Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 December 27

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 27[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 27, 2022.

Private Limited[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 Private limited company. signed, Rosguill talk 05:27, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A private company limited by shares is a type of private limited company. Since the term is not specific, shouldn't it go to the more general of these. Or pehaps a dab? MB 23:08, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Private limited company where the various forms of "private limited" companies are listed. The current target is also linked to in the lede. A7V2 (talk) 23:54, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support retarget per A7V2 and nom. Jay 💬 03:30, 4 January 2023 (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).

Sanathana Sarathi[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 disambiguate. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of "Sanathana Sarathi" at the target, and without a mention these redirects are confusing. I can't see another reasonable target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:28, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 23:01, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support Jay's proposal: draft dab available below the redirect. The epithet is probably too obscure to be the primary topic. – Uanfala (talk) 15:05, 6 January 2023 (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).

Solomon system[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 05:26, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target article unclear. However, the nominated redirect was an article created in 2004 that was subject to a WP:BLAR towards its current target in 2008. Steel1943 (talk) 18:28, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • An external search throws up lot of Reed-Solomon hits. The pageviews shot up starting from April this year, and is ongoing, for some reason. Readers are looking for something. Jay 💬 18:39, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 23:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, readers may be looking for something but which we don't have. The external link at the pre-BLAR content does not work. Jay 💬 06:22, 4 January 2023 (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).

Cool-O-Meter[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 05:26, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned either at the current target or the original target Bender Should Not Be Allowed on TV. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 22:56, 27 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).

Draft:Minecraft[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 salt. --BDD (talk) 02:53, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is already an article for Minecraft and this has a history of nonconstructive edits. No significant pages link to this so it should be deleted per WP:COSTLY. RoostTC(ping me!) 13:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. WP:COSTLY seems to fit in as well. Sarrail (talk) 01:01, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Deleting it would only cause MORE disruption to the draft. The draft would constantly be recreated if we deleted. Users hoping to edit the draft will be redirected to the main article where they can edit that instead. If this is deleted though I suggest we protect it from creation. Deletion is not an alternative to protection. The draft having mostly disruptive edits is not a reason for it to be deleted. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 18:37, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Good point but I think it is quite unlikely that new users who want to edit the main Minecraft article would search up "Draft:Minecraft". However, if this gets kept, it should at least get a increase in protection level. RoostTC(ping me!) 06:48, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (and full/semi protect). Page history makes it clear that some users are finding it and trying to add content to it. WP:SRE also applies here (by which I mean if one of the versions of this which weren't redirects was taken to WP:MFD, the outcome would almost certainly be to redirect it). A7V2 (talk) 00:16, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:09, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I find the WP:COSTLY arguments above much more persuasive. If the Draft version is constantly recreated by disruptors, then editors in the Draft review system have a process for unnecessary Drafts on topics that already exist. Helping them out with protection against re-creation is valid. The presence of this redirect may indicate a source of unnecessary confusion that can be eliminated. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 18:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 22:53, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I read somewhere on the project space that redirects from the draft space to the main space is allowed, but I can't find it via external search engine at the moment. Someone-123-321 (talk) 07:22, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and salt, the page is only being used for test edits or sandbox-like edits. Draft:Minecraft is a tempting title to edit, but let users do the sandboxing at a sandbox, user subpage or a different title. WP:RDRAFT that Someone-123-321 is referring to, is not applicable as this draft did not have its history moved to the mainspace article. Jay 💬 03:24, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and salt seems like the most effective solution here. signed, Rosguill talk 05:26, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete per WP:PANDORA. MusiBedrock (talk) 03:14, 8 January 2023 (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).

Ethereum Blockchain as a Service[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 05:24, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:11, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. It was mentioned at the target whenever I created that redirect. Maybe it was an historical thing, and Microsoft no longer has it? (which might mean some history was lost as some editors like articles to be more like a newspaper, and just cover current stuff). Don't have time to look into it just now. Will try to take a look in the next few days. N2e (talk) 05:45, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@N2e: did you get a chance to look into it? Jay 💬 08:04, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, just did so. Found out the Microsoft Azure article had this bit in it for quite some time after May 2016, at the time the redirect was created, which includes a source:

* Ethereum Blockchain As a Service (EBaaS), provides enterprise clients and developers with a cloud-based blockchain developer environment.[1]

Even though Bitcoin Magazine has been around for quite some years, almost a decade, and is a pretty standard trade press, and has never been listed on the Reliable Sources Noticeboard as a source that should not be used, there is a cabal of Wikipedia editors who insist that any news source that covers the topics of blockchain that come from that industry trade press are invalid sources for Wikipedia. I certainly don't have the time nor energy to get involved in that debate, so I would guess that this material might not last if it is added back to the History section of the Microsoft Azure article. THat is a shame for Wikipedia; but it is what it is. If someone else wants to add it back, and support it as a mere historical statement about a service offering in the burgeoning blockchain space back in 2016, have at it. Too bad so much of the wiki is like a newspaper and historical stuff is crowded out. Cheers. N2e (talk) 05:03, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Giulio Prisco (2015-11-11). "Microsoft Launches Ethereum Blockchain as a Service (EBaaS) at Devcon, Boosts Ethereum". Bitcoin Magazine. Retrieved 2016-05-01.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 22:51, 27 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).

