Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 12[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 12, 2021.

See food diet[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 19#See food diet

Country-style white bread[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 23:53, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, nor do any of the results at Country Style (disambiguation) seem relevant. I would suggest deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 20:27, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Orowheat's Country Style breads are made with "simple, real ingredients". This might just be something a company made up... I think this might be towards the trend of "real foods", less preservatives, etc. UserTwoSix (talk) 20:32, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
My sense is that it's just branding, sort of like "rustic". signed, Rosguill talk 20:37, 12 July 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.

Miami Beach, Yorkshire[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 23:53, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target. An internet search mostly returned results about Yorkshire terriers up for adoption in Miami Beach, FL. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 20:22, 12 July 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.

Croakies[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Thryduulf (talk) 11:16, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target. An online search suggests that this is a brand name for a sunglass w/ strap product line, but does not appear to be a general term for sunglasses with straps. I think deletion is the proper course of action. signed, Rosguill talk 20:19, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think "Croakies" is one of the original brands that was quite popular and well known after its founding in 1977. UserTwoSix (talk) 20:21, 12 July 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:R from related concept[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 Template:R to related topic. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:52, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I typed this in meaning to type {{R from related topic}} (which redirects to {{R to related topic}}), and was surprised to find that this redirects to {{R from related word}}. In my opinion, "topic" is a much more predictable synonym for "concept" than "word" is. This only has four backlinks. Of those:

I suggest that we retarget to {{R to related topic}}, recategorize the second and third transclusions, and bypass template redirect on the fourth transclusion. Not sure yet what to do with the first transclusion. Might need its own RfD. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 20:02, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget and such per nom. The "related topic" and "related word" rcats and their associated redirects/transclusions evolved poorly and haphazardly from {{R from alternative name}} with little overall organization and therefore do not function as logically indicated by their titles, resulting in miscategorized redirects or at least frustration in trying to categorize them. Note also the current requested move attempting to address {{R from related term}} at Template_talk:R_from_related_word#Requested_move_30_May_2021, but apparently attempting to fix that aspect of these rcats is too big of a hill to climb. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:49, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget etc exactly per nom. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:43, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per nom; that all sounds fine. This is fortunately one of those cases where redirect to and from are the same and not opposites, because "related" is a two-way relationship. Anyway, "concept" does indeed better map onto "topic" than onto "word" (or even "term" which would encompass multi-word terms); the same concept often has mutiple names (i.e. words/terms).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:36, 17 July 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:Stockholm 2019[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! 22:47, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a useful redirect. Redirects to wikimania:2019:Wikimania, created by User:Crocusfleur. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 18:16, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Plausible-enough search term that couldn't refer to anything else. I don't think there's really a need to be creating interwiki redirects to Wikimanias from past years (this was created two weeks ago), but I also don't think there's a need to delete them if they're harmless. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 06:22, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tamzin. This is a plausible and unambiguous search term so there is no benefit to deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 10:23, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above comments unless you can prove that 'Stockholm 2019' could refer to something else Wikipedia-related. — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  16:39, 19 July 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:Stockholm[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 23:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a useful redirect. Redirects to wikimania:2019:Wikimania, created by User:Crocusfleur. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 18:16, 12 July 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:Nazi[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 User:MjolnirPants/No Nazis. ✗plicit 23:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a useful redirect. Redirects to Wikipedia:Godwin's law, created by User:Crocusfleur.— Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 18:06, 12 July 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:Don't call people Nazis[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 00:47, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not a useful redirect. Redirects to Wikipedia:Godwin's law, created by User:Crocusfleur. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 18:06, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete "Don't call people nazis if they are not actual nazis" is the actual point of Godwin's Law. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:29, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since Mike Godwin happens to be a Wikipedian, and the meaning of his famous observation is at issue here, I've asked him if he has any thoughts on this. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 06:36, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Godwin's Law has more than one point, but it shouldn't be interpreted as foreclosing the ability to call someone a Nazi, especially if they're really a Nazi (we have plenty still around). Plus, we don't want to shut down irony or jokes, right? In general, Nazi/Hitler comparisons are unhelpful, but this generalization is not without its exceptions. MikeGodwin (talk) 13:27, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retargeting to User:MjolnirPants/No Nazis#Don't use claims of racism as a coup de grâce seems like a decent option, but (1) I am reading the mind of the redirect creator and (2) my understanding of the policies on non-mainspace redirects is rusty at best. On a side note, I do not think anyone, even Mike Godwin, is the final authority of what Godwin's law means - a given piece of writing can take on meaning beyond what their author intended. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact) 16:30, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm a fan of death of the author as a literary analysis tool. Still seemed a useful perspective to get at RfD, where plausibility is a key consideration, and I thank Mike Godwin for responding to my query. The analysis of plausibility for projectspace redirects is a bit different from mainspace ones, because historically we've allowed some leeway to commentary via redirect in projectspace, for instance to allow people to make a point by linking to a specific redirect with a flashy name. Point being, if Mike had said "Of course that's what I meant!", that would have made me consider a keep !vote, although it wouldn't have been dispositive on its own. But if this is a misrepresentation of both the prevailing interpretation of the Law (per Beeblebrox and per general usage) and of the originator's intention, then yes, delete.
    And anyone who disagrees is a—oh wait...[Joke] -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 17:41, 13 July 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.

