Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 June 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 26[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 26, 2020.

Pierre, Paul, ou Jacques[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 19:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This French variant isn't described at the target. Any Tom, Dick, or Harry that tries to use this redirect won't find specific information about it. Unless someone thinks it should be and adds a mention, it'd be best to delete. -- Tavix (talk) 23:18, 26 June 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.

IPhone 12 and 13[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. Should the iPhone 13 become more than speculation, it can be recreated then — Wug·a·po·des​ 02:40, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects are misleading because there is no information about the iPhone 12 or 13 at the target. If I'm trying to find information on either of these specific phones, landing at a general article on iPhones is not helpful. -- Tavix (talk) 21:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tavix: We have had redirects for to-be released iPhones long before, like iPhone 5, which started out as a redirect long before it was announced. ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 21:31, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
So what? It's still misleading for a redirect to target somewhere that doesn't mention the term. It was just as misguided then as it is now. -- Tavix (talk) 22:07, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but we have no idea if Apple will name it that way. The iPhone 12 might be renamed the iPhone (that's been speculated, and leaks shouldn't be underestimated; the leakers even got a copy of the Samsung Galaxy S20 before it released, and even perfectly predicted the iPhone 11 Pro). The iPhone 12 Pro may well be renamed the iPhone Pro, and who knows if Apple'll even name it the iPhone 13. Things like iOS versions won't change, because it's a simple version number. Thanks, Thanoscar21talk, contribs 22:35, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Thanoscar21: What are you implying? ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 01:38, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refine to iPhone#Models regardless of what Apple do name the next iPhone, given the names of the current products iPhone 12 at least will remain a very plausible search term for people who want to know about the successor to the 11. Normally I'd suggest that 13 would be lesser used, but google search shows that there are lots of sources talking about it. Indeed a quick glance suggests that there might be enough sources to write encyclopaedic content about the speculation, predictions, etc. (reporting notable speculation and prediction by others is not WP:CRYSTAL btw). If that's done then obviously the redirects should be targetted there instead. Thryduulf (talk) 12:10, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • You're putting the cart before the horse. When we have content for these potential phones then there can be a redirect saying so. Write the content first. -- Tavix (talk) 13:53, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Prahlad balaji: Sorry, that's was a bit confusing. I'd say keep iPhone 12, but perhaps rename iPhone 13 to iPhone 12 Pro or iPhone (2021). Regarding Descartes, well, Prahlad balaji was right; iPhone 5 was created in advance. Thanks, Thanoscar21talk, contribs 17:53, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep iPhone 12 and move iPhone 13 to iPhone (2021) or iPhone 12 Pro. Thanks, Thanoscar21talk, contribs 17:53, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Thanoscar21: Per WP:MOVEREDIRECT, redirects shouldn't be moved unless necessary. What it looks like you want is to delete iPhone 13 and create one of the other redirects (but the creation aspect is outside the scope of this discussion). -- Tavix (talk) 18:19, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Tavix: Sorry, your explanation is clearer. Thanks, Thanoscar21talk, contribs 21:51, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Thryduulf: It isn't WP:CRYSTAL? I submitted a draft to AfC titled Draft:Apple Watch (sixth generation), and they rejected it on the fact that Wikipedia doesn't do rumors. I also made a draft iPhone (2020), and it was rejected on the fact that Wikipedia doesn't do neologisms. I made a third one Draft:6G (network) as well, and that one was rejected on WP:CRYSTALThanks, Thanoscar21talk, contribs 21:53, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) Speculation is WP:CRYSTAL but reporting the speculation of others is not as long as the article is not reporting that speculation as fact (e.g. "X and Y expect Z to happen" vs "Z will probably happen") - the first sentence of the (edit: iPhone2020) draft as it currently exists is speculation, the second is reporting others' speculation. Most speculation by others is however not notable, and that draft did not establish notability. It was also declined for being a neologism not for being WP:CRYSTAL. Thryduulf (talk) 21:59, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom, strongly for the 13 redirect. Wouldn't it be clearer to the readers if they see that they don't exist yet? --Pandakekok9 (talk) 06:11, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment iPhone 12 is now an article and has been nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IPhone 12. Accordingly, I am procedurally striking that one because it's no longer a redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 13:24, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Did you participate in that discussion yet? ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 14:22, 28 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Courtesy pinging @Tavix. ◊PRAHLADbalaji (M•T•A•C) This message was left at 14:27, 28 June 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.

Alan Lindquest[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. signed, Rosguill talk 19:43, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion. The redirection is misleading. Tuestor (talk) 14:11, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep Misleading how? I see the subject mentioned in the target, albeit minimally. --Micky (talk) 21:49, 19 June 2020 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 21:11, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Though they had been blocked for being a sock, I agree with Micericky. The subject in the redirect is mentioned in the current target. It should be refined to the #Artists section. --Pandakekok9 (talk) 10:44, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. No indication that Lindquest was best (or only) known for his rendition of the song. In the inline external link that serves as a sort of reference, there's no mention of the song. That reference looks like a decent biography for a potentially notable person, though it's also a primary source written by one of his students. --BDD (talk) 15:09, 26 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 19:59, 26 June 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.

