Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 1[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 1, 2021.

Deyrnas[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 22:02, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RFD#D2 "may cause confusion". "Deyrnas" (a soft mutation of "Teyrnas") just means "Kingdom" in the Welsh language. It does not mean "(the) United Kingdom" (Welsh: (y) Deyrnas Unedig). Since its creation on 10 September 2018, it has had 61 page views, or approximately 20 a year. It has no incoming links. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 18:24, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Those pageviews aren't particularly low, but pageviews aren't an exception to WP:RLOTE. cy:Teyrnas is about the general concept of a kingdom, and cy:Deyrnas is a redlink, so this is a standard RLOTE situation, and Welsh has no special affinity to the concept of kindgoms. Delete. I note also that Teyrnas does not (and should not) exist on enwiki. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 18:52, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    1.5 hits/month is very low, but that was just to show I'd done my homework: anyway after a flurry of activity in December 2019 when it topped three hits in one day, it has only managed as many in the last year. Basically there I'm invoking WP:RCOSTLY, there's a nonzero maintenance cost. Deyrnas Unedig is red, too, even though that would have affinity to the topic. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 20:17, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    For a redirect from a foreign language 1.5 hits a month is a not insignificant number. Thryduulf (talk) 13:47, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: This redirect would only confuse the average searcher. ―Susmuffin Talk 10:55, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per RFOREIGN - the current target is incorrect, and there is no particular affinity between Welsh and the generic concept of kingdoms. Thryduulf (talk) 13:47, 4 October 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.

Basarabka and Moldovanka[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 22:02, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Page originally created by a new user which consisted in two separate villages in Kazakhstan merged together into one single article. Basarabka was renamed in 1993 and has now an article under its current name, Saryqobda. Moldovanka was renamed too, but I am not aware of its current name and it doesn't have an article too. Anyway, this redirect is not useful, so I propose its deletion. Delete Draft:Basarabka and Moldovanka too. Super Ψ Dro 16:47, 1 October 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.

Dataism[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 speedily reverted. This does not fall within RfD's scope, but I would have moved it if it were filed at WP:RM/TR, so I've moved it per WP:NOTBURO. @Q28: For future reference, the correct venue to request reversion of a unilateral move is WP:RM/TR. I will instruct the editor who made the original move on how to start an RM. (non-admin closure) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 15:31, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

One person moved the page to a different location, which seems to require discussion, because the person who moved it made very few edits. Here's 28 and did I make a mess? 13:19, 1 October 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.

African Netball Championships[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 22:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target, should delete to encourage article creation (other continents have a dedicated article for their equivalent tournaments) Joseph2302 (talk) 10:33, 1 October 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.

Well I Never[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 19#Well I Never

Gambit (rps)[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 all but The Bureaucrat, which will be redirected to The Bureaucrats. I've added a couple of minor uses to the disambiguation to make myself feel comfortable about that decision. -- Tavix (talk) 00:00, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A collection of redirects on various rock, paper, scissors gambits left over from merging a bunch of sub-stub articles 15 years ago. None of these are mentioned in the target article (nor are gambits in general). Some of these use the unusual disambiguator (rps) which makes them an unlikely search terms, and "The Bureaucrat" seems rather ambiguous. 192.76.8.74 (talk) 00:09, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak retarget (#2) The Bureaucrat to Bureaucrat. While I'd probably support deletion if it were a new redirect, since having a few milion "the <thing>" redirects would be COSTLY, since it's been around 15 years I'd say better to retarget it. Neutral (#7) on whether Scissor Sandwich should be deleted or retargeted to an anchor at Ruby Skye P.I. for an episode of the same name. Delete the rest per nom. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 01:21, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 05:05, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:01, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete #1 and #3-#6, Since they are not often searched for, and remaining two redirects, i don't give reviews.--Here's 28 and did I make a mess? 13:23, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete 1, 3-7: 1, 3-6 due to weird disambiguators, 7 due to obscurity of the proposed retarget (pretty low pageviews on the article about entire series, also based on a Google search of the term). Retarget 2 to The Bureaucrats per EurekaLott and since it's the only similar dabpage. eviolite (talk) 23:51, 18 October 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.

