Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 15

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 15[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 15, 2021.

Corki[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 Corky. ✗plicit 02:23, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not described with this meaning anywhere; Corky is a better target. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:59, 15 October 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.

Corki Buchek[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 02:24, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target any more; no search results elsewhere on-wiki. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:58, 15 October 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.

Cho'gath[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 02:25, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target; all search results elsewhere on Wikipedia apart from the unrelated Chogath appear to be passing mentions. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:53, 15 October 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.

Experimental treatment of androgenic alopecia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 23#Experimental treatment of androgenic alopecia

Belfairs Methodist Church[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 Leigh-on-Sea. The church is now mentioned there -- Tavix (talk) 00:57, 30 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is inappropriate. The church is not a sub-topic of Killing of David Amess it merely is the place where it happens to have taken place. People searching for the church itself will be surprised to be taken to the 'killing' article which makes almost no mention of the church. If this event becomes knows as 'The Belfairs Methodist Church Murder' then it might be, but I think just leaving it as a red link for now is entirely appropriate. The church could plausible become notable enough for an article itself. JeffUK (talk) 20:05, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per WP:CHEAP. The church is not independently notable, but is a valid search term as the location of this event. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:08, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:CHEAP is an essay not a policy, This simply doesn't fit any of the purposes of a redirect WP:RPURPOSE. If it's a sub-topic of any article maybe it is a sub-topic of Leigh-on-Sea where the church is located. JeffUK (talk) 20:24, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Just noting that whether it is an essay or a policy doesn't matter if it is something that is widely followed in practice. "Valid search term" is also a valid reason for a redirect, provided it is likely to lead to the most appropriate topic. On that point you might be right that linking to the recent event might be obvious WP:RECENTISM and this should link to Leigh-on-Sea, although of course someone looking for this is at the time more likely to be looking for the recent event, and WP:Readers first is valid advice. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:28, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I just don't think it's realistic that someone typing 'Belfair Methodist Church' (even today) into the search is likely to be looking for this article, they're going to be looking for an article about the church. One does not exist and that is just fine. Without the redirect they will still see the Ames articles prominently in the search results, AND see the Leigh on Sea article, surely this is better for the reader? JeffUK (talk) 20:46, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I have closed the duplicate Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belfairs Methodist Church, procedurally, as it was at the wrong venue and this was already open. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:09, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target to Leigh on Sea. It’s not worth deleting the redirect, but it is more accurate to have a location in the town without an article to redirect to the article about the town. Kingsif (talk) 20:58, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    There is currently no content about this church in that article meaning that would be an inappropriate redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 22:15, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment add to the Leigh-on-Sea article for the assassination, and thus the location would be on the civic article. Then this can be targetted there. A high profile assassination is surely a notable incident in the history. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:18, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment it may be useful to write an article on Belfairs, the ward of Leigh-on-Sea, if anyone knows anything about it. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 02:08, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This isn't the name of the killing its self so the redirect is arguably incorrect, that said at least temporarily may serve as a useful redirect for people searching. Belfairs is a ward so perhaps the church could be covered there but ward boundaries change a lot and that article doesn't exist. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:06, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The redirect should lead to wherever the greatest content about the church is. Presently that is the killing article, so it's not incorrect from that perspective. Thryduulf (talk) 19:51, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Change target to Leigh on Sea, per Kingsif. Redirecting it to a recent murder would violate WP:NOTNEWS. Yoshiman6464 ♫🥚 02:25, 18 October 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.

John Reynolds (Actor)[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 John Reynolds (actor). ✗plicit 02:27, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is an interesting one. The current target refers to someone who starred in one film (widely considered to be one of the worst of all time) before commiting suicide in 1966, while people who don't capitalize the "a" will be sent to an article about someone who has a recurring role in Stranger Things. Recommend retargeting to John Reynolds (actor) and leaving a hatnote to the previous target. OcelotCreeper2 (talk) 19:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to John Reynolds (actor). I've added a hatnote. (For the record, there used to be an article on him.)— J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 23:07, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, this film has such a meme cult following that an article on him has been created three times despite his non-notability. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 23:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to John Reynolds (actor) per nom and J947 (thanks for that hatnote!). Someone might hold the ⇧ Shift key for too long, plus it doesn't make sense for the differently capitalized disambiguators to lead to two different places. Regards, SONIC678 23:31, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per above, pretty obvious/uncontroversial. ~~~~
    User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)     23:50, 15 October 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.

