Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 2[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 2, 2020.

Steele's debunked hoax dossier[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 GB fan. (non-admin closure) Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of POINT violating fringe-POV redirect -- Valjean (talk) 00:07, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In a discussion at Talk:Steele dossier#Dossier aka "Trump-Russia" Dossier, I made an obviously sarcastic joke, using a ridiculous, extremely fringe POV, title as an example of what some might like, such as those who get their information from unreliable sources. (I should have known better, because it got a bite. Someone did like it!) I never intended for it be created by PackMecEng. It's a classic example of what PackMecEng calls "a crappy POV title", and one I would never make, yet she did it while obviously conscious of the idea of “a crappy POV title.” The irony is thick here.

As it is clearly a POINT violating fringe-POV redirect, it should be deleted. We do not allow fringe-POV content as redirects. Redirects should not be based on an editor's opinion, but on RS, and RS do not consider the dossier either debunked or a hoax. Those are descriptions found on extremely biased sources like Breitbart, InfoWars, Fox News, Townhall, Daily Caller, Hannity, Limbaugh, WND, Zero Hedge, and other unreliable and conspiracy sources. Those descriptions are generally not found on mainstream RS. Just because a few allegations in the dossier have not been proven does not mean the whole dossier is debunked or a hoax. That is the type of deceptive Trump talking point RS reject and debunk every single day.

When someone suggests a sarcastic and obviously stupid redirect example, they are not asking for anyone to actually create it, and creating it is a clear POINT violation. If it is to be allowed to remain, would redirects like the following be allowed to point to Trump's bio?

I really doubt it. Anyone who created those redirects would likely get blocked as NOTHERE and violating POINT. I tried a speedy delete, but that was rejected because I didn’t use the right (non-existent?) template. (So what is the right speedy delete template to use for policy and POINT violations?) One would think that an obvious violation would still be deleted under IAR. Instead, I was told to come here, which wastes more time. -- Valjean (talk) 00:07, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Is this a joke? Delete it. Drmies (talk) 00:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy doesn't apply but should and I suggest it be added for speedy deletion reasons. This is clearly someone not happy with discussion and placing their POV into a redirect. Delete quickly and a trout at bare minimum as this is vandalism.O3000 (talk) 00:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, and formally warn or block the redirect's creator, User:PackMecEng. This is at best a tendentious WP:POINT violation, and at worst straight-up vandalism +/- a WP:BLP violation. In any case, it's disruptive editing in an area (American politics) where we supposedly have heightened standards, especially for established editors who should know better. MastCell Talk 01:54, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, obviously. WP:POINTy and not NPOV. Guy (help!) 08:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, WP:G7 if possible. Yes it was a bit pointy in response to endless hyperbole. Which I will note they continue with just above. Though that does not mean I should of created it. JzG & Drmies sorry about that. PackMecEng (talk) 09:07, 3 August 2020 (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.

Everything Conference[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. -- Tavix (talk) 00:52, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like this redirect was the result of a merge which occurred per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Everything Conference in 2010, but at the present time, as it stands, the subject/phrase of this redirect is not mentioned in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 21:46, 2 August 2020 (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 community church[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) 00:45, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. Steel1943 (talk) 21:44, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This redirect is ambiguous and may cause confusion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:22, 4 August 2020 (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 cd[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) 00:45, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

??? Steel1943 (talk) 21:25, 2 August 2020 (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 Cardiff City Stadium[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) 00:44, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article, not apparently an alternative name for the target, and isn't so "new" anymore since it was completed over 11 years ago. Steel1943 (talk) 21:22, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 10:38, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - the redirects were probably useful a decade ago when the stadium was new, but not anymore. GiantSnowman 10:40, 3 August 2020 (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 bloody syndrome[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) 00:43, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article, and third party search engines do not seem to return any specific results for this phrase. Steel1943 (talk) 20:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This redirect was created as an article about the Antiphospholipid syndrome, but even then, the word "new" was only mentioned in the article title. [1] Doesn't seem to be a common alternative name for Antiphospholipid syndrome. Not a very active user (talk) 10:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Is this a plausible search term? Not bloody likely! Narky Blert (talk) 17:17, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    See also the 2nd Apparition's advice to Macbeth (Act IV Scene 1): "Be bloody bold, and resolute". Narky Blert (talk) 17:21, 6 August 2020 (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 beat hi hats[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. signed, Rosguill talk 20:35, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article. However, this redirect was an article for a few weeks in 2006. Steel1943 (talk) 20:20, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Similar, but not exactly, the same as a minor product line of this company. Not really worth a mention, either. Hog Farm Bacon 03:40, 3 August 2020 (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 band supernova[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. signed, Rosguill talk 20:35, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article, and I wouldn't consider a band formed 14 years ago a "new band". Steel1943 (talk) 20:18, 2 August 2020 (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.

