Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 7[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 7, 2023.

I regret nothing[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 15#I regret nothing

Opps[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 Move OPPS to this title. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:34, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have never seen the word "opps" refer to this. One mention of that term on Wikipedia is the song titled that on Black Panther: The Album, which that has redirected to for a while. Searching up "opps" here on Wikipedia displays some pages that use the word "opps" in a different way either as an abbreviation or for something else, such as Red Opps and OPPS. Suggesting a disambiguation in this case. 1033Forest (talk) 22:49, 7 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).

Mythology of Kosovo[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 15#Mythology of Kosovo

UGA vs TCU[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 Tamzin's argument that a disambiguation page would really amount to a list without a notability assertion has gone unrebutted. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:16, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not the only match-up between the two schools funplussmart (talk) 12:49, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As the redirect creator, I redirected UGA vs. TCU to the 2023 College Football Playoff National Championship. It is the biggest game that the two teams have ever played together. They played four non-notable games before the National Championship, per Here! Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 13:11, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment 2 but looking closely, yeeeeah - they played together at the 2016 Liberty Bowl. I think the redirect could be a disambugation page. Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 13:16, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 14:59, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate per above, from author MicrobiologyMarcus (petri dish•cultures) 15:31, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further comments for disambiguation, such as possible entries for the page?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:48, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: DABify or just delete? (final relist)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow (talk) 21:41, 7 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).

𝕏[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 Blackboard bold#Usage. as more helpful to the reader than the current target. Consensus against retargeting to Twitter (X). (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow (talk) 00:07, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I propose disambiguating. Any opposition? Formigable (talk) 18:05, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What other article(s) are you proposing to disambiguate this with? Thryduulf (talk) 18:09, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Twitter. -- Tavix (talk) 18:34, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Tavix is right. Formigable (talk) 19:23, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by disambiguating? Do you mean a dab page with at least two targets? in this case, what are the other targets? Your proposition may also be understood as a suggegtion for renaming the redirect. In this case, what is the suggested title? D.Lazard (talk) 18:14, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The disambiguated pages would be the current target (U+1D54F: MATHEMATICAL DOUBLE-STRUCK CAPITAL X, which according to Wiktionary is used to refer to arbitrary metric space), and Twitter. The reason I started this discussion is because the target was originally Twitter and the current target mentions it irrelevantly and unnecessarily.
The target could also be X (disambiguation)#Other uses. Formigable (talk) 19:31, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So should we redirect 🎯 to Target Corporation or 🪟 to Microsoft Windows? No. If there is no primary topic for a symbol, the best bet would be to redirect it to an article that discusses these symbols in larger context. Awesome Aasim 19:56, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. I get what the nom is saying. BD2412 T 18:47, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: WP:RECENTISM and implausible search title for Twitter/X. We can just have a hat on the target page, that suffices. Awesome Aasim 19:07, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keeep as is. WP:PRIMARYTOPIC by longterm singifance is the mathematical symbol, similar 5o Apple / Apple Inc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amakuru (talk • contribs) 19:43, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. A hatnote to Twitter would be fine --Lenticel (talk) 02:05, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and possibly add a hatnote to Twitter; the current target is still the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 16:11, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, the symbol 𝕏 is hardly ever used and I doubt anyone is searching for it. Most people searching for 𝕏 are looking for Twitter, so I think it should redirect there with a hatnote to Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cereally8 (talk • contribs) 03:31, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – ℙ, 𝔾, 𝔼, and 𝔸 redirect to Blackboard bold § Usage, while other BB letters either target related mathematical concepts usually expressed by the letter, are a DAB between mathematical concepts and blackboard bold, or are redlinks. If kept, there'll be a inconsistency between 𝕏 and the 4 letters that target Blackboard bold. Should they target the Unicode block or the page about the font? Randi🦋TalkContribs 15:54, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and hatnote - the website did not rebrand to use the double-struck capital X glyph, but a graphic of a stylized X with one wider bar. You can't copy that image and paste it into the search bar here like you could if it was actually a Unicode glyph, and so it is highly unlikely that anyone is going to enter this glyph as a search term looking for the social media website when they could just type the letter X. A hatnote solves the few that might try anyway. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:14, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Blackboard bold#Usage, which I had this pointed to from 26 to 28 July, with hatnote, as I had it around the same time. Jacobolus removed that hatnote, and then (I think based on a good-faith misunderstanding of how redirects and recentism interact) retargeted to Twitter#Rebrand to X "for now". (A discussion of the hatnote stalemated, and I never was notified of the retarget.) Strugglehouse then retargeted to the current target, perhaps missing the better target in the redirect's history. So yeah. Blackboard bold is the most precise target, and a hatnote is clearly warranted by the fairly common usage of this glyph to represent Twitter. Hatnotes, especially section-level hatnotes in a fairly obscure article, do not have a very high bar for inclusion. "Some people use it to mean Twitter" is enough. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 18:13, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment This discussion is a waste of time. Besides the readers of this vote, the redirect has been visited by <10 readers per day. Nobody cares. –jacobolus (t) 18:23, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is a DAB for Blackboard bold, Twitter and Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols viable? Would be nice to see clickstream stats over a longer time period here. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 07:04, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep, disambiguate, or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 07:30, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:TechnoSquirrel69, I don’t really understand how much clearer the consensus need to be. I can’t be a much clearer consensus to keep than this. Tvx1 20:20, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I obviously disagree. There have been decent arguments for retargeting and a couple of suggestions for disambiguation (including the nomination). —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:32, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Blackboard bold#Usage or disambiguate (to that, metric space, Twitter, X Corp.). It's more informative to tell readers that it's a blackboard bold symbol and what it's used for than to say it's some math symbol in the much larger Unicode math block. SilverLocust 💬 23:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Blackboard bold#Usage. This article provides some information about the use of blackboard bold X, in contrast to the page about the unicode block. A hatnote can be placed in the section. Cyrobyte (talk) 00:04, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Blackboard bold#Usage. For redirects whose titles are symbols like this one, the article about the symbol and its meaning should generally be our preferred target over the article about the Unicode block. It's hard for me to imagine someone searching for this symbol to find information about Twitter (it just happens to bear a visual resemblance to their logo) so I don't see any need for disambiguation or even a hatnote. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 21:06, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    A quibble: It more than "happens" to resemble the logo. The logo contains a blackboard-bold/double-struck X by choice. (Tweet with the Unicode symbol from Musk shortly before the logo change) (Financial Times) SilverLocust 💬 19:41, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow (talk) 21:41, 7 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).

