Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 23

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 23[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 23, 2021.

Template:Arabic-international-para[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 18:55, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Originally nominated for speedy deletion by @DePiep with the reason "unused, confusing, not a help" FASTILY 23:30, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Even the target template is unused. Am I missing something? -DePiep (talk) 23:42, 23 February 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:Arabic-international[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 18:55, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Originally nominated for speedy deletion by @DePiep with the reason "unused, confusing" FASTILY 23:30, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Even the target template is unused. Am I missing something? -DePiep (talk) 23:42, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
The template seems to be a completely redundant fork of Template:Script/Arabic. Template:Arabic-international seems to be just taking Arabic script and wrapping it in some span tags with defined fonts and formatting to make it render properly, which is exactly what Template:Script/Arabic also does. I'd be tempted to take it to TfD. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 00:37, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They even use the same choice of fonts, same font size and same font weight. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 00:38, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, the target-templates, with content, deserve scrutinisation. Plan is to do this later on. -DePiep (talk) 16:18, 24 February 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.

AB 1[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 AB1 (disambiguation), which is a newly created DAB page. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:18, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is being done on behalf of Kokopelli7309. See Special:Diff/1005999192. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 20:42, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate (or create a dab page and point this at it). This could also be referring to a type of amplifier (Class-AB1 amplifier) two models of aeroplanes (Bernard AB 1 and Aichi AB-1) a UK postcode (AB postcode area) and maybe a ship (USS Kearsarge (BB-5), formerly Hull classification AB-1). 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:03, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig per the above - I'm surprised it isn't one already tbh. Thryduulf (talk) 15:23, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig by retargeting to new disambiguation page AB1 (disambiguation), but I can't find mention of any "US bill" (banknote or legislative act) to which @Kokopelli7309: refers. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:26, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Shhhnotsoloud: AB 1 stands for "assembly bill 1," (like in this example), and it can refer to a lot of different bills in state legislatures. Since we can't cover all of them, it may not be worth mentioning on the page, but I would still recommend to disambiguate like everyone else. Kokopelli7309 (talk) 15:55, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate I've heard of "assembly bill 1" but not of "AB1." I think that in this case there's no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 11:28, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, it looks like there is already a disambiguation page for AB1. We just need to add a redirect for AB 1, which I'm going to request right now. Kokopelli7309 (talk) 23:00, 27 February 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.

Inquisitor (Warhammer 40,000)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 5#Inquisitor (Warhammer 40,000)

MAGA Patriot Party[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 Make America Great Again#Use by Donald Trump. This (and the similar redirects mentioned) may need to be revisited after everything shakes out. The speculation may be worthy of a mention now, but if it never comes to fruition, it may end up being trivial. -- Tavix (talk) 23:19, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a duly sourced mention can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 20:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I redirected the page because apparently, numerous Trump supporters are trying to form a third party named the "MAGA Patriot Party" after Trump has left office. When I created the page, I believe that there was a mention in the article about the party at the time, although there appears to be none now. -- Politicsfan4 (talk) 23:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you mean this mention, it had a lifespan of less than 20 minutes, and it didn't mention the "MAGA Patriot Party." It discussed Trump's hypothetical musings of forming something called a Patriot Party. The name had already been registered by someone else, and the Trump team promptly disavowed that Patriot Party, as well. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 13:28, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Space4Time3Continuum2x: what you you mean? this article states that numerous Trump supporters have launched third parties, and while they might not be exactly named “MAGA Patriot Party”, it’s still worth at least mentioning. — Politicsfan4 (talk) 13:27, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Politicsfan4: Anyone can file paperwork claiming that they're forming a new party. Trump quickly disavowed them ([1]. They haven't actually managed to form a party with state chapters and candidates. Wikipedia isn't the place to record everything that's briefly mentioned by some news outlets (WP:NOTNEWS).Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 14:08, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed the redirect to Make America Great Again#Use by Donald Trump. Seems more appropriate than the Donald Trump page since they use Trump's "MAGA" in the title and Trump has officially disavowed any affiliation with them. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 14:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to add something about the party to the Make America Great Again#Use by Donald Trump section, here are a couple of reliable sources: local Florida news source and Axios. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 14:25, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Space4Time3Continuum2x: There already is a sourced mention of the party in the last paragraph of that section, which is why I suggested retargeting there. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:31, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I saw your suggestion and agreed that the redirection should target that section. The MAGA party mentioned there is a different one, 'though, the one Trump was contemplating and then abandoned. Space4Time3Continuum2x (talk) 19:06, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 19:40, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete given that at CPAC 2021 Trump explicitly said that he would not be founding a new political party, keeping this redirect is misleading. Elli (talk | contribs) 18:21, 4 March 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.

