Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 28

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 28[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 28, 2022.

Jackson Norris (Marvel Cinematic Universe)[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 23:50, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should this redirect exist? The character's name is Jackson Norriss with two s's. The redirects at Jackson Norriss and Jackson Norriss (Marvel Cinematic Universe) already exist. My vote is to delete this one since the character's name is misspelled, and the proper names already exist as redirects. TNstingray (talk) 23:46, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as implausible title (especially due to it including (Marvel Cinematic Universe), left behind as a result of a page move. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:05, 4 August 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.

Interstate 50[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 Restore everything. The disambiguation page was move to Interstate 50 and the redirect was suppressed. Interstate 50 was then restored to its former state. Too much original research. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 05:41, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Interstate 50" not mentioned anywhere in the article, nor can I find anything anywhere stating that this route will be (or has been proposed to be) designated as Interstate 50. Waddles 🗩 🖉 22:48, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To me, Route 412 being Interstate 50 just makes sense. Highway 50 runs through Missouri, so having Interstate 50 in that state is out. As we know, Interstate 10 runs through the Southern states from California to Florida, Interstate 20 runs through the northern portions of those states such as Louisiana, Interstate 30 runs through the state of Arkansas and Texas and such areas like Texarkana, Little Rock, Dallas/Fort Worth, Interstate 40 goes from California to North Carolina and includes such cities as Fort Smith, Arkansas, while Interstate 70 runs through Kansas City and St. Louis, both in Missouri. So, where would Interstate 50 slot in at? Since Highway 50 runs through Missouri, it cannot be in that state unless Highway 50 was rechristened as Interstate 60 and Highway 60 rechristened as Interstate 50. So, this leaves two possible spots, Highway 62, which includes such cities like Tulsa, Oklahoma, Farmington and Fayetteville, both in Arkansas (but that is unlikely as the entirety of the route through Washington County would get Business Designation due to it running through businesses), or the more likely spot of 412, which goes through Siloam Springs and Springdale, also in Arkansas. This is just my opinion here. I'll search for Interstate 50 and if I find any good sources, I'll put them up here. Moline1 (talk) 22:59, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I did find this source: http://futureinterstatecorridors.com/I-50,%20I-60,%20I-70%20Trans%20America%20Highway.html It describes Interstate 50/60 as going through Springfield, Missouri. Obviously, this will not work unless Highway's 50/60 designation is stripped. So, what I described above would be the easiest way to getting an I-50, plus with Northwest Arkansas on the grow, having 412 designated an Interstate (E.G. I-50) would be very beneficial to the area. As for where I--60 could slot in now, I do not know. Moline1 (talk) 23:10, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Moline1: That is just your opinion though, it is not a verified fact. Please wait until the highway receives a proper Interstate designation proposal before making pages like these and you can source the content properly, or else it violates WP:CRYSTAL. Waddles 🗩 🖉 23:26, 28 July 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.

New-York Courrier[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 23:51, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yet another StrexcorpEmployee (talk · contribs) redirect based on a post in the GPT2 subreddit. Can't find any evidence from plain search that this spelling was ever used in English, but the ProQuest results are a bit less clear and may be about a different, French-language newspaper not covered in enwiki. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:33, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per potentially being a confusing WP:FORRED issue of mixing two languages. See Courrier; apparently, "courrier" is the French word for "courier", and for that reason and since the target is based in New York, there is potential that someone searching this term could be looking for Courrier des États-Unis, which is also based out of New York. Steel1943 (talk) 22:03, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That was probably what I saw in ProQuest in one of the results. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:30, 29 July 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.

Hillary Clintom[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. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:06, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misspelling with only 25 pageviews since creation on 18 April 2022 and minimal trace online. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:19, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. It's a WP:CHEAP and plausible typo, and 25 pageviews might not sound like a lot, but it's enough to have a redirect. CLYDEFRANKLIN 02:19, 4 August 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.

Smiledog.jpg[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 5#Smiledog.jpg

U k[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 4#U k

Star (Murk (band) album)[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 23:51, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This disambiguator within disambiguator makes this redirect very implausible. Star (Murk album) serves the same purpose without the interior disambiguator. TartarTorte 17:55, 28 July 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.

