Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 9

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 9[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 9, 2021.

Part of the world[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 00:39, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a synonym for the target as far as I'm aware, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 13:26, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Rosguill this is almost a synonym for the continent, with a greater historical and cultural flavor and with smaller geographic one. The term is used a lot, both in formal and informal context. See for example: [1] Delasse (talk) 13:56, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that link demonstrates that these terms are synonymous. signed, Rosguill talk 15:54, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Too vague, may as well redirect to Region or something similar. It also may be vaguely used in an astronomical or geological context. Too many possible meanings to disambiguate. WIKINIGHTS talk 14:28, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The phrase could be a wiktionary target if there was an entry there. Jay (Talk) 04:51, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WIKINIGHTS. Winston (talk) 18:29, 10 August 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.

The Hundred[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 in favor of an RM at Talk:The Hundred (cricket), which I'll start momentarily, copying !votes from here. (non-admin closure) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 05:54, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is only one reason anyone would spell out and search the phrase 'The Hundred' on Wikipedia and that's for the cricket competition. The other pages all involve the number and it feels that the redirect is unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grvlx100 (talk • contribs) 12:51, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: Most of the links at The 100 are valid for being spelt out- causal reader wouldn't know if they're spelt as 100 or Hundred in the name. I don't believe that most people will be looking for the "cricket" tournament. Also, this nomination needs to be fixed, as the current target is The 100 not The Hundred (cricket) (and this is the redirect I support keeping). Joseph2302 (talk) 13:04, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Corrected nomination: The target parameter is for the current target, not the proposed one. For clarity, then, Grvlx100's proposed target here is The Hundred (cricket). I haven't formed an opinion yet, but will say, if we're going to do that, it would probably make more sense to move that article to this title, than to redirect from a title without qualifier to one with one, in which case this might be better suited for a requested move. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 01:10, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think that is what I am really suggesting. The Hundred (cricket) to be moved to The Hundred with a full disambig page as suggested by Darorcilmir. Apologies, Wikipedia and the various admin processes are still very complicated even when you think you've cracked them. Grvlx100 (talk) 16:35, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • A few months back I searched for (and found) "The Hundred" when looking for "The 100" TV Series (The 100 (TV series)). Zerosumnet (talk) 04:45, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig with entries The 100 (TV series), The Hundred (cricket) (and probably The One Hundred (band)) with cricket as primary. Jay (Talk) 05:08, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Jay: In light of Grvlx' comment above, would you object to a procedural close kicking this to RM? I can start the RM and, if you'd like, can copy your !vote there. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 20:42, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree that The Hundred now refers only to the cricket competition and nothing else - because nothing else uses this specific formatting. It therefore needs its own main entry, with all other instances listed on disambig page, and a hatnote on the main page. Darorcilmir (talk) 15:15, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It seems like what you're after is a requested move discussion proposing to move The Hundred (cricket) to The Hundred. As a redirect, the current target makes sense. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:05, 10 August 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.

Latin slang[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 18#Latin slang

Mtss[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 MTSS. ✗plicit 00:40, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure this can refer to anything at the MTSS dab page. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 11:51, 9 August 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.

Modera[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) CycloneYoris talk! 01:02, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An IP user annotated this article "Do not redirect here from "Modera" (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1037575805&oldid=967350419&title=Modara) so I've created this RfD on their behalf. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:47, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment would Modera House and Hotel Zags Portland (formerly Hotel Modera) be good targets for this redirect? --Lenticel (talk) 02:02, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate I've drafted a page with Lenticel's two targets, plus a see-also section with plausible-enough terms if this is just a typo or misspelling. FWIW, while it's not clear from the brief article whether Modera House is in the ward of Modara, it does make me wonder whether this is an acceptable term for Modara after all. Even if it is, I don't think there's a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, and this would just be reason to move Modara from the see-also to the main list. --BDD (talk) 15:49, 12 August 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.

Moscow-Сity[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 11:40, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Uses the Cyrillic letter С as the first letter in "City", thus an implausible typo. dudhhrContribs 08:10, 9 August 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.

Vegetarian festival[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! 01:06, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vegetarian Festival (capitalised) redirects to Nine Emperor Gods Festival#Celebration in Thailand as the primary topic per a previous 2018 RfD, with a hatnote to the list. Not sure if the uncapitalised version is sufficiently different enough that readers are better served by it redirecting directly to the list, as it currently does. (All three incoming links appear to be about the Thai festival.) Paul_012 (talk) 05:53, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 07:53, 9 August 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.

Julungsul[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 11:40, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I retargeted this after a merge, but there's no mention in the article, no existing citation and I cannot find a reliable citation for this as an alternative name (only a few mirrors of Wikipedia). (Earlier added the wrong one and then removed it, sorry.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 06:00, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete can't find sources either. Seems to be an unlikely misspelling of Julunggul which is one of the cited alternative names in the target article --Lenticel (talk) 01:36, 13 August 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.