Puola[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 23:55, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RLOTE, no connection between Poland and the Finnish language. dudhhrContribs 17:06, 12 July 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:Tenditious[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:Tendentious editing. Thryduulf (talk) 11:18, 20 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Should probably redirect to Wikipedia:Tendentious editing, but it's a long-existing shortcut that has incoming links so bringing it to RfD to make sure. Paul_012 (talk) 12:56, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Unhelpful comment I'm torn whether this should match WP:TENDENTIOUS EDITING or WP:TENDONITISEDITING. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 14:04, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete since "Tenditious" isn't a thing. Links that would be broken are from archived discussions, and whilst I assume they mean Wikipedia:Tendentious I can't be sure, and deletion will do no harm in mainspace. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:29, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I would argue against deletion, since tenditious is a very plausible typo for a word that isn't always familiar to everyone (as evidenced by its multiple uses). --Paul_012 (talk) 11:31, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom. While {{r from incorrect name}}s don't come up in projectspace as often in mainspace, it's clear that this is a pretty common misnomer. Normally the sizable number of inbound links would be an issue, but I don't think so here, as I'm guessing that ~100% of the people linking to this expected it to redirect to the proposed target rather than the actual target. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 12:00, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:20, 12 July 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.

Obock and Tadjoura[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 20#Obock and Tadjoura

SquatForChange[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request undeletion of these articles. ✗plicit 12:14, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hashtag that had a brief flurry of media coverage in 2018, no longer mentioned at target article. Even when it was mentioned, it was just two sentences (one of them a copyvio from the cited Times article). SquatForChange still exists as a non-profit, and there may be room for a mention of them if Changing table were expanded to say a lot more about access advocacy, but barring a mention there, delete. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 07:27, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 10:32, 12 July 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.

Alexandr Kalinin[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 19#Alexandr Kalinin

Eddie Olosunde[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 04:20, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The correct name, per the list and per Google results, is Eddie Olosunje. 'j' → 'd' as a typo gets only 6 GHits, and pageviews are ~10/year. Delete. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 03:39, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:38, 12 July 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.

Qarabash[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 04:21, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In reliable sources, this spelling refers to a village in Diyarbekir vilayet of the Ottoman Empire (see Google Books results). It's also a surname, but there are no wikipedia articles about such individuals. Therefore delete to encourage article creation. (t · c) buidhe 01:01, 12 July 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_July_12&oldid=1034526788"