Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 8[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 8, 2022.

Mass formation psychosis[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 for now. This redirect received 26,000 views while this RfD was pending, and that predictably led to a number of comments being made that were not particularly grounded in policy. Setting aside such !votes and one !vote that seems to have mistaken the current target, I see a general agreement to keep, but not a very strong consensus that this will always be the right target. Two !votes are explicitly keep for now, while Dennis' keep focuses on short-term navigational benefit and Slatersteven's leaves a door open for future changes. As such I encourage reconsideration in 3-6 months; and of course this consensus does not preclude the creation of an article at this title, or retargeting to an article created at another title, if such an article is deemed notable. (non-admin closure) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 20:53, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to an article just because the guy used the obscure phrase once? No reason this is needed or appropriate. If Alex Jones used the phrase "dysmenorrheal anhedonic Albigensians" in a blog post, that doesn't mean we need a redirect from that phrase to the article about him. --Orange Mike | Talk 17:33, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep because it has been quite prolifically conflated with "mass psychogenic illness", which is a different thing. The term has received quite extensive mainstream media attention, so much that Google had to work on their search results (they ultimately linked the wrong Wiki article, mass psychogenic illness, but that's a different story). Robert Malone, whether you like it or not, is a very important scientist who pioneered mRNA vaccines, and while he may be disputed by fact checkers for some claims, nothing he has said has been completely bat****. For example, he talked extensively about menstrual cycle disruption on Rogan and going to testify at the Hasidic court ...well, guess what was just in NPR? You go ahead and find it yourself. Given a lone academic coined the term, which is basically a rehash of "mass hypnosis", it probably doesn't need its own page, but a redirect should not get this kind of pushback, given the huge importance of Malone, and the huge attention his ideas have received. The person was the first to transfect RNA into a living organism to make a protein (see: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w which says: Realizing that this discovery might have far-reaching potential in medicine, Malone, a graduate student at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California, later jotted down some notes, which he signed and dated. If cells could create proteins from mRNA delivered into them, he wrote on 11 January 1988, it might be possible to “treat RNA as a drug”. Another member of the Salk lab signed the notes, too, for posterity. Later that year, Malone’s experiments showed that frog embryos absorbed such mRNA2. It was the first time anyone had used fatty droplets to ease mRNA’s passage into a living organism.) This guy has infinitely more authority to comment on science/public health than Alex Jones does. Signed, Single purpose account who has made few edits outside this topic 2600:1012:B04D:6EA8:5031:1F1A:8C0A:2F5F (talk) 18:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@2600:1012:B04D:6EA8:5031:1F1A:8C0A:2F5F: You've made more of an argument to redirect Mass formation psychosis to some other [psychology/hynosis-related] article. Also, see WP:Sockpuppetry re logging out to make edits as an IP. Platonk (talk) 20:05, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, but rephrase as mass formation. This is the original term used by Prof Mattias Desmet. Malone quoted Desmet and rephrased it as mass formation psychosis. The Dutch term is Massavorming, the German term (I think Freud) is Massenbildung. Desmet avoids the word psychosis, since this has a negative association and it is used already for something else. Formation is more neutral. The phenomenon is described in The Crowd by Gustave le Bon, and Elias Canetti and Hannah Arendt and Joost van Meerloo described the phenomenon as well, perhaps not specifically as mass formation/massavorming/massenbildung. 2A02:A443:5030:1:A462:63C9:B0D0:B4A (talk) 12:49, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - This is hitting critical mass right now, and it is a term people are going to search (it's how I found this discussion). Likely not ready for it's own article, but a redirect makes sense due to the volume of searches it will surely generate. MSM is pretty much all over it, not just obscure blogs. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 15:28, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, although Sigmund Freud does speak, repeatedly, about "hypnosis" (in German: "Hypnose") of the masses, for instance, when he discusses the work of Gustav Le Bon: "I have reproduced this quote in sufficient detail to confirm that Le Bon really declares the state of the individual in the crowd to be hypnotic, not merely comparing it with one. We do not intend to contradict it here (...)" source: Massenpsychologie und Ich-Analyse (by Sigmund Freud), chapter II. In chapter III of this book he speaks about Mass formation (in German: "Massenbildung").--Mrtijn 2007 (talk) 21:08, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Regardless of where this eventually redirects, I have to point out that most news media is failing at their jobs right now, with fact checks "debunking"[1][2][3][4] some strawman concept of "mass formation psychosis" (not officially recognized, gasp! People aren't literally hypnotized, scientists say!), while completely ignoring the context, i.e. that Malone explicitly mentioned several times he was going off an idea by Belgian psychologist Mattias Desmet. UnHerd is apparently the only outlet that realizes this, even though the transcript of Malone's Joe Rogan appearance makes it clear. Maybe if Desmet gets an article (Lord help him if he does), a redirect could go there. --Animalparty! (talk) 01:07, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to mass psychogenic illness as Desmet doesn't even try to make a distinction between his idea and that more common phrasing. I caution against the WP:RECENTISM being expressed here that Malone is the popularizer of the term. I know we have a lot of JRE fans here, but things that appear on his podcast are not necessarily the way Wikipedia builds its reference. It is fine if a curious Rogan Dittohead comes here and finds our article on mass psychogenic illness as that contains enough information and much better academic treatment than any other target for the concept itself. jps (talk) 18:55, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2A02:A443:5030:1:D87A:1E0E:2539:127 (talk) 10:06, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

