Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 16

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 16[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 16, 2021.

Future GPX Cyber Formula minor voice actors[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. --BDD (talk) 19:55, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

More from WP:Broken redirects list. Voice actors that are no longer mentioned at the target. The list that was split off removed them five years ago. Propose deletion.
Retargetting Takemura seems to face WP:X or Y problems per search.
Matsuda only shows up in the name pages Shinya and Matsuda. -2pou (talk) 18:46, 16 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.

Fuckyerbrainsout[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 21:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Target is an album that is now itself a redirect to an artist discography. This song isn't mentioned there, so the redirect no longer serves a purpose. Lennart97 (talk) 18:40, 16 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.

20015 NCAA Division I Men's Swimming and Diving Championships[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 deleted by Liz. I was not the creator of this redirect, and I thought I needed a clearer consensus, so nevermind. (non-admin closure) Seventyfiveyears (talk) 15:13, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect, as adding another "0" doesn't make it plausible or useful. I have already created the redirect for "20015", in which I targeted to "List of minor planets: 20001–21000#015". This redirect page had only less than 1000 pageviews, while the target has over 4000 pageviews. I'm proposing to speedy delete this redirect as {{Db-error}} unless justification can be provided. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 18:22, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you're proposing to speedy delete a redirect, then why are you nominating the redirect to RfD? — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 20:18, 16 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.

Architecture of Dance[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. Hog Farm Talk 18:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Propose deletion. Found in WP:Broken redirects list. Not mentioned at target. When it was there (before removal), it was an empty section. -2pou (talk) 17:53, 16 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.

Lost My Gun[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 deleted by Anthony Bradbury (talk · contribs) per G3. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:56, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be a hoax or joke from 2007 with little relevance to the article it targets. The page in the article history is a doctored version of the Gears of War page, with all mentions of "Gears of War" replaced with "Lost My Gun", including in the reference. 14 years later I cannot find a single source linking this name to gears of war, so if this was a 2007 era meme it seems to be completley non notable. Google results mainly relate to people asking for advice after loosing a gun. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 17:46, 16 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.

Timcanpi[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. Hog Farm Talk 18:06, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is apparently the name of a Japanese silver accessory company, which is not mentioned in the main article on silver. They have a name drop in List of D.Gray-man characters as they apparently inspired the name of one of the characters from that franchise, but I don't think that's a suitable target and they're not mentioned anywhere else. There is an unsources 2 sentence article in the page history, but it would be A7 speedy deletable if restored. google results for me consist almost entirely of online dictionaries that have taken a definition of this word from this redirect and now think it means silver. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Should have been A7'd instead of redirected. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:30, 16 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.

1.000...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 delete. Hog Farm Talk 18:05, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The proof that a 1 followed by an infinite number of decimal zeros with any arbitrary number stuck on the end = 1 is not mentioned in the target article. While these are both identities involving decimal representations of 1 I don't think it's helpful to readers to send them to an article where this number is not mentioned. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 13:52, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. If the searcher meant 1 followed by an infinite number of decimal zeros with a 1 stuck on the end, then that can't can't exist by definition of infinite, and if they meant a non-infinite number of decimal zeros, then that isn't 1. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:44, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: It's not only not mentioned in the target article, but it's also not exactly mathematically equivalent as Shhhnotsoloud pointed out. The fact that there are almost no pageviews suggests that it's not a very useful redirect either. — MarkH21talk 03:31, 25 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.

2020 American self-coup attempt[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 Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:54, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think these would be better as redirects to the article on attempts to overturn the u.s. election, rather than the article on the election in general. (Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election, maybe the section on whether it should be described as a coup). Listing it here because this is a controversial topic and I don't think it's a good idea for me to retarget them as an IP. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 13:02, 16 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.

Template:R to person[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 21:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is incorrect. Not every redirect to a person also goes to a person. I just wanted to tag Education Standards Institute with this template, but with its current target, it would not fit the redirect. Either delete (and examine the ~20 transclusions case-by-case) or create as a new rcat. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:59, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: almost all of the redirect templates are "R from..." rather than "R to...", so this is not needed within the list of possible templates. It is certainly not the same as {{R from person}} which is used for things like Author->Book. PamD 00:20, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and perhaps find a better target such as {{R to list entry}}(?). There are actually quite a few "R to" templates, so saying "almost all" are "R from" rcat templates seems insufficient reason to delete. I've let this one go waiting to see if its potential usage would increase, so we have to determine if its present usage warrants its conversion to an rcat template. 20 or so transclusions? maybe not yet, but we don't have a crystal ball, so we might want to just leave it alone for a while longer. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. put'r there 20:48, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This template currently has 22 transclusions, and nearly all of them should be using other redirect templates. If my count is correct:
That leaves DressCode (a redirect to Toni Scullion) as the only appropriate use. I don't thing that's enough to justify keeping the template. - Eureka Lott 01:28, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, I find that I added {{R to person}} to DressCode, when creating the redirect from the charity to its founder. I didn't notice that it redirected to its opposite, and have now replaced it with the more appropriate {{R from subtopic}}.
There is no point in redirecting something to its opposite, but there is also no need for the template {{R to person}}, as demonstrated above. If there is a need for such a template, it should exist as a template and not be a redirect. PamD 08:38, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • SOFIXEDIT: I have now corrected all those uses identified above. We do not need a redirect which points to its opposite meaning. If not simply deleted it should be created as a valid Rcat template, with an explanatory note pointing to the likely alternative templates to use instead. PamD 09:12, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think my fixes were more or less as listed above, though I don't remember an album: Nick Simper's Fandango is "band to member/leader", for which there doesn't seem to be a template, so I gave it {{R from subtopic}}. It was one of the few where {{R to person}} would have been valid, if it hadn't been a redirect, but this was certainly not a {{R from person}}. PamD 09:24, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the fixes and for catching that. Yes, that's the one I misread as an album name. - Eureka Lott 14:00, 18 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.