Univeristy of Klausenburg[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 16:27, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This name is not mentioned in the article. NotReallySoroka (talk) 16:18, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The typo makes it unlikely, but "Klausenburg" is German for Kolozsvár/Cluj-Napoca. —Kusma (talk) 20:49, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Franz Joseph University was founded as the Hungarian Royal University of Klausenberg (or Hungarian Royal University of Kolozsvár) in what is now is now Cluj-Napoca, Romania. The redirect University of Klausenburg is used in Arnold Müller and Josef von Fodor. This form with its typo does not seem very useful though. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:06, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The nomination was for no mention at the target, however the discussion has brought out the typo aspect as well.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 17:36, 28 July 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.

This is extremely dangerous to our democracy[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. Intelligible reason to do anything other than keep cannot be gleaned. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:08, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think redirect is supposed to be used to make statement. C933103 (talk) 16:55, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: One of the heavily criticized quotes from the promo was "This is extremely dangerous to our democracy", so it's not an unreasonable search term. The quote is mentioned in the section in the article. TartarTorte 17:08, 28 July 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.

Vacuous water[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 23:52, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Another nonsensical StrexcorpEmployee (talk · contribs) redirect based on a GPT2 subreddit. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:28, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Speedy delete clearly not a real search term or something anyone would ever use. Skynxnex (talk) 17:55, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not a likely search term, can't find any sources about it. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 18:20, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • QuestionIs that subreddit a bunch of bots talking to each other, that occasionally they make articles here? Louis Waweru  Talk  23:31, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    No, they seem to be link to Wikipedia sometimes, and since GPT2 does not do fact-checking, the resulting links often go to nonexistent articles. StrexcorpEmployee is trying to fill them in. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:15, 29 July 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.

Bocche (Locality)[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 23:54, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 23#Bocce (Locality) (the target redirect was moved to these two titles during the pendency of the RfD) * Pppery * it has begun... 15:06, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as regardless of if this place exists it is not mentioned at the target and the target section doesn't exist. Possibly Bocche could be retargeted to Bocce as a plausible misspelling but this might cause confusion as apparently it is Italian for "mouths". A7V2 (talk) 01:41, 29 July 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.

ULEZ[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 Ultra Low Emission Zone. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:11, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should be retargeted back to Ultra Low Emission Zone as it is the only ULEZ on Ulez that is in all-caps. TartarTorte 14:23, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per nom with a hatnote to Ulez. A7V2 (talk) 01:41, 29 July 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.

Wikipedia:CHG[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 5#Wikipedia:CHG

Windows SChannel[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 5#Windows SChannel

Mark Taylor (television)[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. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 07:07, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear how this redirect refers to any topic on its target disambiguation page. (Heck, I apparently didn't even think it represented the article I moved from this title; maybe there was a topic at the disambiguation page back in 2020 ... not sure, but if there was, it doesn't seem like it is there anymore.) Steel1943 (talk) 04:22, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 04:42, 28 July 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.

Touching oneself[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. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:47, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excessively vague redirect created by a user with several problematic redirects. However, this one does not appear to be derived from the GPT2 reddit. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:06, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep it certainly is used that way. And from the Divinyls song, "I Touch Myself" using similar terminology. Or the minced oath insult "Go touch yourself!" and other similar forms out there in the wild. -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 05:09, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per IP. Perfectly plausible search term. Similar to Playing with oneself which also targets the same article. CycloneYoris talk! 08:42, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I suspect it probably is appropriate language in some contexts where the target word is not. The phrase may be learned before the topic word, and be looked up as such. Louis Waweru  Talk  09:36, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as the most common use of this phrase. Glades12 (talk) 19:49, 28 July 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.

Cereal eating by humans[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 4#Cereal eating by humans

N (math)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 5#N (math)