Dansou[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 4#Dansou

Pharoah zoser[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 4#Pharoah zoser

888 16th St NW[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 all caps, revert title case page to article. There's a rough consensus that 888 16th St NW should not be a redirect, but given its history as an article, should not be deleted at RFD. I've reverted the redirection and any interested editor may nominate it for deletion if they choose. — Wug·a·po·des​ 02:44, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target. Searching online, it seems that the MPAA is not the only organization which may have offices at this address (per this ad). I would suggest deletion unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 18:55, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete It isn't notable, it's an alternate entrance for their HQ (which is not notable). I blanked it and added the redirect after someone wrote an article on it.  Darth Flappy «Talk» 20:41, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @DarthFlappy: If the article wasn't notable, why didn't you try seeking its deletion? Instead, we have two cryptic redirects to a target that doesn't discuss this address, that we now have to clean up weeks later. -- Tavix (talk) 14:25, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore article without prejudice to AfD. The redirection and nomination were both done in good faith, but RfD should never be used to delete article content that has not been discussed at an appropriate forum. Thryduulf (talk) 22:47, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Revert this edit and send it to AfD. Delete 888 SIXTEENTH STREET NW.  Darth Flappy «Talk» 14:07, 28 June 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.

BANANA[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 Banana (disambiguation). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:44, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to NIMBY#BANANA. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:09, 26 June 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.

PRDF[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 Federal Democratic Republican Party. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 06:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Resolving this here instead of edit warring; I think that based on our own internal search results, the Spanish Partido Republicano Democrático Federal (Federal Democratic Republican Party) is the clear primary target for this initialism, and thus we should retarget to there rather than what appears to be a fan-derived initialism with no traction in reliable sources. There's a handful of other uses for various other organizations such as Partnerships & Research Development Fund (mentioned at Study on Global Ageing and Adult Health) and Participatory Rural Development Foundation (mentioned at Ram Chet Chaudhary), but it's not clear to me that these are covered in enough detail to justify the creation of a disambiguation page. signed, Rosguill talk 17:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Dude that makes no sense, Non of them has anything do with it. Because they literally doesn't match that redirect. Thats why Power Rangers Dino Fury should be called PRDF. Not some random foreign Fedeural Investigation of Beurau. signed, DustEchoes talk 11:38, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    The Partido Republicano was the ruling party of the first Spanish Republic and continued to exist for decades after its fall. It is commonly referred to by its Spanish-language initials, even in English. signed, Rosguill talk 05:37, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Federal Democratic Republican Party, which, as the nom notes, is by far the most popular, and possibly the only legitimate, use in enwiki. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:54, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Federal Democratic Republican Party, but probably hatnote. I don't really buy the "fan-derived initialism" argument. It's totally logical to abbreviate the TV season this way, whether or not it's officially done so in marketing. The Spanish political party is clearly the more encyclopedic usage, but not providing some access to the contemporary topic would seem to inconvenience readers for no good reason. --BDD (talk) 18:25, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget and add a hatnote per BDD. Its irrelevant how official an acronym is or what its origins are for the purposes of redirects, all that matters is what people search for using this search term. The Spanish political party is the clear primary topic, followed by the Participatory Rural Development Foundation (about which we don't have an article) and then the TV program. Thryduulf (talk) 16:16, 4 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.

Monologue of Samuel de Champlain[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 19:41, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as nonexistent. Champlain didn’t have any notable monologues: this redirect was originally a short biography of Champlain written as a monologue from Champlain’s point of view, probably for a school assignment. Gorobay (talk) 15:36, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. The nom's argument is persuasive especially since a search for "Samuel de Champlain" alone will yield results. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:56, 27 June 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.

Patriarch of Rome[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 4#Patriarch of Rome

Talkng to Myself[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 7#Talkng to Myself

Nerdview[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 7#Nerdview

Space programme of the United States[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 4#Space programme of the United States

Continuous linear functional[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 and keep.
(non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 03:45, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They should point to the same target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:04, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Pandakekok9 (talk) 10:45, 26 June 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.

Second Battle of Oituz[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 procedural close as no longer a redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 12:12, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect messing up the targets of a disambiguation page The Banner talk 09:13, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So WP:FIXIT, it's a work in progress for crying out loud. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:23, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It would have been nice when you had done it without personal attacks. The Banner talk 12:08, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep and thanks to RandomCanadian for working on it. buidhe 01:55, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep agreed, thanks for writing the article. Super Ψ Dro 11:31, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Request speedy close, as nominator Issue is solved now. The Banner talk 12:08, 27 June 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.

Separation policy[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 19:38, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous redirect created by a blocked user called Composemi. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 05:24, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • It seems to actually be an unambiguous redirect (perhaps surprisingly) looking at these search results. — J947 [cont] 05:28, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, because it's a generic concept with tons of other applications. For example, a military might have a policy on the process of separation (i.e. becoming civilians) for servicemen. Nyttend (talk) 12:35, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this thing as a generic term with no clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, even if this particular policy showed up first in the search results, they still wouldn't necessarily determine the primary topic. Regards, SONIC678 14:57, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Better a disambiguation page than the current target. --Micky (talk) 21:59, 19 June 2020 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE --Mdaniels5757 (talk) 21:11, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Pandakekok9 (talk) 08:23, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete search results reflect recentism and I'd guess you'd not get anything similar looking at it ten years ago or ten years from now. buidhe 17:47, 27 June 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.

SUNY football[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 4#SUNY football

Charter 77 signatories[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. This is basically a WP:TRAINWRECK. Please split up the discussion into multiple ones so that each redirect could be discussed properly. (non-admin closure) pandakekok9 (talk) Junk the Philippine anti-terror law! 10:51, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

None of these are more than bare mentions in the article, mostly unsourced. Many of these individuals are likely notable so should be deleted per DEL#10: "If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject." buidhe 01:26, 26 June 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_June_26&oldid=966433232"