Captain George Carleton[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 7#Captain George Carleton

Modeling program[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 02:52, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article. The phrase could also be considered vague, considering it could be used by someone trying to get information about programs on how to become the subject at Model (person). Steel1943 (talk) 07:48, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I agree the current target is far too specific. Taking "program" to mean "software", the most encompassing target would seem to be Computer simulation, where Computer modeling redirects, and where there is a hatnote to 3D modeling (itself a broader article than the current target). However, I agree "program" could have other meanings, and we don't have Modeling software either. 424 enwiki pages have "modeling" in their titles, and probably a good number of them could relate to modeling software. Some sort of disambiguation might be possible, but choosing between deletion (due to ambiguity) or retargeting to a broad article seem like more feasible choices. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:35, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:28, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 22:27, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - unless someone has a strong suggestion for another solution. signed, Rosguill talk 05:24, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now. This was a 2005 unsourced stub that was BLARed. Someone can come up with a dab later. Jay 💬 02:43, 6 January 2023 (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).

Doom (video game)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 10#Doom (video game)

Twittergate[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 5#Twittergate

H-pattern[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 pattern and shifter to Gear stick#Shift pattern, delete box. signed, Rosguill talk 03:10, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Targeted section was removed at some point, and surprisingly there is no specific mention of these terms. It seems like there really should be, but I'm unsure what the best target would be as it might be better to target Gear stick or Gear stick#Shift pattern but certainly then mention should be added. I also wonder if potentially H-box should be deleted since it seems it may not refer to a gearbox at all (I've never heard the term and searching online comes up with a variety of things which aren't gearbox related). A7V2 (talk) 07:40, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to gear stick. The h-pattern material was deleted from the manual transmission article with the rationale of "trimming to avoid WP:FORK- this level of detail is appropriate for the dedicated article". The rationale was sound but that material was never moved to the dedicated article. —  AjaxSmack  03:12, 7 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:13, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - As I said, I'm happy for this to retarget to Gear stick or the section Gear stick#Shift pattern, but only if mention can be added, and I wonder how would be best to do that? A7V2 (talk) 00:23, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget H-pattern and H-shifter to gear stick - that article deals with shift patterns specifically. Delete H-box - I have never heard the term used in reference to a transmission and can find no clear evidence of it being in use. --Sable232 (talk) 21:17, 17 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There's a consensus for H-pattern and H-shifter, but not yet one for H-box
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 22:18, 27 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).

Ukrainian partisans[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 5#Ukrainian partisans

Foreign Policy Council[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 21:14, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I nominated this version [1] for speedy deletion WP:G14 but @Justlettersandnumbers: redirected it to the current target. I don't think this is satisfactory: American Foreign Policy Council (AFPC) is not known as "Foreign Policy Council" and this redirect obscures the presence of other uses ([2]). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:24, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • (edit conflict) OK, Shhhnotsoloud, please do with it as you will. It was not eligible for deletion as WP:G14 because it didn't meet any of the criteria (I'm so used to implicitly trusting your nominations in this area that I initially deleted it, and only afterwards decided that that had been a mistake). Specifically, the policy says "If a disambiguation page links to only one article and does not end in (disambiguation), it should be changed to a redirect". It's Neelix, so someone might be willing to delete it under WP:IAR. (Beeblebrox?) Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:41, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:29, 27 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).

Tory party[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 3#Tory party

Life of Christ[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 3#Life of Christ

Brian O'Conner/archive[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 24#Brian O'Conner/archive

The Presidio[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 Presidio (disambiguation). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 14:59, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to presidio, presidio (disambiguation), or Presidio of San Francisco, unless the film is determined to be the primary topic for the term "The Presidio", in which case it should be moved over the redirect. Conifer (talk) 07:28, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Presidio (disambiguation): While there can be an argument made for Presidio of San Francisco being the WP:PTOPIC (and in my mind I'm a bit surprised it isn't as unambiguously the PTOPIC as I thought it would be), it seems like it would be best to retarget to the DAB page. TartarTorte 21:51, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Presidio (disambiguation). Agree with Torte. The Presidio is one of the most famous locations in San Francisco, and certainly the primary meaning of the phrase in the western United States, when the word without "the" is not used generically. The Presidio (film) is a rather obscure 1980s movie (set in the Presidio), and I'm baffled why anyone would consider it the primary meaning of the term. Moncrief (talk) 03:53, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Presidio (disambiguation) per the above. Inappropriate to have a base title be a redirect to a disambiguated title, and the film does not seem to be the primary topic anyway. Mdewman6 (talk) 06:23, 29 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).

