Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 31

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 31[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 31, 2021.

Aggregate concrete[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. No participation after two relists, which makes me think that the status quo is likely the preferred option. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:04, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should this target Construction aggregate or Concrete (maybe the Concrete#Aggregates section)? This redirect has dual meanings, it could either be the aggregates used in the production of concrete, or it could be aggregates made from recycled concrete. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:11, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 01:47, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:56, 31 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.

1234567890[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 disambiguate due to no consensus. While the discussion numerically leans towards Arabic numerals as the best target, it's very clear from the amount of time this discussion has continued, and the many suggestions there are, that there probably isn't an unambiguous primary topic. I've drafted a disambiguation page covering the three suggested targets and will retarget 123456789 and 0123456789 to it. This will, at least, solve the problems of (a) these very similar targets pointing to different reasonable places, and (b) some messy hatnotes. I obviously invite further improvements to the disambiguation page, and if further discussion is needed about this in future, it can at least start from a more cohesive point. ~ mazca talk 10:15, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While this is described at the target, I'm pretty sure thet Arabic numerals is the primary topic. A hatnote might be added there, but I don't think it's necessary. This redirect gets well over a hundred monthly pageviews and might be confusing for many people. Note that 0123456789 also redirects to the proposed target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 23:00, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While there is already consensus for retargeting, there is still some slight disagreement with regards to the primary topic.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to pandigital number, the correct place if we talk about this as a number, instead of as a string of symbols, and clean up the hatnotes there. —Kusma (t·c) 09:25, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Numeral system. Paul 012 brings up some points that I mostly agree with. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 12:28, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate There doesn't appear to be a clear primary topic to me, and there are three valid targets suggested above. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 12:42, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Arabic numerals. I think someone searching this is intending to type out the set of Arabic numerals (either out of boredom or curiosity) instead of meaning this to be the number 1,234,567,890. Of course, where ever this ends up, please add or clean-up the hatnotes to the other valid targets. -- Tavix (talk) 18:50, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Arabic numerals, in line with 0123456789, and point 123456789 there as well. It's a better target than Numeral system, which is much more broad. I mostly agree with Tavix, but really, it's hard to do more than guess what readers likely mean. Pandigital number is too specific to strike me as the primary topic. — The Earwig (talk) 08:54, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Depending on which retarget option is the most popular, we could end up with 0123456789, 123456789, and 1234567890 going to 2-3 different targets. There seems to be a consensus against deletion and for retargeting, but we can do with more opinions on where to take the redirect.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 09:28, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I've reverted an earlier close. Because of the variety of opinions and the relevance for other redirects, this discussion could do with more input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Uanfala (talk) 23:40, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Arabic numerals. I think this because it points out the Arabic numerals and 0123456789 goes there as well. It is also a more specific one than Numeral system.Keresluna (talk) 18:34, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per 86 IP and Mdewman6, where the three valid targets can be added as to avoid any sort of confusion. CycloneYoris talk! 23:55, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Arabic numerals. Numeral system seems too broad, and Pandigital number seems like an unlikely intended target. signed, Rosguill talk 19:27, 8 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.

Roman equivalent[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 16#Roman equivalent

Cylindricity[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 Roundness (object). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 23:49, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cylindricity is a measure of how cylindrical an object is, but it isn't mentioned in the target article. The best target I found was Roundness (object), but it only mentions the term in the lead. There are also a load of articles on engineering tolerances that might be suitable targets, and an entry on wiktionary. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:08, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Nominator has proposed multiple possible suggestions without a clear indication of which they prefer.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 18:57, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:31, 31 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.

Cockmonger[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 8#Cockmonger

Glizzy[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 8#Glizzy

A (internet meme)[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 03:55, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of memes at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 17:29, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: One of Hololive's talents, Gawr Gura, has a catchphrase "a" that became a meme. I personally don't think it's a likely search target especially when the Hololive article does not mention the meme at all. _dk (talk) 18:47, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    This is the sort of thing that makes me feel old, in that I cannot imagine how "A" is a catchphrase, and don't really want to find out. If there's no content related to the meme on-wiki, then the redirect isn't doing the thing that redirects are for and should be deleted. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:10, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as non-notable meme. Dominicmgm (talk) 21:59, 1 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.

