Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 24

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 24[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 24, 2022.

Winter storm Goliath[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 31#Winter storm Goliath

DWPJ[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. As a mention has been added at the target, the rationale behind the nom and the delete !vote are now moot. signed, Rosguill talk 23:35, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target. This was previously an article that was deleted as a hoax (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DWPJ). This redirect was created two days later for unknown reasons. MB 04:25, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - As per the linked AfD discussion, DWPJ is a real callsign for a radio station, which is why the redirect was created. While the history providing a source has been deleted, it can be found to be from the Philippine government, specifically the PDF file in the answer to this request for information. However, I cannot find any information when searching about this radio station with the exception of what's provided in that document: It's owned by the Philippine Broadcasting Company (subsidiary of Manila Broadcasting Company), operates at frequency of 88.7 Hz, and is located in Ba-ao, Camarines Sur. Randi Moth (talk) 12:18, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:33, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. No mention anywhere in Enwiki. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:51, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Is an actual station, thus my creation of this redirect (on the suggestion of the closer, Feel free to create a redirect from this title to point to an appropriate target article.). Adding it to the RN article has been on my to-do, and I will be doing so. Nate • (chatter) 20:36, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not an appropriate target article because it does not mention the station. If you add something to the article (with a RS), then you can recreate the redirect at that time. MB 01:53, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I added it to the article's station list above, so it now does mention it and is confirmed by Randi's link above. Nate • (chatter) 03:54, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The creator added mention at the target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:30, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • If ambiguous it may need to become a DAB but the current target appears to currently be the only option so weak keep. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:46, 24 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

3D material[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 23:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article. Since it's not mentioned, in theory, the phrase "3D material" could essentially refer to any tangible 3D object. Steel1943 (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:46, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:31, 24 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Secular world[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 3#Secular world

Catholics not in communion with Rome[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 31#Catholics not in communion with Rome

Larrys Text/Epistemology[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 userfy to User:Larry Sanger/Epistemology. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Though this redirect was created in 2001 with old article history, there's absolutely no way how this redirect can be validated as helpful in the least bit parts title with the "Larrys Text" as the prefix for the title. On the redirect's talk page, there is a recommendation to move the history to User:Larry Sanger/Epistemology if the edit history needs to be retained. Steel1943 (talk) 21:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom, and move the edit history to the user page as suggested. CycloneYoris talk! 23:49, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:54, 24 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Faith in Science[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. While there was some support for retargeting, but delete continues to be the clearly-stated preferred outcome of 3/4 participants, with the final participant further not stating explicit opposition to deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 23:11, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It cannot be assumed that "Science" and "Rationality" are interchangeable subjects with nearly identical definitions. This redirect was an article for about two months during the years of 2007 and 2008 prior to being subject to a WP:BLAR which resulted in the redirect targeting its current target. However, this article had a merge request tag that suggested the content of the article be merged into Relationship between religion and science, which seems more like a title match for this redirect. However, then raises the question if the words "faith" and "religion" are strongly enough connected for this redirect to be retargeted there. With all that being said, most likely this redirect should be retargeted to Relationship between religion and science Scientism or deleted with preference on the latter. Steel1943 (talk) 20:11, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that "faith in science" generally refers to scientism. Would that not be a better target than Relationship between religion and science? Either would be better than the current target. – Scyrme (talk) 20:40, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Scyrme: Good find with Scientism, and I agree, so thus I have updated my statement. (Still somewhat believe deletion may be the better option though due to potential vagueness of the redirect.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:48, 24 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Hierachy[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. Keep !votes have both a numerical and guideline advantage (WP:POFR explicitly allows creation of redirects for likely misspellings. signed, Rosguill talk 23:07, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the redirect should be deleted because of WP:CSD#R3. Mast303 (talk) 05:33, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment For some reason, there is an editor who wants this redirect deleted even though it is a plausible misspelling. Liz Read! Talk! 08:48, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I went ahead and fixed this nomination which was slightly malformed and tagged the redirect with the appropriate RfD tag. CycloneYoris talk! 08:53, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep. R3 not applicable for a 2004 created redirect. Jay 💬 11:33, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Plausible typo. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:47, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep plausible misspelling --Lenticel (talk) 12:44, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Users can fix spelling errors, we do not need to redirect every one, not even the plausible ones. - Nabla (talk) 23:40, 28 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

Wikipedia:CopyPatrol[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 redirect to toolforge:copypatrol and keep those that already target there. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 01:32, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CopyPatrol targets Wikipedia:Tip of the day/September 15, while WP:COPYPATROL and WP:Copypatrol both are soft redirects to toolforge:copypatrol. I believe that they should all point to the same location, though I am unsure which location is best. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 01:18, 24 December 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 an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_December_24&oldid=1131216795"