Tlou (tv series)[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. --BDD (talk) 17:05, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely abbreviation + capitalization combination Rusalkii (talk) 05:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, agree with nom, I don't see a point or any navigational benefit to this. I don't think as an initialism that it is used commonly enough, at least for the purposes of warranting a redirect, which as nom says isn't even formatted well. Bungle (talk • contribs) 09:26, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: "Tlou" not mentioned. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, TLOU is a common abbreviation for The Last of Us. That the show wouldn't adopt it is silly thinking.Valkyrie Red (talk) 23:24, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as unlikely synonym with two miscaps in the name and the modifier --Lenticel (talk) 00:26, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - while TLOU (TV series) would be unambiguous, our dab page for Tlou suggests that the redirect could turn out WP:COSTLY if a show about someone with that surname is ever created. signed, Rosguill talk 21:11, 3 January 2023 (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).

Smugging[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 Smuggling. No prejudice to the target being changed if DUE content regarding "smugging" is ever added on Wikipedia. signed, Rosguill talk 21:09, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the article unclear. However, this term was mentioned in the redirected article Unauthorized access in online social networks (the nominated redirect is a former title of Unauthorized access in online social networks), but Unauthorized access in online social networks is currently a redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 21:40, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get this - smuggling is an article, not a redirect. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:14, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Piotrus: Smuggling is certainly an article, but this discussion is about Smugging which is a redirect. Although retargeting to Smuggling as a {{R from misspelling}} also seems like a viable option. CycloneYoris talk! 23:00, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@CycloneYoris My bad. Given it's not mentioned in the target article currently, I'd go for R from mispelling for now, with no prejudice to this being restored ONCE the term is mentioned in the target article. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 11:09, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:41, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment wikt:smugging is also a plausible target. Duckmather (talk) 01:18, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is an alternate target and a soft redirect suggestion. Note that the "Unauthorized access in online social networks" mentioned three times in the nomination was a redirect that was deleted in a separate RfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Smuggling as plausible misspelling. Someone-123-321 (talk) 07:28, 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).

Social network concept[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 21:08, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be some back-and-forth on whether this redirect should target Social networking service or Social network. I believe this redirect should be retargeted to Social network due to it being the "concept" of "Social network". Steel1943 (talk) 21:42, 12 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concur, although Foo concpet is a bad name, so I am more for deleting this. We don't need articles like war concept, Internet concept, etc. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:15, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete If we keep this, it would set a bad precedent for future redirects. As said above, we don't need redirects like physic concept. RoostTC(ping me!) 06:41, 14 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:54, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:51, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete in agreement with Piotrus's reasoning. Also it's not something I imagine too many people would seek out. Orderinchaos 14:11, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per others, this was an unsourced essay for a month before being BLARed. Jay 💬 04:03, 3 January 2023 (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).

Hampton Primary School[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 3#Hampton Primary School

Yarra Bend[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 3#Yarra Bend

Moemar[edit]

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

Tshibaka Alaska[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:CSD G7. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 22:08, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kelly Tshibaka is a native Alaskan and current politician there. The combination of her surname and the state is not a likely search term and I am not aware of any precedent for doing this. Delete. MB 01:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You’re right! That was a dumb redirect I made. Sorry. Anythingyouwant (talk) 05:08, 27 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).

Sari Santal[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 21:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think this refers to a special ceremonial sari, but it isn't mentioned in the page and I'm not actually sure if it's that or something else to pick a potential retarget. Rusalkii (talk) 23:11, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as unmentioned and unverified. This was a one line unsourced stub before being BLARed. The one liner said this is the religion of the Santals, probably why Phil Bridger redirected it that way. Following the BLAR, the same creator re-created the article under a different title, which was moved to draft by Mooonswimmer, and declined by Star Mississippi. Draft:Sari dharam says The word sari is derived from the Santali language sarisarjom, meaning sal tree. We already have Sarna Dharma which appears to be the same topic, so the draft too can be redirected to Sarna Dharma. Jay 💬 03:58, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm really not sure what বুদ্ধি has been trying to do but their English language writing skills are probably not sufficient for en wiki, unfortunately. @Jay's solution makes sense to me. Star Mississippi 04:06, 3 January 2023 (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).

CPPRC[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 21:05, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in page. Closest related page about China is China Council for the Promotion of Peaceful National Reunification, which doesn't have this exact acronym; a search for "CPPRC" gives a smattering assortment of random acronyms with no clear topic. Rusalkii (talk) 23:07, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: I believe this is meant to stand for "Communist Party of the People's Republic of China". While that full name does exist as a redirect (Communist Party of the People's Republic of China), it seems to be less ambiguous to me. There also do not seem to be any parties in the ROC that use the abbreviation CPC or CCP. The only active ROC communist party I could find is the Taiwan Communist Party, and they don't use any abbreviation of the sort. In summary, this is a disambiguating abbreviation for a non-ambiguous abbreviation with regards to PRC vs. ROC. TartarTorte 23:26, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom and Tartar. Jay 💬 03:30, 3 January 2023 (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).

Current European Car of the Year[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 3#Current European Car of the Year

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_December_27&oldid=1135362436"