Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 31

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 31[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 31, 2020.

Kimmelot[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 to delete. After two relists there is no consensus between keeping and retargetting, so defaulting to keep. Thryduulf (talk) 21:37, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 19:52, 14 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 20:42, 22 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Both targets are clearly reasonable. Any further input on which is better would help.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ mazca talk 23:46, 31 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.

Menards.com 200 presented by XPxE[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 ARCA races at Toledo. Essentially a "keep". (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) | free Hong Kong 11:25, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not listed as a former name on the page it redirects to. May refer to an ARCA Menards Series race in 2020, not an ARCA Menards Series East race. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 23:26, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is the venue that I decided to bring the discussion to. There is no need for a broader discussion, and "worrying about redirects" is, in fact, what needs to happen. I would support retargeting to 2020 ARCA Menards Series, as that's the only other plausible target for a one-off race. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Willsome429 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Willsome429: What evidence is there that this was a one-off race (as opposed to any of the other 2020 Toledo races)? The current target was the article for the once-a-year ARCA Menards Series races at Toledo, but was moved in June this year to the name of one of the two ARCA Menards Series East races being held at Toledo. As there are three ARCA Menards Series races at Toledo this year, I would think it better to put at least one, if not all three, into the current target of this redirect, and then if necessary create a separate article for the East races (although one of the races is counting to both for 2020, but not this one or the target). However these kinds of content discussions are not appropriate for here as this is a redirect discussion. Finally, you don't own these articles or redirects, so where you "decided to bring the discussion to" does not preclude others from starting a discussion elsewhere. I do believe a broader discussion should take place, and will open one at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject NASCAR, but of course the outcome of such a discussion may make whatever is decided here irrelevant. A7V2 (talk) 22:08, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Further to my comments above, note that current target Herr's Potato Chips 200 covers all ARCA Menards Series races up to 2019, including when there was more than one in a year. A7V2 (talk) 22:13, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Suggesting that a centralized discussion takes place here ≠ ownership of redirects in question or of this discussion, and I'm not sure where I implied I did own them. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 23:11, 20 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As is always the danger with text-based communication it's easy to read something one way and it sounds like one thing, and read it another way and it has an almost totally different meaning. I believe I misinterpreted what you wrote and read it in a much (for lack of a better word) "angrier" voice than I should have. Apologies. However I still believe this is not the appropriate venue to discuss content issues of the nature I outlined on WT:NASCAR. A7V2 (talk) 00:40, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seventyfiveyears (talk) 15:41, 24 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 21:56, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep/fix double redirect - I have incorporated this race into the existing article which I moved to ARCA races at Toledo, but I'm not entirely happy with the article title so it may well change again. A7V2 (talk) 06:11, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep/fix per A7V2's addition, although from a closer's perspective this could be implemented as retarget to ARCA races at Toledo. signed, Rosguill talk 21:57, 10 November 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.

Royal Truck & Trailer 200[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 ARCA races at Toledo. --BDD (talk) 19:49, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not listed as a previous name on the page it redirects to. Probably refers to an unrelated one-off race in 2020, which was a part of the ARCA Menards Series, not the ARCA Menards Series East. Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 01:56, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seventyfiveyears (talk) 15:38, 24 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 21:56, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep/fix double redirect - I have incorporated this race into the existing article which I moved to ARCA races at Toledo, but I'm not entirely happy with the article title so it may well change again. A7V2 (talk) 06:11, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep/fix per A7V2's addition, although from a closer's perspective this could be implemented as retarget to ARCA races at Toledo. signed, Rosguill talk 21:56, 10 November 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.

