Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

November 7[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 7, 2021.

Mount St. Halenas[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 16#Mount St. Halenas

Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron Is Getting Problematic[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 16#Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron Is Getting Problematic

Genet. Couns.[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 11:43, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The ISO 4 journal abbreviation for this journal is J. Genet. Couns. The abbreviation Genet. Couns. is for a different journal, and this is a misleading redirect.

This should have been speedily deleted, but User:GB fan insisted that it wasn't, so here we are. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 21:43, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't insist on anything. I removed an WP:R3 speedy deletion tag from the redirect, stating that it wasn't recently created. This redirect was here for just under 14 years. ~ GB fan 10:29, 8 November 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.

Wīwī[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 15#Wīwī

Template:Prober name[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 11:44, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request deletion of Template:Prober name as an unlikely misspelling. The B and P keys are typed with opposite hands and opposite fingers. The Wikipedia report of unused templates is the only page linked to the redirect. — CJDOS, Sheridan, OR (talk) 18:37, 7 November 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.

Minecraft: The Movie (2019 film)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 15#Minecraft: The Movie (2019 film)

Salah Uddin[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 Salah ad-Din (name). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 01:47, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

As this appears to be a variant of Salah ad-Din (name), and there are multiple articles with titles containing this name, I think it should point there and not to any specific person. – Rummskartoffel 10:54, 22 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 11:14, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still unclear which page this should be retargeted to.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:32, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per nom. Salah ud-Din should also point to Salah ad-Din (name), and not to Saladin (disambiguation). Jay (talk) 06:02, 17 November 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.

11430[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 11:47, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Highly implausible search term, people are highly unlikely to search the airport's zip code looking for the airport. It could WP:ASTONISH someone that might have expected for a non-existent article on the number 11,430. As far as I know it is not standard practice to redirect postal codes to the areas they represent. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 13:56, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The probability of anyone actually searching that term as a number is very low, so it would not violate WP:ASTONISH, but there aren't really that much views to the redirect to begin with. "11430" isn't even mentioned in the airport article either, and per WP:R#DELETE number 8 this zip code would be very unlikely to be searched in any context. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:03, 7 November 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.

تونس[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 Tunisia. WP:SNOW closure. (non-admin closure) feminist (+) 07:37, 13 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know Arabic but I checked Arabic Wikipedia and found that ar:تونس refers to Tunisia rather than Tunis. I think it has the same name for the city and the country, but if so, the city must not be a primary topic. Sun8908 Talk 13:46, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, the redirect is already questionable since it's in a foreign language (see WP:RFFL) and since there seems to be ambiguity between the country Tunisia and the city Tunis, it's better to delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JayPlaysStuff (talk • contribs) 13:59, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • What WP:RFFL actually says: Examples of appropriate non-English redirects include: Original or official names of people, places, institutions, publications or products. Ambiguous foreign-language terms are either disambiguated (see e.g. Category:Disambiguation pages with Chinese character titles) or pointed to their WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT and hatnoted just like any other terms. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 15:32, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Tunisia as WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 15:32, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Tunisia per the 61 IP and WP:RFOREIGN to correspond with the Arabic Wikipedia. Regards, SONIC678 15:41, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Tunisia per Sonic and the IP editor. Thryduulf (talk) 20:50, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Tunisia per above --Lenticel (talk) 08:44, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Tunisia: This is the main topic. ―Susmuffin Talk 01:16, 10 November 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.

Bombe (Wolaita) (disambiguation)[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay (talk) 17:31, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

created for the hatnote in Bombe (Wolaita) - no longer needed and not likely to be used. Leschnei (talk) 13:42, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Unnecessary redirect with a double disambiguator. Should've been tagged for speedy deletion since it was recently created. CycloneYoris talk! 12:03, 16 November 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.

