Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 19[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 19, 2020.

Oxygen Recordings[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. Deryck C. 18:25, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not listed at target; removed from target after a cleanup of unsourced content. Jalen Folf (talk) 23:05, 19 July 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.

Liquid Recordings[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. Deryck C. 18:26, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not listed at target; removed from target after a cleanup of unsourced content. Jalen Folf (talk) 23:03, 19 July 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.

Trap City (music group)[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. Deryck C. 18:26, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not listed at target; removed from target after a cleanup of unsourced content. Jalen Folf (talk) 23:03, 19 July 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.

Wikipedia:STATUTE[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. No prejudice against repurposing of LAWYERS; personally, I don't see the need. --BDD (talk) 19:01, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sections deleted; the redirects don't seem to make much sense any more. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:30, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:44, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all. Since this is a failed proposal, it seems misleading to use shortcuts of this nature. I would prefer to have redlinks to signify that we do not have specific notability guidelines for these groups of people and laws. -- Tavix (talk) 23:14, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: All six of these land on a "project page" with a top banner "This is a failed proposal." WP:LAWYER (without the "S" on the end) is used extensively and points elsewhere. I can imagine how many people accidentally put an "S" on the end and wound up directing readers to a failed proposal instead of to an oft-used Wikipedia essay. (Also, all the other notability shortcuts start with an "N", such as NBIO, NPROF, NBOOK, NEVENTS, NMUSIC.) Normal Op (talk) 17:35, 26 July 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.

Discoverers of the Americas[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 European discovery of America and Discovery of the New World, and relist the other two. All participants agree that the current targets are inaccurate, but as was mentioned by some participants, but there's clearly multiple outcomes that can be drawn from this discussion for each target, and it may in hindsight have been cleaner to nominate some separately. Rather than relist it again wholesale, I've closed two of them where I do think there's a useful consensus. There's universal agreement to retarget European discovery of America to European colonization of the Americas, and also significant agreement to target Discovery of the New World there too - it was hard to use the alternative suggestion, that of "an appropriate section of New World", given there doesn't seem to be an obvious such section. The use of the term "New World", in any case, generally implies a European perspective.
There is no clear consensus on the other two, with reasonable arguments being made for both potential targets - but there is a consensus that the current target is not correct, so I'm just going to relist those two as a new discussion. I will ping the participants in this one. ~ mazca talk 14:13, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect should link to a more appropriate place that references the multiple native settlements and European voyages to the Americas. For instance, the pages European colonization of the Americas or Settlement of the Americas would be an appropriate target. The latter already has the redirects Discovery of the Americas and Discovery of America. Here is a full list of redirects currently to Voyages of Christopher Columbus that should be changed:

Best, -- ɱ (talk) 22:02, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And we may need to reevaluate what is linked from all of these. For instance, the article Silver uses "which Roman miners produced on a scale unparalleled before the discovery of the New World". This is antiquated, as Europeans did not discover the land already familiar to humans and settled since long ago. ɱ (talk) 22:07, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 22:18, 19 July 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.

Burushi language[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. While a valid theoretical argument for this use of "Burushi" was made, most participants feel that the lack of usage in English, and the variety of other competing minor uses, make this redirect not a net positive. ~ mazca talk 15:10, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The only Scholar results that I can find for "Burushi" refer to an ethnic group in East Africa (and one that doesn't appear to have its own ethnic language [1]); I don't see any evidence that this term refers to the Burushaski in English. Delete unless appropriate evidence can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 18:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It is quite common in Persian-influenced cultures for a language to be named by suffixing the ethnic group or region with "-i"; consider, for example, the historical use of "Afghani" or "Pathani" to refer to Pashto, as well as the names Hindustani and Hindi. Closer to where Burushaski is spoken, Koshur is better known as "Kashmiri", and Khowar is frequently referred to as "Chitrali" (after the area of Chitral). It is thus not much of a stretch to assume that the language of the Burusho, therefore, would be alternatively named "Burushi". M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 18:46, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 21:50, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both. A DDG search suggests that "Burushi" can be a surname, a Japanese company, and a Slavic inflection of the name of the Burusho people of South Asia. As Rosguill suggested, there is no evidence of any English-language usage, instead Burushi may also refer to an unrelated tribe in Africa. so this should be deleted per WP:FORRED. Deryck C. 18:37, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
That page talks about redirects in languages other than English that point to topics that are not especially associated with that language (or a culture that speaks that language). I already explained above why "Burushi" is a perfectly valid name in languages of the region which are very much associated with the target, so the point is moot. M Imtiaz (talk · contribs) 01:27, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But Burushaski is a language isolate, not an Indo-Aryan language! We don't have a redirect at eusquera (Castillian Spanish adjective for "Basque") either. Deryck C. 00:28, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and Deryck Chan. M Imtiaz's argument is compelling enough but outweighed by the potential confusion with the African group, lack of English-language usage, and complete absence from Wikipedia. --BDD (talk) 18:55, 28 July 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.