Dawn 150 (Kansas)[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. There's no information at either of the targets suggested, and the lack of further participation over an extended period strongly suggests that nobody else has much information to be contributed. This can freely be recreated, and rediscussed if necessary, if a useful mention is made at a target. ~ mazca talk 19:19, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not a previous name of the event that it redirects to. Likely meaning an unrelated second event at the track, which started in 2020, not 2001 (https://www.racing-reference.info/tracks/Kansas_Speedway). Willsome429 (say hey or see my edits!) 23:20, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Unsure - This race was a replacement for the regular race at Chicagoland which was to be called the Dawn 150 (note that name hadn't been used prior to 2020 as far as I can tell). Since this is probably a once-off, I'd say best option is to keep at current target and explain it there, or alternatively retarget to Dawn 150 and explain it there instead. A7V2 (talk) 12:47, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 11:19, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Unexplained anywhere on Wikipedia, as far as I can tell. --BDD (talk) 18:31, 30 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 21:51, 31 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.

Princess Eudocia[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 Eudoxia. signed, Rosguill talk 21:53, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Numerous possible targets for this redirect, including Licinia Eudoxia, Aelia Eudoxia, Aelia Eudocia, Fabia Eudokia, Eudoxia Epiphania, Eudokia (wife of Justinian II), Eudokia Ingerina, Eudokia Baïana, Eudokia Makrembolitissa, or Eudokia Angelina, as well as daughters of both John II Komnenos and Andronikos I Komnenos for whom no articles presently exist. Any one of these might be a "princess Eudocia"; there's no reason why any should be privileged with a redirect, still less why Eudocia (daughter of Valentinian III) should take the honour, as presently. GPinkerton (talk) 07:04, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate, as simple as that. All of the entries that are being presented by the nom can easily fit on a DAB page. CycloneYoris talk! 08:48, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well, not simple as that. First, There are multiple backlinks to the name. Second, one must be sure that other ones were called eudocia or "princess". Definitely not Aelia Eudocia. Staszek Lem (talk) 14:49, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep numerous wikipedia articles link to this redirect and I do not see any other "Princess Eudocia" in wikipedia linked to it. The correct solution would be to place {redirect|Princess Eudocia} hatnote on Eudocia (daughter of Valentinian III), which is what I've just done. Staszek Lem (talk) 15:25, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Is 'princess' even appropriate here? Why not delete it altogether? Avis11 (talk) 15:45, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes appropriate. Why are you asking? Staszek Lem (talk) 16:04, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I can't recall any instance in which 'princess' is used for a Roman imperial family. Feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken. Avis11 (talk) 16:20, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
How else would you call daughter of roman emperor. Wikipedia uses this term. If it is improper, then fix wikipedia articles. In this case, it may be retargeted to Eudocia. Especially keeping in mind that Russian "princesses Eudocia" are interchangeably called eudoxia and eudokia. Staszek Lem (talk) 22:35, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know of any Roman-themed Wikipedia article which uses 'princess', and, even if there were, WP isn't a reliable source. 'Princess' and its male counterpart 'prince' are anachronisms, none were used to describe members of the Roman imperial family, neither in that time period or in reliable sources describing it. They are called simply that – "members of the imperial family" – or defined by their blood relationship to any given emperor (e.g. 'daughter of X emperor', per some of the pages provided by GPinkerton above – none of which apparently use the term 'princess'). The Romans just had the word princeps, which simply means 'first' (in authority or precedence), and has nothing do do with ruling dynasty. Avis11 (talk) 00:14, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's certainly an anachronism, but that doesn't mean people won't search for it that way. The fact that someone created the redirect that way, and that someone in this discussion isn't sure how else to describe such a person, seems like strong evidence that at least some users will. But that said, it looks like it might make more sense targeted at a disambiguation page, which could include entries for Eudocias who don't have their own articles, linking to the articles that do mention them. P Aculeius (talk) 13:43, 24 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 21:51, 31 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.

The solar eclipse that takes place on August 21, 2017[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 9#The solar eclipse that takes place on August 21, 2017

The Field of Aquatic Science[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 9#The Field of Aquatic Science

Self sadism[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 retargeted. Coastside (talk) 06:00, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

delete - This is an unhelpful redirect to a disambiguation page. It's an inaccurate and misleading definition of the terms sadism and masochism. Nothing links here. Coastside (talk) 18:44, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good suggestion. I retargeted to Autosadism.Coastside (talk)
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.

