Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 23

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 23[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 23, 2023.

Dead body reported[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 23:32, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt anyone is searching for Among Us by searching "dead body reported". This redirect does get half a view a day, but I would suspect at least some of these are not searching for Among Us. The term could have some everyday use, though it is weirdly phrased and most google hits are for the game with this specific wording. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 22:10, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Way too vague. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 02:01, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Delete /edit: the phrase is pretty generic actually, as noted in a comment further below/ per nom who states "it is weirdly phrased and most google hits are for the game with this specific wording" meaning that the phrase is not vague, as it is specific to the game. It being weirdly phrased only means that it is unlikely that it could appear in other contexts. The article almost mentions the phrase when discussing the related game mechanic: Any living player may call a group meeting by reporting a dead body ... (emphasis mine). The words "Dead body reported" appear in-game on a screen when a "dead body" is reported. There is some memeing activity relating to this phrase. Someone could search Wikipedia to see what the phrase is about when encountering any such meme. So it is a plausible search term. They would then be appropriately redirected to the Among Us article which contains very similar wording, explaining the phrase's origins. The page does get some views. Redirects are cheap.—Alalch E. 09:51, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom.zoglophie•talk• 18:53, 27 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, phrase only used in Among Us. SouthParkFan2006 (talk) 15:17, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete incredibly generic term used in many police reports and news reports [1][2][3] -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 12:53, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Five Nights at Freddy's 7[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 List of Five Nights at Freddy's media. There isn't much consensus on which FNAF game is supposed to be the seventh, so retargeting to the general list is likely to be the best solution. (non-admin closure) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's no mention of this term in the target. I don't see any reliable sources that call this game by the name "Five Night's at Freddy's 7" either. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 15:30, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep, it is called Five Night's at Freddy's 7 sometimes, and besides there's no term that shares this name. Can be kept. SouthParkFan2006 (talk) 19:15, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of Five Nights at Freddy's media where it is noted that Ultimate Custom Night is "Often referred to as Five Nights at Freddy's 7.", but those who are looking for Help Wanted (Google finds results for both) will also find what they are looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 10:47, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I should note that the quote in List of Five Nights at Freddy's media isn't sourced. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 13:46, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    True, but googling for the exact phrase produces so many hits that it is clearly correct. Someone who knows the reliability of sources in the topic area should be able to add a citation very easily if desired. Those same results clearly indicate that this is a very plausible search term (the reliability of sources doesn't really matter for this purpose, only their existence). Thryduulf (talk) 14:04, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've simply removed the claim altogether. I couldn't find any reliable mention of UCN being referred to "Five Nights at Freddy's 7" on google. Feel free to re-add the claim once you find reliable sources mentioning the term. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 20:28, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:48, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • As someone in the FNAF community, I don't think I've really heard people use "Five Nights at Freddy's 7"; I can maybe recall a few people using it for Help Wanted in advance of the game coming out (here's a Game Theory video using FNAF 7 in the title). I'd say either keep or retarget to List of Five Nights at Freddy's media, so anyone can find the game they're actually looking for (or technically a couple books that might be able to be referred to under this title, though that'd be a large stretch). (I don't think we need specifically reliable sources for a redirect, at least when BLP concerns aren't involved – we just need proof that the name was or is in use. Redirects are to aid readers.) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 07:43, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Untitled Mario film[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 5#Untitled Mario film

Lolbit[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:32, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target. No reliable sources mention the character either. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 14:06, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Readers don't particularly care whether Lolbit is mentioned in reliable sources. Someone searching for this character will be led to the correct place. --(Roundish ✡t) 01:44, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Whether it is mentioned in reliable sources is indeed not especially relevant, however it not being mentioned in the article (or anywhere else on Wikipedia) is - someone searching for this term who knows what it means will not find any information at the target, those who don't know what it means will just be confused. Thryduulf (talk) 11:05, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:45, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not mentioned in the article or anywhere else on Wikipedia Ca talk to me! 15:36, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Quasidissipative operator[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 23:32, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target, but briefly explained at Lumer–Phillips theorem. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:09, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Beta Wikipedia(s)[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 23:32, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Useless XNR. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:08, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Pirate attacks on Fuerteventura in 1740[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 * Pppery * it has begun... 01:31, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect which name is not a common name to the article it is targeted. Also, the article mentions nothing related to pirates. 2x2leax (talk) 05:09, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete due to no clear relation between pirates and the attacks. Yoblyblob (talk) 13:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep redirects do not have to be the/a common name. Just something that is an alternative name or a useful search term. It seems that the privateers mentioned in our article are also commonly referred to as "pirates" (and my understanding is that the line between pirates and privateers was very blurry at times): [4] (pg 296); [5]; [6]; "In 1740, When Pirates Were Very Naughty." MX. [7]: "The 1740 attempt by English pirates to conquer the Canary Islands is re-enacted at Gran Tarajal on Fuerteventura island. The poorly armed native inhabitants, known as Guanches, repelled the invasion, and the event is now celebrated annually."; [8]. Some of those aren't particularly reliable sources but unless the redirect otherwise violates some policy, I'm not sure I see an argument for deletion. Skynxnex (talk) 18:28, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow (talk) 13:09, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the target talk.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:05, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. The article needs to specifically have refs that claim that the attackers are pirates. --Lenticel (talk) 02:01, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