Template:Infobox Academic[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:Infobox academic. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:52, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox Academic leads to Template:Infobox scientist rather than to Template:Infobox academic, but seems to be used on several pages (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Infobox_Academic) including, for example, Jill Lepore where a historian is shown with "Scientific career". Needs some disentangling. PamD 11:24, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Template:Infobox academic as an "R from alternate capitalisation". Basically all the current transclusions would work better with the generic academic infobox in my opinion. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:29, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@86.23.109.101: Will that break the existing uses? PamD 14:02, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Of the 10 current transclusions 5 would work fine because they're only using basic input fields that exist in both infoboxes. The other 5 would either need swapping to Template:Infobox scientist or having the field names swapped to their Template:Infobox academic equivalents, depending upon whether they're best classified as scientists or academics. Since there's only 5 of them it shouldn't be too much work to do. Even if you left them alone it woldn't "Break" the info boxes per say, they should be coded to ignore input parameters they don't recognise and just produce a partial infobox. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:14, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom. I have manually updated the small number of articles that were affected so there is zero impact. MB 14:56, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@MB: Well done, thanks. Jill Lepore looks better. PamD 21:20, 16 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.

AB 2[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 AB2. There is consensus to disambiguate, and the proposed title for the disambiguation page is AB2. (non-admin closure) – Uanfala (talk) 22:19, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing in the article or at List of Alberta provincial highways to indicate this highway is known as "AB 2", and AB 2 is ambiguous with Aichi AB-2. My change of target reverted by @NASCARfan0548:. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:53, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The state/province postal code with the number is standard pretty much everywhere in the US and Canada. Aichi AB-2 has a hyphen. HotdogPi 20:07, 25 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 01:45, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is the English Wikipedia. Here, the primary topic is Alberta Hwy 2. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 12:54, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree, I don't think this has anything to do with this being "the English Wikipedia" and everything to do with where readers are located. To Americans/Canadians it may be that "AB2" unambiguously refers to "Alberta highway 2", but as a reader from the UK I wouldn't expect to end up there, for me the primary topic would probably be the UK post code. This name isn't mentioned in the target article and even a google search for AB 2 alberta or AB2 alberta turns up a complete mess of results covering everything from insurance forms to baseball teams to the highway. For these short letter - number combination redirects with multiple valid targets disambiguation is the obvious solution. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 13:20, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the anon. I'm also from the UK and to me AB2 is far more likely to be related to Aberdeen than Alberta. To someone with knowledge of Cuneiform it is highly plausible that the signs will be what they are thinking of, similarly to someone who deals with stellar classification. When I search for AB 2 on google, my results on the first two pages were: "Basic overwinter stubble" (an arable landuse classifcation), a nickel-aluminium bronze (6 hits), AB2 Bio a Swiss drug company (3 hits), the postcode (2 hits), Angry Birds 2 (4 hits), an amplifier (related to nanotechnology somehow I think), an antibody, a bank share ticker and lots of algebra. Adding Alberta to the search term the first occurrence of the highway is the last entry of the first page of results - there is no evidence it is the primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 23:28, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate, I agree with the evidence presented by 86.23.109.101 and Thryduulf that Alberta Highway 2 is not the primary topic. Adumbrativus (talk) 03:57, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Deryck C. 09:29, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per this discussion there is clearly not a primary topic. Elli (talk | contribs) 10:44, 16 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.

1234567890[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 31#1234567890

Category:Tamil folks singers[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 21:37, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible typo, not useful as a soft redirect, no meaningful page history. MClay1 (talk) 09:06, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete category redirects should be used sparingly and this one is unhelpful. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:49, 16 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.

