Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 29

< July 28

July 30 >

July 29

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 29, 2020.

SS New York (Brown, 1888)

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 16:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• SS New York (Brown, 1888) → SS City of New York (1888)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete - there was no ship of this name built in 1888 (or any other year) by a shipbuilder "Brown". It redirects to a ship built that year by J & G Thomson, which was later renamed to New York Davidships (talk) 01:08, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. The error is at the disambiguation page New York too, but I combed the relevant set index articles and List of ships built by John Brown & Company and couldn't find anything that this could refer to. The closest thing I could find was City of New York (1885 ship), which once had repairs overseen by a Captain Brown, but that's a stretch on multiple fronts. Finally, this would be acceptable if the error went beyond Wikipedia, but "ss city of new york" "brown and company" -wikipedia is giving me a grand total of 13 results, all of which are drawing (unattributed) from Wikipedia. --BDD (talk) 16:04, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

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.

Sarn Gebir

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 Geography of Middle-earth#Sarn Gebir. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 03:39, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

• Sarn Gebir → Middle-earth#Geography  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Enwiki has no content about this subject in the article space. Given that Sarn Gebir is a fictional set of rapids on a fictional river that doesn't have an article, I don't see scope for this redirect unless the consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anduin gets overturned and Anduin becomes an article again. Hog Farm _Bacon 23:14, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

• Retarget to Geography of Middle-earth#Sarn Gebir, where there is now a mention of the river's course. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:10, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
• Retarget per Chiswick Chap. Thryduulf (talk) 10:38, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

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.

Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined

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 16:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined → Alex Jones  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target article. Is a (probably NN) film directed by the subject, but is not mentioned in the target article. Hog Farm _Bacon 23:08, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

• Delete 2010 direct to video DVD, available on Amazon[1] and covered by IMDB,[2] but of course IMDB attempts to cover everything. Jones is listed as director and cameraman. I would suggest redirecting to Jason Bermas, but that's just a redirect to Loose Change. Looking at [3], there might be enough to create a Jason Bermas page, but that's outside of the scope of this RfD. Looks like this should be a delete. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:47, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

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.

Lake Wentaron

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 as unopposed. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:40, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

• Lake Wentaron → Lake Simcoe  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, an online search didn't turn up anything illuminating. Delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:20, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

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:ABUSELOG

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 per WP:SNOW. For what it's worth, the nominator is blocked so they won't be able to participate in this discussion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:49, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:ABUSELOG → Special:AbuseLog  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Consider changing to WP:Edit filter as that has more to do with the target, in my opinion. Many people don't know what the abuse log is supposed to be and so this would be a helpful pointer for them. Signed, ◊PRAHLAD^balaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 19:46, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

• Keep - Term implies a log, which is contained at the current target, but not at the proposed target. Hog Farm _Bacon 23:10, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
• Keep; if we have a page called AbuseLog, it really feels like the project shortcut ABUSELOG should go there barring a really good reason not to. I'm really struggling to understand the rationale that this particular shortcut needs to be the one that tells people how the edit filter works. ~ mazca ^talk 23:40, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
• Keep per above. I've added a link to Wikipedia:Edit filter from the target for those who don't know what the log is. Thryduulf (talk) 10:42, 30 July 2020 (UTC)
• Keep per above and original intent, thank you for the notification. –xeno^talk 12:41, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

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.

History of Venus

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. No single proposal gained much support, and there's some support for the status quo as well. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:36, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

• History of Venus → Venus#Studies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Could also mean the formation of Venus. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 11:23, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

