Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 27[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 27, 2021.

Candidates of the next Western Australian state election[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 2025 Western Australian state election. signed, Rosguill talk 00:19, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused redirect with problematic "next" in it. This issue was previously discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 23#Next Alberta Liberal Party leadership election with the outcome of delete. Senator2029 ❮talk❯ 20:39, 27 April 2021 (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.

United States elections[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 2024, delete 2026. signed, Rosguill talk 00:19, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not mentioned at target. ― Tartan357 Talk 20:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget 2024 to Template:2024 United States elections which functions as an index to whichever election the reader is looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 15:39, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete 2026 as there is no template or index page yet that I can find (2024 seems to be the latest year for which we currently have significant information about US elections). Thryduulf (talk) 15:39, 28 April 2021 (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.

UNC-R[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 United Nations Command–Rear. -- Tavix (talk) 02:05, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The abbreviation "UNC-R" has never been a correct name for NC State, and the usage of "UNC-R" is mostly a derogatory reference from rival schools who would already know how to find the article on Wikipedia under the correct name. I even checked the creator's user page, it indicates that he went to UNC-CH, which is usually the source of unwarranted references to "UNC-R". 2600:1700:FDF1:1FC0:D83F:388:E5D5:D1A5 (talk) 17:31, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment the article states this was founded as the University of North Carolina facility in Raleigh as North Carolina College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts, so it would seem to be a viable search term. I don't see where the letters UNC-R become derogatory, as it seems to state what it was when it was founded. I don't seem any expletives in those letters, unless there is an expanded acronym that elides the swear words. You could tag it as a {{R from incorrect term}} -- 67.70.27.246 (talk) 00:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:58, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: As discussed in the article, NCSU was only referred to as the University of North Carolina at Raleigh between 1962 and 1963. That name was dropped due to on-campus fury. NCSU values its distinct history from other colleges in the UNC system. It's virtually impossible that anyone not already in the know about the tense history between NCSU and the UNC system would look for this college using that redirect. It's very likely that the editor that created it was being deliberately dismissive of NCSU and that any users searching for UNC-R are looking for a laugh. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 01:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to United Nations Command–Rear, where it seems to be a less-common but officially-used acronym. Or perhaps disambiguate, although WP:DABACRONYM suggests that it would be a problem to include North Carolina State University if the acronym UNC-R isn't mentioned in the article. (And then the question becomes whether it is verifiable / ought to be mentioned in the article, which I'm not sure about.) Adumbrativus (talk) 07:06, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 19:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Retarget - Unlikely search term. Further, I'd say, it is an inappropriate term even with {{R from incorrect term}}. Use of "UNC-R" is meant to be a "put down" as it is intended to be is to remove the distinctiveness of NCSU name, making it one of the many "UNC at City". Despite some brief flirtation with rebranding 60 years ago, any modern use (if any) of UNC-R is prejudicial. Let me be clear that this isn't about petty college rivalry. It's about what is best for the readers of our encyclopedia. A better target exists. Let's use it. Senator2029 ❮talk❯ 21:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • That seems to be historical revisionism. History still exists even if things are renamed; if they used the name 60-some years ago, then it is a valid name, removing it seems censorship. -- Though I have no problem with retargetting it to the United Nations topic, since that is a current use. -- 67.70.27.246 (talk) 21:41, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate, considering that "UNC-R" is a somewhat obscure search term for both United Nations Command–Rear and "University of North Carolina at Raleigh". WP:RNEUTRAL means that a title being derogatory is not in itself grounds for deletion. feminist (talk) 14:26, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I do not see how it would be a search term for both. my understanding of how the search would look like is this UNCR is the search for the university while UNC-R would denote the United Nations command rear. If you could further explain why it is obscure for me that would be grand. Discount Horde (talk) 14:29, 4 May 2021 (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.

2024 United States House of Representatives elections[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. ✗plicit 00:28, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not mentioned at target. Should probably be salted until after the 2022 United States House of Representatives elections. ― Tartan357 Talk 19:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - We don't need to be creating redirects far in advance of events yet to come. Senator2029 ❮talk❯ 21:05, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:REDLINK and do not salt. We have a detailed article about the 2024 United States Senate elections so it is highly plausible that it would be possible to write a verifiable and notable article about this topic, and it is a likely search term, but we just don't currently have a good target that I can currently find. Thryduulf (talk) 15:43, 28 April 2021 (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.

