Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 21

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

October 21[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on October 21, 2022.

Queen Kapau[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. Page history restored. ✗plicit 00:47, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect was speedy deleted by User:Shirt58 out of process. Procedurally recreating and listing at RfD. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:32, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you give us a reference to something that describes her as a queen, please? Deb (talk) 17:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article did prior to May 2021. Yes, Wikipedia is not a reliable source, but given that said fact remained in the article for so many years, deleting it should have had a discussion. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:03, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:59, 21 October 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.

Dhul-Suwayqatayn[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 article. I will leave it to Drmies or anyone else interested to decide whether this should be brought to AfD, stubbified further, tagged for cleanup, or something else. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:54, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Titles not interchangeable. Dhul-Suwayqatayn is about an Ethiopian person who is predicted/prophesized by Islam to attack the Kaaba in the future. Dhul-Suwayqatayn is not the Kaaba. – Batreeq (Talk) (Contribs) 23:27, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: It may have been mentioned at the target article at some point in the past. Is it a notable prophecy, if yes it deserves a reference in the article and redirect will be valid. Otherwise, deletion will be proper. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 16:56, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:44, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant ahadith are Sahih al-Bukhari 1591, Sahih Muslim 2909a, Sunan an-Nasa'i 2904, and Sunan Abu Dawood 4309. A redirect doesn't necessarily have to be a synonym, it can be an {{r from related topic}}. If this is a notable topic, a better place for it would probably be Islamic eschatology. – Scyrme (talk) 16:04, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As a note, this redirect was previously an article with its own content until it was blanked and redirected by Drmies (talk · contribs) in June 2022. – Scyrme (talk) 16:06, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have an iron in this fire, Scyrme--any redirect would be more helpful than the article in the condition in which I found it. Better, of course, would be for someone who knows the subject matter to actually write the article. If you are that person, please use your skills and improve the project. But I don't mind a different target, and I don't know that we need a discussion for it. Drmies (talk) 21:25, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That's alright. I was only providing some relevant context, since CX Zoom suggested (prior to the relisting) that article history might explain the redirect. – Scyrme (talk) 23:25, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Drmies, I want to strongly push back against your claim that any redirect would be more helpful than the article. There is no information on this topic at the Kaaba article, so a redirect there is unhelpful at best and misleading at worse. If you are to redirect an article, please make sure you are redirecting to a location that has the necessary context to establish a connection. You are an established editor, you should know better! -- Tavix (talk) 19:18, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tavix, sheesh. Hope you feel better after yelling at me. Yeah, this, with three links in Indonesian, two to Google Books without page numbers or text, and no footnotes anywhere in the text, really. "Necessary content to establish a connection" -- how on earth can one judge that if the thing to be redirected has barely any content at all? Like I said, I have no iron in this fire, but I don't need you accusing me with all your adverbs and italics. Drmies (talk) 00:52, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Drmies, my apologies that you took my rather forceful reply as yelling. The point I was trying (and probably failed) to get across is that it was inappropriate to redirect this to Kaaba because that article has no information about "Dhul-Suwayqatayn", and I was disappointed to see you defend the redirection after that was pointed out. It sounds like you had an issue with the article content, but the way to resolve that would be via PROD or AfD. I appreciate that you took what you thought was the path of least resistance, but sweeping the issue under the rug directly led to this discussion. -- Tavix (talk) 02:36, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:29, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete redirect. It seems as though there is a possibly notable article to be recreated here, but the target article has little info on the redirect subject. Per WP:R#DELETE #11. —Ganesha811 (talk) 21:54, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore BLARed article to promote improvement. This seems like a plausibly notable topic, and deletion doesn't seem appropriate here given the article history. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:57, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment – @Batreeq: Redirects can be more than an alternative name, so long as they are related and mentioned in the article. Senator2029 【talk】 04:32, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore and take to AfD. The pre-BLAR version refers to Indonesian sources. It may be draftified if it's notable and can be improved. Jay 💬 12:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Restore per above concerns that the topic is notable. -- Tavix (talk) 19:18, 29 October 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.

Smg4[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 28#Smg4

EZ Gun[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 28#EZ Gun

Kerotan MGS3[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 28#Kerotan MGS3