Baron samedit[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 Baron Samedi. -- Tavix (talk) 23:13, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Given This is apparently the name of a sudo exploit, but it's not mentioned at the target. Delete per WP:R#DELETE #10 unless a duly sourced mention can be added to the target. signed, Rosguill talk 20:14, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak retarget to Baron Samedi. In French the "t" would be silent, making this a moderately plausible homophonous typo. Second choice: delete. -- Tamzin (they/she) | o toki tawa mi. 21:17, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support redirecting redirect to Baron Samedi. Since a mention of the sudo exploit has already been added to Baron Samedi (and the exploit name itself is a reference to that guy) it would make more sense to have Baron Samedit redirect there. Additionally, this would also work for the use-case specified by Tamzin. Sohom Datta (talk) 18:53, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 19:37, 23 February 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.

Three-sided record[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 Multisided record. signed, Rosguill talk 18:54, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the only three-sided record. Second Winter and Big World had their fourth sides blank. Dominicmgm (talk) 19:15, 23 February 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:CRISIS[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 Wikipedia:Responding to threats of harm. (non-admin closure) JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 17:55, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Responding to threats of harm seems like the logical target for this. SITH (talk) 18:38, 23 February 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.

Hammersmith, Derbyshire[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. signed, Rosguill talk 01:28, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as confusing; started off as a 2008 Redirect, converted to a village description, then IP has edited (in 2013, deleting description/converting to a Redirect in this diff) stating it is a street, not a place per se (see Google maps search and Google Streetview with Hammersmith metal street name-plaque).

Hammersmith (disambiguation) has this redirect described from 2014 as ...a village in Derbyshire. Midland Railway – Butterley has piped links to [[Hammersmith, Derbyshire|Hammersmith]] and [[Hammersmith railway station|Hammersmith]] (station created as part of a steam railway tourist attraction) in consecutive sentences.

Confusing and unnecessary to have a redirect to a street name? Suggest deletion of Redirect, with Hammersmith railway station staying as it is a tangible place, of meaning to the heritage railway line. Rocknrollmancer (talk) 03:27, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • It is a settlement[2] not a street, it could perhaps have a separate article but otherwise the usual practice is to redirect to its parish and mention it. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:12, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looking at File:Hammersmith - geograph.org.uk - 1307521.jpg and photographer's description of what are asserted to be 'tied' accommodation, the only mention I've seen so far is at the local history group; being a very-recent Wordpress/WP:SPS non-RS, it's not really what WP wants, but if the assertions can be proven elsewhere then there should be some mention. Whether this is at Ripley or elsewhere is indeterminate, as Butterley seems just as vague as Hammersmith; I would be interested to learn just when this name was coined, historically. As a control I looked at Highoredish (Derbys) and Newton Town (Notts). I have a 120 OS map (probably 1970s) in the house with Ripley printed just off the left bottom corner in the margin, but no annotation for Hammersmith (insufficient space, really). rgds.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 18:46, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:53, 23 February 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.

