Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 12[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 12, 2020.

Conspiracy media[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. Participants view this as an undesirable cross namespace redirect without an obviously good target in article-space to retarget to. Concerns about the name of the category need to be discussed at WP:CFD. ~ mazca talk 15:29, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect from a search term that could plausibly be a stand-alone article (probably more properly at Conspiracist media. I think that deletion is appropriate to allow for internal search results and to encourage article creation signed, Rosguill talk 20:37, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a native English speaker. I'd plead for a replacing the liguistically difficult category conspiracist media by the more direct term conspiracy media. The latter term is - at least at google books - more common among recent expert authors.Otto S. Knottnerus (talk) 20:50, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
"Conspiracy media" does appear to be a more commonly used phrase. I think that the spelling of the target category is neither here nor there as far as this discussion is concerned, as the bigger issue at hand is whether we need a redirect from mainspace to a category for these terms. signed, Rosguill talk 21:00, 12 December 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.

CIS men's national basketball team[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 Unified Team at the 1992 Summer Olympics#Basketball. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 10:21, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of a CIS team at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 20:29, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There are several links from articles. Soviet Union men's national basketball team just mentions Unified Team. According to the article Unified Team at the 1992 Summer Olympics) CIS was an informal name of the Unified Team, and that it included Georgia, which was not a CIS member at the time. Basketball at the 1992 Summer Olympics has "CIS" linking to this redirect. Could it be redirected to Unified Team at the 1992 Summer Olympics, or did a CIS team (or Unified Team) participate in other competitions? Peter James (talk) 10:39, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • REtarget per above, the Commonwealth of Independent States/CIS, (former-)Soviet/USSR and Unified Team were used interchangeably informally, at that time in, and is a viable search term; IIRC it wasn't used after 1994. -- 67.70.26.89 (talk) 16:31, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just make sure this redirect leads to something so that Basketball at the 1992 Summer Olympics doesn't have red links all over the article. MartinYNA (talk) 12:49, 18 December 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.

Rutsov[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. in the absence of any justification for why this particular spelling was relevant to the target. ~ mazca talk 15:30, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Does not appear to be an alternative spelling in any relevant language (I checked Latvian, Lithuanian, German, and Russian). Google Scholar results appear to be for people named Rutsov. I'd suggest deletion unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 20:14, 12 December 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.

Nekki[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 20#Nekki

Lolwtfbbq[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. Worthy effort has been put into trying to find a better target for this, but the ultimate conclusion of the discussion here seems to be that this is such a meaninglessly niche piece of slang that it just doesn't have a good target, on this project or another. ~ mazca talk 18:06, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:32, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Omgwtfbbq, or Soft redirect to the related entry on Wiktionary OMGWTFBBQ. Seems to be an alternative spelling of a long dead piece of internet slang. 192.76.8.93 (talk) 14:26, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Enwiki does not need redirects to long dead pieces of internet slang. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:39, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget in some manner per those above. Preferably to a local target; if it is deemed that those are not necessary either, then this will get deleted because it leads there. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 08:20, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 18:21, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: so obscure it's not even included in Wiktionary's appendix of internet slang. – Uanfala (talk) 16:51, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Uanfala. Comes nowhere close to {{soft redirect}}'s criteria. --BDD (talk) 17:00, 21 December 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.

Muslim Student Union[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 Muslim Students' Association. No prejudice against the creation of a SIA on the subject. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 10:24, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This page was recently moved. UC Irvine surely isn't the only college with a Muslim Student Union, so there shouldn't be a redirect. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:26, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I'm going through the links to Muslim Student Union and pointing them to Muslim Student Union of the University of California, Irvine instead. ImTheIP (talk) 08:35, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 18:21, 12 December 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.

Treading On Thin Ice[edit]

 Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 20#Treading On Thin Ice

Old Shop, Newfoundland and Labrador[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 19#Old Shop, Newfoundland and Labrador

Fire in space[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 19#Fire in space

Eloise Webb[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 20:37, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Eloise Webb probably merits an article, but until such time Eloise Webb should remain a red link. CapnZapp (talk) 12:53, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I should add that I was semi-recently involved in a contentious and ultimately futile attempt to retain the article on Raegan Revord. If this discussion concludes it was fine to create this redirect, and that it is fine to keep Eloise Webb a redirect until such time somebody creates an article for her, I will immediately create a redirect for Ms Revord to Young Sheldon and point to this discussion, since apparently I can use a redirect to bypass the article deletion criteria. CapnZapp (talk) 12:58, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
CapnZapp, there's already been discussion for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raegan Revord and it's currently sitting in Draft:Raegan Revord for being WP:TOOSOON. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:37, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No need to tell me. My point is that if we can have an entry in Wikipedia for Eloise Webb, despite her failing the actor notability requirements (at least back in 2015 when this redirect was created), we can have one for Raegan Revord. I'll gladly create a redirect if that means --> Raegan Revord <-- can go from red to blue. So it'll be interesting to see the outcome of this. CapnZapp (talk) 19:49, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this depends if Webb is strongly tied to this film as primary topic. She's in Queen's Gambit but deep in the supporting cast section rather than starring. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:36, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete to encourage article creation. There is no suitable other target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:26, 13 December 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.

NH90[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 19#NH90

Badger Bay, Newfoundland and Labrador[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, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Badger Bay is not mentioned in the target article. This is a part of a major cleanup of List of communities in Newfoundland and Labrador, where loads and loads of creeks and bays have been added as "settlements", including Badger Bay. (See examples of cleanup.) While Badger Bay might exist as a bay, it should not redirect to a place where Badger Bay is not mentioned. Geschichte (talk) 09:23, 12 December 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.

Back Cove, St. Barbe, Newfoundland and Labrador[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, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Back Cove is not mentioned in the target article. This is a part of a major cleanup of List of communities in Newfoundland and Labrador, where loads and loads of creeks and bays have been added as "settlements", including Back Cove. (See examples of cleanup.) While Back Cove might exist as a bay, it should not redirect to a place where Back Cove is not mentioned. Geschichte (talk) 09:23, 12 December 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.

Xbox 2[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 19#Xbox 2

Indian Punjabi[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! 00:20, 19 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it means "Punjabis living in India", but it redirects to the language used by all Punjabis. I suggest dabifying it. Soumya-8974 (he) talk contribs subpages 08:09, 12 December 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.

Expulsive[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 19#Expulsive

Natalia Grosvenor, Duchess of Westminster[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. Ruslik_Zero 17:45, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

redirect to spouse is misleading and disrespectful. We either have an article about a notable person or not, though not a redirect — billinghurst sDrewth 07:01, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want. Not here advocating that at this time. Dealing with this one. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:40, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There is no policy reason to delete: it is not misleading. Natalia Grosvenor, Duchess of Westminster is the widow of Gerald Grosvenor, 6th Duke of Westminster, and, in the absence of an article about her, the target article gives brief biographical details about her: there is no better target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:01, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Shhnotsoloud. This is not the right place to discuss {{R from spouse}} in general but unless and until consensus around that changes there is no reason to delete this redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 11:24, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete there shouldn't usually be redirects such as this, where a person is only mentioned in the context of relation to another person. The template exists, but the fact that an article can have an infobox and categories doesn't mean that it should be kept, and it's the same for a redirect. Peter James (talk) 18:12, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:16, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Mentioned in the article with some biographical details; a useful redirect. Narky Blert (talk) 11:52, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - this is a perfectly cromulent use of a redirect. Perhaps it should be anchored (to #Personal life) but there is no reason to remove it. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:55, 15 December 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.

Pad (music)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 19#Pad (music)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_December_12&oldid=995555018"