Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 8[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 8, 2019.

Schlockiverse[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. --BDD (talk) 01:45, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A fan nickname not discussed at the target page. Not a very active user (talk) 16:47, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Every redirect doesn't need to be discussed at the target page. Redirects are there to help people find information. It's even part of the official wiki created by Howard Tayler, the creator of the comic. Also, WP:Redirects are cheap. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 21:15, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Also, a quick search for the term on that official wiki turns up several other official uses of it. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 21:17, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 22:46, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Moscow Mitch[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. As noted in the discussion, it could be desirable to have a list that provides context for the moniker. --BDD (talk) 01:40, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is just an abusive political slur. Nowhere in the article is this pejorative discussed, so it should be removed. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:41, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If we didn't have a Donald Trump nicknames article, I think that Clinton would be an appropriate target for that redirect. signed, Rosguill talk 20:45, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 22:46, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Dramatis personae of the Schlockiverse[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 by RHaworth per criterion G8. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 17:41, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term. No other list of fictional characters has a similar "Dramatis Personae" redirect, and "Schlockiverse" is a neologism mostly used by the fans of the comic. Not a very active user (talk) 16:26, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per my arguments in the other discussion. "Schlockiverse" a neologism officially recognized by the creator of the comic, and used by that same creator of the comic. Additionally, "Dramatis Personae" is also officially used when referring to the cast of the comic. Please stop nominating things when you haven't bothered doing any research to support your claims. It only wastes people's time. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 21:21, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – The term "dramatis personae" is not even mentioned in the article, so a reader wouldn't learn from the article why this redirect even exists. Moreover, I am finding pretty much zero non-Wikipedia instances of "Dramatis personae of the Schlockiverse" on Google (zero at all on Google News), suggesting this term isn't really used elsewhere. Seems like a highly unlikely search term. Not sure why the wiki page Nihonjoe linked uses this term, but that wiki seems to be alone in it. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 13:48, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 22:46, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Estolides[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. --BDD (talk) 01:38, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Could be a typo redirect for Estoloides, which is a subset of Desmiphorini, so it needs at the very least a retarget. However, even if the typo is plausible (I don't think it is), the word is an (unrelated to biology) chemical term. I recommend deletion as an immediate action, and recreation as a redirect to fatty acid ester with an appropriate paragraph at the target. (I can write that paragraph but do not have the time right now.) TigraanClick here to contact me 16:14, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep, looks like it's mentioned as a synonym for the scientific name in the relevant sidebar at the target. If kept, the issue of confusion with fatty acid ester can be resolved with a hatnote. signed, Rosguill talk 19:15, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget; seems to be viable as an alternative search term for either the tribe or the compounds, thus point either at Desmiphorini and add hatnote to fatty acid ester, or the other way round (possibly the latter - that may be the more commonly used meaning). --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 15:48, 1 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 22:46, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

New York City Board of Eduaction[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. --BDD (talk) 01:36, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is a typo and a wrong title, an implausible combination. I don't think this is much use. Reyk YO! 21:31, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Maroon Line (Hong Kong)[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. --BDD (talk) 01:36, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Mistaken color. The color of the line is brown, maroon does not appear to be mentioned in the article. Onel5969 TT me 09:59, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm not an expert on colors, but maroon and brown seem reasonably close. I think this may be a reasonable search term. Wug·a·po·des​ 18:24, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 20:09, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The line is never referred to as "Maroon Line" in Hong Kong. "Brown Line" is common. feminist (talk) 04:09, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I thought "maroon line" was West Rail Line. Okay, Ma On Shan Line and West Rail Line are due to be merged (if police would stop firing tear gas inside their existing stations so their engineering staff can go back to the actual construction work to join the two lines up), but this is clearly an ambiguous title that isn't widely used to refer to the target. Deryck C. 14:41, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Leftist errors[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 18#Leftist errors

