Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 4[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 4, 2021.

Dead meme[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 18:28, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, not currently helpful to readers, delete unless a duly sourced mention can be added. signed, Rosguill talk 17:21, 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.

.hack Character Classes[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 00:15, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

redundant to .hack character classes JsfasdF252 (talk) 17:20, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Both. This is a completely bog standard "R from alternate capitalisation" of ".hack character classes" and we shouldn't delete one because it's "redundant" to the other, but there is no mention of character classes at the target article. The article content in the page history seems to be entirely WP:FANCRUFT related to the video game that was merged into the video game article but has subsequently been edited out over the last 12 years, leaving this without a good target. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 17:44, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per IP. The capitalization isn't an issue, but we don't really have any content about character classes for this game franchise, so this doesn't really help anything. Hog Farm Talk 18:30, 12 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.

Computer Xiangqi[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 Both deleted as Wikipedia:CSD#G5 both created by a sockpuppet see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xayahrainie43. Salix alba (talk): 19:51, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No content about Xiangqi at the target, delete. N.b. that the creator of the redirect has been globally locked. signed, Rosguill talk 17:19, 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.

Sayoku[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) 17:21, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, delete per WP:RLOTE signed, Rosguill talk 17:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. I can't even find any mention of Japan at the target, or any detailed description of left-wing politics at Politics of Japan even though it does mention several left-wing parties. Alternatively, super weak retarget to New Left in Japan, the only other semi-plausible target I could find, but I'm not really sure, since in Japan left-wing politics don't seem have a special connection to that movement. Regards, SONIC678 17:32, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Nothing particularly Japanese about the concept of left wing politics. The word is used a few times in the encyclopaedia and I think the search results do a good job of finding relevant usage. I oppose retargeting to New Left in Japan both because it is a partial title match and I don't think it's a good idea to send a term relating to a general concept (left-wing) to an article on a specific political movement. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 17:47, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 02:00, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is like redirecting List of people who have ever lived in the United States to World War I: not relevant at all. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 11:25, 7 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.

Space Marine Land Raider Crusader[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) 17:20, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another broken 40K vehicle redirect, this is supposed to be pointing at a section of Vehicles of the Space Marines in Warhammer 40,000 which was deleted in 2011. There's no mention of the Land Raider Crusader in the target article. Land Raider Crusader is a redirect to Space Marine (Warhammer 40,000), where the vehicle has two name drops as an example of a Space marine tank. I propose either retargeting to Space Marine (Warhammer 40,000) or deletion 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:30, 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.

Necrontyr (Warhammer 40,000)[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 18:16, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional race from the warhammer 40,000 universe that isn't covered at the target article. These used to target Necron (Warhammer 40,000), but that article was converted into a redirect yesterday following an AfD nomination. In the Warhammer lore the Necrontyr became the necrons, but I think it unlikely that the fictional background of the race is going to be covered in depth in the short overview in the main Warhammer article. The only mention I could find is a name drop in Elder race, but I don't think that's a suitable target. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:19, 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.

Necrodermis[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. signed, Rosguill talk 18:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable fictional material from the Warhammer 40,000 universe that isn't mentioned anywhere in the encyclopedia. This used to target Necron (Warhammer 40,000) which had 1 sentence covering the material, but that article was converted into a redirect yesterday following an AfD nomination. Basically unused, 17 page views in the last year. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:06, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep I've made a cited mention of the material in the article's Necron section. --Lenticel (talk) 08:58, 8 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.

Land Speeder[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 Landspeeder. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 09:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another broken 40K vehicle redirect, this is supposed to be pointing at a section of Vehicles of the Space Marines in Warhammer 40,000 which was deleted in 2011. There's no mention of the Land Speeder in the target article. We do however have a full article on the similarly named Landspeeder from star wars, I propose retargeting there. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:57, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • retarget per nom. Very plausible search term for the Star Wars article, and the only other use I can find is a non-notable band about whom we don't even have a mention that I've found. Thryduulf (talk) 18:09, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Landspeeder as the most plausible target. --Lenticel (talk) 00:48, 7 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.

Latomus[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 13#Latomus

Dry -hole clause[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! 09:14, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This badly-formatted title is not a likely search term, and was clearly an error when created, notwithstanding that the article was at this title for some time. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:39, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep per WP:RFD#HARMFUL. The article was at this title for a while, so there may be incoming links from other websites that would be broken by deleting. —Granger (talk · contribs) 19:15, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Granger, helpful and harmless redirect. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 20:46, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. Formatting hyphenated terms like this is something I've experienced from mobile phone predictive text input a few times if it doesn't have the whole term in its dictionary. Thryduulf (talk) 18:12, 6 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.

Damocles (video game[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 18:15, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Missing close parenthesis. Unlikely to aid in searches. There are no incoming internal links. The redirect has existed for seven years so I am starting a discussion here. ~ Ase1estecharge-paritytime 07:44, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Likely created in error. CycloneYoris talk! 07:54, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this search bar clutter per nom. Why do we need this when in most cases the correctly formatted version will appear? Regards, SONIC678 08:03, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this error in disambiguation (WP:COSTLY). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:40, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Implausible redirects should not be kept. 🐔 Chicdat  Bawk to me! 12:27, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as not useful for navigation --Lenticel (talk) 02:01, 6 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 16#1234567890

Template:Government Officials and Priesthood from the time of of Ramesses II Navigator[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) 18:44, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

These are leftovers from moves because of "of of" in the titles, possibly part of why they didn't seem to get very many pageviews since July 2015. Not sure if we should keep these lying around, so delete unless a justification can be provided. Regards, SONIC678 01:29, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Agree, not worth keeping either of these, nor likely to have relevant external links. --Sprachraum (talk) 05:14, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: These are template redirects from moves, so deleting them might break old versions of pages calling them. That said, they remained at these titles for five and one weeks respectively, so likelihood of damage is quite minimal. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:32, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. "of of" is clearly a plausible typo, how else would they have been created? Redirects are cheap - why delete them if they are unambiguous? ϢereSpielChequers 16:01, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both. 'of of' gets zero views, not particularly plausible or likely. Avilich (talk) 18:19, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WereSpielChequers. It's useless to nominate these kinds of redirects to RfD. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 03:58, 25 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:47, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete again. The only objection against deleting seems to be due to external links, but, as said above, these are unlikely. The redirects also resemble little the names of their targets, so they're not plausible search targets. Avilich (talk) 16:48, 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.

Even Though We Used to Be Together[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 18:14, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot make a connection between this article title and any FHFIF episode title, song title, character name, or otherwise. If there is a connection, I cannot find it. I am nominating this redirect for deletion on the grounds that I cannot see why it links to this series page. — Paper Luigi T • C 03:24, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Enwiki has nothing about this topic. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:42, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete According to the article in the page history It's a song that appeared in House of Bloo's, but it's not mentioned in that article and I can't find any sources to verify that it exists. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 12:45, 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_4&oldid=1138583275"