Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 6

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 6[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 6, 2021.

Striped Sweater[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 14#Striped Sweater

Psychofreaks[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 14:27, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, couldn't find any relevant results in an internet search. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 20:54, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Looks like a hinted future track by Camila from her forthcoming album Familiar it should of not been created yet. DanTheMusicMan2 (talk) 23:48, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. Clearly WP:TOOSOON applies here, since the track has yet to be released. CycloneYoris talk! 00:11, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This can wait until the WP article on her third album is created. feminist (+) 02:29, 14 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.

VTAK[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 and retarget to Ventricular tachycardia respectively. The latter I would call an WP:NCRET. --BDD (talk) 22:00, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The target, a disambiguation page, previously listed a single entry spelled "VTAK", the film A View to a Kill. I have removed this entry because it failed WP:DABACRONYM: the film article does not use the acronym VTAK (let alone VTAC), nor could I find any reliable sources which use it either [1][2]. The only acronym sometimes used for the film is AVTAK [3] English Wikipedia discusses nothing else called VTAK either (not counting the WP:PTM Vták Ohnivák, which would not be an appropriate target; wikt:vták just means "bird"). Suggest deletion. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 02:30, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. --Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 12:46, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now. This could be a weak spelling for VTEC or VTAC, but there aren't really any entries worth digging up. There's Applied Research Associates as Virtual Tactical Assault Kit (VTAK) as mentioned in this press release [4]. There's also the Foreign Trade Arbitration Commission in USSR [5] but even then the VTAK and later ICAC don't have articles here. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:52, 28 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or retarget to Ventricular tachycardia as a plausible phonetic mispelling. This could apply to any of the entries, but in particular "V-tach" gets thrown around constantly in medical dramas, and its spelling is non-obvious. Someone could easily think there's a "k" in there, especially with the term often appearing near "EKG". Given that it's linked from the dab, no strong preference between keep and ret. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 05:28, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete VTAK: no article and obscures search. Retarget V-tak to Ventricular tachycardia: good idea Tamzin. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:17, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete VTAK as per above. Redirect V-TAK (and Retarget V-tak) to Ventricular tachycardia. I agree with the logic (per Tamzin), but if someone already thinks "tach" they would likely consider it an abbreviation, so they would search for "V-tach" or "V tach", and indeed, there already are redirects V tach and V-tach to this article. If someone think it's "tak", they are hearing it as an acronym that is pronounced as a word (like "NATO"), which should be capitalized "TAK". Because the first letter "V" is heard as an initialism, it is sensibly hyphenated initialism-acronym, i.e., V-TAK. I wouldn't add V-tak with lower case since acronyms should be capitalized, but since it already exists, I would also redirect it to Ventricular tachycardia as per Shhhnotsoloud. Coastside (talk) 17:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As things stand, I see consensus to delete the first, but that could change as discussion continues on the second.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 15:39, 6 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.

Kingdom of Grenada[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 Emirate of Granada. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 23:42, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have created this redirect to be in line with all 16 Commonwealth kingdoms, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 4#Commonwealth kingdom. Apparently User:Narky Blert want to delete/retarget this redirect. Somerby (talk) 10:39, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Grenada has never been a kingdom. It was formerly a colony of the UK crown - just like e.g. British North America once was. No British monarch has ever been king or queen of Grenada, or British North America for that matter. Narky Blert (talk) 10:47, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Emirate of Granada and mark as a {{R avoided double redirect}} of Kingdom of Granada. Other than this redirect, every google hit for "Kingdom of Grenada" relates to the Islamic realm in what is now Spain and seems to be an accepted spelling for it. After spending a while trying to exclude results for that I finally got results for the New Kingdom of Granada, in present day Colombia, which is linked from my suggested target via a hatnote to Kingdom of Granada (disambiguation). Excluding the New Kingdom, I get some user-generated content, and an international trade agreement noting a publication called "The Kingdom of Grenada Gazette" relating to Guyana in a trade agreement between the EU and CARIFORUM, googling the name of the publication brings only directly related documents. Thryduulf (talk) 11:14, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Thryduulf, it is really strange that Queen of Grenada and King of Grenada will target Monarchy of Grenada and Kingdom of Grenada will lead to Emirate of Granada, isn't it? --Somerby (talk) 11:44, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    The purpose of a redirect is so that readers using that search term can find the content they are looking for. Even after a lot of effort to try and make "Kingdom of Grenada" return results relating the monarchy of the Caribbean island (iirc the search term was eventually "Kingdom of Grenada" -"Granada" -Spain -Arabic -Iberia -Moorish -"New Kingdom") not one of the results related to that - the closest I got was the name an extremely obscure official gazette. It's extremely clear that anybody actually using the term "Kingdom of Grenada" is going to be WP:ASTONISHED to land anywhere other than an article about the historical Arabic realm in present-day Spain. At most it should be an entry on the Kingdom of Granada (disambiguation) page, but as that already links to Grenada (disambiguation) I'm not convinced that is justified. Thryduulf (talk) 12:52, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Please be careful to distinguish Grenada, an island country in the Caribbean, from Granada, a province and city in Spain. Certes (talk) 15:53, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Search results indicate that "Grenada" is either an accepted alternate spelling or extremely common misspelling of the Islamic realm that predated the Spanish province. Regardless of whether "Grenada" is a correct or incorrect spelling of that entity, it is the primary topic for the search term "Kingdom of Grenada" by multiple orders of magnitude, and the next most common is a partial title match for the "New Kingdom of Granada" in South America. The only connection between the phrase "Kingdom of Grenada" and the island country in the Caribbean I can find is a substring of the title of an official publication whose existence I can verify only from a mention in connection with a single obscure international treaty. Thryduulf (talk) 17:23, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Thryduulf. Calling the island nation "Kingdom of Grenada" looks almost like OR. Note that the island is Granada in Spanish. Srnec (talk) 00:42, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, it's not. It's that kind of tomfoolery – running a link to another Wikipedia (ES:WP) then sayinmps "Note that" as if that had some authority: That is duly MOS:NOTED. The island is "Granada (pa%C3%ADs)" in the Spanish Wikpedia. We're not here to discuss how Spanish Wikipedia disambiguates its articles, whether Granada trumps Grenada in the Spanish Wikipedia. We are here to try to help decide as best we can, what an English-speaking reader would expect to find if she entered this name into English Wikipedia's search engine. The criteria are narrower or broader as you wish, but the principle is get readers to where they want to be, whether that is a DAB, an R, a search engine. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 02:21, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
And all the evidence points to an English-speaking reader expecting to find Emirate of Granada if they entered this name into English Wikipedia's search engine (or used any of the many other methods of finding English Wikipedia content). Thryduulf (talk) 09:39, 7 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.