Bela River (disambiguation)[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. After all of this, I hate to not give this a definitve resolution, but there's no way to look at this discussion and see a consensus. As next step I would recommend either:
  • Someone could RfD Bela River, and then loop back to this once that is resolved. (If there is consensus that that term is ambiguous, then retargeting this title to a DAB at that one would be noncontroversial.)
  • As a bold action, an editor could either DABify this page, or DABify Bela River and boldly retarget this title there. A challenge to that DAB would then be handled the same way as any other contested DAB which is, yes, AfD.
  • Or treat this like any other no-consensus XfD and try again in a few months. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:50, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bela River (disambiguation) → Bela Reka  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target disambiguation page doesn't actually describe Bela rivers, rather it describes Serbian villages that have a name that translates to 'white river', which is not intuitive or useful for English readers. Joy [shallot] (talk) 20:18, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep This is how intentional links to dab pages are made. MB 23:04, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The intentional link to this disambiguation page is Bela Reka (disambiguation), not this. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:38, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per MB. The target disambiguates topics that can be translated as Bela River. Thryduulf (talk) 00:25, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    No, they can't be translated like that. Either you translate, or you do not, there is no point to an arbitrary middle ground. For example, nobody would ever say that a Serbian-language reference to New York is 'Novi York' or 'New Jork'. This arbitrary combination building does not exist in practice, neither for New York nor for Bela Reka. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:37, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is the way intentional links to dab pages are made, but not this one: Bela River redirects to Belá (river) with a hatnote to River Bela. Bela Reka does not disambiguate articles that might otherwise be titled "Bela River", and none of the linked articles translates it so. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:24, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, thank you. For reference, the problem arose when a user changed https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bela_River&action=history without any edit summary or other explanation (a problem that I recall warning them about at their talk page once already), and then the bot automatically created this followup internal redirect. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:43, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:18, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: The redirect is neither a title match or variation of the target page's title in the same language (this part is rather important for disambiguation pages), meaning the association between the redirect and the target is erroneous in the way where it could be seen as harmful for searches. Steel1943 (talk) 02:43, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as no pages containing the term "Bela River" are disambiguated at the target. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:03, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Weak keep as there are two entries in the see also section that "Bela River" could reasonably refer, so the current target does serve a disambiguation function for these. But, deletion would also be acceptable IMO. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:07, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see that the two plausible titles per Mdewman have hatnotes to each other, however I have created a disambig draft at the redirect per WP:TWODABS as there is no primary topic. Jay 💬 05:39, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Bela River has pointed to one place since 2008, while River Bela has been separate since 2006. One of the hatnotes also mentions River Belah. I'm not sure if having this separate is better than just using hatnotes as we've had it so far. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 06:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Added River Belah as well to the dab. Jay 💬 06:55, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That was not the point :) these three vaguely similar titles are not necessarily that ambiguous amongst each other that we would need to invent this disambiguation page. Hatnotes have done well for them for decades now, and we're only noticing this due to a technicality. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:07, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This was closed and then listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bela River (disambiguation), and then closed deferring back to the original discussion. Relisting for visibility.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:31, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Option 1: Bundle Bela River to this RfD and resume the discussion.
Option 2: Close the discussion per current consensus or no consensus and start a new RfD with the entries Bela River and Bela River (disambiguation).
Option 3: Delete, and create a dab under Bela river. Jay 💬 11:00, 22 October 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.

″ (double prime)[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 Prime (symbol)#Use in linguistics. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:00, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This symbol, a double prime, is not used on the target page so this is confusing. Prime (symbol)#Linguistics does say that Prime and double prime are used to transliterate Cyrillic yeri (the soft sign, ь) and yer (the hard sign, ъ). so the target is relevant, but the symbol also has different uses in mathemetics, science and music. I propose retargetting to Prime (symbol) as a {{R avoided double redirect}} of Double prime. This will also match the single, triple and quadruple prime symbols. Thryduulf (talk) 18:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget as proposed. I agree with the nominator. Since the linguistic use is mentioned at Prime (symbol) § Linguistics, anyone looking for its use in transliteration would still find what they are looking for. – Scyrme (talk) 14:28, 23 October 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.

"XX99" 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 delete. ✗plicit 23:39, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Every article XX99 where XX = 30-98 (except 7199) redirects to this page. I notice how any other number does not redirect to this page. Should we just delete them all since they seem unneeded? The same thing goes for several XX00 numbers too, like 4100 and 4200. Colgatepony234 (talk) 16:24, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all unless a better target is found; the target does not include any information about these years. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:50, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: @Colgatepony234: If all of the redirects are not listed in this nomination, only the ones that are currently listed in the nomination will be affected by the result of this discussion; the primary reason for this is there could be editors who are watching the redirects that you are referring to that are not nominated in this discussion, and could very well have desire to provide input, but will not be notified of the fact that the redirects are being discussed because there's no tag on them nor are they part of this section. If you want this discussion to affect the rest of the redirects are referring to, you will need to nominate them and add them to this nomination prior to the change of day in UTC. Steel1943 (talk) 20:45, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Steel1943: Done that just now. Colgatepony234 (talk) 21:39, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Colgatepony234: I was referring to the additional redirects you mentioned, such as 4100 and 4200. But no matter, since 5 days have now elapsed, if they are to be considered, they may have to be listed separately or bundled in a relist. (By the way, I did not get notified by your mention ... not sure why.) Steel1943 (talk) 02:53, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
After the XX99 discussion is over, then I'll move on to the XX00 ones. Colgatepony234 (talk) 03:33, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom.
SMBMovieFan (talk) 22:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • As with similar previous discussions I agree delete all unless someone finds a reason to retarget any somewhere else (and there should be no prejudice against recreating any of these as redirects or dab pages if such targets do exist) but keeping these when there is no mention at the target is unhelpful. A7V2 (talk) 23:38, 22 October 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.