ISO 3166-1 N3 Multiuse regional user templates[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 26#ISO 3166-1 N3 Multiuse regional user templates

Left Tern[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 17:22, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This movie was purported to be in development for years, and isn't mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia now that Carniolus removed it in February 2015 because "[it] was never officially announced [and the] only sources [were] LinkedIn and a résumé." I'm not sure if this is still worth keeping, so I'm leaning towards deleting this unless someone can find a good target, although I'm open to being swayed otherwise. Regards, SONIC678 05:27, 16 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.

Template:United States Senators from maine[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! 08:42, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely miscapitalization (no versions for other states exist); unused. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:17, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Harmless alternate capitalisation that unambiguously refers to the current template. The template was at this title for over a decade before being moved ~18 months ago so there will be a lot of uses of this template in old versions of pages. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:48, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per 86...; K4 applies. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 20:21, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the 86 IP and J947, I can see people forgetting to capitalize the M. This redirect isn't hurting anything here. Regards, SONIC678 00:51, 17 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.

Template:W-p[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 23#Template:W-p

Template:WP-Todo[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 17:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused unnecessary template shortcut - no links anywhere and longer than typing {{To do}}. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:08, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Ah yes that's ancient, replaced the following year. As the creator, happy to just delete it. – SJ + 00:17, 17 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.

Template:W cl mu hist[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 17:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused bad shortcut - takes more time to think of how to spell it and what it means than just linking {{History of Western art music}}. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:02, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Implausible shortcut. I think it's supposed to be "Western classical music history" but it's not immediatley obvious and if you came across this in wikicode it would require some thought to figure out what template it is. has received 2 page views in the year and a half it's been around and has no transclusions, so doesn't seem to have seen any use. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:45, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Delete per nom and above; what nonsense. Kind of funny though... Aza24 (talk) 21:42, 16 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.

Template:W c[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 21:36, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Uncommonly-named template shortcut, potentially ambiguous with {{wc}} which targets somewhere else; not linked anywhere so unlikely used (yes, it's subst-only, but if it was used it would likely show up on a list of shortcuts or somewhere else). Elli (talk | contribs) 05:00, 16 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.

Template:WPGEORGIA(COUNTRY)[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 21:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused useless template shortcut (that disambiguation hurts my eyes and isn't something someone would likely type to save a few characters). Elli (talk | contribs) 04:58, 16 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.

Template:WPESCHATOLOGY[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 21:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unused all-caps template redirect; also "WP" prefix doesn't make sense as this doesn't target a Wikiproject. Elli (talk | contribs) 04:57, 16 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.

In Review[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 17:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The target, which is now itself a redirect to the artist's discography, is an album called "Review", not "In Review". I think "in review" could refer to many things, so deleting the redirect would be best. Lennart97 (talk) 10:02, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:16, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – Not a likely search term. If it is searched, it would be more useful for the user to see search results. There's bound to be a song or something with that title that can use the name one day without worrying about the redirect. MClay1 (talk) 09:10, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. For In review I think of Peer review, but since that redirect doesn't exist, delete the uppercase form unless a target that would justify the proper noun can be identified. Alternatively, I would be okay with retargeting to Review (disambiguation) if others feel that is a better option. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:47, 16 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.

Deimos (oil rig)[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 21:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect needs discussion. There is not now and never was an "oil rig" named Deimos. SpaceX did purchase out of bankruptcy an old oil drilling rig, and that marine vessel is in port for total refit above the water level. The oil drilling equipment is being cut off and scrapped, and can't "drill rig" no more. SpaceX named the ship formerly named Valaris 8500 to Deimos. There is a properly named redirect for this article: Deimos (launch platform). I'm seriously unsure if the Deimos (oil rig) redirect is an invalid redirect, and should perhaps be deleted, or if it should stay (for a while?) even though no drilling rig is or ever was named Deimos, which might give the Wikipedia reader a wrong impression about reality. N2e (talk) 04:17, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This includes Phobos (oil rig) also. As the person that created these redirects, I agree that there technically were never were oil rigs, and "launch platform" is a much better descriptor. Maybe the best thing is to move both of them to Phobos (former oil rig)/Deimos (former oil rig), or delete them entirely. Not sure what would be the best. N828335 (talk) 04:30, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. These launch platforms were formerly oil rigs before being refitted so it seems like a sensible enough search term - it got 17 page views in the last month. A google search suggests that "Deimos (oil rig)" is overwhelmingly associated with the SpaceX launch platform, and I couldn't find any other oil platforms with this name. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 12:12, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If we just add "former" to the name by moving each of them, it could keep the search term and remove any possibility of misunderstanding. N828335 (talk) 15:35, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think the qualifier is necessary, if you search for "Phobos oil rig" or "Deimos oil rig" in any search engine you'll get pages and pages of results about how SpaceX is using a modified oil rig called Phobos/Demios to launch its rockets. We also don't have articles on any other oil rigs with the same names that this could be ambiguous with. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:45, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:14, 16 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.

Elexa[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 26#Elexa

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_16&oldid=1138583177"