Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 20[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 20, 2022.

Draft:5000 (year)[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 23:49, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible search term in draft space with no history as a draft page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:48, 20 August 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.

Draft:Year 1 kilo[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 23:49, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible search term in draft space with no history as a draft page. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:47, 20 August 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.

4570s[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 27#4570s

Tarch Maharl[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 23:49, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Other than some kind of exaggerated pronunciation, I don't know what this could mean. Without a justification, delete as not useful. MB 21:41, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Implausible typo. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 08:14, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 11:44, 21 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. A Google search only yields mirrors of Wikipedia about various topics that don't include the Taj Mahal. Regards, SONIC678 22:33, 21 August 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.

3000s[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 any that have not been singled out to be kept or some alternative action. In such a large discussion, it would not be fair to delete any that have been objected to. Of course, this is without prejudice against renomination individually or in a small batch. -- Tavix (talk) 17:19, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Following the closure of Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_August_11#6100s, I decided to RfD the remaining decades redirects. The vast majority of these decades are not mentioned in any entry of the target, and are not likely to be searched. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LaundryPizza03 (talk • contribs) 21:36, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment "6100s" probably should have been disambiguated. There are several products called "6100" for which "6100s" would be the plural, so 6100 should be a disambig page -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 08:42, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete the vast majority of these for the reasons I and others gave at the 6100s discussion. There is no mention of any specific decades or centuries at the target so these are not helpful. I would suggest to keep 3000s, 4000s and 5000s as "R to avoid double redirects" to 4th millennium, 5th millennium and 6th millennium respectively as, on the one hand these were BLARed without much (if any) discussion so may well be restored, and on the other hand similar redirects were recently kept (Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_January_24#11th_millennium). There may be isolated others in the list that should be kept or retargeted for some other reason and my !vote should not be interpreted as necessarily advocating to delete in those cases. A7V2 (talk) 08:34, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure about 5150s & 5170s. Is this plural popular enough for people to search IBM computers with it? —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:51, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Most definitely, the IBM PC and PC/AT were frequently referred to by their model numbers (though less so than by their names), and were seminal machines of their era. And especially so for the 5150, as the original PC needed to be differentiated from other IBM PCs and PC-compatibles and clones -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:56, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 5100s to 5100 as a {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 02:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Someone disputed my conversion of 5100 into a disambig page... so this is now listed at RfD -- RFD August 24 -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • "5100" has been disambiguated as a result of the RfD, so "5100s" can redirect to the disambiguation page -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:28, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT 5110s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:5110) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:01, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 9400s to 9400 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 9200s to 9200 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:14, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 9100s to 9100 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT 9020s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have serveral topics for. (see DRAFT:9020) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:51, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note the draft was published, see 9020. A7V2 (talk) 06:49, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 5700s to 5700 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 05:15, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 5400s to 5400 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 5300s to 5300 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:35, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT 5140s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:5140) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:46, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note the draft was published, see 5140. A7V2 (talk) 06:49, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 5130s to Nokia 5130 as {{R from plural}} -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:48, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 5120s to IBM 5120 as {{R from plural}} -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:51, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I support all of the above retarget suggestions also. A7V2 (talk) 06:49, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment there might be more of this type. I'ven't had time to go through all of them There's quite a number of redirects in this nomination -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:27, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 5050s to 5050 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:09, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT 5030s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:5030) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:27, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 5010s to 5010 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:34, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMNET I think that 3000s, 4000s,5000s should point ot their respective disambiguation pages as {{R from plural}}, 3000 (disambiguation)/4000 (disambiguation)/5000 (disambiguation) ;; the decade, century, millennium can be added as bullet points to the pages -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 10:27, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT 3020s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:3020) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 12:20, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 3090s to IBM 3090 as {{R from plural}} -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 13:22, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. We do not need redirects from every possible thing someone may type. Let the search engine do its job (poor as it it does enough in this case). Also, e.g., there are several articles with 5120 in the title, redirecting to one of them will make it harder on the readers, not easier. Users know how to search (or will learn soon enough) - Nabla (talk) 22:39, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 3100s to 3100 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 05:58, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT 3150s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:3150) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:07, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 3200s to 3200 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:51, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I did 5150s, 5170s, 3030s, 3090s. 5120s, 5130s, as those seem like valid searchable terms for computer models, and a few people supported the retarget suggestions. If there are any other of that form we should do those, and delete the rest and close this. I don't see anyone saying to keep them. Andre🚐 03:19, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 3210s to Nokia 3210 as {{R from plural}} -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 08:31, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT 3220s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:3220) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 08:37, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT 3230s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:3230) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 08:48, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 3250s to Nokia 3250 as {{R from plural}} -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:01, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 3270s to IBM 3270 as {{R from plural}} to match 3270 -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:07, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 3300s to 3300 as {{R from plural}} as multiple items listed can be pluralized -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 09:45, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • RETARGET 3310s to Nokia 3310 as {{R from plural}} to match 3310 --
  • COMMENT 3320s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:3320) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 10:15, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT 3330s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:3330) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 10:21, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • COMMENT 3350s should be disambiguated as a plural form for which we have several topics for. (see DRAFT:3350) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 10:38, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all No retarget, no redirect. This is cruft of gargantuan proportions, the weak, content-free drafts created by some IP user are not worthwhile Wikipedia articles... "X is a BC year, X is an AD year, X is a number, followed by some randomly tangential numeric associations. Zaathras (talk) 21:25, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • They are not randomly tangential numeric assocations. They are exactly what they are, roads numbered that way, or products which have that model number. Which is exactly what should use those numbers. For instance Nokia 3310, the name of this cellphone is "3310" exactly. It is made by Nokia, and that article page uses natural disambiguation by having the manufacturer as part of the article title. That article even has 3310 redirect to it. Clearly 3310s is the plural form of "3310". And just as clearly if it isn't disambiguated, it should point to the singular form destination. Same as "Corvette" is the name of the car, but "Chevrolet Corvette" is not the name of the car, rather it is a car brand attached to the car name. Or the Mazda 3 is named "3", and is from Mazda. Or the Porsche 959 is "959" and is from Porsche. As for the top of the pages, they are formatted like other numberdis pages (that have existed for a long time on Wikipedia), with years and numbers at the top. -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 05:20, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      You, IP user who could be anyone or several someomes, misinterpret. "Random" in the sense that you're writing about ephemeral, unimportant fluff and seeking to create a nonsensical nest of redirects. No competent Wikipedia reader is going to just plop in "3480s" when looking for an old family of IBM computers. This is a timesink of cruft, and my stance of deleting it all stands. Zaathras (talk) 12:34, 4 September 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.