List of yaoi games[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 28#List of yaoi games

List of games with DLSS support[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 23:40, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading redirect: No such list exists in the target article. IceWelder [✉] 15:53, 21 October 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.

List of games using Allegro[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 23:40, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading redirect: No such list exists in the target article. IceWelder [✉] 15:53, 21 October 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.

List of games with support for high-fidelity image upscaling[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 28#List of games with support for high-fidelity image upscaling

Elvish sword of great antiquity[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. Jay 💬 14:23, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article, and such an item is also a feature of other works such as the Lord of the Rings. Not sure that there's a good place to point this redirect. Hog Farm Talk 14:00, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete such an untargetable redirect. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 16:19, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete untargetable, unlikely search term, and not mentioned in target article. --PresN 16:57, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It's a direct quote from Zork I: Above the trophy case hangs an elvish sword of great antiquity. But it could just as well be a description of many other objects in other works, as Hog Farm notes. Double sharp (talk) 23:59, 22 October 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.

Upbeat[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 Up beat. I went ahead and merged this dab page with Upbeat (disambiguation), as both dabs shared the exact same entries. A move request can be then filed at WP:MV to move the dab to Upbeat. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 19:53, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it's helpful to have Up-beat and Upbeat target different articles. "up-beat" isn't actually mentioned in Anacrusis, and the use of "upbeat" there seems to be in a music context. Note there is a disambiguation page at Up beat. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:45, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Redirect both to Up beat, both are valid usage of the term up-beat. Making a distiction just causes confusion.
Roostery123 (talk) 13:17, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • We also have the dab Upbeat (disambiguation). If it makes sense to merge the two dab pages, then all can retarget to it, otherwise Upbeat (disambiguation) can be moved to Upbeat. Jay 💬 12:02, 28 October 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.

Upbeat (radio programme)[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. Jay 💬 11:52, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Upbeat" is not mentioned at the target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:41, 21 October 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.

Poltos[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 30#Poltos

Climbing bean[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 Phaseolus vulgaris. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 07:27, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 08:17, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Some (many?) varieties of beans are described as climbing because of the way they grow (they're vine-line and climb up poles) so this is a highly plausible search term, but I've not yet found anywhere useful to target this. For those who are familiar with the term and know what it means the connection to the target is clear but not useful as it doesn't give information about which varieties are climbers and which aren't nor any information about how/why they climb. For those who don't know what a climbing bean is the current target doesn't really help them. Thryduulf (talk) 09:24, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Phaseolus vulgaris where the term is listed as boldtext synonym for certain cultivars (compare also "Pole bean") BlackholeWA (talk) 16:48, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's the tale wagging the dog. Those terms should not be bold unless there is a redirect pointing there (MOS:BOLD). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:24, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Phaseolus vulgaris per BlackholeWA. A7V2 (talk) 03:01, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I won't oppose the suggested target. However the page also says All wild members of the species have a climbing habit, imlplying all cultivars needn't be climbers. Another species Phaseolus acutifolius or the Tepary bean can also be a climbing bean. Jay 💬 09:41, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:25, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per above, without prejudice against setindexifying to the broader set of beans sometimes referred to as "climbing bean". -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:32, 30 October 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.

Temp (hairstyle)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 28#Temp (hairstyle)

TAC-Alert[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. As an unopposed deletion nomination. Jay 💬 10:38, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"TAC-Alert" is not defined, or mentioned, in Enwiki. A better target might be Alert state but it's not mentioned there. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:13, 21 October 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.

Southern Cross 9[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 28#Southern Cross 9

Chess Roberts[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 08:08, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RDELETE#D8, not mentioned at redirect target InfiniteNexus (talk) 06:22, 21 October 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.

