Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 29

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 29[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 29, 2023.

Dilbert guy[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 7#Dilbert guy

Weak compactness[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 5#Weak compactness

2025 F1 Academy season[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 💬 05:53, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing about the 2025 F1 Academy Season at the target. While it seems rather likely that a 2025 F1 Academy season will happen, with no information there currently, and there unlikely to be a whole ton of information on that season until later in 2024, this should probably be deleted until it can be recreated into an article similar to 2027 Formula One World Championship was deleted at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023 April 5#2027 Formula One World Championship. TartarTorte 19:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • It could be deleted, there is no reason to keep it, however if it is deleted I think it should not be linked to for a few months, to prevent someone else from simply recreating the redirect while there is no still no need. MagicalBear0 (talk) 19:32, 29 October 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).

African eleephant[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 23:39, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An impossible misspelling and extremely unlikely typo (only three non-Wikipedia Google hits). Created solely because it was the canonical example of an extremely unlikely typo on Wikipedia:Red link, and so turning it blue would of course be enormously funny. (Same reason we're stuck with George W. Bussh, though at least that gets a few hits.) Three page views this year before I mentioned it at DRV; only significant page views ever were because 1. silly template magic on WP:Red link made it still look like a red link until it was unlinked in October 2016 and so the sort of people who thought it would be enormously funny to turn it blue kept clicking on it with that intention; and 2. because of its mention on WT:Red link from November 2019 to June 2020. Delete with righteous fire. —Cryptic 18:51, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom, very unlikely typo and near zero page views Polyamorph (talk) 20:07, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, and WP:SALT to prevent recreation without consensus. Thryduulf (talk) 21:17, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: As implausible; however, should we pipe all red links on that page to Red link example, which is already sysop creation protected to prevent scenarios like this? It know the wikicode would look a bit odd having something like [[Red link example|African eleephant]] but it could potentially make it so people are less wont to create said redirects. TartarTorte 01:00, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep as {{R from typo}} dating from 2012. "eleephant" isn't all that unlikely, as a reduplication of a character, is a common form of typo. While the phrase "African eleephant" doesn't seem to appear much, "eleephant" itself does [1] much more. This could also easily be caused by a recurrent sticky key [E] -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 03:20, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's, at best, an argument to keep Eleephant, which has never existed. If it had, it would be less difficult to AGF about the creation of this. Anyway, accommodating all such typos with redirects is impossible - it would mean between 115 and 305 million new redirects (depending on whether we created them for misspellings of other redirects), compared to the 10.7 million redirects we currently have in mainspace - and Special:Search/eleephant suggests elephant just fine. —Cryptic 04:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • It's not an argument to create those millions of redirects. Just that this already exists, and has for over a decade. And it is a reasonable form to have a typo occur due to the commonly occurring method of single-character reduplication. So, I doubt people will be creating millions of redirects for those various typos, and if they did get created, I doubt they would be a decade old right now. Thus a "weak" keep, from the age of the redirect, and the way the typo is formed. -- 65.92.247.90 (talk) 09:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete with so few Google hits it seems implausible especially given Eleephant doesn't exist. Google initially returns 5 results with the duplicates removed but 10 when I chick to show other results. Of the 10 results 7 are from Wikipedia as noted only the other 3 are from outside. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:25, 31 October 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).

Pharmakon[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 Pharmakon (philosophy) over. Jay 💬 07:28, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Greek word φάρμακον is not exclusively related to a business. The term should lead to the disambiguation page, so people can find what they are looking for, without the distraction of this business promotion. NB: the current target gets 1% of the views of Pharmakon (philosophy), almost all due to the redirect. page views -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 18:32, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Move Pharmakon (philosophy) to the base title (and add a hatnote pointing to the disambiguation page). The philosophical concept appears to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, based on pageviews and internet searches. - Eureka Lott 14:16, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Sounds like a good plan. Is the hatnote already on that page sufficient? -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 22:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I somehow overlooked the hatnotes at Pharmakon (philosophy). I just merged the two hatnotes into a single one. - Eureka Lott 00:55, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Pharmakon (philosophy) and move per Eureka Lott. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 12:56, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The simplest would be to delete so that it does not require a page mover to move Pharmakon (philosophy) to Pharmakon. But the closer should do what they think most practical. I should probably just have asked for a page move in the first place, but I wanted to be sure there were no concerns about removing the redirect first. I also assumed that procedure would be to redirect to the disambiguation page, but it's true that here there is a very clear primary topic page. -- SashiRolls 🌿 · 🍥 13:37, 5 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).

Farming as a Service[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 23:39, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:37, 29 October 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).

IDaaS[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 23:39, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:37, 29 October 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).

BPaaS[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 23:40, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:37, 29 October 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).

Data-Intensive-Computing as a Service[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 💬 05:56, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target (or anywhere else on Wikipedia). * Pppery * it has begun... 16:37, 29 October 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).

JVC GZ-HD7[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 6#JVC GZ-HD7

Silkmoth redirects[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 6#Silkmoth redirects

No-one knows what it's like[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 6#No-one knows what it's like

Social history of the United Kingdom[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 💬 12:05, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The social history of the United Kingdom is broader than "English society", and the English society article covers only the social history of England. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:50, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom to promote article creation. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 12:56, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per OP and the above: making this a redlink could encourage a broader article on this important topic. – GnocchiFan (talk) 09:50, 5 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).

