Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 4[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 4, 2022.

Redirects to Superficial charm[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 12#Redirects to Superficial charm

Wikipedia:AAR[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 12#Wikipedia:AAR

First letter of the alphabet[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 Letter (alphabet)#Types of letters. Jay (talk) 03:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There אre mאny אlphאbets, אnd not אll hאve "a" אs their first letter. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 21:24, 4 January 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.

Texas United States state elections, 2006[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 12#Texas United States state elections, 2006

V discography[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. -- Aervanath (talk) 14:37, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete overly ambiguous. Multiple topics at V (disambiguation) have published discs -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 01:12, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as vague --Lenticel (talk) 05:30, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate. I count three people at V (disambiguation) who have articles with a discography section. Obviously an editor who bothers to search for the phrase "V discography" is not looking for all non-discography-related topics under the title, "V", so create a page limited to the likely targets of such a search. BD2412 T 06:51, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • There are 3 people, a band, DVD/BR/VHS releases for 2 TV shows that could be considered to have discographies. -- 65.92.246.43 (talk) 12:53, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate or Redirect to V (disambiguation) as with multiple people and bands going by the name. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:44, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:41, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:18, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Despite the fact that a DAB page has been drafted, there's still a notable lack of consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 17:56, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate at this title as that is the most directly useful to readers using this search term. Retarget to V (disambiguation) as second choice. Thryduulf (talk) 18:16, 4 January 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.

Arjun Pandit (2010 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 speedy deleted per WP:G7. -- Tavix (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of a 2010 remake or rerelease at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 16:51, 4 January 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.

2022 European Athletics Championships[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 12#2022 European Athletics Championships

Draft:A Little More Alive[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 12:37, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Leftovers from unrelated-page-repurposings by blocked User:$uperFan32; we previously dealt with other draftspace examples back in 2020, at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 9. UnitedStatesian (talk) 07:26, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Notorious repurposer that left WP:ASTONISHING redirects behind. Alternative would be to WP:HISTSPLIT and see if it G13s, but that seems like more work than it’s worth. — 2pou (talk) 19:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 12:54, 6 January 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.

Dog (2021 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 keep. ✗plicit 12:38, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. When release years change, we normally delete, as misleading, the redirect that contains the erroneous release year. UnitedStatesian (talk) 07:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. What we do depends on how likely someone is to be looking for the film at the incorrect year, in this case given that it had three different publicised release dates in 2021 (January, July and then specifically 16 July) and that this information is included in a sourced section of the article, keeping this {{R from move}} seems particularly useful. Thryduulf (talk) 15:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The release year isn't erroneous, it's simply outdated. Sources from before the date got pushed back will refer to this as a 2021 film, so it's a useful redirect. I can't ever recall a redirect like this being deleted. Perhaps you are getting the precedent confused with "development hell" redirects? -- Tavix (talk) 00:44, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I dunno, I'm pretty sure I've seen some of these before. But maybe I'm getting confused with (upcoming film) also. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 03:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      We do (at least sometimes) delete when there is no connection with the incorrect date or it was just vague speculation that never gained any traction, which may be what you are remembering. Thryduulf (talk) 13:48, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as useful to readers. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 17:41, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep but Refine to Dog_(2022_film)#Release which discusses the release year change. --Lenticel (talk) 01:23, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. Ambivalent about refining. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 03:23, 8 January 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.

QASIM IBRAHIM[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. -- Aervanath (talk) 14:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RCAPS UnitedStatesian (talk) 05:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Uncontroversial, we don't usually see biographical article redirects in ALL CAPS, and it is not a usual search method. Havradim (talk) 07:16, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. It was incorrectly created and moved within 4 hours of creation to the proper title. Jay (talk) 07:33, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a perfectly normal and perfectly harmless {{R from other capitalisation}}. We shouldn't routinely create these redirects, but once they exist deleting them is more harmful than keeping them. Thryduulf (talk) 15:15, 4 January 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.

Bleach(anime)[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 12:37, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely typo, we tend to not keep disambiguation typos like this. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:18, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: WP:UNNATURAL. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:06, 4 January 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.