MU Cephei[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. The discussion has not definitively established whether "MU Cephei" refers primarily to Mu Cephei or a different star. However, the discussion has established that either they are the same star and so the redirect is redundant; or it refers to a star that has no coverage on Wikipedia and so the redirect is unhelpful. Both possibilities point towards deletion as the best outcome. Deryck C. 13:47, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target, and all other search results on the English Wikipedia appear to be about Mu Cephei. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:07, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Two different stars. The star MU Cephei is also a variable star (hence the MU), but a Cepheid and much fainter than the naked-eye Mu (μ) Cephei. Seems like it would be highly misleading to redirect to μ Cephei without any explanation in that article, and I'm not sure that explanations there about a typographical anomaly would be appropriate. Quite a common issue though, so maybe there is somewhere about stellar nomenclature that discusses this and MU Cep would be mentioned as an example? Or just delete it, we don't generally have redirects for non-notable stars. It probably isn't independently notable although it has been included as one of many in quite a few papers about Cepheids. There is one paper focused on MU Cep and just one other star, but I think that's it. Lithopsian (talk) 11:21, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What Paul_012 may have meant to say was: MU Cephei originally pointed to Mu Cephei... Jay (talk) 05:17, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep "μ" is listed at the target page. If the variable star designation were to be added to the list, then both could be listed. As it is now, it works for people looking for "mu Cephei", while not misleading people looking for "MU Cephei" into believing that that "μ Cephei" is "MU Cephei" -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 20:53, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Seriously? 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 23:44, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, this is a serious discussion. -- Tavix (talk) 22:35, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or keep (don't retarget). The categories on the redirect page apply to a different star, which would probably occupy the title per WP:DIFFCAPS if it had an article. It shouldn't be retargeted to μ, which would be a misleading redirect from incorrect capitalisation. --Paul_012 (talk) 02:50, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:37, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I found the info using SIMBAD. It is for that particular star and not another. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 15:53, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Out of curiosity here... if this is a different star, what would the catalogue entry for it be? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 00:15, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean? 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 18:27, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If Mu and MU are two different stars, they should have two different catalogue/database numbers. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:34, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
"MU Cephei" is a variable star designation, "μ Cephei" (mu Cephei) is a Bayer designation;; however I will note that a theoretical "M Cepehi" and "m Cephei" would both be Bayer designations for different stars, one lowercased, one uppercased. There is only lowercased Greek letters in Bayer, so there is no Mu/mu distinction, and variable star designations only use uppercase Latin letters. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 11:44, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
They are different stars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kepler-1229b (talk • contribs) 18:32, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as not mentioned at target per nom, as non-notable per Lithopsian, and as potentially confusing with μ Cephei per Paul. Jay (talk) 05:17, 17 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per others above. Not mentioned at target, so no point in keeping. CycloneYoris talk! 02:25, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Jay's summary of the problems. -- Tavix (talk) 22:35, 21 November 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.

Draft:Don[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. ✗plicit 11:49, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect no longer makes sense as the target is at its proper location — DaxServer (talk) 10:27, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Per nom. Kailash29792 (talk) 13:46, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep to avoid breaking links, and causes no harm. ~~~~
    User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)     23:23, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural keep. Any proposal to delete redirects from draft publications should be an RfC, not the RfD of a single redirect. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 05:00, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, there is no longer any such draft by that name. Also, Don is ambiguous and the redirect does not attempt to disambiguate which Don this may be. -- Tavix (talk) 14:37, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:31, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per WP:RDRAFT. That the title of the draft and the title of the published article are no exact matches is not relevant. Thryduulf (talk) 09:28, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:RDRAFT. It doesn't matter that the target was moved, the page history remains the same. Curbon7 (talk) 01:46, 8 November 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.

General Education[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 Procedural close. This be being discussed at Talk:General Education (film)#Requested move 5 November 2021. Thryduulf (talk) 20:54, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

With the capitalization, may be more likely to refer to the film (currently at General Education (film)), but there's still the more generic concept relating to (and redirecting to) curriculum. Thoughts? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:27, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

With the capitalization, may be more likely to refer to the film (currently at General Education (film)), but there's still the more generic concept relating to (and redirecting to) curriculum. Thoughts? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:27, 7 November 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_November_7&oldid=1073158598"