Melissa Cross[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. -- Tavix (talk) 01:58, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cross does not appear to be notable, and thus should not be listed at the target. This redirect should be deleted, although if someone can find sources to establish notability, creating an article at this title would b appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 17:43, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - AFAIK, people do not need an article to be listed at List of vocal coaches. Can also be redirected to Angela_Gossow#Other_work. --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:17, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a list of notable coaches, so they need to either have an article or clearly have sufficient coverage to merit an article. signed, Rosguill talk 17:36, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and remove the entry from list of vocal coaches per nominator. Given that she's mentioned in a few different articles, search results are more informative than pointing to just one of her students, or to a bare list entry. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 04:11, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 19:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and 61 IP. Since the subject is mentioned on different articles, having this redirect can be highly confusing for a casual reader. CycloneYoris talk! 09:45, 14 May 2021 (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.

SOER[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. signed, Rosguill talk 18:09, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

May also refer to Sustaining Oklahoma's Energy Resources. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:26, 27 April 2021 (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.

Patrice Synthea[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 5#Patrice Synthea

Chris Candelaria[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 5#Chris Candelaria

Solomon Islands at the 2020 Summer Olympics[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 8#Solomon Islands at the 2020 Summer Olympics

Nauru at the 2020 Summer Olympics[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 8#Nauru at the 2020 Summer Olympics

United Peace Alliance[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. ✗plicit 00:26, 5 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, searching online I wasn't able to find a clear connection between the party named in the redirect and MLAM Hizbullah. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 15:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete from what I've found in a quick google search, this is a former political party (or similar organisation) in Sri Lanka but which possibly (effectively) ceased to exist in 2019, supporting the Sri Lanka Podujana Peramuna presidential candidate Gotabaya Rajapaksa.[1][2] I'm uncertain if they are notable enough for a mention anywhere, but without any I've found the redirect is not useful. Thryduulf (talk) 15:56, 28 April 2021 (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.

P-I[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) feminist (talk) 14:27, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This previously pointed to Seattle Post-Intelligencer, but was retargeted today by 67.70.27.246 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). It's always hard to search for terms that differ only in punctuation from a better-known term (in this case PI or P.I.), so I can't say for certain that "P-I" refers to the Post-Intelligencer the significant majority of the time, but there's nothing else at the DAB page where you'd expect to find a hyphen in the abbreviation. The only other entry with a hyphen in it is Provider-independent address space, but I don't think "P-I" is frequently used to refer to those. Special:PrefixIndex/P-I yields seven other results, all redirects, only one of which seems potentially shortenable to "P-I", namely P-I dyad; however, its target page, interval cycle, shows that "P/I dyad" is the preferred nomenclature. On this basis, I propose restoring the Post-Intelligencer as target. -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 13:36, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Commnet "P-I" is one of the attributive forms for abbreviations PI or P.I.; so can be used with several of the topics listed at the disambiguation page. It's also an unusual alternate form of "P.I." abbreviations that I've encountered some times in the past. If it is restored to Post-Intelligencer, then a hatnote should be added leading back to the disambiguation page -- 67.70.27.246 (talk) 20:45, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:25, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as is. BD2412 T 17:46, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as-is. Why encourage the possible accumulation of bad bluelinks? There are enough to be getting along with as it is (see WP:BPAT). Narky Blert (talk) 20:20, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - it is an ambiguous term, and should not point to the newspaper. Senator2029 ❮talk❯ 21:10, 27 April 2021 (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.

Beit Midrash Har'el[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. -- Tavix (talk) 02:06, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recently created redirect that should have been an article if notable, and target article contains no information on the subject. Jbrzow (talk) 02:14, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It is notable re its pioneering role in granting Orthodox Rabbinical ordination to women. See Women rabbis and Torah scholars #Orthodox Judaism. This redirect is a placeholder for an appropriate article. Fintor (talk) 17:53, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If it's meant to be a placeholder, it should be a red link, not a redirect to a page where it gets ten words of mention. See reason to delete a redirect number 10. Jbrzow (talk) 01:48, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok - but please give me a few days to write the article ... Fintor (talk) 09:56, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:22, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep, a mention appears to have been added at the target. signed, Rosguill talk 00:16, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Rosguill and Fintor, without prejudice to the creation of an article if necessary. This can actually be tagged as an {{R with possibilities}}. CycloneYoris talk! 09:42, 14 May 2021 (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.