177 AM[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 Deutschlandfunk Kultur. (non-admin closure) — Mikehawk10 (talk) 02:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirected to the current target after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/177 AM, but the list of longwave radio broadcasters might be a more appropriate target, as it actually mentions this frequency and other similarly named pages are supposed to be lists. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:41, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:58, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The only entry for 177 at List of longwave radio broadcasters is Deutschlandfunk Kultur, so I wondered whether it would make sense to retarget there, although the article says they ceased broadcasting on that wave in 2014. The AfD suggests Deutschlandfunk Kultur is not alone among those who formerly broadcasted over it. If this is really "supposed" to be a disambiguation page, perhaps we're better off with deletion. I wouldn't normally think to invoke WP:REDLINK for a disambiguation page... --BDD (talk) 20:34, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Deutschlandfunk Kultur as only notable broadcaster of it (if you're looking up 177 AM on Wikipedia, you're probably looking for what used it). eviolite (talk) 23:36, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Retarget to Deutschlandfunk Kultur. The "disambiguation" only ever had one entry, and I was unable to find other radio broadcasters that used this frequency. Unless a second entry gets added to list of longwave radio broadcasters, it makes more sense to bypass the list and redirect to the only use. -- Tavix (talk) 23:37, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Deutschlandfunk Kultur as the only article with relevant content at present. If at any point a new, notable, radio station starts broadcasting that that frequency, then a dab (or list) can be re-created. – Uanfala (talk) 20:48, 19 October 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.

Kingdom of Denmark[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. There's clearly interest in swapping the redirect and Kingdom of Denmark, though I see that as a step too far based on this discussion. A separate RM also seems more likely to attract participation from editors with expertise on Denmark. --BDD (talk) 20:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Danish Realm. Referring to the Kingdom of Denmark as the "Denmark" can be confusing. The use of the term "Denmark" for the Kingdom as a whole might imply that Faroe Islands and Greenland are not equal to the metropolitan Denmark and that the three island countries have no say in affairs pertaining to the Kingdom but are instead subordinate to the metropolitan. Though the influence of Faroe Islands and Greenland in Kingdom affairs is limited, it certainly exists. Somerby (talk) 16:09, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Danish Realm as proposed. I kind of wonder if the redirect should be reversed (Danish Realm → Kingdom of Denmark). Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 17:17, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The official name of the entity discussed at Denmark is "The Kingdom of Denmark". The Danish Realm is a separate legal entity containing it. It's an inherently confusing situation, for reasons out of Wikipedia's control (worsened by the fact that Dutch law has a similar arrangement, but calls its broadest entity the Kingdom of the Netherlands), but Danish Realm is linked in a hatnote, and that's really all we can do. (I'll note also that this is an incredibly high-visibility redirect, and if consensus forms quickly (in any direction), we may want to consider a speedy close.) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 17:20, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, that's quite confusing. What's more confusing is we are currently describing both Denmark and Danish Realm as "Kongeriget Danmark". Is "Denmark" the country in Europe, or does it also include Greenland and the Faroe Islands? Is it both? Confusing indeed. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 17:33, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Tamzin, the article in Danish Wikipedia called da:Kongeriget Danmark and da:Danmarks Rige is a redirect which targets Kongeriget Danmark. In Danish law the terms Kongeriget Danmark and Danmarks Rige used interchangeably --Somerby (talk) 17:58, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Huh... Is it possible that this is more something the relevant talk pages need to sort out? PEIsquirrel is right that both Denmark and Danish Realm claim a name of "Kingdom of Denmark" (Kongeriget Danmark), with neither seemingly acknowledging the other article's claim to that name. I feel like that shouldn't be the case. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 18:09, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • There now. All this time I thought the Kingdom of Denmark & Denmark, were the exact same thing. GoodDay (talk) 19:20, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know which target is the better one for the redirect, but there isn't a distinction between the Kingdom and the Realm. "Kingdom of Denmark" is the formal name for the state, "Realm" is a shorthand description. The Faroes and Greenland are autonomous units within Kingdom of Denmark, with their own governments but represented within the Danish legislature. The confusion here stems from the real-life ambiguity of "Denmark" having dual meanings, both a shorthand for the Kingdom as a whole, and as the name of the non-Faroe/Greenland parts of the state. See page 4 (bolding mine): "This Constitutional Act shall apply to all parts of the Kingdom of Denmark...The Constitutional Act applies to Denmark, the Faeroe Islands and Greenland. Special home rule arrangements for the Faeroe Islands and special self-government arrangements for Greenland have been passed by law. These arrangements give the Faeroese and Greenlanders far-reaching autonomy in respect of their own affairs." CMD (talk) 07:39, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • CMD, is there is any reliable source where "Denmark" means the Kingdom as a whole? As far as I can see, in academic sources "Denmark" always means "metropolitan Denmark", i. e. without the Faeroe Islands and Greenland. --Somerby (talk) 14:46, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • UNGEGN List of Country Names 2019. CMD (talk) 14:49, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • but this is just the short name, not a formal name, for the Kingdom of the Netherlands here used the Netherlands as a short name too. --Somerby (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
          • Unsure what you mean by this. Both Denmark and the Netherlands are the short names of those countries. The formal names are Kingdom of Denmark and Kingdom of the Netherlands. CMD (talk) 12:55, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reading the above, I think we could do with a short broad concept article or something similar that explains this confusion and links to the relevant articles. My assumption prior to reading this was that the "Kingdom of Denmark" terminology was equivalent to the "Kingdom of the Netherlands" terminology. Thryduulf (talk) 11:13, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget and then move Danish Realm to Kingdom of Denmark, but for this separate discussion should be held.. The situation is similar to Dutch case, although the relationship between parts of the Kingdom of Denmark is not so equal, unlike that of the Netherlands. And as shown above in the sources by the Kingdom of Denmark usually meant the state as a whole, not only metropolitan Denmark. --Lagelander (talk) 18:29, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 05:08, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:57, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget; I believe it is reasonable to believe that a person searching for the "Kingdom of Denmark" is searching for "Kingdom of Denmark", not the "Kingdom of Denmark"; they were searching for the later, they would just use Denmark. Further, a user actually looking for Denmark is not going to be particularly surprised ending up at the Kingdom. I would also support a move as discussed above, but that should probably be discussed in a RM. BilledMammal (talk) 22:28, 4 October 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.