National Produce Stakes[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 National Produce Stakes (Irish greyhounds) was moved to National Produce Stakes in accordance with a linked RM. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:38, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is also an article at National Produce Stakes (Irish greyhounds). Are we confident that the former name of a horse race in the distant past is a dominant topic over the greyhound race held since 1939? —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 16:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 22:01, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:55, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One final try. Also notified of this discussion at the target talk.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:01, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kogen Province, North Korea[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. However, changing the target to Kōgen-dō as the next best option. Jay 💬 06:38, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kōgen is the Japanese pronunciation of 江原 (Kangwŏn), which was used in Japanese Korea instead of the DPR Korea. Konno Yumeto 02:49, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:18, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the talk of the current and proposed targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:36, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Kogen Province, South Korea[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. However, changing the target to Kōgen-dō as the next best option. Jay 💬 06:36, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kōgen is the Japanese pronunciation of 江原 (Gangwon), which was used in Japanese Korea instead of the Republic of Korea. Konno Yumeto 02:45, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:18, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:31, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

🔞[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. (sigh) (non-admin closure) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:30, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Is Wiktionary the best target for this redirect? On the talk page User:Error suggested that List of age restrictions might be better, and at Apple Color Emoji the symbol is linked to Age of majority#Age 18. Previous RfDs failed to reach a consensus on the best target (there was consensus that Eirin (the Japanese film rating system) was not an appropriate target) and so it was deleted, it was recreated as a soft redirect following a 2021 deletion review. 18+ redirects to 18 rating. I'm undecided as local targets are generally better than Wiktionary ones but this Wiktionary entry is directly relevant and high quality. Thryduulf (talk) 18:22, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've just spotted that the page history also has Minor (law) as another possible target. I'm actually now wondering whether a disambiguation page might be best here? Thryduulf (talk) 18:25, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah it seems that there are quite a few pages that can fit the symbol. Maybe a dab is the correct way including the wiktionary link there as well. Gonnym (talk) 18:30, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
First choice target would be Age of majority#Age 18. Second choice List of age restrictions. Third choice this Wiktionary redirect. And failing all else, Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs. I would also suggest courtesy pinging all the editors previously involved in the previous RfD and DRV. Awesome Aasim 18:33, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - See also Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2021 August 31 and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 March 9. If anyone is wondering why they were pinged about this RFD, they may have participated in the DRV or the previous RFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:53, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs. I think attempting to turn this random emoji into something "useful", as if some user is going to type it in looking for information on age of majority or minor (law) is really silly. It's a unicode character, so just redirect to the relevant section on it.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:05, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to 18 rating or keep. Enix150 (talk) 19:14, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    That's completely implausible. The 18 rating symbol doesn't look like that.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:44, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • No idea why I was notified of this, but I have no particular opinion, except in that I don not really see the point of redirects from emoji in general. Sandstein 19:21, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: too many potential meanings for any target to be very useful. Edward-Woodrow • talk 19:50, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you think "Miscellaneous symbols and pictographs" would be a WP:CHEAP target? Awesome Aasim 19:53, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    My second choice would be to keep per Steel1943. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 13:07, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget 18 rating (previous closing admin changes his mind). Thanks User:Thryduulf for the ping. Re-reading my own words from more than half a decade ago, my closure of the previous RfDs seems to have hinged on the lack of a good target that summarises the idea of "no under 18s". But since then 18 rating was created, which is a good set index for this concept. So I think it makes sense to target there now. Deryck C. 20:10, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Equal second choice for me would be Age of majority#Age 18 or wikt:🔞 since these also clearly refer to age 18 restrictions. Fourth choice Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs - I can see a reader copy and paste the character when the character doesn't display correctly on their device, who will find any of these targets more useful than a redlink. Mildly oppose deletion. Deryck C. 12:20, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget 18 rating.--Error (talk) 01:14, 17 October 2023 (UTC) It seems useful.[reply]
