Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 18

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 18[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 18, 2022.

Double redirect[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, and tag as {{R without mention}}. (non-admin closure) JBchrch talk 16:29, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

These redirects need a fresh discussion, free from the WP:XNR debate, free from trying to sync up these redirects, and free from sockpuppetry. In the last discussion, Dolyn sock Balkovec got in the last word by creating a short section on how MediaWiki software handles double redirects, but that was reverted by the closer (before Balkovec was blocked). Like BDD, I am wary of a redirect without mention situation here. Unless we can find a way to discuss this term somewhere, I lean towards deletion. -- Tavix (talk) 22:36, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per Mx. Granger and Uanfala from the previous RfD, and tag as {{R without mention}}. It seems to be the only article we have that discusses this concept. If a reader searches for "double redirect" they're taken to a section whose title is "Redirect chains" and whose first sentence is "One redirect may lead to another". Jay (talk) 05:21, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the previous RfD (a two-and-a-half-month-long discussion that closed a few days ago). While it's of course preferable for a well-developed article to discuss all the relevant terminology, there's no need for each exact term to appear verbatim in the text. Here, the connection between the redirect title and the topic of the target is obvious. – Uanfala (talk) 13:20, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I'm not sure offhand if the situation changed or if my previous judgment was too hasty, but the main case where I can live with {{R without mention}} is for close synonyms. Absent explanation, a redirect generally communicates to a reader "these are the same", or at least mostly the same. It's only a short hop from "double redirect" to "one redirect may lead to another". If there's an elegant way to also mention the exact phrase, that could still be a good thing. --BDD (talk) 16:29, 21 April 2022 (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.

Shillelagh (Shillelagh)[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 23:55, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary title in both name and disambiguator. Looks like the creator wanted to WP:G7 this thing per this edit. Steel1943 (talk) 20:40, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. It looks like this was left behind when I moved Shillelagh (Shillelagh) to Shillelagh (disambiguation). I don't see a reason to keep it. Feezo (send a signal | watch the sky) 08:02, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 04:30, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and page creator. TartarTorte 17:51, 21 April 2022 (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.

⋺[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 25#⋺

⋵[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 25#⋵

Inflación en Chile[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 23:55, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term. It's in Spanish Bedivere (talk) 18:47, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. WP:RLOTE allows for redirects in another language if there's affinity between the topic and the language, and Spanish is clearly relevant to anything Chile-related. However, this principle should only apply to proper nouns (names of people, places, objects, etc), and not to descriptive titles. – Uanfala (talk) 00:08, 20 April 2022 (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.

King of SoundCloud[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 23:55, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Does not unambiguously refer to any one Soundcloud artist, deletion seems appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 17:38, 18 April 2022 (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.

(EP) Minus 1[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. signed, Rosguill talk 20:58, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The misplaced location of the disambiguator, as well as this being only title that begins with "(EP)" leaves this redirect unlikely and WP:COSTLY. In addition, the title is not the name of the subject which it represents: the title of the subject is Dark Space -I. Steel1943 (talk) 19:05, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:50, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Happy Editing--IAmChaos 05:33, 12 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nominator comment: Though this title does seem to be a {{R from move}}, this redirect's title is so erroneous that there is virtually no chance of this exact title being linked, or even used as a search term. For one, there's no evidence in the article that the "Dark Space -I" subject is an extended play at all, leaving the "(EP)" part of this redirect most likely erroneous. Also, there's no evidence that the title of the topic has ever been correctly or erroneously referred to as "Minus 1" without "Dark Space" is not inherently evident at all. And lastly, there's no evidence that the intended target had the exact name "(EP) Minus 1" ... because without that evidence, this redirect is nothing better than an erroneous, WP:COSTLY redirect with a malformed disambiguator due to its location in the title. Steel1943 (talk) 16:05, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 17:21, 18 April 2022 (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.

List of royal visits by Queen Elizabeth II[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 26#List of royal visits by Queen Elizabeth II

List of banned political parties[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 14:51, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a redirect that was created as a placeholder for an article here per the history. This should be deleted per REDYES to allow for the article to be created. TartarTorte 14:06, 18 April 2022 (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.

ITV5[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 14:51, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is completely implausible. There's no such channel as ITV5 and this has previously been deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ITV5. Pkbwcgs (talk) 13:52, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. A Google search reveals nothing of any significance. -- Dr Greg  talk  14:09, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not real. Not a thing. Bonusballs (talk) 14:49, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No such TV channel. This is Paul (talk) 15:15, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. I think there was a rumour at one time ITV Encore would launch as ITV5, or would be rebranded, but it didn't happen in any case and no longer exists. This is Paul (talk) 15:22, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 04:31, 20 April 2022 (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.

Unlimited Class Wrestling Federation[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 30#Unlimited Class Wrestling Federation

Dune, Elsweyr[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 13:36, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article PamD 05:46, 18 April 2022 (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.

User:Tag Scientist/sandbox[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 page blanked. Techie3 has blanked the page, to which I have no objection, and nobody has raised any concerns about removal of the redirect or objected to blanking. Mdewman6 (talk) 09:26, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No obvious reason why this redirect exists. Apparently only edit by this user was to redirect their sandbox to this page. No evidence of any content by merged between the two. Seems like this could be speedily deleted, but I can't identify a criterion for which it qualifies. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:21, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It may be better to simply blank the sandbox, if this is a real user (albeit with one edit). Mdewman6 (talk) 04:01, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Mdewman6 I have blanked the page. Is it okay to close this RFD? Techie3 (talk) 08:17, 26 April 2022 (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.

Darth Sideous[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 13:35, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelling of "Darth Sidious". BurritoQuesadilla (talk) 00:51, 18 April 2022 (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.

Day Book[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 at Day Book. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) Слава Україні! 05:49, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(See also: Day Book (disambiguation).) I believe that all three redirects should go to the same location. I'm not an expert in bookkeeping, but it would appear from that article that a general journal is only one type of daybook among several, so that isn't the most appropriate target, and that the spaced version (day book) is frequently used in bookkeeping, so my initial suggestion is to Retarget all three to the Bookkeeping article section. This should then get a hatnote linking to the dab page. The dab page currently has a WP:DICDEF for the most general use of the term (but no links to either of the bookkeeping definitions), and the names of two newspapers, neither of which is simply called "Day Book". As a minimum, the dab page should have links to the bookkeeping articles. Tevildo (talk) 17:49, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep the spaced-and-capitalized Day Book as is. Retarget the others. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:18, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Replace with disambiguation page make the disambiguation page primary, and point other forms there, perhaps using day book -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 21:45, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:37, 18 April 2022 (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.

Rock reptile (Dungeons & Dragons)[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 restored article without prejudice to AfD. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:25, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:17, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 18:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • It doesn't appear on the 2E list because it's 1E (Monster Manual II (TSR 1983), p. 106). I don't know what our policy is on D&D monsters that only appear in the 1E documents, so my opinion is Neutral. Tevildo (talk) 18:05, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Non notable fancruft creature that is not mentioned at target any longer. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:36, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Like the spider eater redirect (currently at RfD), this used to be an article for a long time (2013–2020) before getting boldly redirected. – Uanfala (talk) 22:13, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore article and Afd. This redirect was the result of a WP:BLAR in response to a PROD. Send to AfD to determine its fate. Mdewman6 (talk) 17:44, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:36, 18 April 2022 (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.

Spider eater (Dungeons & Dragons)[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 restored article without prejudice to AfD. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:26, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:28, 9 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further consideration of Mdewman6's proposal.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:27, 18 April 2022 (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/2022_April_18&oldid=1085704451"