XXXIII century[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 23:50, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are 572 redirects to Timeline of the far future, at time of writing, but this is the only one to use Roman numerals, which is not customary for centuries. Originally targeted 33rd century before that page was merged to 4th millennium, which in turn got merged to the current target. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:22, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Though redirects like 33rd century should probably be deleted also (though they mostly were articles so perhaps they should be restored?). A7V2 (talk) 06:51, 26 August 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.

Suisare[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 23:50, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Other than a google hit for urban dictionary, I cannot find anyone using suisare to mean party. Furthermore, the urban dictionary definition seems to be from a while ago and hasn't really gained any traction. TartarTorte 21:03, 20 August 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.

2022 evacuation of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republics[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 23:51, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Typo (extra "s" at the end) left behind from a page move. It is highly unlikely anyone would accidentally add an "s" to "Luhansk People's Republic", a proper name. InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:45, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: While 2022 evacuation of the Donetsk People's and Luhansk People's Republics is feasible, the plural Republics for Luhansk is pretty implausible when Republic is already there for Donetsk. TartarTorte 21:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: this is a grammatically incorrect typo, and I would be okay with speedy delete. We could create dozens of these for any complex title, but I think there’s no point because the main keywords will still get the reader there. —Michael Z. 21:12, 20 August 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.

Stonewall Heights[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 23:51, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stonewall Heights is a name a developer tried to name a portion of Kensington, Philadelphia in 2017 that gained no traction anywhere in usage. It's not mentioned at the current target article or at the Kensington, Philadelphia article, furthermore a publicity stunt by a developer is not notable enough to be included on wikipedia; therefore, I recommend deletion. TartarTorte 19:33, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: The article history seems to indicate the page was essentially an advertisement before it was WP:BLARred, so there's no valuable page history to keep. TartarTorte 19:35, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The article should have been speedy-deleted, not BLARed. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 19:40, 27 August 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.

