Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 19[edit]

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

Dystopia: Love Myself[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 17:16, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the correct name of Dreamcatcher's album. The correct name is Dystopia: Lose Myself. So I believe that this redirect should be deleted. HDORS (talk) 20:52, 19 October 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.

Panigaon[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 17:16, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Panigaon is a location in Assam which is referenced in a couple of articles, but has no article itself. Paigaon is a village in Uttar Pradesh. There's no connection. Colonies Chris (talk) 20:36, 19 October 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.

Hill of Beans Productions, Inc.[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The result of the discussion was withdrawn, now mentioned. Thanks, Duc4Wikmedia! (non-admin closure) 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:06, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:35, 19 October 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.

Family Tree Productions[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, now mentioned. Thanks! (non-admin closure) 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:07, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:33, 19 October 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.

December 3rd Productions[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, now mentioned. Thanks! (non-admin closure) 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:08, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:33, 19 October 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.

Moonlight Productions[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, now mentioned. Thanks! (non-admin closure) 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:09, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:30, 19 October 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.

Selfish Mermaid[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, now mentioned. Thanks! (non-admin closure) 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 15:10, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:29, 19 October 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.

Walpurgis Night (EP)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 26#Walpurgis Night (EP)

Heptadecenoic[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 17:15, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect currently targets an article for a saturated fatty acid, whereas the "enoic" indicates an unsaturated fatty acid (as opposed to "anoic"). Indeed, the only link to this redirect occurs at List of macronutrients in the monounsaturated fat section. The title of the redirect is ambiguous, as there are numerous compounds to which it could refer, varying by the location of the unsaturation, none of which currently have articles. It is also an incomplete name, as it should end in "acid". Therefore I believe this redirect should be deleted and the entry on List of macronutrients corrected with an appropriate red link. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:35, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. The "en" component means unsaturated, and the single word refers to a functional group not a compound. I make it 30 heptadecenoic acids (including cis and trans isomers). Narky Blert (talk) 12:01, 20 October 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.

Pentadecenoic[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 17:15, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect currently targets an article for a saturated fatty acid, whereas the "enoic" indicates an unsaturated fatty acid (as opposed to "anoic"). Indeed, the only link to this redirect occurs at List of macronutrients in the monounsaturated fat section. The title of the redirect is ambiguous, as there are numerous compounds to which it could refer, varying by the location of the unsaturation, none of which currently have articles. It is also an incomplete name, as it should end in "acid". Therefore I believe this redirect should be deleted and the entry on List of macronutrients corrected with an appropriate red link. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:35, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. The "en" component means unsaturated, and the single word refers to a functional group not a compound. I make it 26 pentadecenoic acids (including cis and trans isomers). Narky Blert (talk) 12:02, 20 October 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.

TWTD[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 26#TWTD

Blox[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 Move to preserve history and make way for dab. signed, Rosguill talk 17:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Google search brings up Roblox and some other uses as the default search result. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 13:39, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Giving this a relist since there's some page history that may be worth discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:58, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • If it's really necessary, I say disambiguate. Otherwise, redirect to Roblox. I don't really see how a Polish-language media conglomerate is going to be of much more interest than a much more well known software. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 18:04, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could also be a plural form of Block, so this is ambiguous. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 18:09, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sounds like a good idea. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 21:52, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I haven't added Roblox though. Is this a synonym or a related term? – Uanfala (talk) 00:24, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's more likely a related or alternative term. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 13:56, 26 October 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.

Teqvoly[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 26#Teqvoly

Administrative division of Greece (1833)[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 17:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Completely unrelated to its current redirect target: the regional units are a 2011 creation, and although they have some continuities with the prefectures that were first established in 1833, the dissimilarities are enormous, and article redirected to does not offer any information in that regard. It is better to redlink the redirect. Constantine ✍ 15:28, 19 October 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.

Ȫ, Ȭ[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 17:25, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What the heck it was be that there!?! 223.206.246.56 (talk) 02:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as it is simply senseless.Acidic Carbon (Corrode) (Organic compounds) 13:30, 1 October 2020 (UTC) Account blocked as sockpuppet[reply]
  • Refine to Livonian language#Alphabet. These are letters that are only used in the Livonian language and this is the only place we have any coverage of the Livonian alphabet. Single unicode characters are almost always highly plausible search terms and these are no exception. Thryduulf (talk) 15:38, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Do you have a source for your claim that these are letters that are only used in the Livonian language? Your proposed section does not include this information. -- Tavix (talk) 21:47, 1 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Ȫ (the first nominated redirect) is also used at Americanist phonetic notation#Chomsky & Halle (though as that section states, Chomsky & Halle (1968) proposed the following schema, which was hardly ever used) and Soyombo script#Vowels (that romanisation convention doesn't seem to have a source, though). Ȭ (the second nominated redirect) is mentioned at Punjabi grammar#Nouns (for oblique case of singular feminine nouns). 59.149.124.29 (talk) 02:13, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (at least the second one), these were specifically added to Unicode for Livonian [1][2]. The only place on the internet that uses "Ȭ" in Punjabi transcriptions is the article Punjabi grammar. The first one could be disambiguated per the IP above but it's probably not going to be of much help to readers. – Thjarkur (talk) 18:47, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:04, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 15:26, 19 October 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.

