Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 6

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 5
May 7 >

May 6

[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 6, 2023.

Dirty african

[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 00:56, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a novel term that is not listed as a slur at the target article. Google search of the term does not reveal that this is a notable slur or has a citation to prove as such, and per discussion on the target page, every slur should have a citation to warrant its inclusion. Since this is not mentioned at the target and is unlikely to be included, it appears to not be useful and fails WP:R#DELETE#8 The Night Watch (talk) 23:27, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It also says in the fourth paragraph of the target article that "Ethnic slurs may also be produced as a racial epithet by combining a general-purpose insult with the name of ethnicity, such as "dirty Jew", "Russian pig", etc. Other common insulting modifiers include "dog", "filthy", etc. However, such terms are not included in this list." Thus, it is unlikely that this term will be ever included in the target article. The Night Watch (talk) 23:39, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No article links to this, no mention in target article. Richard-of-Earth (talk) 03:58, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Pr 0211

[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 Procedural close. Wrong forum. Editors are free to either boldly make this change or open a merge discussion at a relevant article talk page. signed, Rosguill talk 00:37, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is an article about another planet in the system, Pr0211 c. The recommended solution would be to create a new article about the system, like we did at Kepler-277. An alternative would be to merge both planets into a single article about the system. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:10, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge Pr0211 b and Pr0211 c into a Pr0211 article. As with the Kepler-445 and K2-21 planets, these articles are short and can be consolidated into a single article about the planetary system. SevenSpheres (talk) 17:00, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Kepler-445

[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 Procedural close. Nothing for RfD to do here, merge discussions can proceed and content can either be merged or moved to this title if need-be without an RfD discussion about it. signed, Rosguill talk 00:34, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Currently, there are 2 other articles about planets in the same system, but there is a proposal at Talk:Kepler-445d#Merge_needed to merge all of them into a single article about the system. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 07:09, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Matt Pearce (baseball)

[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 11:26, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Released by the Cards in 2018, so obviously no longer within the scope of the current target. I do not believe there is a good target for this redirect to point to. Hog Farm Talk 04:30, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Eli Álvarez

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 13#Eli Álvarez

Tyler J. Watson

[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. As an unopposed deletion nomination. Jay 💬 04:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No longer plays minor league ball according to milb.com; I don't think there's a good target. Google searching suggests that there might not be a primary topic for this name anyway. Hog Farm Talk 04:21, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Razvedupr

[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 between keep and retargeting, with a final editor expressing ambivalence between the otherwise evenly-split opinions. signed, Rosguill talk 03:39, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this could refer to GRU (Soviet Union) or GRU (Russian Federation) ... but it's unclear in what context. Seems the word is mentioned in both articles, but it's not clear if the word is synonymous with either subject, or if it's some sort of subtopic. Steel1943 (talk) 20:16, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Since the target article has a disambiguating hatnote pointing to the other relevant article where it is mentioned, there is no need for any change here. However, if the term is really important we could add a {{Redir}} hatnote specifically for the "Razvedupr" term as well. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 09:21, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This does not address the ambiguous problem at all. This would not change any aspect of the existing problem at all. Steel1943 (talk) 17:57, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to GRU (Soviet Union). Razvedupr is short for “intelligence directorate.” I see it was used for a predecessor: Soviet Red Army intelligence 1921–41,[1] which doesn’t have a separate article and is covered in the early history of that one. —Michael Z. 14:24, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, SONIC678 22:39, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:47, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Panzer Dragoon (R-Zone)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 14#Panzer Dragoon (R-Zone)

