Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 10

October 10

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 10, 2021.

Reclaiming of nigger in African American Vernacular English

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. (non-admin closure) - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 00:47, 20 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reclaiming of nigger in African American Vernacular English → Nigga (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Seems like an unlikely search target Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep this is the subject of the target article and with about 70 hits so far this year and just shy of 100 last year it's clearly being used so either it is actually a plausible search term or it's linked to from somewhere outside of Wikipedia, or both - and given that it's a very academic way of phrasing the topic it wouldn't surprise me if the answer is indeed "both". Whatever the reason it's being used though, it is being used and points to the right target so deletion would be harmful to the encyclopaedia without brining any benefits. Thryduulf (talk) 00:29, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Arguably the redirect overlaps with parts of the Nigger article, such as Nigger#Intra-group_versus_intergroup_usage, and so therefore a redirect to Nigga is not unambiguous. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:35, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That section has a {{main}} link to Nigga so there is no ambiguity problem. Thryduulf (talk) 01:34, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Thryduulf. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:23, 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.

School of Thought

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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:11, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

School of Thought → School of thought (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This term (with the capital "T") should be redirected to American rock band Ded (band), as the term refers to their upcoming music album. Failing at this, a hat note should be placed at school of thought directing readers to the band, as there is no harm in doing so. Jax 0677 (talk) 23:32, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose A hatnote at the School of thought article would suffice. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose (and no specific hatnote either) "School of Thought" could just as well be a copy-paste search term from title case (as which refers to the actual concept. The hatnote is already there, linking to a disambig page; and there's no reason to hijack this clear redirect to a primary topic to make a redirect for an album which hasn't even been released yet (that would really be overly promotional); and for which the whole coverage in the target article is a simple listing. See also discussion on my talk page (User_talk:RandomCanadian#School_of_Thought), where OP here most convincing argument is essentially "I disagree, but ok"... This would also be consistent with other similar "clear primary topic but there's an album/song/whatever named like that": for example, Revolution is a clear primary topic, and it is also a song by the Beatles (who are certainly a far more high profile band than same random American rock band). Yet the former has no mention of the latter; the hatnote simply leading to Revolution (disambiguation). Or even Rock and roll, which has no mention of the Beatles' Rock 'n' Roll Music (album); and to which both Rock and Roll Music and Rock 'n' Roll redirect... RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 23:48, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep at its current target per Hemiauchenia and RandomCanadian, with a hatnote to the band. It's WP:TOOSOON to change its target, and people might miscapitalize what they are searching for. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 00:05, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per RandomCanadian, the existing hatnote to the disambiguation page is more than sufficient for now. If the album becomes notable enough that a full prose article is written about it then a direct hatnote may be justified but until that time it isn't. Thryduulf (talk) 00:32, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and do not hatnote per above. A WP:DABMENTION entry for the album at School of thought (disambiguation) is more than sufficient even if School of Thought (album) ever becomes an article. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 10:06, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I just tried to create an article for the actual album, but I was reverted per WP:AHIJACK, which does not apply to redirects, but applies to changing an article subject to a different article subject. --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:50, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You attempted to take this redirect, for which there is clear consensus above for it to link to School of thought, and instead tried to make it into an article that, as already mentioned to you multiple times, should be at School of Thought (album). Not only is that against the spirit of the guidelines, however worded they may be, but it is also clearly out of process (and needlessly disruptive, as there was absolutely nothing preventing you from putting the article at the proper place to begin with). RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:18, 17 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.

Polyvalent vaccine

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 Vaccine#Valence. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:10, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Polyvalent vaccine → Vaccine#Types (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Vaccine#Valence, the relevant section of the article Areferencetopeterkropotkins1892booktheconquestofbread (talk) 19:08, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:39, 11 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.

What Goes Up...

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 What Goes Up (disambiguation). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:09, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What Goes Up... → Bugs (TV series)#ep11 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I propose that this be retargeted to What Goes Up (disambiguation). I don't think that the current title is exclusive enough to refer to a single episode of Bugs (TV series). There are episodes of The Batman and The Brady Bunch with the same title. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 18:59, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per nom. Thryduulf (talk) 00:34, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per nom. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:56, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget ambiguous term to disambiguation page What Goes Up (disambiguation). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:50, 15 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.