Space Mafia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 28#Space Mafia

Clothes free[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 17:24, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like quite a reach for the target. I'd suggest deletion. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 05:06, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:32, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WriterArtistDC and retarget to naturism. It's a plausible search term. Guettarda (talk) 18:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 14:44, 19 October 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.

Cryptojacking[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 13:47, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nominating in response to a request at the help desk. Target section no longer exists and the article doesn't discuss the concept in other sections, and this target probably unfairly associates this one particular cryptocurrency with the concept of in-browser malware mining. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:25, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note that the help desk request was by an editor who was trying to create an article on top of the redirect, but was reverted once by John B123 saying "more info in target" (I didn't see where there was, but I was skimming) and then again by Onel5969 citing WP:DICDEF. I think that an article definitely could be written, or at least a section added to cryptocurrency or maybe cybercrime, and so I suggested drafting it first. Everyone involved has been notified of this discussion or pinged in this edit. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:30, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify for now. When the original redirect was created, the target was more specific to the term. But I agree with Ivanvector that there is most likely enough for a section in one of those two articles (I think cybercrime would be the more appropriate one), if not a full-fledged article. Onel5969 TT me 16:34, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Web threat might be a better target. Monero (cryptocurrency) has essentially the same content ("Malicious hackers have previously embedded Monero mining code ..."), but it's probably happened before. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:38, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) Comment The "article" I reverted back to a redirect was Cryptojacking is the act of using somebody elses hardware to mine any cryptocurrency, such as BitCoin. The target article (although not at the redirected section) includes Monero is designed to be resistant to application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC) mining, which is commonly used to mine other cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin. I'm sure there is enough material to form a useful Cryptojacking article, but a single sentence that is already covered in the target article doesn't justify removal of the redirect. Perhaps Monero (cryptocurrency)#Mining is a better target until a full article is written. --John B123 (talk) 16:48, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I strongly disagree. The redirect indicates that Cryptojacking is either an integral aspect of Monero or even a synonym. This is wrong. My edit fixed that mistake. Having a small page helps people to be able to add more aspects and references as creating a new page is a way higher burden than editing one. I'm not willing to spend more of my time on this topic and I'm disappointed that the community seems to think an established wrong redirect is better than a new, correct, article stub. --MartinThoma (talk) 09:45, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • I agree with MartinThoma here - unless Monero is the only coin that can or has been used for this form of crime (my understanding is that it's not) we should not be targeting the general topic this way. It's a WP:RFD#D3 situation, or as MartinThoma put it somewhere else, it's akin to targeting fraud to United States dollar. The solution might be more than just retargeting this redirect but we can do better. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:03, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'm fairly ambivalent about this redirect is kept or rewritten as a standalone article, but based on my knowledge, Monero is the only major cryptocurrency which actively resists ASIC mining. Combining that with Monero's commitment to privacy by default, this makes it the only currency that is viable when it comes to cryptojacking. I am not aware of any actual attempt of cryptojacking which does not involve Monero. A standalone article would struggle to finds any reliable source talking about non-Monero cryptojacking. That does not mean that a generic standalone cryptojacking article should not exist, but it does mean that the topic of cryptojacking is intimately tied in with Monero. I think that such an article should definitely start as a draft for the community to see if there is enough meat on the bone for a meaningful cryptojacking article. Melmann 20:50, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The redirect should be removed or changed. Monero is not a synonym of cryptojacking. While it is a related topic, it is also not the only cryptocurrency implicated in cryptojacking attacks.

Testem (talk) 10:27, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

    • Can you point to a reliable source claiming that a non-Monero cryptojacking attempt has been identified in the wild by the infosec industry? Melmann 20:50, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Melmann: - Possibly this, although I'm not particularly familiar with some of the cryptos involved in it. Hog Farm Bacon 17:51, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
        • @Hog Farm: Your source does not mention which cryptocurrency was used, it just gave examples of cryptocurrencies for context. Melmann 20:11, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:40, 9 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 14:41, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - having gone through a pretty wide variety of sources covering the term specifically, and malware used for crypto mining in general, I now feel that in fact all of the widely reported instances of this activity did relate to the Monero platform, or platforms based on it. The court documents posted above list some coins as examples of cryptocurrencies generally, not which were used in the attacks subject to those court cases specifically, but nearly every other source covering the phenomenon either mentions Monero directly, or mentions activity through Coinhive which was linked to Monero anyway. Probably a draft could be written about the phenomenon of cryptojacking which would survive as an article or be merged into somewhere more general, and then this redirect could be retargeted there, but as of right now this redirect points where it should. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:42, 19 October 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.