Bill Weasel[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 17#Bill Weasel

HTF CH[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. --BDD (talk) 01:34, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. These do not appear to be recognised abbreviations in general use and are unlikely search terms. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:47, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Crusius hypermarket shooting[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 18:58, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't appear to actually be an alternative name for the event. Note that "Crusius" is the suspected perpetrator's last name, whereas hypermarket is an oblique way to refer to the Walmart where it happened; as an industry term with little use in colloquial American English, it's unlikely that this will ever be used to refer to the subject. signed, Rosguill talk 18:37, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Wikipedia:TERRORIST[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. Levivich had a good idea, but consensus says to keep it at the current target. (non-admin closure) James-the-Charizard (talk to me!) (contribs) 12:40, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This page has been a well-known shortcut since its creation in 2007, and there are (presumably) numerous incoming links in places we can't fix them (edit summaries) intended to refer to the "contentious labels" section of the Manual of Style specifically over editors describing living persons as terrorists. A few months back Levivich in good faith changed the target to point to Wikipedia:Wikiproject Terrorism, aligning with WP:TERRORISM and such, and created MOS:TERRORIST as a replacement. I think this was improper and I have reverted, but Levivich's concept is worth discussing so I am opening this discussion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:34, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm somewhat inclined to put it back. I understand the impulse to change it, and I'm glad that Levivich tried to boldly improve things. Also, WP:TERRORISTS is a redlink, and that might be a more appropriate shortcut for the WikiProject. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:17, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The thing that confused me was that WP:TERRORISM and WP:TERROR pointed to the WikiProject, but WP:TERRORIST pointed to the MOS. So I re-pointed WP:TERRORIST to the WikiProject and created MOS:TERROR/TERRORISM/TERRORIST (TERRORISTS is probably another good permutation to have, hadn't thought of that one), and (more recently) added a hatnote to the WikiProject page point to MOS:TERRORIST. There are no mainspace links affected (I checked, and recently changed some). There are, of course, a plethora of Talk: and other namespace pages that point to the link. I didn't change those because I wasn't sure if that was kosher under WP:TPO. I hadn't even thought of the edit summary issue that Ivan raises. I think it's confusing to have WP:TERRORISM/TERROR point to one place and WP:TERRORIST point to another, but I'm not sure what to do about edit summaries and talk page backlinks, other than perhaps "bite the bullet" and just change it over, with the understanding that some of the old links will now point to a different page. I could do an AWB run to change talk page links over (if that's a good idea), but nothing that I know of can be done about the edit summaries. – Levivich 20:26, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think that Levivich's change was an improvement, despite the concerns listed above. The inconsistency is confusing, and I myself have ended up at the wrong target because of it more than once. It's regrettable that this may break edit summary links, but as it stands, someone is equally likely to link to it in an edit summary in error. signed, Rosguill talk 20:43, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so sure about it being accidentally linked in edit summaries; namely I don't think I link to wikiprojects in summaries that often, and definitely not with the frequency I link to essays in summaries. I think the best option is to keep the target where it has historically been (per WP:ASTONISH) and place a hatnote at the MOS page so that users linked in error can quickly navigate to the wikiproject. While it's unfortunate that the TERRORISM, TERROR, and TERRORIST do not follow a clear pattern, I think enforcing consistency in this case would do more harm in link rot than we would gain in usefulness. Wug·a·po·des​ 23:53, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore to its original target, and hatnote at the wikiproject. 2601:643:867F:5370:E44A:534:D1D4:338C (talk) 07:32, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    N.b., This was (appropriately) restored before discussion, so this is a "keep" vote. --BDD (talk) 01:51, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I certainly get what Levivich was going for, but this is so longstanding and, IMO, a pretty fundamental principle on Wikipedia. Now, if the members of WikiProject Terrorism specifically wanted to repurpose that, I'd listen and probably agree. But normally, I wouldn't expect this specific form of redirect for a topical project (e.g., WP:POLITICIAN doesn't go to WikiProject Politics; cf. WP:MUSICIAN which goes to WikiProject Musicians). All that said, the hatnote on the WikiProject is appropriate, and there should be one in the MOS section too. --BDD (talk) 01:51, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

The Godfather: Part II (1974 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 speedy delete per criterion G7. Unnecessary disambiguation, creator acknowledges. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:36, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary disambiguation redirect. ___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 09:51, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok for deletion. I didn't know the policy of unnecessary disambiguations, sorry for that. Bunder (talk) 09:55, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Might as well start a new discussion if you feel strongly about it, it can run for 7 days from that point. G4 could apply but it looks to me like it's going to end up in a new discussion one way or another. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:58, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
G4 does not apply because the page would have to have been deleted as the result of consensus at a deletion discussion. In this case, the redirect in question was deleted via CSD. -- Tavix (talk) 20:56, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Geolodus and Ivanvector: Would you two be able to comment on the merit (or lack thereof) of this redirect? So far you've only made RfD/CSD procedural comments and actions. If you both agree that deletion is an acceptable editorial (rather than janitorial) outcome, we could finish this off without another full discussion. Deryck C. 14:36, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 16#The Godfather: Part II (1974 film). Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:59, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Laylow[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. Deryck C. 14:30, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect points to the article on an area of London, but there is no reliable source that this word actually means that part of London. Nominating for deletion. Viennese Waltz 07:17, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Thyskaland[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 13:28, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Eubot) Not mentioned on either Germany or Names of Germany. feminist (talk) 02:21, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_October_8&oldid=921930526"