Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

May 12[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 12, 2021.

Lunchtime O'Boulez[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 20#Lunchtime O'Boulez

Robert Feggans[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 21#Robert Feggans

Supreme Court of Justice of Buenos Aires[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was restore article. This should be considered procedural; if the redirector still considers the article unsuitable, he may take it to AfD. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 (T·C) 15:13, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this redirect as "Supreme Court of Justice of Buenos Aires"' own article has been already created. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alsoriano97 (talk • contribs) 18:36, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Alsoriano97: which article are you referring to? This title has never been anything other than a redirect, and no article with a very similar title exists in mainspace or draftspace that I can find. Thryduulf (talk) 21:44, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Thryduulf: In this link I leave you the revision in which it can be seen that I created the article and then it was redirected. I mention CommanderWaterford, who was the one who did it in case he wants to argue something. I am using WP tools that I have never used before, so perhaps my nomination is somewhat broken. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 21:59, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • (edit conflict)The nominated page was briefly an article on the provincial-level supreme court. Two minutes after it was created, it was WP:BLARed by User:CommanderWaterford to the article on Argentina's national supreme court, which doesn't mention the provincial supreme court. I don't understand why that was done, and I don't understand the nomination, either. This is all rather confusing. - Eureka Lott 22:03, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think what is actually being asked for is to restore the article? If so, yes that would seem sensible but I want to hear why it was redirected first. Thryduulf (talk) 00:34, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Thryduulf: @EurekaLott: that's what exactly I'm asking for. The fact that it is a short article is not (or should not be) a reason to be redirected in less than five minutes to an article about a judicial stay that is completely different. That way it has not been given the possibility to improve it, which I am willing to do. Perhaps I have made a mistake in how I've made the nomination, but my idea is this. _-_Alsoriano97 (talk) 10:10, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore article not an appropriate redirect, these are two different courts, same as the District of Columbia Court of Appeals is not the Supreme Court of the United States. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 14:08, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore article (pending any comment from @CommanderWaterford:). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:45, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reinstate article, since we've seen no explanation for the redirection. - Eureka Lott 02:26, 21 May 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.

AirTag[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. Nomination was malformed, and the request has already been completed as the result of a requested move. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 17:40, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per a consensus on AirTag (tracker), the page is being renamed to simply "AirTag" and the page previously just "AirTag" will now be AirTag (company). The "AirTag" redirect needs to be deleted before the naming change can be completed. Abobeck11 (talk) 16:58, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Procedural close. The WP:RM discussion at Talk:AirTag (tracker) is still open. If it's closed with a decision to move, which seems likely, the pages will be moved without the need for a discussion here. - Eureka Lott 17:33, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose no consensus has yet been established as the requested move is open (at the time this comment was made) . -- 67.70.27.105 (talk) 00:50, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural close. The RM closer will fix this. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:47, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the move request has closed. The "AirTag" redirect has been replaced by the Apple AirTag article -- 67.70.27.105 (talk) 02:49, 16 May 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.

Jordan Oliver[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was move draft to Jordan Oliver and add hatnote. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 (T·C) 15:19, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion, as it redirects to another redirect, unneccessarily causing a double redirect PabloLikesToWrestle (talk) 15:13, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thia discussion has been open for over a week, and it looks like we've achieved consensus. I expect it will be closed soon. Just hang on a bit longer, please. :) - Eureka Lott 02:22, 21 May 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.

Next Welsh Assembly Election[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 21#Next Welsh Assembly Election

Next National Assembly for Wales election[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 21#Next National Assembly for Wales election

Prager Academical Institution[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 03:22, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a likely search term for PragerU. –dlthewave ☎ 12:05, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A search for that exact term in Google shows no obvious hits. Are there any examples of this term being used by a questionable source? Absent evidence of use, I think removal makes sense. Springee (talk) 13:00, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a somewhat humorous oxymoron but is unlikely to be used as a search term. MasterTriangle12 (talk) 06:35, 13 May 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.

