Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 7

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 7[edit]

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

Polavaram[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 move Polavaram (disambiguation) to Polavaram. I will update incoming links presently. (non-admin closure) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:15, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The sources almost exclusively discuss Polavaram Project when searched for it ("polavaram" and pageviews). Nominating to retarget it so that it'd serve better. — DaxServer (talk to me) 18:52, 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.

David Cleary[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 delete. WP:BLPDEL ~TNT (she/her • talk) 17:51, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 17:08, 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.

Delay (game)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 15#Delay (game)

All-union[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! 00:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This can vaguely be a demonym/adjective for the state, but really isn't helpful at all for a reader. More suited as a Wiktionary entry IMO. Gaioa (T C L) 14:48, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. 39 of the top 40 search results for "all-union" on Wikipedia were directly related to the Soviet Union but all were partial-title matches of some sort and none was particularly prominent over the others. A set-index of things called "All-Union" might work but I'm not sure. That 1 result was an irrelevant mid-sentence occurrence talking about "all Union Territories" of India. Thryduulf (talk) 22:31, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - There is no such thing as "Federal", yet Wikipedia has a page by that name. In a US context the word always refers to the United States and its government, but as there are other possible targets, the page is a disambiguation page. "All-union" is an English translation of the Russian word всесоюзный and is used throughout Wikipedia. The Russian language Wiktionary defines "all-Union" as "referring to the whole of the Soviet Union". If there were other meanings, then it should be a disambiguation page. -- Petri Krohn (talk) 23:33, 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.

گردليدان[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! 00:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We don't normally have redirects from foreign language terms in non-Roman scripts, and I see no reason to make an exception in this case. The likelihood of numerous people searching for "گردليدان" in English Wikipedia is negligible. JBW (talk) 10:49, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete for the reasons set out by nom and per WP:RFOREIGN. This is one of many similar redirects being produced by well-meaning but inexperienced new user Faster than Thunder. Others include 순대, Eñ, Дими́трий, رياض, Aslam Abad, and גמטריא; and a few other borderline redirects such as Tues, Bossfight, Black score and Kehe. TJRC (talk) 19:12, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the actual text of WP:RFOREIGN says Examples of appropriate non-English redirects include: Original or official names of people, places, institutions, publications or products. We normally have redirects from foreign language terms in non-Roman scripts where the language of the redirect is relevant to the target article. Category:Redirects from Chinese-language terms for example has nearly 11,000 entries in it for example, and after you hit "next page" twice you reach the end of the transcriptions and they're all in Chinese characters. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 02:04, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, per IP 61's RFOREIGN-based point. I think it might be good to have a policy/guideline discussion about non-Latin script redirects, but current guidance seems to support this redirect. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 02:20, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep per above. Furthermore, of the six other RLOTEs mentioned, only Aslam Abad seems invalid, although Eñ is marginal. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 07:02, 9 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Appropriate per WP:RFOREIGN and mentioned. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:06, 10 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.

Shyama Charan Agrahari[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]

Can't find any source using this name Venkat TL (talk) 09:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: WP:BLP vio as unsourced — DaxServer (talk to me) 21:36, 9 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.

Sputnik[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 Sputnik 1. Thryduulf (talk) 11:51, 15 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Right now this targets List of spacecraft called Sputnik. But the most famous Sputnik is Sputnik 1. While the recent Russian vaccine named Sputnik got some coverage, I don't think Sputnik (disambiguation) would make a better target, but I think this should have a target change from the list of spacecraft to Sputnik 1. Thoughts? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:41, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • As an Englishman, "Sputnik" definitely means "Sputnik I", and no other. It does not mean the vaccine, which has not been distributed in the United Kingdom and so has no common parlance in the UK. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 11:24, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I think it's fine as it is, but Sputnik V COVID-19 vaccine is extremely popular so I've added to the hatnote at the current target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:12, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sputnik is definitely Sputnik I for the majority of people in English speaking countries. Sputnik V is definitely the vaccine. Search on google "Sputnik" and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sputnik_1 is the first result for UK, Canada, New Zealand and Australia. https://history.nasa.gov/sputnik.html is the first result for US. Is this discussion some kind of abuse?HelenHIL (talk) 01:47, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Sputnik 1: There are a massive number of sources that refer to the original probe as "Sputnik". The target can be changed if the relative notability of the subjects change, but I honesty doubt that this will happen. ―Susmuffin Talk 15:14, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Sputnik 1, which I would expect to be the primary topic by a ridiculous margin. This situation is akin to having Moon as a redirect to a list of natural satellites in the solar system. Add hatnotes to the list of spacecraft and the disambiguation page. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 15:19, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    In fact it would make sense to reverse the redirect here, and move the article currently at Sputnik 1 to this title. Ivanvector's squirrel (trees/nuts) 15:23, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No, that would fail WP:PRECISE (titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article); this would seem to fall under WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. While consensus seems to lean towards Sputnik 1 being the WP:primary topic for Sputnik, it's by no means unambiguous. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 17:43, 9 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.

ST9[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 20#ST9

W.E.B[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 15#W.E.B

AM/FM[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 15#AM/FM

CBS 8[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 move. (non-admin closure) feminist (+) 06:10, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect's current target, article KFMB TV, suggests that that station is the only CBS affiliate in the country that is on channel 8. There are actually more CBS affiliates on channel 8. Therefore, the redirect shall actually go to article CBS 8 (disambiguation). After the target is changed, the disambiguation page title shall be changed to CBS 8, with CBS 8 (disambiguation) being a redirect to CBS 8. CanadianAndNYer (talk) 03:11, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Move CBS 8 (disambiguation) to CBS 8 and quash the existing redirect. BD2412 T 03:45, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move as above, adding a link to this dicussion to its talk page. (Tracing the history of moved pages is difficult enough as it is.) 85.67.32.244 (talk) 00:28, 8 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_7&oldid=1050870123"