The Living End (Huesker Due album)

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 13:41, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Living End (Huesker Due album) → The Living End (Hüsker Dü album) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Yet another Eubot umlaut redirect, whose band's Eubot title Nyttend broke uep back in 2017 as housekeeping. It's only been listened to a whopping 37 times since Juely 2015 as well, so uenless someone can provide a juestification, deletion also seems to be the way to go here. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 18:24, 10 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.

Latin civilisation

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 27#Latin civilisation

Side channels

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 18#Side channels

Varase

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. The only participant in this discussion is a banned sock. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:24, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Varase → Glossary of Carnatic music (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete per WP:RFD#D2, "might cause confusion". Not mentioned at target, no online English dictionary site I have tried defines it. (Results I get are mostly for Spanish/English dictionaries: ES:WP doesn't have es:varase. We do have wikt:varase, listing two Spanish imperfect subjunctive verb conjugations.) 85.67.32.244 (talk) 12:54, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the creator's transliteration of Varisai, recently created (6 September) by the same user, User:Faster than Thunder, on the same day. I've refined that to the section "Learning exercises" via an anchor: Glossary of Carnatic music § Varisai. wordhippo.com transliterates Tamil "வரிசை" as "Varicai"; shabdosh.com as "Varichai": I'm ignorant on whether any or all are "correct".85.67.32.244 (talk) 13:15, 10 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.

Border, San Diego, California

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 13:42, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Border, San Diego, California → List of communities and neighborhoods of San Diego (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Border, San Diego → List of communities and neighborhoods of San Diego (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect infers that there is a community or neighborhood of San Diego called "Border", which I don't think there is, but in any case is not listed at the target or at San Diego. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:42, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Back in 2011, when I was very active in the area of San Diego neighborhood articles, I accepted this as a stub article and even added a reference. But I now feel that this is not a real neighborhood and never was - it's just a tiny designated area in San Diego police nomenclature - and is not appropriate for even a redirect. And as Shhh... points out, these are not a helpful redirects because the subject is not mentioned at the target article. (Note: I was asked to comment here by the original author of the stub.) -- MelanieN (talk) 14:48, 16 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.

The Border Battle

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 15#The Border Battle

Yuritemp

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 per G6. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:25, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yuritemp → Yuri (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

It's likely that this very old redirect was a temporary placeholder, and now serves no purpose Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:17, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Snow delete as per nom, does not appear to be used much. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 01:44, 12 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.

Stuart Scheller

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. Technical close. Because I merged the lead paragraph to a new paragraph under "domestic reactions": Withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan (2020–2021) § Reactions the page history must be retained for maintaining attribution to all users involved in creating and altering the content that I copied/merged. wbm1058 (talk) 18:56, 12 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stuart Scheller → Withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan (2020–2021) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target article. AfD seemed to have somewhat of a consensus to merge but as it stands a few weeks later the target article does not contain a mention of Scheller, making this a confusing and unexplained redirect. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:41, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the thread at AN/I and the recent AFD, I changed the redirect from Fall of Kabul (2021) to the current namespace on my own. I chose to full protect the page as preferable to blocking User:FloridaArmy at this time. I was in the process of notifying that user when I was interrupted in RL. I have no interest as to redirect target. BusterD (talk) 03:59, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The only mentions we have of him are (1) an unsourced listing in Lieutenant colonel (United States) and (2) an entry on the surname page Scheller. I'm all in favour of redirects for WP:NN people if there is useful info at the target, but WP:NOTADIRECTORY. The facts that he has complained in public and been subject to disciplinary proceedings for doing so do not strike me as encyclopedic material; still less when the lede of the deleted article prays WP:DAILYMAIL and WP:NYPOST, of all things, in aid. I know this is relitigating Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stuart Scheller. but I can see nothing worth merging anywhere. Narky Blert (talk) 05:22, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This subject is apparently non-notable (because otherwise an article or a mention would exist) and no suitable target exists. The 2 occurences Narky lists would then be redlinks, and could be deleted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge (former content), per the original AfD of a few days ago. This article has been changed to a redirect without merging twice ([1], [2]) since that discussion.--NapoliRoma (talk) 22:25, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

...or not... Looking at the article, there really isn't much of anything to merge. I'm just concerned that this is, as Narky Blert put it above, relitigating a closed AfD outside of normal process.--NapoliRoma (talk) 22:39, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, there isn't really much to merge. Feoffer (talk) 00:52, 11 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I just merged the lead paragraph to a new paragraph under "domestic reactions": Withdrawal of United States troops from Afghanistan (2020–2021) § Reactions. – wbm1058 (talk) 14:30, 11 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.