(identifier) wikidata soft redirects[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 10#(identifier) wikidata soft redirects

Interstate 80 Business (California)[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 Business routes of Interstate 80#California. signed, Rosguill talk 01:28, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is an ambiguous redirect. It could also mean the Truckee loop. It should be re-redirected to the California section of Business loops of Interstate 80. -322UbnBr2 (Talk | Contributions | Actions) 17:41, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a link to where you claim this can also be redirected to? I have trouble finding any reliable info on a "Truckee Loop" which is also called (or contains) "Interstate 80 Business". Fram (talk) 20:31, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Fram: Interstate 80 Business (Truckee, California). Imzadi 1979 → 21:56, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Unbinilium-322 Dibromide: you didn't need to open a formal RfD just to repoint the redirect to resolve the situation. I'd just bolding make the suggested change to repoint it to Business routes of Interstate 80#California, but now we have to wait for this discussion to be resolved. Imzadi 1979 → 21:56, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, this could have just been done, as the new redirect target Business routes of Interstate 80#California includes both the old and the wanted target. If it then got opposed (because the old target is by far the more popular page, the new one hardly gets any views) an RfD could be opened. Fram (talk) 09:00, 24 February 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.

My hole[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) 19:43, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently this was a minor news story [3], but without any mention at the target I don't see a reason for the redirect. signed, Rosguill talk 17:26, 23 February 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.

5/25[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 May 25 (WP:SNOW closure). Thryduulf (talk) 19:56, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose retargeting to May 25. While this is the most recent well-known event to happen on this day, I'm not sure that the connection is strong enough to warrant pointing this redirect to here. This doesn't quite seem to be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Hog Farm Talk 16:22, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would agree.Slatersteven (talk) 16:24, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to May 25 per nom. The redirect was targeting the date for 3 years until changed last year. The killing of George Floyd is mentioned on the date page for readers who are looking for it and I'm struggling to find anyone using "5/25" as an alternate name for the killing of George Floyd. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:28, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget back to May 25 per nom and the 86 IP. That's where it pointed before it was retargeted to the event last June 6, and unlike 9/11, people are likely searching for the day in general. Regards, SONIC678 17:14, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget — as a contributor to the article, I've read many of the sources, and I can't think of any source referring to this event as "5/25" (unlike "9/11"). Levivich harass/hound 19:36, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget - no substantial usage of this term in the sources, and in any event a reader will be able to find George Floyd's death mentioned on the date page. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 16:41, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom and previous editors.Less Unless (talk) 22:24, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget as creator of the redirect. feminist (talk) 13:15, 25 February 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.

Tau Manta[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 18:54, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Vehicle from the Warhammer 40,000 universe not mentioned anywhere in the encyclopaedia. If kept this would probably be better targeting T'au Empire but it's not mentioned there either. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:19, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete it is known as a very expensive unit in the tabletop game. Otherwise, it's just one of the heavier units detailed in the lore. Anyways, I think the WH40k fandom wikis would be the better platform to discuss the unit than en.wiki. --Lenticel (talk) 01:02, 1 March 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.

Techpriest Enginseer[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 18:54, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mechanic/priest/engineers from the warhammer 40,000 universe which are not mentioned anywhere in the target article. They have a few namedrops in other articles, but no substantive coverage that would be a good target in my opinion. These used to target Adeptus Mechanicus, which was deleted following a 2008 AfD nomination then were retargeted to Imperium of Man (Warhammer 40,000) which was converted into a redirect in 2018 following an AfD nomination 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:02, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete per nom. They are represented in the games and literature but usually as background/support characters. --Lenticel (talk) 00:50, 1 March 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.

Jaq Draco[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 List of Warhammer 40,000 novels#Inquisition War. signed, Rosguill talk 01:27, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable character from the Warhammer 40,000 universe not mentioned in the target article or substantially anywhere in the encyclopedia. He has an entry on the dab page Draco which links to an article where his surname has a namedrop as the title of a book. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:50, 23 February 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.

Ceramite[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 01:26, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This currently targets the Warhammer 40,000 article as the name of a fictional material used for making power armor, however it is not mentioned anywhere in the target article. It has a short mention in Space Marine (Warhammer 40,000)#Equipment which might serve as a suitable target, but Creamite is also a real material used in the production of refactory linings [4] Not sure what the best use of this redirect is. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:42, 23 February 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.

Trollkore[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 18:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Recreated after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trollkore, no mention anywhere on Wikipedia. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:38, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Enwiki has nothing on the subject. I like the 2004 stripped-down AfD style though  ;-) Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:30, 25 February 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.