Arthur Gets Grounded[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. -- Tavix (talk) 00:48, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 17:46, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep both. The target target section mentions both Caillou and Arthur, and explains how getting grounded is connected to these characters. Not a very active user (talk) 11:07, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Unfortunately, Arthur is one of the characters that are used for these kind of videos. It's pretty stupid, but it has a relation to the article. Koridas 📣 19:43, 8 August 2020 (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.

German-speaking Bohemia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 10#German-speaking Bohemia

Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the saddest one of all?[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 9#Mirror, mirror on the wall, who is the saddest one of all?

Jack Kister[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. signed, Rosguill talk 20:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Kister ended with a consensus that the subject does not warrant an individual article, but there was no consensus over whether a delete or redirect was more appropriate. Therefore I am bringing it here for review. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:12, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I don't see a real controversy here. In the article's deletion discussion, there were three calls for a redirect or merge to VMEbus, while two people said they did not see a clear redirect target. No one indicated what another target might be, nor did anyone argue that VMEbus was inappropriate. Kister is mentioned in that article as initial creator of what became an international standard, arguably a career highlight. While I do not dispute that the subject fails notability and therefore should not have a stand-alone article, the case for keeping it was at least colorable, with many, albeit thin, references. The article has existed since 2005, and there is no suggestion of bad faith or self promotion. Unless someone comes forward soon with an argument for a different target, I think this could be quickly closed.--agr (talk) 21:20, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Obviously, my rationale is the same as in the AfD: Mentioned in the target article, a plausible search term and of course redirects are cheap. Pavlor (talk) 09:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, mentioned at the target. Not a very active user (talk) 11:10, 4 August 2020 (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.

Barmer (Rajasthan Assembly constituency)[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 Withdrawn by nominator. signed, Rosguill talk 17:25, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Vidhan Sabha constituencies of Rajasthan is better served with a red link than a link to Barmer, a disambiguation page. The Banner talk 17:02, 2 August 2020 (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.

Luis Diaz (footballer)[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 retarget to Luis Díaz. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:38, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Preferably redirect this to Luis Díaz disambiguation page. There are three other footballers by this name, and the Chilean one is not an obvious primary topic 2A00:23C5:E187:5F00:1AF:A55D:D82B:538E (talk) 16:26, 2 August 2020 (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.

List of titles and honours of the British Crown[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. Once this set of articles is stable it may be worth revisiting. -- Tavix (talk) 00:49, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect should be re-targeted to List of titles and honours of the British Monarch. This redirect is the previous title of the latter article, and therefore the most appropriate place to redirect to. A.D.Hope (talk) 22:31, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 16:06, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: RM still open...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 16:18, 2 August 2020 (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.

Imola Grand Prix[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 11#Imola Grand Prix

Italianised[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 Italianization. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 17:19, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Italianization. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 13:03, 2 August 2020 (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.

Arabe[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was disambiguate. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 05:15, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

French WP:FORRED. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:59, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • weak retarget to French ship Arabe. Not exactly the best match but this dab points to two ships named Arabe --Lenticel (talk) 02:04, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify, draft available below the redirect. In addition to the ship index (which we can't merge back here because of the existing convention about ship indexes), there's also a person with this as a surname and a football club (whose longer name appears to be shortened to Árabe, at least judging from the usage in the article). The see also links are more than usually relevant as well: most readers will probably be looking for Arabe, and Arrabe is easy enough to confuse. – Uanfala (talk) 18:16, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • DABify per Uanfala. Good draft (which I've tweaked slightly). Narky Blert (talk) 17:29, 6 August 2020 (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.