Frig (word)[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 almost all to Fuck#Common alternatives and retarget Frigs to FRIGS. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:17, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Well, here we are again about 7 years later. Please refer to the old discussion from 2015 for the details. Since then, Frig (interjection) was moved to Frig (word), then in 2020, Frig (word) was redirected to Minced oath as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frig (word). (It has been over two years, and no merge ever occurred, apparently.) And since then, the creator of the aforementioned article, as well as most of these redirects, was blocked and given their own WP:CSD that was active for a few years: WP:X1. My rationale for deleting these is the same as it was back in 2015: These are examples of minced oaths, not the alternative names for the subject "minced oaths". And as it was last time, these redirects are not even mentioned in the target article. (Also, for precedence, on Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 September 4, there are several other redirects to Minced oath I nominated that day that were either deleted or retargeted to a page unrelated to Minced oath.) Steel1943 (talk) 23:51, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I did not include Frigger from the previous nomination since it has a different, and apparently plausible, target. Steel1943 (talk) 00:02, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 03:08, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per Mellohi. Fuck#Alternatives does a much better job at explaining these words and their meaning. For Frigs, the sources at FRIGS demonstrate that it's very often written with lowercase letters, so I think the band edges out the minced oath in that case. Add a hatnote at the band if Frigs ends up being targeted there, though. Glades12 (talk) 17:34, 28 July 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.

Xavier Alexander Musk[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. -- Tavix (talk) 21:31, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Former name of Musk's daughter ([1]) not mentioned at the target. Delete unless consensus changes to include mention of her former name. signed, Rosguill talk 19:15, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What is the protocol on Wikipedia for including that kind of information? I would not want to accidentally commit "deadnaming" if I were to try and include her former name. QRep2020 (talk) 20:19, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep The individual in question is mentioned in the text, though not by name. Unless there's a policy I'm unaware of, redirecting from a former name of a transgender individual seems fine (e.g. Bruce Jenner redirects to Caitlyn Jenner). Either her current or former name both seem like plausible search terms to me. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:33, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I have not done much editing in this topic but I think probably delete per former name per WP:DEADNAME: If a living transgender or non-binary person was not notable under a former name (a deadname), it should not be included in any page (including lists, redirects, ...) (bold mine). I believe, unlike Jenner, that Musk's daughter in question was notable under their former/deadname and I'm not sure it's notable now since enough RS are not including it? Skynxnex (talk) 02:07, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    What makes the new name notable though, if I may, is the fact that she used to "be" a Musk but now not only has adopted a new surname but has stated she wants nothing to do with her father and whatever is associated with being a Musk. As for the privacy concerns, every single article about the matter I have come across features both names, and there are a lot of them as one would expect. QRep2020 (talk) 08:01, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure if she/her new name is notable or not but this is about her deadname. Redirects of non-notable things to aid searches are definitely done, but WP:DEADNAME seems to disallow that for non-notable deadnames. But this definitely seems like an edge case not directly fitting the examples given of either a famous person who was famous and changed their name and are still famous (Jenner) or someone who was unknown, changed their name, and then got notable (Rachel Levine). Skynxnex (talk) 12:19, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I only bring up the new name because it also has a redirect that has not been flagged, but no doubt the issue is a complex one. QRep2020 (talk) 08:25, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not here to spread rumors or fallacies, but I do recall seeing somewhere on reddit's Wikipedia sub that a person did not want their name on their father's article and wanted to know the process of removing it, so let's hypothetically put her in this category and delete as someone who does not want to be publicly associated with their father on Wikipedia and just delete this unnecessary redirect entirely. Trillfendi (talk) 19:17, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • On the one hand, this name has been reported in a few reliable sources. However, MOS:DEADNAME is unusual in that it does not say to defer to usage in reliable sources (largely, I think, because some RSes have not always been responsible, with respect to individuals' privacy in dignity, in the way in which they report deadnames). Was she notable under this name? No. Thus the redirect should be deleted. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 22:36, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 03:05, 28 July 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.

1922 film & 2002 film & 2012 film[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 4#1922 film & 2002 film & 2012 film

Fudge (euphemism)[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 Fuck#Common alternatives. Jay 06:19, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

In the previous nomination from 2020, this redirect was retargeted to Minced oath since the redirect was mentioned at the aforementioned article; it is no longer mentioned. As it stands, the redirect is misleading since it is an example of a minced oath, but not an alternative name for the subject "minced oath". Steel1943 (talk) 00:07, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:27, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget. Reader can learn about minced oaths from the retarget, but may not gain clarity from current destination. Louis Waweru  Talk  10:18, 28 July 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.
  • Delete There is a Fudge( disambiguation) page already which mentions it and is reached from Fudge.. Who the fudge is going to type Fudge (euphemism)? Wikipedia i not a dictionary, much less urban dictionary. NadVolum (talk) 12:29, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_July_28&oldid=1138583387"