Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 19[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 19, 2021.

Salami's Law[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 00:17, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Was previously mentioned in target article after it was added by the creator of this redirect, but I cannot find a single source that doesn't appear to be a mirror of the old version of the article using this name for it. I think this name might be WP:MADEUP. Hog Farm Talk 23:41, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Completely improbable, no evidence that this is a common typo. The user who created the page seems to have a history of creating questionable redirects. /Tpdwkouaa (talk) 22:26, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I agree. This simply doesn't seem useful. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 17:41, 22 September 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.

Muscular Arms[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 27#Muscular Arms

Template:Dog bites and attacks sidebar[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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the template's undeletion. ✗plicit 00:21, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Navbox moved to reflect it is no longer a sidebar but a standard navbox, no transclusions of this redirect exist. Cavalryman (talk) 23:27, 19 September 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.

Beetle (video games)[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 00:18, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is meant to refer to a non-notable enemy in the game (Egg Beetle), but it isn't mentioned in the target article or on List of Sonic the Hedgehog characters, where Minor characters in Sonic the Hedgehog (where it was redirected after an AFD way back in 2006) now redirects; plus it was redirected back to its current target in January 2008 (where it wasn't mentioned). Also, the title is ambiguous, as it could also refer to other video game stuff, both in the Sonic the Hedgehog franchise (e.g., the unrelated Egg Beetle in Sonic Unleashed) and outside it (e.g., Beetle Adventure Racing), so I'm not really sure we still need this lying around. Regards, SONIC678 19:07, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I originally created this page, when I was 12 and didn't understand Wikipedia's policies very well. For some reason I've found myself fascinated by that specific enemy in the past; I don't know why. (It probably has something to do with the fact that I used to be afraid of it, as anyone familiar with the game will probably understand.) But yeah, I agree that it's probably not notable enough even for a redirect. Plus, it's a generic enough name that it can undoubtedly refer just as easily, if not moreso, to other things. (Hell, there's even an unrelated class of enemies by that name in the same game, strangely enough.) flarn2006 [u t c] time: 19:31, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: It's clear from the page history that it was blanked and redirected, but there's no reason that we'd need to keep a page with a parenthesized title around as a redirect when it has no mainspace pages that link to it. /Tpdwkouaa (talk) 22:34, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Delete per G7, author supports deletion (as mentioned above) PlanetsForLife 16:52, 25 September 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.

Metal Harbor[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 27#Metal Harbor

Life as We don't Know It[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 27#Life as We don't Know It

Wanasur[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 27#Wanasur

History of the world[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. ✗plicit 00:18, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The previous discussion on this redirect resulted in no consensus. I was hoping we could reevaluate this redirect to see if redirecting to World history, disambiguating, or keeping the redirect as is. My first choice would be disambiguating. Interstellarity (talk) 16:57, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, the lead of human history also refers to the topic as "world history". Retargeting to world history would be less helpful since the article doesn't explain the history of the world but rather what world history is. Waddles 🗩 🖉 21:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep where it is. The phrase refers specifically to the subject of "human history", and is still in my opinion the more traditional and better title for that topic. It doesn't refer to the topic of "world history" as a distinct topic in history writing, so shouldn't redirect there. P Aculeius (talk) 11:48, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Sdkb in the last discussion. Is it usual at RfD to repeat the same discussion just for the sake of it? – Joe (talk) 09:02, 24 September 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.

Green state[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. Without prejudice to the creation of a DAB page if someone thinks it's needed. Although an agreement among participants for maintaining the status quo is clearly evident. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 01:35, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous term. I usually hear "green state" in reference to U.S. states where marijuana is legal, and I've found several other uses that do not suggest this to be the primary target (e.g. the Green Party, Bowling Green State University, etc.). Either delete or convert to dab Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:02, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:33, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep No other plausible redirect available onwiki, but I agree that it may function better as a disambiguation page. This will take a little work, as there are currently no other onwiki usages of the term. /Tpdwkouaa (talk) 20:15, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate Green state could also mean an environmentaly friendly (green) state. PlanetsForLife 16:48, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep Someone could try to draft a disambiguation page if desired, but count me among those skeptical. --BDD (talk) 20:28, 30 September 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.