Distinct (mathematics)[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. Thryduulf (talk) 18:07, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural nom due to an ongoing dispute over the target. I originally turned this into a redirect to Equality (mathematics), which I still favor. The article was an unreferenced mish-mash of OR and HOWTO. I chose this target because when talking about "distinct" objects in mathematics, the general notion of "not equal" is meant (and which has a definition in the lead, all that's needed for this term). On the other hand, Inequality (mathematics) is inappropriate because it focuses more on (in)equations involving inequalities of real numbers, rather than the general notion. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 17:28, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep the target Equality (mathematics). I agree with the transformation from an article into a redirect, and Inequality (mathematics) is inappropriate as a target per WP:SUBMARINE ("distinct" is not defined there, although it is used once). D.Lazard (talk) 18:22, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I agree with Deacon Vorbis and D.Lazard. Apparently, there is no objection at all to this viewpoint, so the discussion can be closed as consensus. - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 11:44, 8 November 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.

Bone facts[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 Thryduulf (talk) 17:13, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Halloween! This would probably only be appropriate for a trivia section, but per WP:NOTTRIVIA, that is discouraged. -- Tavix (talk) 16:46, 31 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.

Shoooes[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 Thryduulf (talk) 17:14, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like nonsense to the target. I also thought of retargeting this redirect page to "Shoe", but I have no proof of how adding two extra Os can be considered as plausible mispelling. I instead would suggest deletion. Similar to "Hungrrrrry", which was deleted at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 20#Hungrrrrry. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 16:33, 31 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.

Bustown[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 Lachlan Philpott. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 10:19, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is more likely a book and a play by Lachlan Philpott, so searching "Bustown" would not give Columbus as the default search result. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 15:49, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • That sounds like a good idea. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 11:43, 5 November 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.

Business mobility[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 soft delete Thryduulf (talk) 18:09, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This phrase is ambiguous and the use of Search gives a better result that the current target, where the phrase is not mentioned. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:32, 31 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.

Whenever (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 retarget to Whenever#Albums. (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 10:44, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with this redirect is that Allmusic alone lists 99 albums by the name Whenever. Therefore, no one of the 99 artists are a more suitable redirect target than the other. And it's a bit pointless altering it to a disambiguation page with up to 99 entries. Geschichte (talk) 10:13, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Whenever as WP:INCOMPDAB and add any albums that are mentioned in Wikipedia (e.g. this one by Atmosphere). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:21, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There may be 99 albums, but only 1 apparently has a mention in an article (unless you can say otherwise: I didn't search exhaustively). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:11, 25 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:09, 31 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.

Stonks[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 10#Stonks

Signalling (biology)[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 Signalling (disambiguation) which I have gone ahead and created. signed, Rosguill talk 21:51, 10 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Should this redirect target Signalling theory or Cell signalling, both of which are biological concepts? I expected it to target the latter and was pretty WP:SURPRISEd when I clicked on it. Disambiguation could be another option. Spicy (talk) 04:26, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Current target begins with a short list of disambig: "This article is about signalling in evolutionary biology. For the analogous theory in economics, see signalling (economics). For the engineering concept, see signal theory." We could add +1 disambig, but it's starting to be a long list. I'd be leaning towards adding a Disambig page. Ben Aveling 05:56, 31 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.

Edward Clark Streeter[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. Already retargeted by nom to Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 10:17, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a 13 year old redirect and it's unclear how this person is linked to the article this redirects to. Maybe it was clear in an earlier version of this page? Jessamyn (talk) 02:04, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I had previously tried to do this via speedy delete and was re-directed here. Thanks for any help. Jessamyn (talk) 02:05, 31 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_31&oldid=988368337"