Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 3

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 3[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 3, 2022.

En/googlemail[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 23:46, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be some age-old practice which allowed duplicate articles to be created with "En/" prefix. Only 3 such redirects exist today. No incoming links & non-significant pageviews (479 views combined for the 3 redirects over past 6.5 years), probably accidental visitors like me. ---CX Zoom(he/him) (let's talk|contribs) 20:24, 3 April 2022 (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.

(Seasonal Energy Efficiency Ratio)[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 23:46, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can find no obvious reaoson for this redirect to exist. Nothing links here, it got only 1 view so far this year and only 22 last year (which is higher than I would expect, but not that high), there is no talk page and no summary on creation that sheds any light. Google refuses to distinguish uses with and without parentheses so is actively unhelpful. Thryduulf (talk) 17:46, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • (Delete) per nom. I'm not sure why someone would search like this either-it looks like a disambiguator without a term to disambiguate. Regards, (SONIC678) 00:34, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Appears totally useless to me. I agree. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 01:15, 7 April 2022 (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.

Russian-Soviet War[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 23:47, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing any evidence that this is an alternative name for the civil war based on GScholar and internet searches. Delete unless evidence of use can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 17:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete My first thought was the breakup of the Soviet Union, and Yeltsin behind bullet proof vests and lexan in front of the White House. Red October is only a part of the Russian Civil War, there were the other groups as well, the parliamentarists, the republicans, the imperials, the minsheviks; not just the Bolseviks and imperials -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 23:34, 6 April 2022 (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.

"rose tinted spectacles"[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 23:48, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could be retargeted to rose-colored glasses, but quotation marks make this implausible/WP:UNNATURAL. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:45, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@1234qwer1234qwer4: I'd have no problem with retargeting (the rose-colored glasses dab page apparently didn't exist when I created this).
But (given that it's a 12-year-old edit I don't remember anything about) I'm not sure what the deal was with the quotes. I can't think of any reason I'd have intentionally included them in the title.
I'm guessing it was an oversight due to cutting-and-pasting the term from a source that included the quotes, which- if the page doesn't already exist- apparently gives you a redlink like this which lets you create the page but includes the quotes.
I notice I created rose tinted spectacles shortly after, so I perhaps realised my mistake. At any rate, we don't really need the quoted version of this redirect, so probably better to just delete it.
16:21, 3 April 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ubcule (talk • contribs)
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.

Template:R from grapheme[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 11#Template:R from grapheme

L̥̄[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 11#L̥̄

Ḹ[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 11#Ḹ

Kong references in King Kong (2005 film)[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 King Kong (2005 film)#References to original 1933 King Kong. Refined current target. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 09:34, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It seems this redirect might be refined to King Kong (2005 film)#References to original 1933 King Kong, but as the redirect is worded, it may be unclear what "Kong" is in regards to a search term, and the phrasing of the redirect is rather implausible. This reflect would probably be better deleted. Steel1943 (talk) 21:11, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Refine per nom. The redirect title has poor phrasing, but keep for attribution. Jay (talk) 06:22, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting since the nom is also suggesting deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:24, 3 April 2022 (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.

High Princess (Stache)[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 22:14, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confusing/unclear redirect. It seems that a song with some sort of variation of this title (but not exactly this title) was intended to be on Artpop, but it looks like it didn't make the cut. Also, this redirect was at one point targeting Zedd (producer) which targets Zedd. It also seems the phrase "high princess" is nowhere on Wikipedia. Probably best to delete this vague/unclear redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 18:40, 19 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak retarget to Clarity (Zedd album)#Other songs. Apparently this refers to the Lady Gaga promotional version of Stache. However, my !vote is only weak as I'm not convinced that the parenthetical formatting of the redirect is plausible. eviolite (talk) 03:10, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:25, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:21, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as unclear, not useful and with an unnecessary disambiguator. The target suggested by eviolite has Princess High Stache in brackets as the title of an article, but that's about it. Jay (talk) 06:17, 11 April 2022 (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.

Areo Magazine[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 22:14, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is an inappropriate redirect for the magazine (https://areomagazine.com/). It was established by Malhar Mali in 2016 and edited by him until 2018. The ~3 year editorship of Pluckrose does not warrant a redirect to Pluckrose, nor would it to its current editor (Iona Italia). Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 14:10, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep given that the target mentions more about the magazine than Helen Pluckrose's role, and we have no other articles that mention this magazine, apart from the articles that are using magazine in the citations, which makes a search more confusing for the reader. There is Areopagitica but the mention there is trivial. Another option is to retarget to the Aero International magazine as an {{R from misspelling}}. In fact I first read this nomination as Aero Magazine! Jay (talk) 20:53, 23 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 01:39, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete to encourage article creation, if notable. Thec current target is not good enough for a redirect but would feature in a Search. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:56, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:21, 3 April 2022 (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.

Appleton, WI MSA[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 Appleton, WI MSA and Appleton, WI Metropolitan Statistical Area. No consensus for Appleton, Wisconsin metropolitan area. Jay (talk) 05:57, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is wrong, as the Appleton MSA (Metropolitan Statistical Area) is not at all identical to Appleton city; the MSA is much bigger. Delete per reasons for deletion #2 Yellowcard (talk) 22:01, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Need consensus for Appleton, Wisconsin metropolitan area.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 16:07, 26 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:18, 3 April 2022 (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.

G.D. Goenka School and G.d goenka. public school[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 No consensus for G.D., delete G.d. signed, Rosguill talk 22:09, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

redirect is reasonably old and abandoned. Not required and useful in anyways. BeLucky (talk · contribs) 14:05, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 16:29, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete the second per Paul. Also, isn't the first ambiguous? I see a GD Goenka School, Sarita Vihar in Madanpur Khadar Village, GD Goenka Signature School in SCJ World Academy, and GD Goenka Global School in Bethany Stahl. If there are schools other than Public schools, and they cannot be disambiguated, delete. Jay (talk) 07:50, 24 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:13, 3 April 2022 (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.

Ecole Supérieure de Réalisation Audiovisuelle[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 13:18, 10 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear how this is plausible when the "é" is replaced with an "Ã" and a copyright symbol. Steel1943 (talk) 01:21, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Useless. BD2412 T 01:50, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Deleté per nom and BD2412. The É may appear as é on some older devices, but I'm not sure people would deliberately search using an é instead. Régards, SONIC678 05:38, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete; we only seem to have single-character encoding errors in Category:Redirects from mojibake. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:19, 3 April 2022 (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/2022_April_3&oldid=1083511188"