I am always right attitude[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 13:13, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Could also refer to various personality disorders, see recent discussion about a similar redirect. Deletion is probably the way to go here as well. signed, Rosguill talk 19:12, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The lead section of Self-righteousness clearly mentions the words right and attitude both. By adding attitude at the end, now the redirect matches the target article in the intent. Crashed greek (talk) 06:05, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes both words are technically there but not in that sense; "a feeling or display of moral superiority derived from a sense that one's beliefs, actions, or affiliations are of greater virtue than those of the average person" ≠ "I am always right attitude." — Godsy (TALKCONT) 01:24, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:14, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Which personality disorders? Agree with Crashed greek from the previous RfD that Narcissism is different than self righteousness. Jay (Talk) 15:07, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a case of unclear nomination. Jay (Talk) 10:15, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The nomination is very coherent. Moreover, this is redirects for discussion, not deletion; one does not need to strongly advocate a position to raise a potential issue here. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 17:57, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
This nomination is for deletion, and the nom did not get back on alternate targets/ambiguities related to various personality disorders, which is supposedly the basis of the deletion nomination here. Jay (Talk) 19:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
As you've asked me to spell it out, "I am always right attitude" is as much as description of Narcissism, Narcissistic personality disorder, Grandiosity, Stubborn, and likely other targets beyond what I can come up with on the spot, as it is a description of Self-righteousness. Disambiguation at this title would not be appropriate, which leaves deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 21:32, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a phrase/term that could refer to several articles. Jay (Talk) 10:56, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:33, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Too vague to be useful and not seemingly a common alternative. Furthermore, the concepts are disparate; one can be sanctimonious without acting as if they are infallible. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 17:51, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This seems vague, as stated above, to the point in which deletion appears to be the right call. I agree. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:28, 23 September 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.

Halocene[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 13:11, 26 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Halocene is a fairly popular rock band on YouTube and Twitch. I am not claiming they are notable enough to have their own Wikipedia article (although they might be), but this is a distinctly unhelpful redirect for people looking for an article about the band. Better just to link to generic page that this page does not exist. Just looking at the edit history for this redirect, it looks like people have been looking for the band since as far back as 2016. 148.75.248.140 (talk) 21:52, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've tagged the redirect. 148.75, please remember to tag redirects with {{subst:rfd}} when you file them. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 23:10, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom to encourage article creation. While this has some value as a plausible misspelling of its current target, the band is clearly what most people are seeking at this point, and would be astonished upon reaching the article about the geologic period. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:05, 11 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep for attribution - at least two articles about bands named Halocene (one of them extant in the history, the other much older and deleted at Halocene (band)) have been attempted, and may be required to preserve if an article is created. I'm not seeing much evidence supporting the band's notability, and I'm not sure the title is a plausible misspelling of the geologic era, but this page has been consistently registering around 5 hits per day for quite some time. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 17:59, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think there is much here worth saving. The two lines of text attempting to describe the band are unsourced and not close to being a proper stub, and if the content at Halocene (band) was deleted, any redirects to it would have been speedily deleted anyway (here, it was retargeted back to its original target). Much better in my view to not astonish those looking for the band, and encourage the creation of a proper stub about the band via deletion of the redirect, than to try to save this meager history. Mdewman6 (talk) 18:21, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, I am not aware of any evidence here that any content was moved or merged elsewhere that we would need to concern ourselves with attribution (but correct me if I'm wrong). Mdewman6 (talk) 18:23, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:48, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Mdewman6, I don't see this as a plausible misspelling for Holocene. They are right that nothing in this page needs to be kept around for attribution. If the band becomes notable and someone decides to write an article, it will be their own work and will not require attributing anything from the deleted revisions. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 18:43, 20 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as harmful for navigation. Readers searching for "Halocene" are very likely not seeking the current target as their topic. feminist (+) 13:52, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, misleading. PlanetsForLife 16:45, 25 September 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.

MIGY[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 26#MIGY

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_September_19&oldid=1047474410"