QWERTY effect

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 Qwerty effect. A move discussion or round robin swap can be made through the normal editing process. Hog Farm _Talk 13:43, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

QWERTY effect → Switching barriers#QWERTY example (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No longer mentioned at target article, apparently still targeting a section which was removed. I suggest deletion or a retarget to Qwerty effect as an {{R from alternative spelling}}. CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:17, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the sources in that article, Qwerty effect should probably be renamed to QWERTY effect, actually. Mlb96 (talk) 04:49, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per nom - but tag as {{R from other capitalisation}}, because the spelling is identical. (I'd also support a WP:ROUNDROBIN swap after retargetting.) Narky Blert (talk) 05:26, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Qwerty effect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:41, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget, tag and swap per Narky Blert. Thryduulf (talk) 10:45, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget, tag and swap per Narky Blert. Switching barriers was rewritten to remove a section on keyboard layout lock-in, but the term "QWERTY effect" does not seem to be used in that context. Certes (talk) 12:11, 11 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.

Channel 13 Eyewitness News

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 Eyewitness News. MBisanz ^talk 14:22, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Channel 13 Eyewitness News → WTHR (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

KTRK-TV has also in the past called its newscasts "Channel 13 Eyewitness News" (and even now still calls them "ABC 13 Eyewitness News"), so there is some ambiguity. Google searches for most variations of this title are dominated by KTRK, even when "ABC" (which wouldn't apply to the NBC-affiliated WTHR) isn't included. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:44, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We do not need another laundry list of "stations on channel X using news branding Y". Delete and do not retarget. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate with all stations that have used this branding. Eyewitness News has a list, but it is not easy to pick out the Channel 13s from it. -- Tavix ^(talk) 12:06, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Eyewitness News which can be improved if necessary. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:43, 10 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.

Channel five eyewitness news

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 Eyewitness News. MBisanz ^talk 14:22, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Channel five eyewitness news → KPIX-TV (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

While KPIX-TV is probably the largest station to have titled its newscasts anything like this (albeit as "Channel 5 Eyewitness News"), this could just as easily refer to KSTP-TV, which has also branded its news as "Channel 5 Eyewitness News" in the past, and even now is still "5 Eyewitness News" (whereas KPIX has not used the Eyewitness News name in any form in nearly a decade). There have been other stations on channel 5 that have used the "Eyewitness News" name in the past as well, so there's some possible ambiguity, but it's worth noting that Google searches for anything close to this term are dominated by KSTP-TV, not KPIX-TV. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:34, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate at Channel 5 Eyewitness News with all stations that have used this branding. Eyewitness News has a list, but it is not easy to pick out the Channel 5s from it. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:32, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We do not need another laundry list of "stations on channel X using news branding Y". Delete and do not retarget. Too many stations that have used this now or in the past: KPIX, KSTP, KSDK, WTVH, KENS all occur to me off the top of my head. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Eyewitness News which can be improved if necessary. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:44, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- ... and retarget 5 Eyewitness News there too. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:46, 10 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.

Channel 3 Eyewitness News

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 Eyewitness News. MBisanz ^talk 14:22, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Channel 3 Eyewitness News → WFSB (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

While WFSB is probably by far the largest station to title its newscasts as "Channel 3 Eyewitness News", this is also the branding for the newscasts on WRCB, so there is some potential ambiguity. (On top of that, KIDK also used this title in relatively recent times when it still aired local newscasts; even now, a subchannel of KIFI-TV is branded as the similar "Eyewitness News 3".) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:26, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Eyewitness News, which lists all the stations that have used this moniker. - Eureka Lott 01:47, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but add a hatnote on WFSB that links to Eyewitness News, which says something along the lines of "Channel 3 Eyewitness News redirects here. For other uses, see Eyewitness News." Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:30, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate with all stations that have used this branding. Eyewitness News has a list, but it is not easy to pick out the Channel 3s from it. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:28, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We do not need another laundry list of "stations on channel X using news branding Y". Delete and do not retarget. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Eyewitness News which can be improved if necessary. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:47, 10 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.