Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 20[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 20, 2020.

Hungrrrrry[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:26, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Seems completely unrelated to target article. CycloneYoris talk! 23:53, 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.

Bootstrapping (corporate finance)[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 Bootstrapping (disambiguation). Thryduulf (talk) 16:50, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The target does not really describe "bootstrapping" in the context of corporate finance, and may be ambiguous with Bootstrapping (finance). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:57, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:35, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Wug·a·po·des​ 23:08, 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.

Michi Saagiig Anishinaabe[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 27#Michi Saagiig Anishinaabe

Hades (imprint)[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. signed, Rosguill talk 21:46, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects point to sections long since removed, and without a mention a reader is left confused. Furthermore, hades (imprint) is ambiguous with Hades Publications. Unless a mention is restored, I suggest delete and remove the hatnote. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:53, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. These three titles are label names for specific book series of the former publisher Harri Deutsch. They are needed to catch these terms, f.e. when they are used in citations, so that the reader gets redirected to the proper article about the publisher. Nothing was removed from the target article, the target anchors for these terms continue to exist in the article and could be expanded (which, however, is not a requirement for the redirects to exist). This is well covered by the purposes and reasons for redirects to exist per WP:REDIR, and it was deliberately set up for this very purpose (and is not the remnant of some random edit-history that would need to be cleaned up).
I oppose the OP's proposal to remove the hatnotes because the hatnotes deliberately exist to avoid confusion rather than to create it. We have a publisher named "Hades Publications" and we have an imprint Hades formerly used by the publisher Harri Deutsch, that's why the redirect is named Hades (imprint) rather then Hades (publisher). Since an imprint and a publisher are two different things, Hades (imprint) rightfully points to Verlag Harri Deutsch. If Hades Publications would publish under the imprint Hades as well (which, according to the article, it does not), we would need additional disambiguation rather than than deletion of already existing disambiguation aids.
The redirects and hatnotes exist for good purpose, removing them would be counter-productive and create exactly the confusion that the OP seeks to avoid.
--Matthiaspaul (talk) 12:42, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Matthiaspaul: thank you for your explanation: I made an incorrect assumption about removed sections. But the situation is still confusing, with one anchor in external links and 2 right at the top: if I am redirected to an article it needs to be clear why I am there. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:15, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Building up infrastructure and improving article contents are independent of each other and do not necessarily happen at the same time. I checked the ref, and since it also mentiones the hades cliXX and DeskTop labels, I have moved the other two anchors down there as well. At a later stage this could be expanded and moved into the body of the article.
--Matthiaspaul (talk) 15:11, 7 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 20:46, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Hugely SURPRISE-ing, quasi-external links. An obvious solution would be to add any discussion of these to the article body. --BDD (talk) 15:51, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
At least there is some info about them. The surprise would be much larger for readers if they don't find any information about hades in our encyclopedia at all, or even worse, if hades (imprint) etc. would be deleted and people would start to mix this up with hades (publisher)...
WP:R#KEEP #2 ("They would aid accidental linking"), #3 ("They would aid searches on certain terms"), #4 ("You risk breaking incoming or internal links by deleting the redirect") and #5 ("Someone finds them useful") all apply pro keeping the redirects.
Nevertheless, following your proposal, I have now added a paragraph on hades, cliXX and DeskTop to the article body, hopefully solving the issue.
Sooner or later, this should have happened anyway, but, again, building up infrastructure and improving article contents are independent of each other and do not necessarily happen at the same time (or even by the same people). Therefore, it is counter-productive to nominate redirects for deletion just because these processes are not in sync for some while - in order not to waste efforts and trash useful contributions we have to base such decisions as if viewed from the perspective of the potential end result.
--Matthiaspaul (talk) 15:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would dispute that those external link listings constituted information about the imprints, but it's moot given your improvements to the article. Thanks for that—changing my vote. --BDD (talk) 18:29, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Wug·a·po·des​ 22:52, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. In order to address the "surprise" argument, I added a paragraph discussing the hades label and cliXX / DeskTop series now. I hope, this will, in a never ending continual improvement process, once again raise the quality of the encyclopedia a tiny bit and settle the issue.
--Matthiaspaul (talk) 15:17, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep My concerns have been addressed, and these are now discussed in the target article. Let's keep an eye on the first of these, since the distinction between a publisher and an imprint are not always clear. Since it's redirecting to an anchor, there's no elegant way to hatnote it, so we shouldn't necessarily write off the idea of retargeting it to Hades (disambiguation). --BDD (talk) 18:29, 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.

Buffalo Williams[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. --BDD (talk) 16:05, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find any evidence that this back-formation is commonly used. Hog Farm Bacon 20:21, 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.

Pico Creek 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) 14:50, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:07, 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.

Is or Isn't Entertainment[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) 14:51, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:06, 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.

Green Door Pictures[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) 14:54, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:06, 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.

199 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) 14:56, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:05, 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.

Shoe Money 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) 15:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:02, 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.

Vicinio.com[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. --BDD (talk) 15:51, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 20:29, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep this was their website locale from 2007–2012. Also was one of the things they trademarked. [1] AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:43, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:41, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete because it isn't mentioned so anyone using the search term who doesn't know the history will be confused. If this were mentioned at the target though then AngusWOOF's comments would be a solid reason to keep. Thryduulf (talk) 14:49, 15 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 19:21, 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.

Garage days revisited[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 27#Garage days revisited

List of works produced by Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 28#List of works produced by Hanna-Barbera and Cartoon Network Studios

Julius Seizer[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. --BDD (talk) 15:48, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A quite obscure pun on the pronunciation of "Caesar" in English. Not mentioned in target. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 18:13, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete per above. --intelatitalk 20:45, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete guessing it's a joke about him and the Romans seizing land. Not a plausible search term though. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:23, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I can find a variety of uses of this term online but they are all plays on words or puns rather than actually referring Julius Caesar. A7V2 (talk) 04:35, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I don't think it's meant to be a pun—I think it's a redirect for a possible spelling error. Not everybody knows how to spell "Caesar", and someone who doesn't might come up with this. Since there don't seem to be any other likely targets, this redirect seems harmless. P Aculeius (talk) 14:02, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom --Devokewater (talk) 20:18, 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.

Paradife loft.[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 27#Paradife loft.

Santa Rosa de Lima ( Abiquiu, New Mexico)[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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 10:29, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect was left over from a page move to make it "consistent with wide practice and U.S. city naming policy," and was part of this June 7 mass nomination. Plus, it presently gets WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY less pageviews than its correctly formatted target, so I'm not sure if it's really worth keeping Regards, SONIC678 17:42, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • [Comment relating to a different discussion moved to correct location. Thryduulf (talk) 23:28, 20 October 2020 (UTC)][reply]
Note the space after the first parenthesis. Also, delete for formatting error/spelling.--intelatitalk 20:47, 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.

Environmental causes[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 27#Environmental causes

Thames foot tunnel[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 27#Thames foot tunnel

Asian Music Chart Top 40[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 nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Opalzukor (talk • contribs) 13:17, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Circular redirect. Opalzukor (talk) 12:14, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, @Opalzukor: please withdraw nom. --Muhandes (talk) 12:18, 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_October_20&oldid=986440123"