• ...Is there an article or section of an article for that? Otherwise, keep. Steel1943 (talk) 15:35, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
  • There is Formation and evolution of the Solar System but that's a bit too general. The "Formation of the planets" or "Terrestrial planets" subsections are more specific but which is better would depend on how far back you consider "Venus" to start, and neither are about Venus specifically. Thryduulf (talk) 01:06, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
• Comment looking at the other planets there is little consistency:
  • History of Mercury (planet) is a redirect to Mercury (planet)#Observation history which is a substantial section of the article with subsections, each having main article links for more detail.
  • History of Mars is a dab page between Geological history of Mars and History of Mars observation. Geology of Venus exists but doesn't really cover the history in much detail (and doesn't cover the formation) but from a skim read of the article this is likely because we don't know a lot about the geological history of the planet; Observations and explorations of Venus covers the history.
  • History of Jupiter is a redirect to Jupiter#Formation and migration, a small section with a main article link to Grand tack hypothesis and a see also to Formation and evolution of the Solar System.
  • History of Saturn is a redirect to Saturn#History of observation and exploration, which is similar in size and structure to the equivalent section of the Mercury article.
  • History of Uranus is a redirect to Uranus#History a shortish section covering only the discovery and name. Uranus#Formation and Uranus#Exploration are two short sections much further down the article with links to more detailed articles. I can't immediately find any history of post-discovery remote observation.
  • History of Neptune is a redirect to Neptune#History, a summary section covering the discovery, naming and status. Neptune#Formation and migration, Neptune#Observation and Neptune#Exploration (all level 2 sections) cover what you would expect.
  • History of Pluto is a redlink, but Pluto#History (covering discovery, naming and classification), Pluto#Origin and Pluto#Observation and exploration are all top-level sections of the article. Thryduulf (talk) 01:06, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
• Weak disambig between the articles and sections covering the formation, history of observation, history of exploration and geology/geological history following the lead of Mars. Thryduulf (talk) 01:06, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  • If we have any content about the history of non-planetary Venuses suitable for entry on a dab page, then delete the "weak" from my recommendation. Thryduulf (talk) 02:06, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
• Comment There's also Venus (mythology), which could be something someone is looking for. There's a cult history section at that page. Hog Farm _Bacon 01:50, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
• Comment there's also the goddess Venus, who has a history as well. and all those other gods and goddesses. They should all be disambiguation pages. -- 70.51.44.93 (talk) 01:56, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
• Note I've left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Solar System inviting participants of that project to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 02:13, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
• Weak retarget to Observations and explorations of Venus, identified as {{main}} at the current section. Not opposed to disambiguation, but we'd need a clear target for formation / geological history, which we don't seem to have. I don't see much merit for considering the goddess; you don't usually refer to the history of a god ("cult history" and such, sure). --BDD (talk) 19:12, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 03:17, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

• Comments, Well the history of Venus on Wikipedia seems to start here:- Formation_and_evolution_of_the_Solar_System#Formation_of_the_planets. There isn't a lot of linkage in that section, i.e., it doesn't describe formation then get specific about each planet individually, so it is not simply perfect as a catchall for these redirects, but it is seemingly the point in the wiki that each planets history as an individual entity begins, and it is not unthinkable that a slight rewrite could add links to each individual formation section. However, better might be to adopt "formation" sections as standard in the Sol (our system) planet articles, and in that case, I would encourage the hatnotes to point to the specific section, with a view to adding more detail about planets individually towards branching into Formation of the planets. If you want to discuss it in a timely fashion where projects are not eager, try canvassing each planets talkpage, and the talkpage of Formation_and_evolution_of_the_Solar_System and asking at RD/S what the terms are. More than simply changing a target needs done, most likely. @Thryduulf: in fact there is a section called Venus_(mythology)#Cult_history_and_temples, and it is about the history of the worship of Venus, which does seem like a relevant search term for that one. Is a disambig relevant there? I say yes, ~ R.T.G 04:37, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

  That's something, but Formation and evolution of the Solar System#Formation of the planets is very likely to disappoint readers who we lead to believe we have content specifically about the formation of Venus, since it's just lumped in with the other terrestrial planets. We could rewrite and then redirect, but redirecting in hopes of a future rewriting does not seem wise, especially since it's a featured article, and editors may resist such efforts. --BDD (talk) 14:38, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

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.

Age-structured homosexuality

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 6#Age-structured homosexuality

UTS Leichhardt Wanderers

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 Leichhardt Wanderers. Involved close against my own nomination; Malo95's suggestion is very reasonable and am happy to endorse it rather than going through a full relist. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:28, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

• UTS Leichhardt Wanderers → UTS Sport#Rugby League  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, unclear if this is the same subject as Leichhardt Wanderers. Either redirect to there if it is, or delete it if it isn't (barring some other justification). _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:17, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@Rosguill: At the Facebook page is written: "The UTS Leichhardt Wanderers are a joint venture between the University of Technology Sydney and the Leichhardt Wanderers JRLFC." I didn't saw that the page Leichhardt Wanderers exists. I think the best would be that UTS Leichhardt Wanderers is redirected to Leichhardt Wanderers.--Malo95 (talk) 06:48, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:37, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

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.