Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 25

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 25[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 25, 2021.

All Asians look the same[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 no consensus. ✗plicit 03:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect has accrued a grand total of 95 views since creation on 6 February 2017, versus 464606 for the target. It is an implausible search term because it is phrased as a sentence. The sentence itself is not mentioned at the target. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:43, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I wouldn't call 95 page views in a little over a month implausible, that seems fairly well used. Also page view comparisons with the target article are meaningless, if we judged redirects with that logic we would end up with no redirects to popular pages and loads of them to rarely viewed pages. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:48, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • There's a typo in the nom statement - it was made in 2017, not 2021. that means it got what, 25 page views a year. that does seem a lot more implausible.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Unclear what action needs to be taken here. Is this redirect actually implausible or not?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:42, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, I can imagine searching for "why do all Asians look the same" and indeed if I enter that (or even "why do all Chinese look the same") into Google it returns to me exactly that article. There are more factors, but I suspect redirects like these are taken into account by search engines. So even if it's not popular with human visitors (since when does popularity matter?), there's another reason to keep it. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 18:49, 26 March 2021 (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.

Sushie (video game character)[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 to Paper Mario (video game)#Story and characters. ✗plicit 03:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessarily disambiguated redirect with atypical disambiguation, when Sushie already redirects to the article in question. Unlikely to be used by people to search. While it says it is a redirect with history, the history is slight. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 15:54, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:40, 25 March 2021 (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.

Super Mario RPG 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 retarget to Super Mario RPG#Legacy. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:21, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't seem like an actual "working title" for the game and the original article was gibberish. Unnecessary WP:SURPRISE redirect. ZXCVBNM (TALK) 16:02, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:40, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per IP86. Seems to be a reasonable target, and the connection is explained there. Hog Farm Talk 04:32, 5 April 2021 (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.

Big sad[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 no consensus. Hardly any participation after two relists and nearly a month after being nominated. Seems unlikely a third relist would be fruitful. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:24, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a meme about depression that is not mentioned in the target article (See the comments on the redirect pages). Does not appear to be a widely used name for depression, google turns up a few memes and some unrelated results 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:34, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as a bona fide popular slang term, certainly significant enough to be a redirect. (I hear it not infrequently in daily life.) For the standards of 'significant enough to be a redirect', it passes, even if it doesn't make Wikipedia notability. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 12:02, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:05, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 23:09, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per WP:NOTURBANDICTIONARY.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 21:43, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep - seems to be the primary meaning here, and even has some use in RS. [1]. Not the strongest redirect in the world, but it seems to be reasonable to me. Hog Farm Talk 04:36, 5 April 2021 (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.

Toby Hedges[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. ✗plicit 03:29, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No mention in the target article; previous target was redirected here for NOTDIRECTORY reasons. Jalen Folf (talk) 19:20, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete A non-notable DJ with no mention in the target article.Less Unless (talk) 21:42, 26 March 2021 (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.

SoCal Uncensored[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 Procedural close withdraw. RM/TR should be issued. Wrestling organization is the primary topic. (non-admin closure) AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 00:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The current target's only connection to the name "SoCal Uncensored" is that its official website is hosted at a domain called socaluncensored.com. SoCal Uncensored (professional wrestling) should be the primary topic, with perhaps a hatnote back to the Hall of Fame article. 162.208.168.92 (talk) 18:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If I’m reading this right and you want SoCal Uncensored (professional wrestling) to be titled SoCal Uncensored I believe WP:RM is the proper venue.--67.70.100.30 (talk) 20:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, please close and I will resubmit as RM. 162.208.168.92 (talk) 14:42, 27 March 2021 (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.

Wikipedia talk:BOT[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) retarget to Wikipedia talk:Bots. This didn't need discussion, as it's a case of mismatched redirects. Completely uncontroversial. Primefac (talk) 17:21, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect would be expected to point to Wikipedia talk:Bots since WP:BOT points to Wikipedia:Bots, but instead it points to the talk page of WP:BOTPOL, and it appears to have been retargeted there by a double redirect-fixing bot. I'd like to propose retargeting it to Wikipedia talk:Bots. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 17:11, 25 March 2021 (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.

Oobie[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. ✗plicit 03:31, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oobie is not the same artist as "Lil Jon". BME Recordings redirects to Lil Jon. There's no mention of "Oobie" on the Lil Jon page. Ssjhowarthisawesome (talk) 16:24, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Oobie is a female singer that appeared in several Lil Jons records (2002-2003). She is not notable and not mentioned anywhere, I believe deletion is a right option. Less Unless (talk) 21:46, 26 March 2021 (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.

