Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 13

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

June 13[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 13, 2022.

Nanzhou Passenger Station (metro)[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. Jay (talk) 14:25, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion: this redirect is for the wikipedia policies ill-formatted (Stations capitalized and metro disambiguator). ZandDev (msg) 12:13, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 13 June 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.

Survival arms[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 July 15#Survival arms

Aggregate state[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 the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 06:46, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Aggregate" doesn't appear anywhere in the target, so a reader who searches for this isn't given any clues to its meaning. An inquiry at the talk page hasn't indicated any interest in adding a mention. The phrase is used in a handful of other articles, but none strikes me as a good alternative target. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:34, 13 June 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.

HZM Line 1[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 19:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect between different namespaces ZandDev (msg) 18:10, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an unnecessary XNR Happy Editing--IAmChaos 00:21, 14 June 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.

Novgorod cross[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 Moot. Withdrawing as moot, as article creation has begun and can proceed normally. signed, Rosguill talk 18:32, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

While the Novgorod cross is visually similar to the Celtic cross, its origins are distinct (see ru.wiki, and it is not mentioned at the target. Deleting to encourage article creation seems appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 18:06, 13 June 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.

Realistically[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 / move. I will move the history to Realisms, which already exists as a redirect (and its history is trivial). Arbitrarily0 (talk) 20:49, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like a bit of a WP:SURPRISE. I think a soft redirect to wiktionary would be possibly worthwhile or otherwise deletion. TartarTorte 17:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A cross project redirect seems a little unneeded, delete it. | Zippybonzo | Talk | 17:27, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Indeed. Realism is a big disam page, with none of the entries likely to be any help. Just delete. Johnbod (talk) 17:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as nothing useful at the dab page. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 18:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Happy Editing--IAmChaos 02:03, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I don't think that this should go to anything, really. Better to simply let people use the search engine. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:55, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move to something like Realism (concept). Under the redirect there's the history of the article that existed at the title of "Realism" between 2002 and 2013 (when it got redirected and moved to this strange title). I'm not sure if the title Realistically should continue to have a redirect or not: I don't see consistency with regard to redirects from adverbs (e.g. Boldly exists, Falsely doesn't), but there are instances in articles of the string "realistically" being linked [1], which can be taken as a hint that this may be a plausible search term (the views – an average of one per day – also point in this direction). I'd rather err on the side of keeping. As for a wiktionary redirect, there's no need to create one if it's an everyday English word. – Uanfala (talk) 16:28, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 17:31, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete realism is not what the word realistic means. Immanuelle 💗 (please tag me) 22:23, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move per Uanfala to preserve the history at the title. - Eureka Lott 15:12, 15 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move, noting that this addresses delete-!voters' concerns as well. signed, Rosguill talk 19:43, 20 June 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.

Hrvatska metropola[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 19:41, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't make sense to repeat the entire rationale from the previous two examples ("Glavni grad Hrvatske", "Mali Beč") yet again, as it mostly applies here, too. https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=all-time&pages=Zagreb%7CAgram_(Croatia)%7CHrvatska_metropola%7CCroatian_metropolis shows the comparative numbers of views, and it also includes the 'Croatian metropolis' redirect that is the translation of this phrase as well - the numbers are only marginally different. I'd reckon this one might occasionally get someone looking for it because the phrase exists in the Croatian political and historical discourse. Nevertheless, I do still think that the literal foreign phrase is practically meaningless for navigation on en:. Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:49, 13 June 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.

Mali Beč[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 19:40, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The rationale from the previous examples "Glavni grad Hrvatske" generally applies here as well, so I'll skip those parts. I don't see how it makes sense to have the Croatian phrase meaning "Little Vienna" in the English Wikipedia. This is not a phrase that is conventionally signposted anywhere so I don't see that English readers would be looking for this just based on a raw search. For Croatian readers, it's entirely implausible that they'd be looking for this here esp. given that this actually contradicts common knowledge in Croatia, where the phrase Little Vienna is usually associated with Varaždin. I previously confirmed this with a search of Hrčak which indicated most references are to Varaždin, Osijek and only then to Zagreb. https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=all-time&pages=Zagreb%7CMali_Be%C4%8D%7CAgram_(Croatia)%7CLittle_Vienna%7CSmall_Vienna shows the context, with 8389 views for the English phrase Little Vienna which has had an article since 2007, and 65 for both Mali Beč and Small Vienna, another redirect created by the same user at the same time in 2015. This volume certainly doesn't seem to me like something that implies this redirect is plausible. Also, it's very curious that both of these have 65, and Glavni grad Hrvatske has 63... that sounds more like bots that went undetected than actual users. Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:44, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Happy Editing--IAmChaos 00:18, 14 June 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.

Glavni grad Hrvatske[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 19:40, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how it makes sense to have the Croatian phrase meaning "Capital city of Croatia" in the English Wikipedia. This is not a phrase that is conventionally signposted anywhere so I don't see that English readers would be looking for this just based on a raw search; for Croatian readers, it's entirely implausible that they'd be looking for this here, given that this is common knowledge, the existence of other language encyclopedias, etc. https://pageviews.wmcloud.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=all-time&pages=Zagreb%7CGlavni_grad_Hrvatske%7CAgram_(Croatia) shows 3397017 views of the article, 93 of the 'Glavni grad Hrvatske' redirect, and 16882 for the very intricate, disambiguation-related historical name redirect Agram (Croatia) over all time (2015, which was roughly the age of the deleted redirect too). This volume certainly doesn't seem to me like something that implies this redirect is plausible. In addition, it doesn't satisfy the requirements in WP:RFOREIGN. Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:39, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Happy Editing--IAmChaos 00:18, 14 June 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.