Slashbot[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 04:45, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned anywhere in relation to Slashdot. There is an unrelated list entry at List of villains in VR Troopers#Slashbot though, to which I propose this be retargeted. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:19, 23 February 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.

YouInsensitiveClod[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 5#YouInsensitiveClod

Karma whore[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 01:24, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target nor anywhere else on Wikipedia. Might also refer to Reddit karma. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 13:13, 23 February 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.

AIMBot[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 5#AIMBot

Administrator Control Panel[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 Control panel. signed, Rosguill talk 01:20, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No explanation anywhere at target; the only passing mention we have is at PHP-Nuke. Also potentially ambiguous as this term is not exclusive to internet fora: This might even refer to the Control Panel (Windows), particularly the Administrative Tools. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:26, 23 February 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.

Postwhore[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 redirect to Wikt:postwhore. signed, Rosguill talk 01:20, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target or anywhere on Wikipedia, causes unnecessary confusion (cf. talk page: This is, I suppose, a derogatory term for the "Internet forum" term. I don't have the time to go through the WP:Article titles policy base, but it seems obvious to me that we are not allowing such redirects. If we make exceptions, please let me know. Nxavar (talk) 17:43, 17 December 2018 (UTC)). Soft retarget to wikt:postwhore or delete. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:23, 23 February 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.

You Talkin' To Me?: Rhetoric from Aristotle to Obama[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 delete. (non-admin closure) 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 17:06, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Calling for this wikilink to be a redlink, because that is how we signal to other contributors it is a good target for a new article.

Deepfriedokra turned this from a redlink to a redirect, earlier today. Loafiewa then promptly called for the speedy deletion of You talkin' to me? (disambiguation).

Yeah, I don't think that is how disambiguation is supposed to work. Leave the redlink, Deepfriedokra. Don't create a redirect.

Loafiewa, before calling for speedy deletion check for vandalism.

Redlinks are how we signal to other contributors that the redlink is a good target to consider for a potential new article. Creating a redirect can be confusing, because the redlink routinely ends up right next to a direct link to the target, and it obfuscates that the article does not yet exist. Geo Swan (talk) 12:06, 23 February 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.

Genius Labs[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 List of mergers and acquisitions by Alphabet. signed, Rosguill talk 18:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. An internet search returns quite a few search results related to a "teeth whitening" company as well as "cloud based software designed for business", but nothing related to blogging. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 11:26, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:12, 23 February 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.

Trending topic[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 5#Trending topic

Wikipedia:POVFIGHTER[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 18:52, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A strong consensus has been reached at an RfC (permalink) to remove the section of WP:TE to which this formerly pointed. As such, this shortcut serves no purpose, and is in fact confusing, and thus it should be deleted. Crossroads -talk- 05:15, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete It should have been deleted as part of the discussion. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 11:09, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No longer serves any useful purpose. --Tryptofish (talk) 19:48, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Technical delete, could be recreated if the previous content was moved to an essay or reworked. —PaleoNeonate – 07:55, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete since currently has no purpose --Lenticel (talk) 00:49, 1 March 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.

I-15[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) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 22:58, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to consider whether this should be made a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to Interstate 15 with an appropriate hatnote to the dab page. This would be consistent with most other I-# redirects targeting other interstates. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:31, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as is, as there are multiple usages on the dab page which include hyphenation. I don't think you can really draw a hard rule that I-# redirects should target Interstates, it's going to depend on whether other usage exist. I checked 3 randomly and two target DAB pages (I-14 and I-12) and one targets an interstate (I-25). 86.23.109.101 (talk) 01:08, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Also in the last 30 days the interstate received 3300 page views, while the I-15 aeroplane received 3000, the band 440 and the submarine 300, so it isn't an overwhelming primary topic of the things called I-15 listed on the dab page 86.23.109.101 (talk) 01:17, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep redirect to DAB. To consider the road the primary topic is a very Americentric viewpoint. Polyamorph (talk) 13:43, 23 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as it is. 86 always raises a lot of important points in their comments. Usually I agree with them. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 11:13, 27 February 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_February_23&oldid=1138583104"