Charles S. Adams[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 18:24, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect to a DAB page on which no-one has the middle initial "S" (apart from Charles Addams, a WP:PTM). Physicist Charles S. Adams is linked in Institute of Physics Joseph Thomson Medal and Prize. Delete, to encourage article creation if justified. Narky Blert (talk) 12:21, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: Should the physicist be included on the disambiguation page? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:34, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not while it would be a circular redirect. IDK whether or not a redirect to the Award page would meet {{R with possibilities}}, I haven't looked. Narky Blert (talk) 20:09, 27 April 2021 (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.

Template:Country data Brjanskaja oblast'[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 keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Dudhhr (talk) 00:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UNNATURAL redirect'; do you want me to type like this' Dudhhr (talk) 05:45, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is definitely not UNNATURAL, as the apostrophe is clearly intended to transcribe ь, the soft sign, at the end of the world "область". For the same reason, oblast' exists as well. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per 1234qwer1234qwer4. This is the conventional transliteration of the Cyrillic soft sign ь into the Latin alphabet (even though it's often omitted, because there is no equivalent in the latter). See e.g. Rus' and Bel'sky District. Narky Blert (talk) 20:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    {And also, FWIW, of the rare hard sign, Ъ.) Narky Blert (talk) 20:55, 27 April 2021 (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.

Sleep with me, I'm not too young[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 4#Sleep with me, I'm not too young

File:Infromation and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario logo.jpg[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 00:15, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned WP:UNNATURAL file redirect created by page move Dudhhr (talk) 05:00, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: implausible typo. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 05:10, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep: thank you for teaching me about WP:FILEREDIRECT. 03:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Leaning keep per WP:FILEREDIRECT as below. ~~~~
    User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)     18:34, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - obvious typo which was fixed. Keeping the error serves no purpose. Senator2029 ❮talk❯ 21:13, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment that was copied from COMMONS, but we are not COMMONS, we do not have to keep track of multiple different projects that have to access the file. There is only one English Wikipedia to keep track of, so there is no need to keep bad file names because a bot needs to crawl through many different projects to fix file links. -- 67.70.27.246 (talk) 21:53, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:FILEREDIRECT. Thryduulf (talk) 16:01, 28 April 2021 (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.

File:My blood is full of aiplanes.jpg[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. ✗plicit 09:45, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned WP:UNNATURAL file redirects created by page move Dudhhr (talk) 04:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: implausible typo. Not worth the bandwidth its taking up on the aiwaves Firefangledfeathers (talk) 05:05, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:FILEREDIRECT. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 05:38, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning keep per J947, especially harmless in file namespace. Not sure this is a case of UNNATURAL either. ~~~~
    User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)     18:28, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment that was copied from COMMONS, but we are not COMMONS, we do not have to keep track of multiple different projects that have to access the file. There is only one English Wikipedia to keep track of, so there is no need to keep bad file names because a bot needs to crawl through many different projects to fix file links. -- 67.70.27.246 (talk) 21:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:FILEREDIRECT, which is English Wikipedia policy. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 23:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:FILEREDIRECT and per above. Thryduulf (talk) 16:02, 28 April 2021 (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.

Bharat (place)[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) feminist (talk) 05:09, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Says "(place)" but redirects to the disambiguation page. I say re-target to India to match Bharat. NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 03:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 03:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. If a searcher goes through the trouble of typing the parenthetical qualifier, it would probably be most helpful to give them a list of all places to which it could refer. Mdewman6 (talk) 16:46, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Everyday {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. What's the problem? Links through it will be found and fixed within 6-8 weeks, on recent performance. On the other hand, silly redirects to a WP:PTOPIC hardly ever get found and fixed (I've seen some really bad ones which had been linked for over a decade). Narky Blert (talk) 20:17, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, pretty much per Narky Blert. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 21:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Narky Blert. Thryduulf (talk) 16:03, 28 April 2021 (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.

Requisition[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) 05:09, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Requisition has quite a few meaning outside the realm of eminent domain, so the target seems to be too narrow. Not sure what the best way to handle this is, though. Hog Farm Talk 02:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'll belatedly add into the mix Requisitioned → Eminent domain.
We lack an article on military requisition. Military logistics doesn't really cover it even for armies; and as well as ships, there are also the ancient prerogatives of a siege commander (to destroy buildings, to confiscate supplies, and to enforce labour). I looked at Falklands War and Queen Elizabeth 2 for modern naval requisitions, but the word is unlinked. The topic is covered in a group of ten articles in other languages, including de:Requisition, fr:Réquisition and ru:Реквизиция. Narky Blert (talk) 06:51, 2 May 2021 (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/2021_April_27&oldid=1023379150"