Videolog

[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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:11, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting consensus on appropriate redirect target: Vlog (in the style of Video log)? Video logging? Leave as-is? Huell Howser's Videolog? A dab page? Some secret nth thing? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 16:58, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:15, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: All that is needed now is a dab draft.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 † edits 02:12, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Created a draft below the redirect. Feel free to amend it as needed.
The entry for the mail-order distribution service technically breaks the guideline for one link per entry, but I think it warrants an exception; both articles mention the service and it was jointly founded by both so it's not clear which would be linked if there were only one link. Guidelines aren't absolute laws, and I don't think it's too problematic to pragmatically allow two links in this circumstance, at least until an article for the service itself is created (assuming anyone decides to write one in future). – Scyrme (talk) 18:22, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Video log should probably be discussed after this redirect is sorted, to decide whether to retarget it or simply amend the hatnote to Vlog. – Scyrme (talk) 18:26, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)(Nominator here) Looks good to me. Someone unaware of this discussion may pare the mail-order distribution service entry back to one wikilink—either way, readers should find the dab entry helpful. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 18:35, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Wikipedia:PUFFERY

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 13#Wikipedia:PUFFERY

God of the Bible

[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 God in Abrahamic religions. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:04, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bible is defined as "a collection of religious texts or scriptures that are held to be sacred in Christianity, Judaism, Samaritanism, and many other religions". Therefore, it is biased to state the god of the bible is the god Christians have theorised.

Therefore, I propose that the redirect be either DABified with God in Christianity and God in Judaism, or that it be deleted. Veverve (talk) 01:29, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

SUPREME BEING

[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. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 03:22, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure a title in full capital letter is helpful. I propose deletion. Veverve (talk) 01:21, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Hegelese

[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 speedy keep. Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) J947 † edits 04:32, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I found this word used nowhere in any reliable source. Therefore, I propose deletion. Veverve (talk) 01:19, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hegelese is used frequently in books and scholarly articles. gobonobo + c 02:16, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

The Difference Between Fichte's and Schelling's Systems of Philosophy

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 13#The Difference Between Fichte's and Schelling's Systems of Philosophy

Absolute (philosophy

[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 04:22, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unhelpful, I propose deletion. Veverve (talk) 01:15, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Relation of the Universe to God

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 13#Relation of the Universe to God

Dumnezeu

[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 04:22, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This means "God" in Romanian. Per WP:RLOTE it should be deleted. Veverve (talk) 00:58, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Harry Singh

[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 04:22, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 19:32, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:52, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 † edits 00:57, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Our Lord

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 13#Our Lord

Elochai

[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 04:23, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Acording to the argument of the user who opposed the speedy (which is an WP:USERGEN source), this is a transliteration from Hebrew that means 'my God'. I have found nothing apart from this Yahoo answer link on Google.

Either due to WP:RLOTE or it being unhelpful, I think this redirect should be deleted. Veverve (talk) 00:53, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Biblegod

[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 04:23, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsensical, unhelpful redirect. I propose deletion. Veverve (talk) 00:47, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Zubair Ahmed

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 21#Zubair Ahmed

Açoriano

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 14#Açoriano

Luandense

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 14#Luandense

Crawling in my skin

[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. A clear majority believe that WP:DIFFCAPS applies here; the minority in favor of unifying the redirects is further divided over which target they should both point to, making keep the only viable result. signed, Rosguill talk 00:31, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Title could refer to either the song from this 2020 album, or Linkin Park's "Crawling" song that came out many years before, that has this as the first line of it. I suggest a disambiguation for this one. Colgatepony234 (talk) 17:06, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the amount of "Keep" votes... if this does get kept I suggest adding a hatnote targeting to the Linkin Park song, for those looking for that. Colgatepony234 (talk) 21:17, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding Crawling in my skin to this nomination, as suggested above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:15, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Crawling in my skin" has the primary association of the Linkin Park song. The fact that it isn't mentioned on the article is irrelevant: Wikipedia can't include them due to copyright in most cases, it's still a useful target that is the primary meaning for the phrase.
With the naming conventions, it's much less likely for someone to search "Crawling in My Skin" for the lyric, but this is the correct name for the song. I'd say it's likely that most of the searches with this capitalisation will target the song rather than the lyric.
This does also mean hatnotes on both targets pointing to each other. Randi Moth TalkContribs 23:10, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_May_6&oldid=1157968449"