List of Beatles members[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 the "line-ups" redirects as is, retarget the rest to The Beatles#Personnel. Unfortunately, I don't see consensus quite as clearly as Pppery does. There seems to be a distinct split on whether just the "line-up" redirects should be kept as is, or both "line-ups" and "list" redirects kept as is. It wasn't until Carlinal's subsequent comment that the scales tipped toward just the "line-up" redirects. -- Tavix (talk) 17:17, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly not the same topic. Beatles members are John, Paul, George and Ringo (plus Pete Best). The target of the redirect lists everyone who was in a band involving these five. Pichpich (talk) 16:11, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • As the creator of this exact redirect, all I have to say about this is that if you want to delete this then you'll have to delete List of the Beatles members and List of Beatles too. This one I just made for convenience. I have no real opinion of it here. Carlinal (talk) 16:19, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I've added those and other similar redirects to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 17:56, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget all to The Beatles#Personnel. The current target has a section, List of members of bands featuring members of the Beatles#The Beatles with the information in (The Beatles was indeed a band featuring members of The Beatles), but it is far more detailed than many people using this link will want. The section of The Beatles article presents a good summary of the key information in an easily-digestible format and has a link to the main article for anyone who does want the extra detail. Thryduulf (talk) 18:08, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thinking again after seeing the comments below, I'm equally happy to keep the "line-ups" redirects where they are, but I do still think the all the "list" and "members" redirects should be retargetted. Thryduulf (talk) 10:45, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all of the "line ups" redirects: the current target is a better listing of all the different iterations of Beatles lineups, as well as predecessor and successor groups. Retarget the others to The Beatles#Personnel, which is a list of people most commonly known as the band's members, as well as notable early members and guest performers, and where there is a link to the current target for more detailed information anyway. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:18, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all the "line-up" and "list" redirects, retarget the others as above. The current target used to be just a list of members of the Beatles until it was expanded to include their solo careers. It still functions as a list of the Beatles' line-ups. Anyone searching for something that specific is looking for information beyond John, Paul, George, Ringo. MClay1 (talk) 23:32, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refine line-ups to List of members of bands featuring members of the Beatles#The Beatles, retarget others to The Beatles#Personnel – refining takes readers to the relevant section for line-ups. People searching the others are likely not looking for too complicated of a list, there's a timeline there, and there's a hatnote for readers seeking more. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 06:43, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:48, 25 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow (talk) 21:39, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why was this relisted twice? The consensus seems quite clear here. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've been keeping track of this discussion and it has indeed been at least a week too long. There's been slight variations in these opinions, though I agree with them wholeheartedly.
    Keep the "line-ups" redirects as is, redirect the rest to The Beatles#Personnel. Funny how there's no redirect exactly saying "List of Beatles line-ups" and such. Carlinal (talk) 06:05, 9 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).