Mailinator[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 02:28, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

First page was merged into the current target in 2016, but isn't mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia anymore. Second one used to redirect to the first, but was retargeted as a double redirect. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:42, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - the only mention I can find so far is an attempt at linking the page in an old edit, since removed. No valid target to redirect to. edit: in my usual fashion, I forgot to check the page history itself, which is fairly significant. I've been looking for sources to indicate notability and so far I'm only finding mentions, so I'll keep my vote the same unless something else comes up.20:33, 15 October 2021 (UTC) ASUKITE 20:17, 15 October 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.

Mortal Kombat: The Movie[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 Mortal Kombat (disambiguation). ✗plicit 02:29, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Now that a reboot exists, these redirects should be retargeted to Mortal Kombat (disambiguation) OcelotCreeper2 (talk) 17:06, 15 October 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.

C/O[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 keep. Nominator is a banned sock. -- Tavix (talk) 02:29, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RFD#D2, confusing. This is an abbreviation for "Care of" or "In care of", but the target, a disambiguation page, did not have that. it had of three entries its first WP:DABENTRY a WP:DABBLUE to Wiktionary, which is about as much use as a snake in an arse-kicking competition (I don't mean Wiktionary, but the link) and its third as a link to an article that never mentioned either CO OR c/o OR anything. I can see that CO is a useful DAB, but this is useless redirecting to it, since no entry says "C/O" or "c/o". Care of targets Mad Men (season 6). 85.67.32.244 (talk) 12:41, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My change from DAB to R is here, in Care of. As you will see the first entry was a Wiktionary entry, the third target does not mention "c/o" or anything close to it. For the want of doubt, I have never seen Mad Max in any season and have no particular view on whether the redirect should target it. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 12:48, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, given that CO already mentioned C/O for Certificate of origin, and I've also added a few other WP:DABMENTIONs and such (e.g. former name of the art gallery Gerhardsen Gerner). Also, having Care of point to a WP:PTM is not ideal. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 13:39, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep' per 61.239.39.90. Everything encyclopaedic "C/O" can refer to is directly or indirectly covered at the current target. Thryduulf (talk) 14:30, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the target nom is referring to, is not CO but an old version of Care of, to which the redirect never targeted. I am not clear with this nomination. What is the argument here with regards to C/O targetting to CO? Jay (talk) 20:32, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but explicitly list Care of in the list and explicitly state "C/O" as a variant being disambiguated at the target. Mdewman6 (talk) 22:41, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep and add Care of to the disambiguation page per Mdewman6. There's a few other uses of this variant as well listed on there. Regards, SONIC678 23:39, 15 October 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.

The Border Battle[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 1#The Border Battle

Moni Scarpa[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) 18:59, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The target mentions a Moni Ritchie but not a Moni Scarpa. The article formerly at this location suggests these are the same person, but I don't think a single unsourced sentence that uses a different name in an article about another person makes for a useful redirect. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 10:58, 2 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete per nom. Although redirect seems to be a classic case of an {{R with history}}, so not sure if deletion is appropriate. One thing I did notice though, is that target article would make an excellent candidate at AfD, since it lacks proper sources and has very little content. CycloneYoris talk! 01:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:INVOLVED relist to allow the October 2 log page to be closed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • weak keep, Moni is mentioned at target. I don't know if this helps or hinders, but Moni (that's a ridiculously short article and nothing to do with this) or rather Móni are pet names, short names, for Mónika (name) in Hungarian. Although she (I assume) is only briefly mentioned, WP:BLP may apply as Moni Rtchiie founded the multimedia rock group, I know it is a passing mention but it is, to be pedantic, biographical details. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 13:00, 15 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. --CycloneYoris talk! 05:32, 20 October 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.

Deathtoengue[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 02:31, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another heavy metal Eubot redirect that isn't used much, which is getting A LOET fewer pageviews than the fictional band's proeper name Deathtöngue and the version without the umlaut because of the error. Delete it unless a justification can be proevided. Regards, SOENIC678 04:04, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. After five years we are still clearing up Eubot's crap. Others argued at the time for a new criterion at CSD, I said no I think we can handle it. I was wrong. The editor was in good faith, but misguided. This is metal umlaut, it is easier if you say so explicitly. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 13:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix (talk) 02:33, 16 October 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.