Stormbirds (video game)[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 01:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not covered on the target article. IceWelder [✉] 20:47, 19 July 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.

The World's Oldest Library[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 27#The World's Oldest Library

Thomas Gennarelli[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 28#Thomas Gennarelli

NASA Shuttles[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 Space Shuttle. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:47, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Space Shuttle according to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:53, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per nom. Someone using this search term is almost certainly looking for information about the vehicles. Thryduulf (talk) 13:24, 19 July 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.

Shuttle A[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 Orbiter (simulator). signed, Rosguill talk 20:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See the RfD of Shuttle-A. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:53, 19 July 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.

United States Space Shuttle[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 Space Shuttle. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:46, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Space Shuttle according to WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:52, 19 July 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.

NASA/Rockwell Shuttle[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. (non-admin closure) Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 13:55, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Space Shuttle à la Rockwell Space Shuttle. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:40, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose because it relates to the Rockwell-built orbiter, Rockwell Space Shuttle needs correcting as well. MilborneOne (talk) 15:59, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per MilborneOne. Instead, the other one should point to this target. Rockwell did not build the entire shuttle stack. -- 70.51.44.93 (talk) 02:04, 21 July 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.

The challenger[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 Challenger. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:43, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Challenger. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:37, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to the dab page at Challenger - this is very ambiguous. Thryduulf (talk) 13:29, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to DAB page Challenger. Highly ambiguous; could refer to a participant in a boxing, chess, or (in the dim and distant) Wimbledon tennis match, or to any of the ships. Narky Blert (talk) 15:34, 19 July 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.

Challenger Spacecraft[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 26#Challenger Spacecraft

San Antonio Theater 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. signed, Rosguill talk 20:35, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This page and two others link to Santikos Theatres about an event that has since been deleted within the article by an administrator. These redirects need to be deleted. Inexpiable (talk) 08:49, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

x3 entries merged together. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:12, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The sections "2010 shooting" and "2012 shooting" were in fact removed in this edit by this user, a Wikipedia:Single-purpose account whose user name and subsequent edits appear to indicate an intention to promote the venue. However, since there has been no effort or consensus to restore that material, without it these directs may cause confusion.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shhhnotsoloud (talk • contribs) 09:25, 19 July 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 unreleased Britney Spears[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, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like an incomplete spelling of List of unreleased Britney Spears songs. Not really coherent or necessary. NØ 08:23, 19 July 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.

JT Eberhard[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! 08:42, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirect of person unlikely to meet WP:GNG. I’m particularly uncomfortable with the current categorization scheme. Grey Wanderer (talk) 00:24, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. The nominator gives no policy-based reason for deletion listed at WP:R#DELETE. Why does whether the person meets GNG important? He organized the event in 2008, 2009 and 2010, and was a speaker in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014. This is documented in the article. And by "unused" you must mean unlinked-to, but it has 200+ pageviews over the past year, which means that it is used. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:56, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Criteria 2 seems applicable here. More importantly though I don’t think we want non notable people appearing in categories like Category:Missouri State University alumni. His association to the event does not seem strong enough to me to merit a redirect. If the category issue can be sorted out then I’m impartial when it comes to deletion. Please note I didn’t propose deletion so I’m not sure what it is you’re opposing or why I would need to cite deletion policy, I think you’re responding to an argument I’m not making. Grey Wanderer (talk) 18:07, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Then what are you proposing Grey Wanderer? — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 21:18, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Removal of the cats. Grey Wanderer (talk) 22:05, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    That is not in the scope of RfD. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 22:07, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Mentioned in article several times. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:28, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the above. Well used, unambiguous redirect with a clear target where it is mentioned. Thryduulf (talk)
  • Delete non-noteworthy person with only passing mention as one of many speakers at an event. MilborneOne (talk) 16:02, 19 July 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_July_19&oldid=970309925"