2022 Youth Sailing World Championships[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. (Yes, I participated in this discussion, but I do not consider myself involved because I did not opine on the redirect itself.) -- Tavix (talk) 17:04, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:REDLINK to encourage creation. None of the other years have a redirect. Qwerfjkltalk 18:27, 31 October 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) 19:43, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete to encourage article creation, and consistency Yoblyblob (talk) 14:05, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I don't find the nomination convincing, but there's not really enough substance in a one-line table entry to warrant a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The 2022 edition was cancelled because of Covid. What article are we expected to create on it? Unlike other years, it makes sense to keep it as a redirect to the generic page which mentions that it was a cancelled edition. Jay 💬 18:51, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jay: The 2020 edition was cancelled because of covid, not 2022. The 2022 edition was held in The Hague from 10–14 July. -- Tavix (talk) 19:06, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Struck. Jay 💬 05:22, 15 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).

APOSPORY (locus)[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. Jay 💬 18:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a genetic locus in Arabidopsis thaliana. The target article discusses a homologous locus in Hypericum perforatum, but APOSPORY isn't mentioned in any Arabidopsis related article on Wikipedia. Delete. Plantdrew (talk) 18:45, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete it's possible a more robust description of genetic/protein control of apomixis/apospory can be added to that article, but Hypericum perforatum isn't the place for it. The redirect should be deleted with no current appropriate targets. ― Synpath 18:24, 8 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).

ARI7[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. Jay 💬 18:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a gene in Arabidopsis thaliana. The target article discusses a homologous gene in Hypericum perforatum, but ARI7 isn't mentioned in any Arabidopsis related article on Wikipedia. Delete. Plantdrew (talk) 18:44, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The relevant content was just removed from the article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:33, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and similar to APOSPORY (locus). ― Synpath 18:26, 8 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).

ARIADNE7[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. Jay 💬 18:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a protein in Arabidopsis thaliana. The target article discusses a homologous gene in Hypericum perforatum, but ARIADNE7 isn't mentioned in any Arabidopsis related article on Wikipedia. Delete. Plantdrew (talk) 18:44, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The relevant content was just removed from the article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:33, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and similar to APOSPORY (locus). ― Synpath 18:32, 8 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).

HAPPY[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. -- Tavix (talk) 17:00, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Zefr:, I hadn't realized the user was responsible for including that section in the H. perforatum article (which is a Good Article). I think the whole edit should be deleted. It's in the same spirit as the medical spam (a study found a chemical in this plant that has an in vitro effect) in plant articles that you frequently deal with. Plants have a whole bunch of chemical in them. Plants have a whole bunch of genes in them too, and of course those genes are going to have homologs in Arabidopsis thaliana since that's the best studied plant genetically. Plantdrew (talk) 20:46, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete HAPPY (locus), which is no longer mentioned at the target. Plantdrew (talk) 23:07, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that the redirect was not tagged until now. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as there is no appropriate target. Removing the edit makes sense as including the genetics of apomixis is probably out of the scope of this article. It comes across as obscure trivia. However, in deleting the edit the mention of apomixis was removed. I added that back to the article in the Reproduction section rather than Flowering Characteristics in this edit. ― Synpath 20:24, 13 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).

Visions (TV series[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. Jay 💬 18:38, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Broken redirect title. Correct title is at Visions (TV series). Gonnym (talk) 17:40, 7 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).