His explanation is identical to the article above and Curry explains what Malone missed in Desmets message. 2A02:A443:5030:1:A05B:BEC4:A085:11BF (talk) 13:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep current redirect to Freud's writing, potentially add a disambiguation page if/when COVID-19 misinformation discusses the topic. Bakkster Man (talk) 14:51, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep unless we can find a better target, as he is about the only person who has used it.Slatersteven (talk) 15:02, 13 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.

President bar[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 00:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Same situation as Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 5#President Gravel, this redirect is misleading as Bob Barr never served as president of anything. feminist (talk) 13:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I can't find any evidence that anyone with the name "Bar" or "Barr" has served as president of any country, organisation, etc. that would make this a useful search term. There are multiple drinking establishments known as the "President Bar" but none of them appear to be notable and certainly none have an article. Thryduulf (talk) 13:57, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete not even remotely close to becoming president.--65.93.195.118 (talk) 03:54, 9 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.

President Yeltsin'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 no consensus. ✗plicit 00:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will people search for this when President Yeltsin exists? feminist (talk) 13:16, 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.

Deutsches Medizinhistorisches Museum[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 15#Deutsches Medizinhistorisches Museum

Sydney Poitier[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 Restored original target for the first redirect, and retargeted the second to the same article. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 06:52, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Target had been Sydney Tamiia Poitier for 15 years as an obvious variation of the name. Recently changed to Sidney Poitier as a misspelling. Not sure which would be more likely intended. MB 06:44, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Restore previous target. A correctly-spelled target should basically always win out over a typoed one. We have one article on someone whose first name is Sydney and last name is Poitier, and this redirect should point to her. Furthermore, looking at WikiNav, more people browsing the younger Poitier's article carry on to the article on her mother than to the article on her father, suggesting that this isn't a case where most people viewing her article really meant to go to his. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 08:01, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Target back to original Sydney Tamiia Poitier. Consider it a corollary of WP:SMALLDETAILS to target the topic with the actual spelling, not a misspelling.—Bagumba (talk) 12:14, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Clearly primary. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 12:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore previous target per Tamzin and Bagumba. A hatnote to the the present target will serve anyone trying to find that article at the incorrect spelling. Thryduulf (talk) 14:00, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore previous target - Hatnotes on each article to point to the other. That's what hatnotes are for. Platonk (talk) 07:02, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore previous target - A correct alternate name should win out over a typo any day. Use the {{Redirect}} template for the occasional surprised visitor (like me, just now) who was looking for the Sidney Poitier article. TJRC (talk) 20:26, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nom addition I added Sydney poitier (different capitalization) to the nom. I don't believe it should be controversial.—Bagumba (talk) 08:51, 10 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.