Curdled Milk[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 Nicole Dollanganger#Discography. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 16:39, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unlikely mis-capitalization of curdled milk. No incoming links. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 12:35, 13 June 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.

All of Creation[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 20#All of Creation

Template:NYCS stations[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 20#Template:NYCS stations

Palandri District[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) CycloneYoris talk! 08:06, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such place. Pallandri is the headquarters of Sudhanoti District. "Palandri District" is confusing/misleading. Recommend delete. MB 06:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this confusing or misleading, MB? Districts in South Asia are almost always named after their headquarters; for the few that aren't, it's plausible that readers may try searching using the city name. – Uanfala (talk) 15:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Because if you search for "Palandri District" and are taken to "Sudhanoti District" and you may be surprised why. You have to start reading the article to find Pallandri (note the alt spelling too). You might get there faster without the redirect by finding Pallandri in the search results. Note that Pallandri District is a redlink. MB 18:26, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You're right that the search results do fine and so the redirect isn't strictly speaking necessary. But I don't think any reader who follows it would find the whole thing surprising: what else could they possibly be looking for? – Uanfala (talk) 19:06, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep As said above, South Asian districts are almost always named after the head city. Someone may be looking for 'the district with Pallandri as its headquarters' and look up Pallandri District expecting the head-city rule to apply. No ambiguity is created by this. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 01:46, 17 June 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.

Unsecret[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 20#Unsecret

Natalie Mariduena[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 20#Natalie Mariduena

Tiquan Forbes[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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:49, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 10#Ti'Quan_Forbes Joeykai (talk) 03:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that Forbes is no longer part of the White Sox, thus making the redirect useless. So, the redirect should be to his current team, which is the Arizona Diamondbacks, in a section could be written, or previous bio could be restored and revised. Cherrell410 (talk) 22:41, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can make the section under the page Arizona Diamondbacks minor league players that is about Forbes, if needed. Cherrell410 (talk) 22:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not. These pages are not meant for just every minor league player. Just notable ones and Forbes is in no way notable to be on there.-- Yankees10 01:22, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 21:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:02, 13 June 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.

Middlesborough in the 2010 general election[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 ToryBoy The Movie. Fix the double-redirect and make consistent with the correctly-spelled redirect. For the alternate target suggestion of Middlesbrough (UK Parliament constituency), start a new nomination. Jay (talk) 01:58, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The underlying redirect to ToryBoy The Movie is fine but this one was misspelt on setup – it should only have been Middlesbrough. I can't see any point in keeping this one, which seems to have been a pure mistake rather than an attempt to catch a misspelling. Do we need this one? DBaK (talk) 11:41, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously fix the double redirect, and tag {{R avoided double redirect}}, but I think it is a plausible misspelling. Keep Happy Editing--IAmChaos 02:17, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It is a vaguely plausible misspelling, yes – I know this as someone who spends a certain amount of time fixing Middlesboroughs that are not in Kentucky. But if you start typing it you get shown the right possibilities quickly enough, and we cannot provide a redirect to cover every possible mistake for Middlesbrough, which has many articles – that way would lie madness. Why keep this one, which wasn't even created to help with an existing Middlesb[o]rough situation, but just by accident? I don't feel that strongly, I just don't get it and don't see why we don't just cull the silly one as adding nothing of value to the encyclopaedia. Cheers DBaK (talk) 09:34, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget both to Middlesbrough (UK Parliament constituency) imo. Don't see how the film is the primary topic. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 07:42, 5 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why keep the accidentally misspelt one at all? It was literally never meant to exist! It is not an attempt to help with misspelling – it is itself a spelling screwup, pure and simple. People seem to want to talk about the targeting but that is not the question I raised. Does anyone want to address that please?
And yes I know it does not really matter at all, and we are unlikely to run out of server space over it. I'm just a bit gobsmacked that we haven't really addressed the question I raised ... Best to all, DBaK (talk) 07:39, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I think this is a highly plausible misspelling. Why it was created isn't entirely relevant in that regard. Note also that generally you shouldn't be moving redirects per WP:MOVEREDIRECT. I'm not sure if the best target is ToryBoy The Movie or Middlesbrough (UK Parliament constituency)#Elections in the 2010s however I'm leaning towards ToryBoy The Movie simply because the correctly spelt redirect wasn't included in the nomination and they should both target the same place. A7V2 (talk) 00:19, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks very much for that. OK I get it re the "plausible misspelling" ... I guess I am just a bit surprised, and feel that we do not need a parallel misspelt redirect for every Middlesbrough article but never mind: I will get over it. I didn't know about WP:MOVEREDIRECT so thanks for that. As for the correctly spelt one not being nominated ... I didn't nominate it for anything as I don't care about its existence, so I have no position on where it should go. Others may but, having tried and failed to get the (imo) silly one deleted, I will leave the targeting concern to others. Thanks for explaining it to me so clearly. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 07:52, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't mean "the correctly spelt redirect wasn't included in the nomination" in the sense that you should have included it, moreso that that isn't what is being discussed here, since the nomination is about whether to keep the incorrectly spelled version, so I would prefer to keep at the current target unless the other one is added which is probably too late for this discussion. A7V2 (talk) 01:13, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:01, 13 June 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.

Mustard sauce[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. Lots of weak opinions with no clear outcome. signed, Rosguill talk 19:40, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Mustard sauce" could refer to any sauce using mustard as the primary ingredient or flavor base, and is usually not used to refer to the condiment itself. In that case, a better page to target to Mustard (condiment) would be Mustard (sauce). Colgatepony234 (talk) 12:36, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 21:41, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:00, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete: I myself have made some mustard sauces, and it is not the same thing as the mere condiment, so the redirect is a bit misleading. Veverve (talk) 02:10, 13 June 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_June_13&oldid=1098321386"