Native American clothing[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) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:43, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should this not redirect to Native American fashion? Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 19:19, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Native American fashion per nom, and add a hatnote pointing to the current target. CycloneYoris talk! 19:44, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:57, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Actually, looking a little closer, I think Thryduulf's disambiguation proposal makes the most sense. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:59, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig. If I was using this search term I would be looking for an article about the traditional clothing of Native American peoples (c.f. Inuit clothing, Pakistani clothing, Japanese clothing, etc). As far as I have been able to find we do not have a single article that covers that topic though we do have several in Category:Native American clothing. I do agree though that Native American fashion is also a valid target for this term, but I don't see evidence it is primary over the traditional clothing. I'll leave a note about this discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America. Thryduulf (talk) 20:13, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I assume Pakistani and Japanese categories were included by accident? Edward-Woodrow • talk 12:18, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    No, they were intentionally included as examples of "<Nationality/ethnicity> clothing" search terms leading to articles about the traditional clothing of those people. Thryduulf (talk) 14:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, I see. The inclusion of the Inuit category confused me. Edward-Woodrow • talk 20:56, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep with hatnote - I agree with Thryduulf, but we don't have one single article which broadly covers the traditional clothing of all those disparate groups and cultures, at least not better than the current target. I think it could be improved into a useful set index, or one could be created. Without evidence I would think that traditional clothing is a far more likely topic to look for than an article on modern Indigenous fashions only since the latter part of the 20th century. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:14, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support disambg - There is no one single target article to point to that covers this topic exhaustively. I agree with @Thryduulf and @Yuchitown. --ARoseWolf 18:30, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify per Thryduulf and Yuchitown. --Lenticel (talk) 10:51, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Create an article, but do not create a so-called disambiguation page or set index. Those are not for lists of related topics, only for things referred specifically, not generically, as "Native American clothing". Lots of sources[1] (and subsidiary articles, e.g. Category:Native American clothing) available. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:53, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Set index it (this would be indexing a specific type of item) and tag with {{Broad-concept article}}. Clarityfiend's concern is a valid one, but an index with a maintenance tag is probably the best we can do unless someone has the ability to tackle such a deep topic before the RfD is completed. Otherwise, a retarget to Category:Native American clothing would probably be the best option that does not involve creating a new page. Native American fashion is too narrow and Textile arts of the Indigenous peoples of the Americas is not a close-enough fit. -- Tavix (talk) 17:14, 23 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I have no preference between a disambig, a set index and a broad concept article, and no objection to retargetting to the category as a second preference to the dab/SIA/BCA. Thryduulf (talk) 00:24, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:SA, "A set index article (SIA) is a list article about a set of items of a specific type that also share the same (or similar) name." (bolding mine) If worst comes to worst, I'll write a stub article on the subject. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:16, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm a Native American who's currently wearing a hoodie, t-shirt, and jeans. What "Native American clothing" is would be hard to pin down, which is why no one has written an article on this subject. Native American fashion, at least, is narrowed down to fashion design by Native Americans. Disambigution would be the best course; since, as you point out, Textile arts of the Indigenous peoples of the Americas wouldn't fall under a set index. Yuchitown (talk) 01:36, 24 October 2023 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]
  • Clearly the subject is Traditional Native American clothing. Also, disambiguation isn't an option since it shares the same restriction as set indexes: the same name. Inuit clothing, for example, is not a synonym, merely a type/example. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:26, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't care what the type of page is technically called, what I care about is that readers are able to find the information they are looking for. In this case this is links to the various articles we have about things that could be referred to as Native American Clothing and/or which are part of the set of things called Native American Clothing. Inuit clothing, Native American fashion, etc. all fit that description. If the rules don't allow for such a page then then the rules need to be ignored. Thryduulf (talk) 12:25, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:25, 26 October 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) 15:35, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is over 574 Federally recognized Tribes in the United States and that's just the ones that have gained federal recognition. There are and were literally thousands of Tribes across the America's, all with their unique and rich histories, cultures and clothing. Personally, I think this the wrong route to go by pushing it into one article and it was better as a category or disambig. There isn't an article on Traditional European clothing, Traditional African clothing, Tradition Asian clothing. This is what typically happens with Native Americans and I don't really understand it. I don't believe it's in bad faith but the natural tendency is to always reduce our cultures to fit in one box together. That's not done with any other race of people or ethnic group. It actually has the opposite affect and it cheapens the experience. I disagree with this but I will yield to consensus as always. --ARoseWolf 12:17, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please go take the disambiguation route. This Traditional Native American clothing stub is mainly a list of Plains clothing with some ceremonial items that aren't just "clothing" or "fashion". Plus "traditional" is a heavily loaded, subjective term—"traditional" at what time period and to whom? Agree with User:ARoseWolf, there are 574+ tribes here, and there's a good reason why the editors most familiar with this subject matter haven't attempted to create an article like this. Yuchitown (talk) 14:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]
I concur with ARoseWolf and Yuchitown. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 18:36, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll go with the dabify route with this article as an additional entry there. --Lenticel (talk) 01:49, 11 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).