Don Cherry (singer/golf)[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 10:20, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused (zero views in past month) and uncommon (particularly given "golf, not "golfer") redirect, with the additional issue that it uses a slash - something we typically want to avoid BilledMammal (talk) 04:23, 1 October 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.

Pesco/Pollo vegetarianism[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 10:20, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused (no views in the past month) and uncommon redirect, with the additional issue that it uses a slash - something we want to avoid if possible BilledMammal (talk) 04:22, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: The combination of two different diets makes this redirect useless. ―Susmuffin Talk 10:59, 4 October 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.

MIT/Wellesley Toons[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, in effect withdrawn by nominator. I've changed the redirect into an {{R to section}} as suggested, and added a courtesy comment at the target per WP:RSECT. (non-admin closure) by 85.67.32.244 (talk) 16:32, 2 October 2021 (UTC)}}[reply]

Unused (zero views in the past month, very few looking further back) and unlikely redirect, with the additional issue of the use of a slash, something that we generally try to avoid. BilledMammal (talk) 04:21, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Makes sense; I'll make a note to check such matters in the future. Support as proposed by Tamzin. BilledMammal (talk) 06:20, 2 October 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.

Miscellaneous Space Marine Chapters[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. Hog Farm Talk 22:03, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible search term - I don't think anyone is ever going to be searching for "Miscellaneous foo" expecting to get to the article "foo" and there is no mention of various space marine chapters in the target article 192.76.8.74 (talk) 00:17, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Heh, thought this was going to be a bulk nomination based on the section header. The reason such a weirdly-titled redirect exists is that it was once an article, in an era when "Miscellaneous ____" for a catch-all list wasn't too out-there at title. While this isn't per se an {{r from merge}} according to the history, there still may be some reliance on the link, and it's unambiguous, so keep. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 05:04, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 05:10, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:06, 1 October 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.

Unfulfilled religious prophecies[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 8#Unfulfilled religious prophecies

Chinese drama[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 8#Chinese drama

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_October_1&oldid=1050815816"