  • Retarget to 18 rating per above --Lenticel (talk) 02:04, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs. If I'm searching for A, I want to know about A. If I'm searching for 🔞, I want to know about 🔞. CMD (talk) 02:05, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    or keep Wiktionary target, given it is at the moment similarly informative (although providing different information). CMD (talk) 02:49, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This argument can go both ways though: Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs doesn't say anything about what 🔞 means. Deryck C. 12:22, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see what the other way is. 🔞 is a relatively recent pictograph, like all emojis it "means" whatever the author intended it to mean. CMD (talk) 01:05, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Not really. At least some emojis have some associated meaning that is commonly known even if somebody uses it differently or against that meaning. The question here is what that meaning is for 🔞 and which Wikipedia (or Wiktionary) page covers it. --Error (talk) 20:07, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If the emojis can be used differently to their "meaning", they clearly have multiple meanings. The most common meaning for 🔞 in my experience is Not safe for work, already listed on Wiktionary, yet that has not even been mentioned here. The proposed 18 rating target on the other hand, is a set index article listing film classification and censorship boards, and I can't say I've come across using 🔞 to mean that. CMD (talk) 02:48, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Retarget to Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs. If a user enters an emoji in the search bar, it is unlikely that they want information about the subject. That is, an editor is unlikely to enter 🔞 to get information about anything related to age 18. As per Sandstein, I think that redirects from emoji are stupid. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:58, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment to User:Sandstein - I don't see a comment by you in either of the previous cases. You are a mystery pingee. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:58, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Robert McClenon Sandstein commented in the deletion review, the most recent discussion about this symbol. Thryduulf (talk) 10:06, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Acknowledge. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:52, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep: do not retarget to "Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs" as there is no explanation of the symbol at all. I still think that Wiktionary is sensible as it has the best most suitable coverage, but I am also sympathetic to 18 rating. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:23, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget No symbol#Emoji and other unicode versions, where it's used. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 07:38, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget No symbol#Emoji and other unicode versions per Hyphenation Expert. -- Tavix (talk) 16:10, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This discussion should probably be temporarily suspended since this RfC was opened on the topic. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 22:05, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, the RfC kind of ran into the ground, so this comment no longer applies. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:48, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Not safe for work. That's the meaning of this emoji. (The function of an emoji is not to denote a content rating but to facilitate communication. The image is a metaphor for "not safe for work".)—Alalch E. 22:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus seems to be focusing on retargeting, but to which target: Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs, 18 rating, No symbol § Emoji and other unicode versions, or Not safe for work?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 02:53, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further input... Keep, delete, or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:11, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No votes since the last relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NotAGenious (talk) 12:16, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep the redirect to Wiktionary. That target does a better job of explaining what this symbol is, instead of all of us giving our own interpretations of what it represents. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:19, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Fu-chien County[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. However, changing the target to Fujian Circuit as the next best option. Jay 💬 06:32, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no Fu-chien (Fujian) County but Fu-chien Province. Konno Yumeto 02:31, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:18, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the talk of the creator, and the current and proposed targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:09, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Auto car[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 Autocar. ✗plicit 14:18, 30 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious that Self-driving car is the correct WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT target for this page. Almost all references to "auto car" (uncapitalised) I've seen have been references to a car with an automatic transmission. If capitalised then "(the) Auto Car" is the name of a publication. Personally I think this should redirect to the disambiguation page Autocar. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 09:48, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