File:Charles Mason Remey - Second Guardian of the Orthodox Baha'i Faith.jpeg[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. ✗plicit 03:37, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recently created. The move to File:Charles Mason Remey.jpg was requested due to NPOV, so probably better to get rid of this redirect. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 14:14, 25 March 2021 (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.

Autosomal recessive agammaglobulinaemia[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 to Hypogammaglobulinemia. ✗plicit 03:34, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is wrong, but I'm not sure: as far as I understand, an X-linked disease can't also be an autosomal disease. If someone else agrees, I want to at least create a new stub article out of this. Kritixilithos (talk) 13:50, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I change my mind, I think it's better for this to redirect to Hypogammaglobulinemia instead, since it seems there are many types of autosomal-recessive agammaglobulinemias. Kritixilithos (talk) 14:29, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom -- the nom is correct that 'autosomal X-linked' is impossible (for observers to whom the terms are gibberish jargon: "autosomal" refers to chromosomes other than X or Y). As for converting to an article, making articles on the individual diseases could be reasonable, and from there I could see room for this being a disambig listing all of them, but one step at a time. Vaticidalprophet 22:46, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, thinking a bit further, a better order might be to convert this to an article that lists the specific disorders. Basically, something like what I did at 17q12 microdeletion syndrome where an individual syndrome that wouldn't manage a non-stub article is listed in the article for a more common sister syndrome. It'd probably be more useful to readers, who are more likely to be interested in the symptoms of an overall autosomal-recessive agammaglobulinemia syndrome than the exact genes underlying it, and allows for a more centralized discussion of the different presentations between different causes. But again, that's all for later, after it gets retargeted to somewhere less wildly inappropriate. Vaticidalprophet 22:58, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retargeted. For now I redirected it to Hypogammaglobinemia, this should later be fleshed out into a full article, perhaps following Vaticidalprophet's suggestions. Kritixilithos (talk) 16:34, 26 March 2021 (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.

CAOS Linux[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 Restored and sent to AfD at that is what appears to be the consensus. (non-admin closure) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:11, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This term does not appear in the target article at all, although it appears to have once contained content and later been turned into a redirect. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:00, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete If I am looking for information on a specific Linux distribution, getting redirected to Linux distribution is not very helpful. —Dexxor (talk) 07:21, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - the page history shows that this was a misplaced redirect to replace an article on a non-notable Linux distribution. As noted, it is unhelpful to readers to be redirected to a page that does not mention the topic, so the redirect should be deleted. - Ahunt (talk) 13:32, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore and send to AfD. There was an article at this location for 15 years before being blanked and redirected last July, so this should be evaluated as an article rather than a redirect in my opinion. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - that would just be a waste of time. It clearly was not notable and was adjudged so when the redirect was created. If you really want to go this route, then I can store the article and move it to drafts without leaving a redirect, where it will get auto-deleted in six months, without wasting everyone's time on an AfD debate. - Ahunt (talk) 15:17, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Per WP:BLAR the process for dealing with disputed blank-and-redirects is to restore the article and send it to AfD. The article was judged non-notable by a single editor without any kind of discussion or community feedback - I don't see that as a ringing endorsement for deleting the article content. Moving a 15 year old article to draft space with the specific intention of it being deleted is obviously Gaming the system and is specifically disallowed in WP:DRAFTIFY - "The aim of moving an article to draft is to allow time and space for the draft's improvement until it is ready for mainspace. It is not intended as a backdoor route to deletion.". The contents of this article do not fall under any of the speedy deletion criteria (A7 only applies to web content, not software) so it needs an AfD discussion or prodding in my opinion. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:55, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • It has been a redirect for eight months with no revert, comments or complaints, which means the removal of the text has not been controversial, that is an "editing consensus", hence we are here to discuss the redirect, not the previous article. The fate of the previous article was uncontroversial. - Ahunt (talk) 21:40, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore and send to AfD. A blank-and-redirect is not the same thing as a community judgement. In fact, as the article's history shows a declined PROD, it appears that there was debate and a possible lack of consensus regarding this article's notability. Vaticidalprophet 22:49, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore per 86.23.109.101 and Vaticidalprophet. RfD can delete redirects with history, but not when the history is so long and the blanking – so recent, nor when the article has survived a PROD. There has been disagreement about notability, so the place to go is AfD. – Uanfala (talk) 22:07, 27 March 2021 (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.

Super Mario Story[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 1#Super Mario Story

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_25&oldid=1016262397"