Template:R from formula[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 Create new category. Pinging proposing editors Tavix, Paradoctor to carry out the change, as I haven't directly worked with categories before. signed, Rosguill talk 21:33, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous shortcut: {{R from chemical formula}} or {{R from mathematical formula}}? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 20:40, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment there exists formulae that are neither chemical nor mathematical. Seems like deletion would be best -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:11, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Create as a parent category for both {{R from chemical formula}} and {{R from mathematical formula}}, while also catching redirects from formulae that are neither chemical nor mathematical. -- Tavix (talk) 18:45, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure "mathematical formula" and "chemical formula" necessarily share a common parent class defined strictly enough to be a category. Would that also include speech formulae, for instance? ~~~~
    User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk)     03:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Honestly, I am not sure what other formulae would be categorized, I was riffing off of 65.92's idea. I mainly envision this to be an "error catching" category so someone who is wanting to RCAT from formula but is not aware that we have separate RCATs for mathematical formulae and chemical formulae. I envision the RCAT text to mention that this RCAT is not for math nor chemical formulae in the same way that {{R from initialism}} warns that it is not for acronyms nor short names. A periodic sweep of the RCAT would get those recategorized in the correct place, and would be better than the status quo of having math formulae categorized into the chemical category because the categorizer didn't pay close enough attention about where this redirect is targeting. -- Tavix (talk) 16:10, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Create per Tavix, which seems like a simple way to improve the encyclopaedia. Thryduulf (talk) 18:39, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Like qwer, I don't see mathematical and chemical formula as having a strict enough parent class here. I also don't think we should encourage people to create vague rcats. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 22:23, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:22, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Create per Tavix: A formula is a concise way of expressing information symbolically, as in a mathematical formula or a chemical formula.
P=NP is an example of a computer science formula that is neither mathematical nor chemical. Paradoctor (talk) 10:59, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum: ¬¬ is an example of a logical formula. Paradoctor (talk) 11:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum2: ¬ b is arguably an example of a non-scientific formula. Paradoctor (talk) 11:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Addendum ad nauseam: I spotted a few entries in Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:R from mathematical expression that belong in this category. Will do them as soon as this RfD has concluded. Paradoctor (talk) 12:01, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Paradoctor: could you clarify please - you say "Create per Tamzin" but Tamzin is recommending deletion, it is Tavix who recommended creation. Thryduulf (talk) 19:54, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Thryduulf: Whoops, fixed. Thanks. Paradoctor (talk) 19:56, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The Cabal of Ta\w{1,2}i\w. (Here not doing a very good job of being a cabal.) I'll be honest, I've mixed up our usernames once or twice too. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 06:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
P=NP: The P versus NP problem is a major unsolved problem in computer science. (my emphasis) Paradoctor (talk) 21:41, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: the existence of "R from formula" does not inhibit the creation of Template:R from set-theoretic formula and Template:R from logical formula. (Although, speaking as a mathematician, P=NP is not a set-theoretic formula, but rather propositional/logical, and separating out logical formulas from general mathematical ones seems silly.) Bernanke's Crossbow (talk) 02:24, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I assure you that many, if not most philosophers will disagree with considering logic a subfield of mathematics. If anything, the reverse seems de riguer. ;) Paradoctor (talk) 15:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Create per Tavix and Paradoctor. It's a plausible name for an rcat and people will likely continue to attempt using it even if it's deleted. We can save ourselves some inconveniences by having this as a dedicated template whose text will advise about the two other template, while catching the occasional use that's neither mathematical nor chemical. I'm not sure why we would doubt the existence of the single concept of a formula, but even if you adopt that view, I believe it will still be useful for us to be able to track redirects for this sort of non-linguistic strings of symbols. – Uanfala (talk) 22:17, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Create per Tavix and Paradoctor. --Heanor (talk) 10:05, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Create per Tavix and Paradoctor. Bernanke's Crossbow (talk) 02:24, 19 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.

Jph[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) CycloneYoris talk! 06:33, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect was originally created in 2009, but it is difficult to understand, at least for me. In addition I have not found any other suitable redirect targets. Q28 (talk) 06:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate Delete or Tag This is an acronym of her maiden name, but not mentioned in the article. Paradoctor (talk) 12:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • dabify -- drafted below the redirect -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 03:26, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as dab remove the redirect, convert to dab.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 23:49, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as dab, if there is anything referred to by the initials JPH (Jet Propulsion Haboratory?) Makes no sense to redirect to this person's biography, as far as I can tell, unless she went by her initials or is referred to by them often. I will say for the record that this does make sense in some cases (rms, NPH, JFK, GWB, et cetera). jp×g 01:09, 10 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.

Jvf[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) CycloneYoris talk! 06:33, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is difficult to understand, at least for me. I have found no other suitable redirect targets. Q28 (talk) 06:11, 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.

Kzk[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 KZK. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 06:32, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think redirecting it to Kasautii Zindagii Kay would be a better option. -- Q28 (talk) 06:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget as an old redirect from page move. Jay (talk) 06:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Retarget to KZK created by Paradoctor. Jay (talk) 04:45, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to KZK, is also the ICAO designator for Air Kazakhstan. Paradoctor (talk) 08:05, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to KZK per Paradoctor, with thanks to him for creating that DAB, unless someone can show that the lowercase variant has a particular affinity for the show (in which case WP:DIFFCAPS may apply). Currently the abbreviation appears at neither show's article. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 08:17, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to KZK per Paradoctor --Lenticel (talk) 02:35, 9 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.

Zbd[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 Zafarabad Junction railway station. I also created ZBD which now points to the same article as per Tamzin's suggestion. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 06:37, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused by this redirect and can find no other suitable redirect target. Q28 (talk) 05:38, 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.

Zones and woredas of the Afar Region (template-redirects)[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 delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request undeletion of these templates. ✗plicit 05:07, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

These 11 template-redirects (batch #1) are left over after completing a month-long project to organize, simplify and update 167 outdated and disorganized templates (many old redirects, duplicates, and overlapping) into just 12 remaining templates. All 11 in this batch point to the same template, and have been double-checked to ensure there are no remaining articles using them. Removal of these old redirects will help to reduce any confusions as to which templates are to be used in articles, and simplify maintenance of named administrative divisions in a country (Ethiopia) which frequently renames, splits, and merges their zones and districts. Platonk (talk) 01:46, 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.

DC Washington[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 15#DC Washington

Carbon gas[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 15#Carbon gas

Akash DTH[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 16#Akash DTH

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_January_8&oldid=1068145221"