Current Fractions[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. Hog Farm Talk 17:49, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While this is the title of a section at the target, it's a generic phrase that does not necessarily refer to Kerala Congress. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 17:23, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as hopelessly ambiguous. There are probably literally a thousand or more things this could refer to. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:11, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as ambiguous, per above. I'm 90% sure this (and the title of the section it points to) is also a typo and is supposed to be "Current Factions", rather than "Current Fractions", as the article is about various political factions in the Kerala Congress. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 20:29, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I had the same thought. One more reason to just delete it. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:35, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Ambiguous and misleading. LSGH (talk) (contributions) 11:03, 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.

Arnold Hall (Hartwick College)[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. Hog Farm Talk 17:49, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 16:48, 31 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.

Fine Arts Theatre[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. Hog Farm Talk 17:48, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, could conceivably refer to many different theatres. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 16:46, 31 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.

Paolino Recreation Center[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. Hog Farm Talk 17:47, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target or anywhere else on Wikipedia, delete unless a duly sourced mention can be added. signed, Rosguill talk 16:45, 31 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.

OpenStore[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. Hog Farm Talk 17:47, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 16:42, 31 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.

Kinnies[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 7#Kinnies

Free Willie (Due South)[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 List of Due South episodes#ep2. Hog Farm Talk 17:46, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article. I dunno what the disambiguator is supposed to mean. Is it a song? Dominicmgm (talk) 14:56, 31 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.

Fee willy[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. Hog Farm Talk 15:26, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible typo. I doubt anyone would miss the "R" from "free". Dominicmgm (talk) 14:52, 31 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.

Bum bum be-dum[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. Hog Farm Talk 15:26, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I propose this redirect be deleted per #5 and #8 of WP:R#DELETE and WP:NOTLYRICS as with Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 28#Work work work work work. Pamzeis (talk) 13:54, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think I agree that it should be deleted,but not for the first two reasons in the nomination. LYRICS refers to content of articles, not redirects, and the other link is just a list of reasons one might delete a redirect, with no indication given which reason is germane in this case. It's generally helpful to be specific in a nomination about why a policy applies as opposed to just throwing out some shortcuts and assuming that makes a clear argument. All that being said, this is not a useful redirect, unless it was to go to a WP:DAB page (that at this time does not exist) similar to la la la. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:22, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. While redirects from lyrics can be helpful (especially if the title of the song is not in the lyrics), this is too ambiguous to redirect to a certain song. Dominicmgm (talk) 13:51, 3 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.

Stephen French (troll)[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. Hog Farm Talk 15:25, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mr. French is a non-notable living person who was convicted of threatening and harassing Lorraine Higgins. "Troll" as a parenthetical disambiguator seems like a BLP violation to me (though some newspapers have described him as an internet troll). I suggest deleting this and replacing it with something like Stephen French (criminal). Cheers, gnu57 13:07, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete If he's not notable on his own I don't see good reason to have any sort of redirect at all.Beeblebrox (talk) 21:51, 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.

(East Lancs) British Citybus[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. Hog Farm Talk 15:25, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible search term Nightfury 09:53, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete; unusual format makes it somewhat confusing and unlikely to be useful. Adumbrativus (talk) 03:32, 7 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.

Geodreieck[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. Hog Farm Talk 15:21, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is the name of a set square produced by a German company. The target of the redirect was a section of Set square that was removed as blatant advertising [1]. So, the only occurrence of "Geodreieck" in En WP is this redirect, which must be deleted either. D.Lazard (talk) 08:27, 31 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.

Incompetent valves[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 8#Incompetent valves

Put to the sword[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 8#Put to the sword

Podarke (polychaete)[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 Oxydromus. signed, Rosguill talk 20:03, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

redundant and misleading. Redirecting wrongly. Correct Podarke (genus) Estopedist1 (talk) 06:50, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:46, 31 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.

Sub Zero (roller coaster)[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. apparent hoax. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:27, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This was a fabricated claim by an editor who was later blocked. There was never a roller coaster announced or installed by this name at a Six Flags theme park. GoneIn60 (talk) 07:24, 31 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.

Eductor-jet pump[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 7#Eductor-jet pump

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_31&oldid=1138583264"