its article either), and also it only got five pageviews in 2019. Regards, SONIC678 18:04, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Useless to delete, useless to nominate, and slightly helpful. — J947 [cont] 19:46, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Obviously created in error. CycloneYoris talk! 21:42, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unambiguously created in error error. Useless junk. Narky Blert (talk) 21:49, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unambiguously created in error. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • And why is that a reason to delete? — J947 [cont] 00:15, 13 May 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.

Cyclical economy[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. — Wug·a·po·des​ 05:22, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While these terms appear similar, I think that this redirect is potentially misleading. The target article states that A circular economy (often referred to simply as "circularity") is an economic system aimed at eliminating waste and the continual use of resources.. However, economic cycles, ie Business cycle, are a feature of all capitalist economies regardless of whether they focus on sustainability. Searching Google scholar for "cyclical economy" did not return results about "circular economy". I would suggest either retargeting to Business cycle, or deleting the redirect, as business cycles are rarely referred to as a "cyclical economy". signed, Rosguill talk 17:59, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Circular and cyclical are different things. The Earth's orbit around the Sun is (roughly) circular but not cyclical; the progress of the seasons is cyclical but not circular. Narky Blert (talk) 21:54, 8 May 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.

Correct horse battery staple[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 15#Correct horse battery staple

Australian Television Network[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 21:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Similar to Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_May_1#Philippine_Television_Network, rather WP:XY. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 10:36, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as {{R from former name}}. Mentioned in the target: "Left without their original partners, ATN-7 and HSV-7 joined to form the Australian Television Network in 1963" (emphasis in the original). Narky Blert (talk) 11:55, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and tag per Narky Blert. CycloneYoris talk! 21:43, 8 May 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.

Department of HeaIth and Social Care[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. signed, Rosguill talk 21:09, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, implausible typo created earlier this year. In case you can't see it (took me a minute to figure out why the target was showing up in Special:Search/intitle:ITH), the word "Health" is misspelled as "H-e-a-Capital I-t-h". This particular misspelling of the department's name has never occurred anywhere on the Intertubes until now [1]. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 06:10, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This seems to be a typographical error in creation and not a common misspelling. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No-one is going to search for this spelling on purpose. Congratulations on the find, this sort of error (another is the use of Cyrillic characters) is very difficult to spot. Narky Blert (talk) 09:58, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This isn't going to be something someone types in thinking it's correct, and is pointless because it's not going to be a logical thing to type. The replacement of the operation of typing l with [shift]+ i isn't going to be plausible. Hog Farm (talk) 15:27, 8 May 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.

Science it works bitches[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. signed, Rosguill talk 21:08, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article, appears to be a joke that appeared in the comic once, too obscure to be a likely search term. Hog Farm (talk) 04:45, 8 May 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.

Cu.nniling.us[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. signed, Rosguill talk 21:08, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target article, appears to be a bawdy joke. Hog Farm (talk) 04:43, 8 May 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.

Oraneg[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 deleted by Boing! said Zebedee. (non-admin closure) Regards, SONIC678 15:09, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Google search brings up literally nothing with this exact spelling. Hog Farm (talk) 04:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Enwiki has nothing about "Oraneg". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:18, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Orange. --Soumyabrata talk contribs subpages 09:36, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Orange per Soumyabrata. Narky Blert (talk) 10:04, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have speedy deleted this as part of a redirect vandalism spree by its creator (including various mis-spellings of "Orange" all redirected to Apple). If anyone really thinks this is a valid redirect, feel free to recreate it as you see fit. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:04, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Page creator here and I do not have any qualms with this being deleted. However speedily deleting a redirect nominated for RFD without requesting to delete it or mention why it fits speedy deletion is pretty disruptive, especially since the latest 2 votes prior to deletion were retarget. OcelotCreeper (talk) 13:35, 8 May 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.

Goool![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. I'm personally sympathetic to the redirect option, but there's nevertheless a consensus to delete. signed, Rosguill talk 21:08, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unexpected target. Apparently this is the title under which the film was released in Italy, which violates WP:RFOREIGN. If anything it should go to the originator of the term, Andrés Cantor, but probably best to just delete it. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:42, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Implausible search term. Looks like complete ninsense so I might WP:DAFT this if it gets deleted. OcelotCreeper (talk) 03:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Andrés Cantor, where it is specifically mentioned. This seems to be the Spanish variant of GOOOOOAL!. Plausible search term, I personally don't see anything wrong with this. CycloneYoris talk! 09:23, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. How many 'o's do you wanna add? Furthermore, this is the English Wikipedia. Elizium23 (talk) 09:28, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not mentioned elsewhere in WP. Goool.de is not a match because of the exclamation mark. Narky Blert (talk) 11:46, 8 May 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.

Accuracy dispute[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. Regarding J947's caution, it looks like at one point in 2005 an editor tried starting a WP-space style page at this title, and it was then quickly marked for deletion. WP:Accuracy dispute predates its creation by a few years, so a history merge seems neither needed nor feasible. signed, Rosguill talk 21:06, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous term; could refer to a large number of things. Delete. — J947 [cont] 00:43, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Upon further investigation, this redirect has a rough history, and from old links it seems to perhaps be the former title of Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute. It has views but I don't know how many are looking for a specific accuracy dispute and how many are looking for Wikipedia:Accuracy dispute, if any at all. Maybe turn this into an unconventional dab page? Either way, I think we need an admin to look at the past histories of this redirect and possibly perform a histmerge. — J947 [cont] 00:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete inappropriate cross-namespace redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:20, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:XNR. We have zero title matches to justify a DAB page. Narky Blert (talk) 10:06, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note to closing admin: please don't delete straight away, check the past histories as I'm unsure what to make of this. — J947 [cont] 20:37, 13 May 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_May_8&oldid=956948012"