Langue arabe[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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 05:11, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

French WP:FORRED. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:58, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. French is extensively used in several Arabic-majority countries. – Uanfala (talk) 18:18, 3 August 2020 (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.

Deutsh[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 Deutsch. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 17:16, 7 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Deutsch. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:46, 2 August 2020 (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.

Esperantu[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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 05:10, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The O and U are one key apart. Means do hope! in Esperanto. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:17, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep; harmless typo (also a term for the targeted language in some languages). — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 23:10, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Perfectly plausible typo.NK1406 (talk) 15:25, 5 August 2020 (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.

Bourane[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. signed, Rosguill talk 20:34, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

French WP:FORRED. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:07, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Russian spacecraft, so no string ties to France/French. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:18, 2 August 2020 (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.

Russian space shuttle[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 10#Russian space shuttle

Apollo landers[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 Apollo Lunar Module. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 05:09, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Apollo Lunar Module per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 11:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Of course per common sense. Doesn't seem like a controversial move. "Apollo landers" or single "Apollo lander" aptly describe the suggested retarget. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:01, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • support retarget per nom --Lenticel (talk) 02:05, 3 August 2020 (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.

Population explosion[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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 05:06, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As this refer specifically to the human population, retarget to human overpopulation. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 11:52, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as-is. The definition in Oxford Reference is "A sudden rapid increase in size of the population of a species or genus". It isn't restricted to a kingdom, let alone the species Home sapiens. Narky Blert (talk) 12:05, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Narky. This term can refer to the overpopulation of any species, anywhere in the world. Regards, SONIC678 23:07, 2 August 2020 (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.

Thunderwell[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. signed, Rosguill talk 20:33, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject. 72.194.27.90 (talk) 05:19, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Without a mention in the article this redirect is confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:46, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep and tag with {{R with possibilities}}; IIRC, this is the only known example of a thunderwell (if the projection of the launch into space is accurate), so seems like a suitable redirect -- 70.51.44.93 (talk) 01:15, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
My vote is for delete, but if you are proposing to keep the redirect on the grounds that a target with a tenuous connection to the subject is better than no target, then I'd like to suggest that Non-rocket spacelaunch is a more appropriate target than Operation Plumbbob. 72.194.27.90 (talk) 01:50, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thunderwells are not covered in that article (the closest would be the spacegun, covered in its own article; except that thunderwells do not chamber the projectile, it's sealed onto the "muzzle"). It could be expanded to add such, and other missing nuclear launchers (ie. Project Orion also isn't a rocket). So Plumbbob currently seems more appropriate than non-rocket spacelaunch. -- 70.51.44.93 (talk) 23:02, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:47, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not mentioned anywhere in English WP. Any reader following this redirect will find zero information. Narky Blert (talk) 13:48, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Not mentioned in the current target or anywhere else. The redirect could always be recreated if something about the term is added to another article. A7V2 (talk) 03:42, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Also note both Operation Thunderwell and Thunder well redirect to Operation Plumbbob#Propulsion of steel plate cap but I'm not sure if they can be added to a relisted discussion. A7V2 (talk) 03:50, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Further, when the redirects were created ([2]) there was a mention of the term "thunder well" in the relevant section (note that the current redirect being discussed also directs to that section) however this reference was later removed and the section renamed. A7V2 (talk) 03:59, 3 August 2020 (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.

Racist patterns[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. signed, Rosguill talk 20:32, 9 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Pattern" is too ambiguous to redirect anywhere. There is no mention of "patterns" in the article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:43, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment google search results for this term are overwhelmingly about institutional and societal racism, especially patterns of behaviour/policies/etc that unintentionally and frequently unknowingly lead to racial discrimination. Ethnic stereotypes is probably the wrong target for this, but I haven't found what is. Institutional racism is closer but not perfect. Thryduulf (talk) 10:22, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as ambiguous. A search for "racist patterns" on enwiki gets zero results. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:31, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or retarget to racism. "pattern" much to generic, so the only suitable target is the base article -- 70.51.44.93 (talk) 01:17, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:47, 2 August 2020 (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/2020_August_2&oldid=1142586771"