Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 3[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 3, 2020.

Aktiv Politik[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 19:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The target page does not mention Aktiv Politik. AP was a tiny, local political party that split from the Centre Party in 1966 (cf.article history) without substantial coverage other than local newspapers. As such it's not really related to the Centre Party and not worth preserving. Geschichte (talk) 18:14, 3 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.

Lowercased storm names[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 all. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 10:39, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Who would lowercase storm names? We don't have similar redirect pages like Hurricane opal, Hurricane ivan, and Hurricane nate, even though they still go to its page by searching them up. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 15:00, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all.Polyamorph (talk) 12:39, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. However, these sorts of redirects generally shouldn't be made. They don't aid searching since that's generally case-insensitive, and it's easier to notice errors like this with red links than it is to rely on them being in the proper rcat (which these weren't) that a gnome is patrolling. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 21:47, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Only some methods of reaching Wikipedia content are case insensitive, so yes these redirects do aid people finding the content they are looking for. We do not make it harder for readers to find content just because it makes things marginally more convenient for editors. Thryduulf (talk) 00:27, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all - Correct targets, unambiguous, and not harmful. Actually, these are rather helpful for those who search via the search bar. Not harmful, sometimes helpful, so they stick around, although do change the rcats per Deacon Vorbis. Hog Farm Bacon 03:05, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all per above. Cheap and harmless. --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 05:55, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all I have tried to CSD 1971 Odisha Cyclone, and it failed. It's harmless and doesn't hurt anything. SMB99thx my edits 03:05, 5 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.

We Ride ((I See the Future))[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 19:58, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UNNATURAL, no pageviews. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:58, 3 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.

Demons & Wizards ( album)[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 -- JHunterJ (talk) 16:03, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UNNATURAL, unused. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:52, 3 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.

Pnictogen hydrides[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! 10:42, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary redirect made by myself. Simply can be written as Pnictogen hydrides. Acidic Carbon (Corrode) (Organic compounds) 12:52, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: What is the rationale for deletion? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:53, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Sounds like WP:G7. DMacks (talk) 13:26, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Given that other people have recommended keeping it G7 no longer applies. Thryduulf (talk) 15:39, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep, this plural form is mentioned in the article several times (in fact, it's the first two bolded words), and this redirect doesn't seem to be in the way of anything. As Deacon Vorbis said earlier, redirects from plural forms "are actually pretty useful, especially for [people] who don't know the plural trick...[or] know our singular titling convention." Regards, SONIC678 13:56, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep per above. {{R from plural}} redirects are normally among the most useful and this is not an exception. Thryduulf (talk) 15:39, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Are we really encouraging people to create these types of redirects, or is it just that we don't want to delete existing ones? I originally nominated it for CSD because suffixes are so easily (and commonly) accommodated, and it seems unnecessary potential bloat to create redirects for them. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:04, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Unnecessary" is never a reason to delete a redirect, and "bloat" is not something we ever need to be concerned about in terms of redirects because they are WP:CHEAP and Wikipedia is no paper. Suffixes might be easily accommodated when making links in articles, but that is far from the only way redirects are used - the forms with the suffixes make it easier for people to find what they are looking for when linking from external sites, when searching and when browsing. Thryduulf (talk) 12:09, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep also the name for the class of compounds so potentially useful. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:01, 8 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.

Didier François ( Journalist)[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 19:57, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UNNATURAL, no pageviews, resulted from move five hours after article creation. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:51, 3 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.

Satellite of Earth[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 -- JHunterJ (talk) 16:05, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Although Moon is the natural satellite of Earth, there are many artificial satellites orbiting the Earth, and they are colloquially called just satellites. Therefore, this redirect is ambiguous. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 09:00, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This is not a natural expression anyone is likely to enter, and the current redirect is misleading. If it cannot be deleted, it should probably go to "satellite" (assuming there is such an article. Imaginatorium (talk) 09:25, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Not ambiguous and definitely not misleading. The Moon is obviously Earth’s only natural satellite, and since this redirect is written in the singular form "Satellite" and not in plural, then confusion is unlikely. Anyone searching for artificial satellites would seldom use this search term. CycloneYoris talk! 11:01, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Anyone searching for artificial satellites would seldom use this search term. This is why I have nominated this redirect in RfD. --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:02, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Right, and anyone looking for the moon would be even less likely to use this term. Imaginatorium (talk) 12:31, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    How so? This is a plausible search term. Disambiguating is a better solution as others have pointed out below. CycloneYoris talk! 21:25, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak disambiguate. It seems an unlikely search term, but upon checking, there were 2 incoming links, one meant for Satellite, and one meant for Moon (I'll leave them in place for the time being), so it might be slightly handy to have as a check on careless linking. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:27, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig per Deacon Vorbis. I don't understand why you think this would be an unlikely search term given that Earth is not the only planet with satellites. Thryduulf (talk) 15:42, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmm, I'm still getting to grips with this... I suppose this would be someone who did not know the name of the earth's satellite? Is that right? Imaginatorium (talk) 15:03, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Possibly, but also people looking for a temporary natural satellite of earth, people seeing the phrase elsewhere and wondering what it means, or several other possible reasons. It doesn't matter why people use this search term, only that they do - and two incomming links from current revisions of the English Wikipedia is evidence that it is useful. Thryduulf (talk) 23:43, 5 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.

Wikipedia:PDF[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 10#Wikipedia:PDF

Agatha Arpad[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 19:56, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The name "Agatha" appears nowhere in the target.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  05:16, 3 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.

Far Away from Home[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) feminist (talk) | free Hong Kong 11:16, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This phrase is not mentioned in the target article, leaving its connection unclear. Chompy Ace 04:02, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is the name of a track from Covergirl (album) though looking at the number of references I’m not sure if that’s notable enough for an article.--76.67.170.18 (talk) 05:53, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Or just redirect to Willpower (will.i.am album). Not hard. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:36, 3 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_3&oldid=982856963"