2023 Rainbow Bridge bombing[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 1#2023 Rainbow Bridge bombing

Deleted to make way for page move[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 and salt. signed, Rosguill talk 21:27, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The process that we list pages to be moved to this title per WP:EXPLICIT makes sense, but it doesn't require a page to actually exist here forevermore. * Pppery * it has begun... 00:22, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: The redirect is used as a reminder and holds the place to keep pages from being accidentally moved here. I also started an associated MfD of its editnotice in case that it's deleted and unsalted. Please also refer to the related discussion User_talk:Sdrqaz#Undeletion_request. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 01:51, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The editnotice works better then a cross-namespace redirect, and if someone actually does try to move a page here, we can solve that by A) mocking them mercilessly, and B) salting the title. Delete. —Cryptic 11:23, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I have to say: how can you expect that a page mover can realize the existence of this editnotice before they mistakenly try to move a page here, if there's nothing holding up the move? That's exactly what MaterialWorks did here and what Reading Beans did here. In fact, the editnotice will never work. I have asked for salting this title before the redirect created, while the request was declined here by Sdrqaz. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 15:28, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    When the page is redlinked, the editnotice shows up when you click the link. So, for example, if someone is wondering whether they should move to page to that title then request deletion there, they might visit it to see the deletion log. Or if they move the page to that title and then edit it to add {{db-moved}} or {{db-disambig}} (or if someone else does), the editnotice will show up. I don't think it would "never" work — or that it needs to always work. I would support salting the page as you suggested. SilverLocust 💬 16:45, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    If they must visit the page (no matter if it exists) to access this editnotice, why not use a redirect to take up this place with all clarification in the "hatnote" parameter of {{Redirect category shell}}? Let's ask @MaterialWorks and Reading Beans: Have you ever checked the deletion log of Deleted to make way for page move before you made these erroneous moves? Feel free to reply here as we won't mock you mercilessly anyway. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 17:07, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't. I felt like the redlink was supposed to be tagged after I've moved it there. Lol. I have no prejudice to trouting. Lol. This is cracking me up though. Lol. Reading Beans (talk) 17:20, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No. Not sure what's the point of pinging us. — MaterialWorks 17:33, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, possible search term for Wikipedia newbies. SouthParkFan2006 (talk) 13:45, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete with seasoning: The real solution here is to make {{RM}} not link "Deleted to make way for page move", like it does with "?", but until then, we should not be making purely self-referential redirects, and salt so that, unless you're an admin, you can't move there. (And if you are, trouts'll do.) Queen of Hearts ❤️ (no relation) 16:30, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Changing the link to a subpage of Draft:Move could also work as a placeholder until the page gets deleted, but your idea is probably the best one. — MaterialWorks 17:35, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that could be done with a (template-protected) edit to Module:Requested move at line 406 (test edits: delinking the title in an RM, sandboxing suggested template change, testing sandboxed change). I don't think it would cause any error with User:RMCD bot, but WP:RMC would still show it as a link unless the bot were changed. Pinging @Wbm1058 who operates said bot. SilverLocust 💬 17:45, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: ... and salt. Was amused when the red link turned blue. I don't think it is needed. There are ways for a dab page to disappear. one is to G14 where applicable, second way is to to a three-way pageswap among the other three titles listed and turn the dab at the new location into the appropriate redirect. – robertsky (talk) 17:43, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • SALT the solution to prevent people from moving stuff here is to salt the pagename -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 06:12, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and salt, obviously. This is a matter of a procedure spun out-of-control while I wasn't paying attention. Now it will take more time and effort to clean up the wreck. A redirect-for-discussion isn't the ideal place for discussing RM procedures, but, in a nutshell, WP:EXPLICIT was added to better deal with cases where a topic such as Cricket is pulled off of primary topic status (because it's not clear whether the sport or Cricket (insect) should be primary topic). The implied move which should be explicitly stated is Cricket (disambiguation) → Cricket. WP:EXPLICIT didn't really account for the inverse scenario, in which Cricket (sport) would become PT and move to Cricket. In this case, the opposite move is implied, Cricket → Cricket (disambiguation). User:SilverLocust made a 1 August 2023 edit to clarify this, which apparently wasn't sufficient clarification, because it was followed by the addition of bad advice, which I've reverted. WP:CSD#G14 deletion of unnecessary disambiguation pages is a separate matter of page deletion, not page moving. Consensus via discussion is not necessary to make these speedy deletions. – wbm1058 (talk) 14:45, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and salt, there's going to be zero chance this will be an encyclopedic article in the future, or one in need of being a redirect. Doesn't need to exist, and salting prevents it from being mistakenly recreated. Utopes (talk / cont) 14:48, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and salt – I'm pretty lenient on cross-namespace redirects, but this is not a useful one for readers. If the only reason this exists is to prevent accidentally moving a page here, I don't think an XNR is a good solution, especially when salting is good enough for non-admins; in addition, I think most editors likely to accidentally create this page would be page movers, so that deals with the most problematic group. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 23:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Creating Template:WikiProject Ghana/2023 GOIF Wikipedia Contest/Contest/entries[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 delete. CSD G6 Liz Read! Talk! 06:12, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary left behind redirect from a move. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:35, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I only left the redirect behind because I was forced to by policy. It did not qualify for WP:R2. However I don't think this is a good mainspace redirect, and I think it would be unhelpful for it to show up in search results. –Novem Linguae (talk) 03:44, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: tagged as G6. Queen of Hearts ❤️ (no relation) 04:46, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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_November_23&oldid=1188814214"