Ayinla[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 disambiguate. WP:RFD encourages editors to be bold and convert redirects into pages. An RfD was not necessary for this, but disambiguation was supported by the !voters. Regarding a page move, that can be done at WP:RM#TR, where uncontroversial moves can be requested. If the film is made the primary topic, WP:ONEOTHER says a hatnote is sufficient, and the disambiguation page can be converted into a namelist per WP:APOS. —Bagumba (talk) 10:34, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page says It is used because Wikipedia has only one article about a person with this surname, or because one individual is the most likely topic sought by this surname but other well known subjects with the same name exist on the encyclopedia. Would like the page to be moved to a disambiguation page to make way for a film title. The Sokks💕 (talk) 11:25, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support The article Ayinla (film) is about a film about the murder of someone else with the same name. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 14:43, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per nom. I started a draft disambiguation page below the redirect. I didn't include the Oba Fatai Ayinla Aileru article for now, because I couldn't tell whether or not it's a WP:PTM. - Eureka Lott 17:50, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Hey @EurekaLott: Thank you for your help. About Oba Fatai Ayinla Aileru, Oba is his traditional title, meaning King suggesting that 'Ayinla' is his middle name. The Sokks💕 (talk) 18:19, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks, TheSokks, that was my initial reaction, too. If that's the case, then we shouldn't include that article on the disambiguation page. - Eureka Lott 22:13, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support dabify --Lenticel (talk) 05:36, 14 May 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.

Complex variables (disambiguation)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 21#Complex variables (disambiguation)

Cock carousel[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. -- Tavix (talk) 20:19, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: offensive/abusive term used by incel/MGTOW/PUA types to slander women who have more sex than they do.[1] Not mentioned on the target page. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 01:52, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Soft redirect to wikt:ride the cock carousel. The only part of the nomination that is relevant is that the term is not mentioned at the target (see WP:RNEUTRAL), but it is a plausible search term with e.g. 133 page views last year. I couldn't find any relevant content on en.wp, and the article in the page history was essentially just a dictionary definition, so soft redirecting to the Wiktionary entry seems best. Thryduulf (talk) 10:37, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I could live with that, but I'm curious why WP:RFD#D3 would not be relevant here. The Wiktionary entry specificallty says the phrase is derogatory. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 11:04, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • The linked WP:RNEUTRAL#Neutrality of redirects section explains why some derogatory terms are good redirects, but basically if a term is (a) likely to be searched and (b) there is relevant content about the term then a redirect will help people find the content they are looking for. The target can (and in many cases should) note any non-obvious concerns around uses (e.g. if it's derogatory, etc), which might be nuanced (e.g. there are terms that are regarded as offensive in the US but not UK and vice versa). Thryduulf (talk) 11:24, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Lin, Jie Liang (2017). "Antifeminism Online: MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way)". In Frömming, Urte Undine; et al. (eds.). Digital Environments: Ethnographic Perspectives Across Global Online and Offline Spaces. Transcript Verlag. p. 89. ISBN 978-3-8376-3497-6. JSTOR j.ctv1xxrxw.9.
  • Strong delete — having this redirect legitimizes the concept and gives the impression that we support it, which we absolutely should not. A soft redirect to Wiktionary would probably have a similar effect. If we end up having a List of manosphere jargon article like RationalWiki does, then we can potentially recreate the redirect and have it point there. 3 kids in a trenchcoat (talk) 17:06, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Being offensive alone doesn't mean we need to delete, but the phrase isn't particularly common—and in its own crude way, it's clear enough what it's referring to. --BDD (talk) 20:16, 18 May 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.

Rooah[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 21#Rooah

Tinkling[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 21#Tinkling

LTL[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 keep. 162 etc., courtesy ping to start an RM if you want to. (non-admin closure) — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 21:25, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Pageviews do not add up for a primary redirect here. Recommend moving LTL (disambiguation) to the primary title. 162 etc. (talk) 00:08, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the case, please close and I will resubmit, thanks. 162 etc. (talk) 15:19, 14 May 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_May_12&oldid=1024729019"