Lauren King[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 Lauren J. King. (non-admin closure) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 01:07, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There has been another "Lauren King" at Lauren J. King who has recently been voted in to be a US federal judge. Its usage is also quite common, see [7] and [8] —twotwofourtysix(My talk page and contributions) 08:30, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget and hatnote. A person with an article is going to be primary over a person without in at least the majority of cases. Thryduulf (talk) 10:17, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Lauren J. King per nom and Thryduulf. CycloneYoris talk! 00:10, 14 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.

Wanasur[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! 10:57, 25 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, no relevant results on GScholar or DuckDuckGo as far as I was able to see. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 17:20, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I was asked by a wikipedian on my talk page to help disambiguate an article where Wanasur was used. There are many online results for Vanasur/a see [9]. Wanaur/a is a plausible alternate spelling and search keyword. So it should not be deleted, unless there is a conflict and/or better target. Venkat TL (talk) 17:35, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:19, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep per Venkat TL. If this is simply an alternate form of the name, I can live with the {{R without mention}}. The only current use of either one of these on the English Wikipedia (Waneshwar Mahadev Temple) is indeed refering to Banasura. --BDD (talk) 20:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:45, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a plausible alternative (mis)spelling. For a certain class of words in Hindi, there is a /b/ ~ /v/ alternation, and /v/ (at least before non-front vowels like /a/) can be anglicised as w. – Uanfala (talk) 14:42, 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.

English republicanism[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 Refined the first and retargeted the second. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 23:35, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Create a disambiguation page like that which I was created before it was reverted. Maybe add link to Commonwealth of England too. User:Certes, I agree with you that not all those who seek independence for England also advocate a republic, but also not all those who advocate a republic seek independence for England. And English republicanism can mean both, thus a disambiguation page is the best choice. Somerby (talk) 06:42, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We can't distinguish by WP:SMALLDETAILS: how does "English republicanism" differ from "English Republicanism"?
You state "not all those who advocate a republic seek independence for England": patently England cannot be a republic within a monarchical United Kingdom. Not all who advocate a British republic seek English independence (or Scottish, etc). But many people around the world do use the terms "England" and "Britain" (and "English" and "British") as if they were synonymous. (The American Milton Friedman frequently did in his TV appearances, for example.) Thus it is at least slightly useful to retarget these to where English republicanism is mentioned. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 08:46, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget 2nd to Republicanism in the United Kingdom or its #History section. There's little correlation between independence and republicanism. The monarchy is based in England, and more popular in England than in Scotland (which forms most of the rest of the UK; no figures given for Wales or NI), so an independent England might even be less inclined to become a republic than the current UK. Certes (talk) 09:07, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget English Republicanism to Republicanism in the United Kingdom and keep English republicanism there (possibly refining both of them to the history section of the article). It doesn't make sense for these alternative capitalizations to target two different articles. Regards, SONIC678 23:51, 6 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.

Eyewitness News 5[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 13#Eyewitness News 5

Draft:Playhouse Disney (Asia)[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 14:45, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There's no connection whatsoever between any incarnation of Playhouse Disney (much less the Asia version) and a CBS station in Dallas–Fort Worth, Texas. It did start out as a redirect to the more-logical Disney Junior (Asian TV channel) (since moved to Disney Junior (Southeast Asian TV channel)), only for the creator to change the redirect to KTVT — but despite being in the draft namespace, it's never been anything but a redirect (there is no non-redirect history). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:49, 6 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_6&oldid=1055705774"