Archer[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. Continue discussing at Talk:Archer (disambiguation)#Requested move 16 October 2021 which is a more appropriate venue than RFD. (non-admin closure). Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:49, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Crouch, Swale Did you mean to leave RFD notice at Archer? MB 16:36, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Archer → Archer (disambiguation) Archery  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
    PamD changed the redirect target from Archer (disambiguation) to Archery after the RfD listing. Jay (talk) 13:12, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I did so because in the previous state the word "archer" was redirected to a dab page which had no link to Archery, an unacceptable situation: retargetting the redirect (reverting to long-standing target) seemed the simplest remedy, rather than editing the dab page during this discussion. WP:BRD PamD 13:17, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I added the note to avoid confusion. My "keep" was based on the current target, not the target as per nomination. Thryduulf's "retarget" was based on nomination's target, not current target. I then wondered if I voted wrongly. Jay (talk) 13:47, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This has mostly redirected to archery, but one or more editors have repeatedly changed it without discussion. Starting discussion myself to resolve this. The dab page shows archery is PT. Recommend restoring as it was. MB 01:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If this is going to be kept as is, Archer (2009 TV series) should at least also be added as a PT at the top of the page. OcelotCreeper2 (talk) 19:29, 15 October 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.

Delay (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 retarget to Delay#Sports. MBisanz talk 14:24, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced this is the right target. Delay of game may be better. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:01, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • comment hmmm I see the point, but "delay of game" and "delayed game" are indeed different cases. in American/Gridiron footbal, "delay of game" is a penalty where a team does not initiate a live-action play during a game within a specific period of time, where a "delayed game" is an occurence when the entire game is stopped or not started for an official reason (such as weather). They are two different cases with similar names. Maybe make it a Disambig? But seriously--nice catch.--Paul McDonald (talk) 17:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Delay#Sports that already disambiguates these two meanings. The first entry there will need to be reworded to point directly at the target though. Thryduulf (talk) 22:26, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Doesn't make much sense for the page "Delay" to have an entry "Rainout (sports)." If I had to guess, the entire reason that Delay (game) exists is so that there would be a reason to link to Rainout (sports) on the disambig page for Delay. In which case, the redirect is working as intended. Mlb96 (talk) 05:12, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      You don't need a redirect to do that. You just write something like "Delayed game, or Rainout (sports), ...". Synonyms are not uncommon on dab pages. Thryduulf (talk) 23:50, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      I agree that looks like a good solution. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:12, 11 October 2021 (UTC) (nom)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:01, 15 October 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.

W.E.B[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 W.E.B.. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:11, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a reasonable redirect. I nominated for CSD, though it was denied as it not being recently created. Currently, there are no articles that use the redirect and the only user pages that use it either do so in a warning message for vandalism or in the notification of the page's CSD/AFD nomination. I propose it be deleted. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:13, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:55, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to W.E.B. per Mlb96. Conveniently, that article has a hatnote to the disambiguation if needed. ✗plicit 02:35, 23 October 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.

AM/FM[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 Radio receiver#Broadcast radio receivers. Thryduulf (talk) 19:01, 1 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

AM/FM is strongly correlated with the concept of AM broadcasting and FM broadcasting. This title should probably be disambiguated between this concept and the current unrelated AM/FM/GIS target. BD2412 T 01:17, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, there are schemes that modulate in amplitude, frequency and phase, which makes constellation diagrams look very pretty. I'm arguing that it's not useful to conflate the two without some further qualification (e.g. "radio"). To give an analogy, we have AC/DC (electrical) targeting Electric_current#AC_and_DC, that makes sense as the heading is "AC and DC". Here we have AM radio targeting AM broadcasting and FM radio targeting FM broadcasting, but AM/FM radio targets Radio_receiver#Broadcast radio receivers, even though there's a sub-subsection "AM and FM". While broadcast audio is probably the most familiar use by far, I feel that the unqualified "AM/FM" is not specific enough to target that. I'm probably in a minority, though. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 17:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix (talk) 02:36, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Radio receiver#Broadcast radio receivers, which is a section that discusses combination radio receivers that tune both AM and FM signals, by far the most common form of commercial radio receiver since about the 1950s. You probably have an AM/FM radio at least in your home and your car, and so probably did your parents and grandparents. You might also have an AM/FM radio in your smartphone or other portable devices. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 16:16, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    No doubt that's the primary topic for "AM/FM radio", but that's not the topic of discussion. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 17:47, 9 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix (talk) 02:36, 16 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It's the primary topic for "AM/FM" as well. What other topic besides broadcast radio could it refer to? AM/FM/GIS is a subtopic of another topic that's already very niche, especially compared with commercial radio. Yes, there are other common radio receiving devices that combine AM and FM and other modulations, but none are known by those terms. It's television, not "FM monaural audio with subtractive stereo and motion picture luminance on an AM-VSB subcarrier and additive chrominance over QAM". Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:50, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:55, 15 October 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_October_15&oldid=1142917590"