Conservative think tank(s)[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 Conservatism. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 15:26, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Current target is too narrow; think tanks are not solely an American phenomenon. Hog Farm Talk 05:12, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • How do you propose redirecting them? Benjamin (talk) 05:32, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • This is a sum of parts. It can redirect to either "conservativism" or "think tank" without any Amerocentrism. My opinion is that "conservativism" is perhaps the better redirect, since the think tank employs that philosophy. The user can then also look up "think tank" separately. Nicole Sharp (talk) 06:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I agree the current target is too narrow, but the obvious alternative List of think tanks (nor the UK or US sub-lists) does not mention ideology at all so someone searching for one or more conservative ones specifically will not be helped. Thryduulf (talk) 13:58, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi there. I created the redirect but now would support a redirect to Conservatism#List of think tanks if such a section list could be compiled or a stand alone page List of Conservative think tanks. Disclaimer: I'm from and living in New Zealand :) DadaNeem (talk) 06:25, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 05:13, 4 January 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.

Helionium[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. Liz Read! Talk! 04:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The English Wikipedia does not describe this term anywhere. We do have an article on helonium, but this appears to be referring to a different concept looking at the page history and talk page post. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 01:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment looking at the page history, when it was originally created, it appears it was a typo-redirect for helonium -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:45, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment exotic forms of helium should be discussed in the helium article, so we are missing information there, for antihelium, antiprotonic helium, muonic helium, tauonic helium. These should be added to the characteristics section as exotic forms -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:55, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. An onium is a bound particle-antiparticle system such as positronium or protonium. Thus helionium is a hypothetical electromagnetically bound atomic system consisting of a helion and an antihelion. Nicole Sharp (talk) 05:58, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    With no mention at the target, this does not help the reader. ~~~~
    User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)     16:31, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Per nom OP and as repeated @16:31: the word "helionium" does not appear in mainspace at all. There is no target. -DePiep (talk) 06:31, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Firstly because there is no target, and secondly because the term is ambiguous. If it follows the regular meaning of "-onium", it should mean a helion-antihelion system, but it has also been used for antiprotonic helium. Double sharp (talk) 09:20, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 04:59, 4 January 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.

Pionic deuterium[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 11#Pionic deuterium

MoS4[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 12#MoS4

Department of Internal Affairs[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 rename Department of Internal Affairs (New Zealand) as WP:PRIMARYTOPIC with that WP:PRECISE name. -- Aervanath (talk) 14:31, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If the target is the only other page with Department of Internal Affairs in its title and no other country's internal affairs department is notable enough to have their own article, then the target should probably be moved to Department of Internal Affairs. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 19:10, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment many police IA dept appear in film and television, so it would not seem that the NZ dept would be the only one notable enough to have a mention on Wikipedia -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:12, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete then rename target. Per MrPersonHumanGuy's suggestion, and backed up by the fact that the vast number of hits on "Department of Internal Affairs" within Wikipedia are for the New Zealand department. There's a smattering of mentions of the ones in Tashkent, Pennsylvania, and some Russian districts, and none of those have articles; a chapeau may suffice. Chumpih. (talk) 10:37, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 04:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete and rename target per Chumpih. The redirect was too generic, possibly referring to any number of national interior ministries, or US police departments' internal affairs bureaus. Uganda for example has a Ministry of Internal Affairs. But as an article title it is WP:PRECISE. Havradim (talk) 07:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • If there are multiple notable departments that could be known by this title then disambig, otherwise move the target over the redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 15:17, 4 January 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.

Pre-drop[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 12#Pre-drop

Kennebunk Pier Light[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 10#Kennebunk Pier Light

Turkish prison[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 Prisons in Turkey. Liz Read! Talk! 22:54, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the target of this redirect is incorrect. In my opinion, the redirect does not pertain to a single Turkish prison, a famous Turkish prison or a film about a Turkish prison. Even if the latter was correct, why was it more appropriate to have it point to the film but not the book? Rather, it seems perfectly logical that the redirect instead pertains to prisons in Turkey in general, and that is where this should be targeted. Havradim (talk) 00:37, 4 January 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_January_4&oldid=1065243860"