Kalseru[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 August 16#Kalseru

Captive audience[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) CycloneYoris talk! 00:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The concept of a captive audience seems to go way beyond this Supreme Court case, which is but one example of it. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 02:55, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wiktionary as a dictionary definition. Note there is a media book for the proper noun at Captive Audience AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 04:27, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • How about a disambiguation page for this case and the book mentioned above? And any other potentially relevant pages. Mlb96 (talk) 07:43, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Formally !voting to disambiguate; a draft has already been created. I think an actual article on the legal concept would be even better, but a disambiguation page is better than a redirect for now. Mlb96 (talk) 00:58, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate. Draft provided: there's rather more than I first thought. As always, improvements are welcome. I think there may be a case for a broad-concept article here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:19, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Strongly oppose. Disambiguation is needed, There is already the statement that a direct article on the subject is needed. Thus, at least two things are lost with a redirect to a single court case. —¿philoserf? (talk) 12:35, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig per Shhhnotsoloud. Thryduulf (talk) 16:32, 17 August 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.

Nick Bates/oldversion[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 history merged. The former article at Nick Bates/oldversion existed from 2006–2008 and the current article was started in 2010. Without any parallel history I was able to perform a history merge to the current target. Roy Glover/oldversion has the same timeline, but the article at Roy Glover evolved from a paring down of List of past Emmerdale characters (2000-) until he was the only character left and the page was moved in 2011. So what I did was move all edit history from when it was a list back to List of past Emmerdale characters (2000-). After that, there is no longer any parallel history, so Roy Glover/oldversion could then be history merged. I do want to make one final note: moving the edit history to the talk namespace is not the way to handle this because it reclassifies the history into an incorrect namespace (ie: the history is article content, not discussions). -- Tavix (talk) 22:01, 14 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. These appear to be the leftover remanents of round robin page moves Tassedethe performed in 2012. I'm unclear if any history merging is required, but if so that should happen before deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 22:28, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - required for WP:ATTRIBUTION. These are leftover former articles which were content-merged with the present articles at some point prior to the 2012 move; the revisions need to remain accessible to satisfy WP:CWW. I don't think history merging would be possible here without ending up with a harmfully confusing page history, since they are histories of different pages. I also don't think a reason has been given for why these should be deleted. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 12:40, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as they're necessary for attribution, but move to talk namespace (as they're not articles or useful for navigation). Elli (talk | contribs) 19:06, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • History Cleanup as noted above, these cannot be deleted for attribution reasons, but the history here could be fixed by an admin who knows how to do it. If an admin can't be found to do so, Elli's suggestion to move to talkspace seems fine. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 23:09, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to "nick bates" and "roy glover" (in lowercase) without redirect, and add the required merge notices to the talk pages. Since all lowercase is a plausible redirect title, this addresses the issue with minimal effort. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 08:27, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rename per Oiyarbepsy, by moving to Nick bates and Roy glover without leaving redirects. Along with links to this discussion in the move summary, that will still leave a "paper trail". --BDD (talk) 19:18, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:20, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to talk per Elli, as is the usual way of dealing with things like this (as far as I'm aware?). Do not move to lower-case forms, as that's a sure-as-hell way of confusing anyone who looks at the page histories in the future. --Paul_012 (talk) 18:32, 13 August 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.

Hot dogs and hamburgers[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. Deryck C. 22:46, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No discussion of hot dogs or hamburgers at the target. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 17:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly. But the combination "hot dogs and hamburgers" is a common shorthand for the foods served at backyard cook outs. People will often have conversations such as:
Person 1: We're cooking out this weekend, do you want to come over?
Person 2: What are you having?
Person 3: Hot dogs and hamburgers.
I have no personal opinion on whether this is enough to justify the redirect. --Khajidha (talk) 14:13, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:XY and because the two don't come together, any uncommon combination of food could potentially be made into a redirect otherwise. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 06:42, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to American cuisine#Ethnic influences per UserTwoSix. While there's nothing much to say about the two foods as a combination (Jay's examples) a wiki search for "hot dogs and hamburgers" reveals that this exact phrase, in this exact order, is often used as a sort of generic placeholder for popular American diner food, or maybe specifically fast food. The section in the American cuisine article addresses this (though not well), and/or it seems we could easily create a List of hot dogs and hamburgers restaurants from the search results and target this there. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 12:35, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There are 18 results for "Hot dogs and hamburgers", and some of them are prefixed or suffixed with "like", "such as", "etc.", "soft drinks", implying that "and" being a common joiner is used in sentences the way it is intended to be used, and the words it is joining may not have any special meaning whatsoever. However the other results may indicate that they do come in a package. If food joints consider them a package per Ivan, then can we get a citation, just to make this argument stronger? Jay (Talk) 13:56, 28 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The suggested retarget doesn't isn't convincing. Winston (talk) 07:25, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:XY. None of the suggested retargets seem right to me; these two foods are too general. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 08:11, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not mentioned at the target, and not used in any article. "Hot dogs and hamburgers" doesn't sound particularly like a stereotype. JIP | Talk 20:36, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to American cuisine#Ethnic influences. I don't think this is an arbitrary pairing at all. It's quite common at a backyard American barbeque, for example, to have a choice of hot dogs or hamburgers. I admit an "ethnic influences" section isn't the first place I'd look for information on these two, but that's where we have it. --BDD (talk) 19:16, 5 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I think this shows its usefulness if the information resides in an obscure section. UserTwoSix (talk) 21:28, 9 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:20, 9 August 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.

R-star[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 R* (disambiguation). (non-admin closure) dudhhrContribs 19:15, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think it may r to R* (disambiguation). -- q28 (talk) 11:20, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I think R-star should redirect to R* (disambiguation) as per q28. Viséan (talk) 11:33, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:15, 9 August 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_August_9&oldid=1039647111"