Tallest in the United States[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 17:24, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I found another tallest redirect again. What is the meaning of "tallest in the United States"? Maybe buildings, structures, dams, etc. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 13:03, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Trees? People? Stories? Narky Blert (talk) 14:00, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Could also refer to presidents, bridges, statues, etc. Thryduulf (talk) 15:54, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep in some form: this redirect sees quite a bit of use, suggesting either external link rot or readers using it as a search term. This may not be the most appropriate target but unless someone has a better idea, we should keep it. Besides, anything that can be described as the "tallest in the United States" is likely to be a building; mountains and other geographical features are normally described as "high", not "tall". Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:48, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Ambiguous. MB 23:31, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above, not specific enough to point to any specific target. ComplexRational (talk) 01:15, 20 October 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.

Lewer[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 Convert to set index. signed, Rosguill talk 17:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect to a DAB page with no relevant article. An implausible phonetic misspelling of "lure". Other candidates as a misspelling include "lever", "Lewes" and "lower". Further, there is an Italian shoe company called Lewer srl - who may be notable, because they're a shirt sponsor of Parma Calcio 1913, who play in Serie A, the top tier of Italian football, and are linked in 2019–20 Serie A. Delete, to remove confusion and to encourage article creation. Narky Blert (talk) 08:03, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Unclear word probably more appropriate for Wiktionary. Rulforth (talk) 08:10, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete to encourage article creation per nom. Convert to set index per Eureka Lott. CycloneYoris talk! 08:32, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is actually a plausible phonetic spelling of "lure" in accents that have that word as two syllables (e.g. northern England), but I agree that it is not a useful redirect on balance. Thryduulf (talk) 15:57, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Convert to set index per EurakaLott below. Thryduulf (talk) 19:08, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Convert to set index. This is a surname, and I drafted a set index article below the redirect. - Eureka Lott 18:26, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • (Changing !vote). Convert to surname page per EurekaLott. (I added a qualifier to the link in 2019–20 Serie A before posting here, so that problem is solved.) Narky Blert (talk) 12:07, 20 October 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.

Skyput[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 17:23, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The creator of this redirect claims that it's a slang. However when I Google it I found nothing related to the game. It's very obscure and not notable. I say delete. Rulforth (talk) 07:48, 19 October 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.

零[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 all to Chinese numerals. (non-admin closure) Seventyfiveyears (talk) 18:27, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We are an English-language site. As much as we would like to show that "零" is zero in the Chinese script, it is not our job to have redirects from every foreign-language title. While this redirect is well established, most people are probably not going to search up "零" looking for the page "zero", even on the Chinese/Japanese keyboard, because every keyboard has a "0" key and AFAIK the IME has the Latin number 0 as well. I'd say redirect to a page detailing the Chinese character, but we do not have such a page so delete. We actualy do have an article on Chinese numerals so I think retargeting may be a good idea. Aasim (talk) 16:03, 21 October 2020 (UTC) Aasim (talk) 05:50, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete It seems exceedingly unlikely that anyone would search for this character in an English encyclopedia. However, there is no objection to showing this character somewhere in the article. −Woodstone (talk) 06:24, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Chinese numerals where this is is explained. -- Tavix (talk) 15:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Tavix. Individual unicode characters are very much plausible search terms and should almost always be or lead to a relevant article or disambiguation page. Thryduulf (talk) 16:01, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I just realized that my nomination is a bit incomplete. So I am listing the rest of the RfDs here. Can an uninvolved editor relist? Aasim (talk) 21:20, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
A relist simply moves a discussion from an old log date to the current one. Since the discussion is already on the current date, that would be unnecessary. -- Tavix (talk) 21:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Tavix. The Chinese numerals article is indeed the most plausible target for each one of these characters. Contrary to what the nom states, an article that explains the details of each character does in fact exist. CycloneYoris talk! 08:02, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree. I forgot about that page. I think a retarget to that article may be good. Thanks for telling me about that page @Tavix. Aasim (talk) 03:56, 21 October 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.

Kalos[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) CaptainGalaxy 16:58, 27 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This has redirected to Kalos inscription for 12 years. Now it has been changed to Pokémon X and Y where it is a fictional place. There is Kalos (Pokemon) and Kalos quest which both redirect to the game (both have no incoming links). There are three more articles that start with "Kalos". Perhaps Kalos should be a dab. MB 04:19, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate Redirect target was changed by a single-edit IP address with zero consensus. Dabify is obvious course of action here. Zeke, the Mad Horrorist (Speak quickly) (Follow my trail) 15:09, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate there are a lot of potential targets here.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 09:33, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate. Note that καλός (transliterated = "kalos") is Greek for "good". Narky Blert (talk) 12:11, 20 October 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 York Giants Depth Chart[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 26#New York Giants Depth Chart

Wikipedia:New features[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 26#Wikipedia:New features

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_October_19&oldid=985956716"