Dilbert guy[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 15#Dilbert guy

Theatrical mask[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 Mask#Masks in theatre,. (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow (talk) 00:08, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Target is a sourceless stub that makes no mention of "theatrical masks" other than 2 muses that are associated with them. ― Blaze WolfTalkblaze__wolf 15:16, 7 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]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 20#💁‍♀️

🫗[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 20#🫗

Adachigahara[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 18#Adachigahara

Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip[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. The consensus seems to be that the 2023 Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip is currently the primary topic for the general term. The location of the disambiguation page currently at Invasion of Gaza can be decided with a requested move. (non-admin closure) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:36, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This could also refer to the 2014 Gaza war, when Israel also invaded the Gaza strip. I don't see a primary topic between the 2014 war and the ongoing invasion at this point, so it might be wise to have this be or point at a dab. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 00:08, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See also: a related discussion. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 00:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support changing into a disambiguation page. DFlhb (talk) 02:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep at the moment I think this is likely to be primary usage, as the current conflict is the dominant global news story and the 2014 war was some time ago. I'm sure it can be revisited in the future. Hut 8.5 19:13, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Hut 8.5. – Hamid Hassani (talk) 06:21, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • retarget to the suggested new disambiguation page creation Invasion of Gaza lodged at October 30 RFD -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 12:51, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate – the current target seems like WP:Recentism. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 22:44, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow (talk) 13:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:Merge and delete, the redirect needs to be kept for attribution purposes. Thryduulf (talk) 14:56, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh... Licensing. Legalese can be such a barrier to understandability.
Changing to Keep, for now. Perhaps some cleaning could be done to merge this with Invasion of Gaza at some point, but it's probably not worth getting into now. PhotogenicScientist (talk) 16:32, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep for now per Hut 8.5, the 2023 invasion is clearly the primary topic at the moment. If that changes in the future then we can revisit this. Thryduulf (talk) 14:56, 7 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).

Punk police[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. Jay 💬 12:34, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This term isn't mentioned in the article, and I could find no clear evidence of a connection. 2A00:23C6:880C:E101:A18F:AC91:9177:E79F (talk) 12:13, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Google results are entirely about songs - it's a suprisingly popular title but none of them appear more notable than any of the others and none have mentions on Wikipedia. The only uses on Wikipedia are partial title matches for three different non-notable songs and a partial title match for a non-notable compilation album. Thryduulf (talk) 12:49, 7 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).

Poema[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 and boldly retargeted the plural form Poemas there as an {{R from plural}}. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:32, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This term (apparently simply the word for "poem" in various foreign languages, judging by the titles of the equivalent articles on other Wikipedias) isn't mentioned in the article, and I could find no evidence of a connection. 2A00:23C6:880C:E101:A18F:AC91:9177:E79F (talk) 12:09, 7 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).

Draft:Genie (film)[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. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:38, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous, now that Genie (2023 film) and Genie (upcoming Indian film) are both in the mainspace. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:40, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as targetting the page that was created at this title or retarget to Genie (disambiguation)#Films which lists them both. Thryduulf (talk) 12:51, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep without retarget per WP:RDRAFT and since the current target is where the content formerly located at the nominated title currently resides. In addition, ambiguity of draft-to-mainspace redirects should not be a concern on third-party search engines due to WP:DRAFTINDEX. Steel1943 (talk) 13:19, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Steel. Jay 💬 12:52, 14 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).

Regional university[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 18#Regional university

Seclusion room[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 18#Seclusion room

Larrin[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 07:06, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does not exist at target article, having been deemed not an actual recurring character in this edit 2.5 years ago. Zaathras (talk) 05:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. There are no alternative uses of this name on Wikipedia that would be suitable as redirect targets. Thryduulf (talk) 12:54, 7 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).

Digital wealth[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 14:35, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does not seem to be a synonym. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 05:15, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: given that cryptocurrency is digital currency, we can probably say this is {{r from related word}}. Edward-Woodrow (talk) 13:17, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Can refer to any number of video game currencies. Yoblyblob (talk) 13:23, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Too ambiguous, may refer to topics other than cryptocurrency per above. Steel1943 (talk) 15:47, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Digital currency, which encapsulates both cryptocurrency and any number of video game currencies. OmegaMantis (talk) 18:06, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The actual topic seems to be about wealth management services with a digital offering, but it's not clear wealth management is a good target either. Using the term "digital wealth" for cryptocurrency smacks of crypto marketing - David Gerard (talk) 20:03, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget same as paper wealth; it isn't "real", it is "on paper" (or "on screen") wealth -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 09:22, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete None of the proposed targets mention the term. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as vague --Lenticel (talk) 00:43, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, no such term. There is digital wealth management per David Gerard, but we don't have an article for that. Jay 💬 08:05, 14 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_7&oldid=1186126226"