Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 26[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 26, 2021.

Wikipedia is not a forum[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 3#Wikipedia is not a forum

Senator-designate[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 Senate. ✗plicit 00:06, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Senate if not delete because the term doesn't seem to be specific to a single country. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:00, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per nom; excessive US-bias -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 03:03, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep existing redirect. What other Senates have this particular role / terminology? If they do, is it covered on Wikipedia? (I suspect that some US State Legislatures might use it, too, but that usage is sufficiently more minor and clearly subordinate to the US Senate version that the existing redirect still provides the relevant one-sentence explanation.) If it's not covered elsewhere, existing redirect is fine as a genuinely US-specific term. SnowFire (talk) 09:38, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom – this term is not US-specific; some quick searching shows that it is also used for Canada, Australia, Germany, and Barbados, at least. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 12:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget all per nom and Mx. Granger. Veverve (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2022 (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.

Isabella of Jerusalem[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 3#Isabella of Jerusalem

Ciclying activist[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 00:05, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recommend deleting this implausible typo (with no incoming links). We already have cycling activist. czar 16:46, 26 December 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.

Wikipedia is the worst[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 3#Wikipedia is the worst

Textual differences in the Bible[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 14:42, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The page it redirects to does not list the textual variants found in the whole Bible (Old Testament + New Testament); the page it redirects to only lists the history of translations of the Bible.
I very strongly disadvise redirecting to Textual variants in the New Testament, as the latter only concerns one part of the Bible (the New Testament), and on top of that this part is quantitatively inferior to the part not there (the Old Testament, the biggest part quantitatively speaking of the Bible).
The redirect should be deleted to encourage creation. Veverve (talk) 14:29, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I very much agree with nom's rationale. WP:REDYES is an appropriate policy to apply here. snood1205 14:37, 26 December 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.

Versions of the Bible[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 3#Versions of the Bible

4.5[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 10#4.5

Deuce deuce[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. Feel free to recreate if a mention is added somewhere. -- Tavix (talk) 21:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These should target the same place. Not mentioned at .22 Long Rifle, but is slang for .22 caliber, of which .22 Long Rifle is arguably the primary topic, but not sure if it should be targeted directly there. A mention should probably be added at the target page. Deletion or disambiguation at 22 (disambiguation) could also be considered. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:38, 12 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Without a mention, this redirect is confusing (or misleading). Enwiki has several mentions, none of which is about ammo. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:58, 19 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwerfjkltalk 12:27, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per Shhhnotsoloud (and nom). Oppose retarget to .22 caliber for the same reasons. Jay (talk) 08:00, 7 January 2022 (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.

Indelible mark[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 2#Indelible mark

Daily Post (Disambiguation)[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 14:43, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Created in error, implausible typo. No incoming links. Real dab page is Daily Post (disambiguation) (small "d" in disambiguation). Declined {{db-error}}. Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 08:35, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Harmless {{R from other capitalisation}}. Absolutely no benefit in deleting. CycloneYoris talk! 09:44, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete. Incorrect capitalisation of the "(disambiguation)" qualifier is specifically listed in WP:RDAB as a classic example of a redirect which should be deleted. It is costly because it clutters disambiguation reports, wasting editors' time which should be spent fixing actual errors. The (disambiguation) suffix is a Wikipedia internal technical measure which no reader types manually, so there is no advantage in cluttering the namespace with redirects from one of a plethora of potential typos. I would support a guideline clarifying that such cases qualify for {{db-error}} rather than troubling RfD. Certes (talk) 13:39, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Certes/WP:RDAB. snood1205 14:39, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: no reason to keep this, while we do not create a redirect from "Foo (Thing)" for every "Foo (thing)". PamD 15:31, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Certes. Not a proper noun disambiguator. Lower-case version already exists. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:37, 26 December 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.

Sandrembi Chaisra[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 restore article and send to AfD. Numerically this is 3 restore, 2 delete, 1 retarget. There is sufficient participation that I do not think a third relist is justified. I give little weight to the nominator's delete !vote, as it predates the "discovery" of the BLARing. The rest of this is better viewed through a lens of "send to AfD" (3) versus "don't send to AfD" (2), since the arguments to delete or redirect can just as well be made at AfD (and the redirect portion of SnowFire's !vote doesn't address the issue raised in the nom). In a close debate, the default outcome should be the one in line with general policy, and general policy is that articles should not be deleted except through CSD, PROD, or AfD. I do not think the two "don't send" !voters have met the burden of overcoming that presumption, while the "send" !voters, particularly Mdewman6, have made a strong case against the BLAR→redirect deletion route. I will thus will send to AfD. (non-admin closure) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 07:54, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting deletion; this is not mentioned in the redirect. —AFreshStart (talk) 03:46, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete to encourage article creation. Simple wikipedia article can be found here --Lenticel (talk) 03:13, 3 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are 70+ revisions from 2019 in the history. Can that be a better substitute than the Simple Wikipedia article?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 04:16, 7 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Send to AfD - Seems to be a case of WP:BLAR. Maybe better restore the article and send it to AfD instead. --Lenticel (talk) 04:21, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore to [1] and send to Afd per Lenticel.--Aervanath (talk) 20:03, 20 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This was created as a dismally sourced, barely comprehensible, article, which managed to survive for two months before apparently getting picked up at NPP and getting turned into a redirect. The creator has subsequently been blocked for sockpuppetry, and after almost two years, there doesn't appear to have been any objections to the loss of this article. At the very least, this can be treated as a soft delete à la WP:PROD: there's no need to also do the rounds at AfD. If there's any appetite for having an article on this topic, then we're much better off just importing the one on simplewiki: it's in a much better shape (though it's been written by the same socks, who are not blocked on that project, so if it were imported here it would be eligible for WP:G5 deletion). – Uanfala (talk) 22:06, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:07, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep redirect. No need to litigate at AFD over something that's harmless as a redirect and that nobody is advocating to turn back into an article, per WP:NOTBURO. SnowFire (talk) 09:44, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Send to AfD. WP:BLAR + RfD is not a backdoor to AfD. And without a mention at the target and apparently no other suitable redirect target, BLAR is not a suitable alternative to deletion. Mdewman6 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:25, 7 January 2022
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.

Temperature (Sean Paul song)[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 Wrong venue. RfD is not the place to request the creation of a redirect. Please refer to WP:AFC/R. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:12, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I really want this to be created, along the lines of Thriller (Michael Jackson song) but it was declined at AFC General Vicinity (talk) 07:01, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Qwerfjkl: General Vicinity (talk) 07:03, 26 December 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_December_26&oldid=1064909421"