Rural Canada[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. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 19:38, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was an article about rural Canada before being BLARred, which wasn't necessarily an incorrect decision as the article was in a mostly unsourced and essay like state at the time, but its current target doesn't really have any relevant information on rural Canada as a concept. TartarTorte 19:21, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tagging from the page history relevant parties to the discussion (Trillfendi—Canadaolympic989—Ulric1313—Katharineamy—KH-1) TartarTorte 19:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Revert without prejudice to AfD. While it was esssayish it wasn't so bad as to be speediable - some of what was there might be useful for an article if one is desirable (given we have multiple articles in Category:Urbanization by country and articles like Rural areas in the United States exist, it's entirely possible that an article about rural Canada would be encyclopaedic). Thryduulf (talk) 20:35, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore article per Thryduulf. A bad redirect isn't the solution to a bad article. The redirect isn't suitable as there is no particular discussion of rural Canada and it doesn't look like a better target exists. A7V2 (talk) 09:18, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore article. Based on a WP:BEFORE search, it seems like there are many sources that could be used to construct a new Rural Canada article. Besides, the old version, while not great, seemed like it could have been fixed. A redirect was not a good solution in this case. 2601:647:5800:1A1F:DDBB:5FD1:FCB9:EB0C (talk) 18:08, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Revert to article. WPCANADA rates it [1] as mid-importance. -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 03:27, 23 August 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.

Spellbound Interactive[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 23:51, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading redirect. The company in the target article was based in Germany and never went by "Spellbound Interactive". Conversely, Spellbound Interactive was based in England. The two companies are not related. IceWelder [✉] 18:21, 20 August 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.

Intergenerational ethics[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 article's undeletion. ✗plicit 14:51, 27 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Intergenerational equity and intergenerational ethics are two quite distinct areas of study – the former is something studied mostly in economics and the latter mostly in moral philosophy – and the latter isn't discussed in the article on the former, or in any other article in sufficient depth to be worth retargeting. As such, WP:RDEL #10 applies and we're better off deleting this to encourage creation of an article on this topic. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 15:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 17:46, 20 August 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.

Butter (alchemy)[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. signed, Rosguill talk 19:03, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

I see no articles listed on the target disambiguation page that relate to the use of butter in alchemy (or things in alchemy called butter), nor is there a section with the header, "Alchemy". BD2412 T 04:46, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Restore DAB page which was later merged into Butter (disambiguation). I haven't researched when/why they were removed. Also note the old RFD that says this should be kept due to the page history, and that Butter of antimony and Butter of arsenic are mentioned in the respective articles, and Butter of antimony & Butter of arsenic are also redirects, so I think it is a valid/useful dab. MB 04:26, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There's nothing in the page history preventing deletion. This used to be a dab page with two entries (no descriptions) [2] and before then a stub article consisting of a total of two sentences [3]. Neither is required for attribution: the content isn't found anywhere else on Wikipedia, and besides, that dab page was below the threshold of originality, while the article text, as indicated at the end, was copied from a public domain work. Uanfala (talk) 13:15, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think there's anything to disambiguate here (either in a separate page or within the main dab). There are several terms of this form [4] (not just the two above); but it's "Butter of X", and it doesn't appear that any of them would have been referred to as just "butter", so they're classic WP:PTMs. Uanfala (talk) 13:15, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Enwiki has nothing generic about compounds in alchemy called butter. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:46, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:05, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:43, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete and merge the original disambig to Butter (disambiguation). Create a new section called "Chemical compounds" for the two pages in the original disambig. This should resolve most issues related to the redirect. 2601:647:5800:1A1F:DDBB:5FD1:FCB9:EB0C (talk) 18:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Shhhnotsoloud as there is nothing in enwiki on this. Agree with Uanfala that there are no entries worth disambiguating either at the redirect title or the target title. Entries were merged from the alchemy dab to the general dab, which were then removed, hence there is no point in a "re-merge". If this is not going to be deleted, retarget to Antimony trichloride which mentions it was known to alchemists as butter of antimony. Jay 💬 10:04, 26 August 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.

Wikipedia:GAMESOURCES[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. Added hatnote to the alternate board and table games page. Jay 💬 09:16, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Since we also have Wikipedia:WikiProject Board and table games/Sources, I think this should become a disambig. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:41, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and add a hatnote. There is no reason to break or change the many existing incomming links that clearly intend this target. Thryduulf (talk) 10:14, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and add a hatnote per Thryduulf. Retargeting or disambiguation would disrupt too many links (30 at the moment, excluding the target page and links related to this RFD) and established shortcut usage to be worth it. This is the project namespace, so users won't be confused just because they have to click a hatnote at the top of the page. Glades12 (talk) 18:58, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and hatnote. Links from discussions are easy to fix, but we can't change links from edit summaries, and sources lists get lots of use in edit summaries (e.g. "rv, not reliable, see WP:GAMESOURCES"). 61.239.39.90 (talk) 01:28, 23 August 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.

Arashabbasi[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 27#Arashabbasi

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_August_20&oldid=1108666610"