Park Towers (Corner of Park & Cecil Streets)[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. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:22, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely disambiguator; the streets the towers are located on is not mentioned in the article. Result of being moved shortly after page creation, no incoming links. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:36, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. If this is correct (I've not looked), the it would seem like a valid {{R from other disambiguation}}. The fact that it was created at this title speaks to its plausibility. Thryduulf (talk) 11:45, 7 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 20:53, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Recently created article moved in the first 15 minutes from a tentative title. The Park Towers dab has similar named titles disambiguated by city, which the creator may have realized, and corrected the title. Delete as we would not want to have street locations of buildings as disambigators, unless there are multiple buildings with the same name in a city. Jay 💬 12:00, 5 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).

Horacio Astaburuaga[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 💬 12:06, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not at all clear if these are the same person: no mention of Horacio in the target article of refs. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:47, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 18:33, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Unless this specific name confusion is discussed somewhere it doesn't deserve a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 20:36, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the talk of the 1928 Olympics swimming article as well.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:30, 29 October 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).

Waltuh[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 5#Waltuh

Bitch tits[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 5#Bitch tits

I Am the Very Model of a Scientist Salarian[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. Jay 💬 06:04, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is context for this as the character sings this line and to some extent it's refered to in the article with the line At one point in the second game, Mordin sings an alternate version of Gilbert and Sullivan's Major-General's Song; numerous critics considered it one of the trilogy's best moments, but the lyrics themselves from this redirect are not included. I'm split on this because I think that some people could potentially find this useful, but without explicit mention it could also be confusing for those who don't know that this is a reference to Major-General's Song. TartarTorte 17:06, 13 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 23:54, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I don't see anyone possibly looking for that...--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:56, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I think there's just enough at the target for this not to be confusing. Do not create a cross-namespace redirect to Wikiquote. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:00, 22 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:06, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. It works just fine as is. My second choice would be a soft-redirect to wikiquote, but that's not ideal. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 04:04, 30 October 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).

Dab hand[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 redirect to Wikt:dab hand. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:17, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

This was discussed at RfD last year, with no consensus being achieved. After that it continued to point to expert, for which it's a rough synonym, then was retargeted to Dab (dance), which is a similar term but not in any way connected to the common meaning of this phrase. I continue to think a soft redirect to wikt:dab hand is the best way of providing the reader with what they're likely to be looking for in the absence of any discussion in the encyclopaedia. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 18:36, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment As the one who redirected the article to point to the gesture, I did so because I typed "Dab hand" into the Wikipedia search bar in search of the article about the dance, and was instead directed to the expert page. Not being familiar with the usage of the term described on Wiktionary, I thought this to be an error and retargeted it to the gesture, which I have often heard described as a "dabbing hand" or "dabbing your hand/doing the dab hand". I do not know how common this usage is, and I also do not know what the appropriate solution here is, though my temptation is to suggest that the redirect is replaced with a disambiguation. silviaASH (inquire within) 12:07, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to DAB and add an entry for "dab hand" to the existing disambiguation page. silviaASH (inquire within) 12:28, 14 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 23:54, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Soft redirect to wikt:dab hand? Or retarget to DAB?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Yes, Soft Redirect to Wiktionary is the right answer. Anything else will just be confusing. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:00, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft redirect to wikt per above. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 17:13, 4 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).

Tamar's campaign of Eldiguzids[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 14:29, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From a recent page move, grammatically incorrect title, thus unlikely search term. CapitalSasha ~ talk 02:55, 29 October 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).

Wiki:stub[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[cetacean needed] (they|xe|she) 03:09, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Recently created in an invalid namespace (so really, this is in mainspace, making it a WP:XNR. Edward-Woodrow • talk 00:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hah! First! Edward-Woodrow • talk 00:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete per CSD R2. estar8806 (talk) ★ 00:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • WP:CSD#R2 explicitly excludes redirects to the Wikipedia namespace, so this does not meet the criterion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:18, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • R2 also excludes shortcuts - primarily shortcuts beginning with "WP:", which wasn't a software-supported namespace alias for a very long time - and so I'd have declined a speedy tag on that basis before even remembering that Wikipedia: redirs are permitted. Delete, slowly. —Cryptic 19:10, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        FWIW, the carve-out for Wikipedia: was mostly because there wasn't yet one for shortcuts; this is the relevant discussion. Might be worth revisiting, now that WP=Wikipedia and so WP:WHATEVER isn't in the main namespace anymore, and that even if it was it would still be excluded as a shortcut. Other mainspace→Wikipedia: redirects listed here. —Cryptic 19:42, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        There are several (main) → Wikipedia: shortcuts that have consensus to exist, almost always because they are helpful to very new users. Per WP:NEWCSD point 2, these would need to be explicitly excluded somehow. Given that:
        1. There isn't an easily definable set of such redirects,
        2. The set can and does sometimes change (in both directions) as Wikipedia changes
        3. Listing every approved redirect would be impractical
        4. Discussion of them does not overwhelm RfD
        5. When they are discussed there is often disagreement about whether the redirect should exist at all and/or there is a better target in a different namespace
        Removing the exemption from R2 would not be a net benefit. Thryduulf (talk) 21:28, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There is no "Wiki:" namespace, and "Wiki:" is not a consensus-approved pseudo-namespace like "MOS:", so this should not exist.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  02:45, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy delete per nom. Thank you User:CapitalSasha for TP message. Regards, An emperor ✖ 02:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Under which speedy deletion criterion? Thryduulf (talk) 12:18, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. There is no consensus for a "Wiki:" pseudonamespace, this is not a page that new editors who have not yet learned about namespaces need to be easily able to find (they can find a link at Stub, but unfortunately the search results for Wikipedia stub are not helpful), and it's not a likely search term for any article we currently have. Thryduulf (talk) 12:18, 29 October 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_October_29&oldid=1183965943"