Square up[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 sentence case and replace title case. Jay 💬 10:26, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Previously pointed to Square-up; suggest reverting both to that as a clear WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. I recognize a potential WP:DIFFCAPS aregument for the uppercase variant, but I'm generally opposed to splitting a pair of two-word redirects based only on the capitalization of the first letter of the second word. If there's consensus against retargeting Square Up, then Square Up (EP) should be moved there per a request made by 2600:1700:9DD0:8FD0:4933:3749:3F94:549C at WP:RM/TR, which I challenged in favor of this RfD. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 05:00, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 05:36, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate There are a bunch of obscure topics here (I had heard of none of them before) currently poorly-disambiguated by small details, which makes this a good candidate for a disambiguation page. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:50, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate like Friendly Fire for the title case version only, leave the sentence case redirect as is. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:30, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Crouch, Swale: Based on your reference to the title-case title Friendly Fire, have you transposed "title case" and "sentence case" here? -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:00, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There are several uses that are title case and several sentence case, a draft DAB now exists at the sentence case where the title case should probably also go. I wasn't aware of the other use at the time. Crouch, Swale (talk) 06:05, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate at Square up, move Square Up (EP) to Square Up. My first thought for the lowercase version was in reference to Bunt (baseball) and the broader use described at Glossary_of_baseball_(S)#square_up. The lowercase is clearly ambiguous with no obvious primary topic, but the uppercase has only one use and should be treated per WP:DIFFCAPS; anyone explicitly using the uppercase form probably seeks the proper noun. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:22, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, y'all've convinced me. Disambiguate (drafted) at Square up. Move Square Up (EP) to Square Up. As to SquareUp, I realized that it previously pointed to Square (financial services) and was only retargeted to Block, Inc., due to a merge and re-split, so I've restored the earlier target. But I still think a follow-up RfD is merited as to whether to retarget that to the DAB, or to keep or delete. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:00, 28 October 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.

Nigger Hills[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 28#Nigger Hills

Febris undularis[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 without prejudice agains recreation if a good source can be found. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 06:33, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, results on Google Scholar do not suggest a connection. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 15:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Google gives a number of German-language hits for "febris+undularis" which translate it as Schüttelfrost, ie. "chills", although I'm not sure why. (This includes the German-language Wikipedia, where it is given as the Latin synonym but this detail is unreferenced.) I found a number of non-English sources (eg. this German source) that use Febris undulans as a synonym for brucellosis. I haven't found any English sources that refer to "undulary fever" (febris undularis) but several refer to "undulant fever" (febris undulans) which refers to brucellosis. – Scyrme (talk) 15:54, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 15:31, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weakest possible keep. I would really like to hear from Mats84 who created the page, but it looks like they go months between editing. With Google I found two[1][2] English sources from 1938, and one hit[3] that postdates the creation of the redirect. I kinda suspect that last hit got the term from us, chuckle. I also found a graph[4] showing that "febris" was in regular usage during the 1800's and early 1900's, but pretty much died out by 1950. However the page also significantly says that "febris undularis" was the #1 most common phrase in which febris appeared. It looks like this was once significantly used medical term that appears to have some crossover into English, but it isn't showing up in computer searches because it's a pre-digital age term. I'm reluctant to nuke what may be a plausible medical term when there is credible uncertainty. Alsee (talk) 10:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Another relist seems fair to hear from the creator.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 02:10, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom as not mentioned at the target, and no alternate target suggested. Brucellosis per Scyrme for "undulant fever" has a different translation than the redirect term. If / when we have a proper source, the redirect can be re-created. When there is uncertainty, we can err on the side of caution where medical articles are concerned. Jay 💬 09:58, 28 October 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.

Sonic 2 Long Version[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 List of unofficial Sonic media. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 19:52, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is information in the article about how the game was gonna be longer but I doubt people are going to search this on Wikipedia. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 13:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as unlikely search term. There were cut levels in early development, but it's generally not ever alluded to as "long version" or anything like that. Sergecross73 msg me 13:47, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget both to List of unofficial Sonic media, where a ROM hack of Sonic 2 with this name is mentioned. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 21:35, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Brainulator9. Jay 💬 14:18, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:43, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete This redirect is neither useful to editors nor helpful to readers. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:48, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Brainulator. I agree that the current target is unhelpful, but see no issue with the proposed retarget. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 05:11, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget: Per above. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 12:27, 28 October 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.

Game hacks[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 28#Game hacks

Northern Tavria[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! 09:09, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Tavria Okruha. 93.92.31.194 (talk) 13:20, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete  Tavria/Taurida (disambiguation) is a geographical region significant over centuries, and originally refers to the Crimean peninsula. (Tavria Okruha was an abortive subdivision that only lasted two years, and was outside the peninsula within the expanded definition.) By deleting, searchers will find whichever article is most relevant to a search, and it’s unlikely to be Tavria Okruha. If not deleting, the current redirect target is better than the proposal, because the article Kherson Oblast includes a lot of history. —Michael Z. 16:37, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:53, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:37, 21 October 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.

Microsoft XL[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 Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 07:47, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect name for Microsoft Excel. I know that if you say the two letters out loud, it sounds like Excel, but I hardly ever see people refer to that program as that. Even Google searching it in quotes doesn't produce too many results relating to the actual program Excel. XL could also refer to the shirt size extra large. Plus, it doesn't get that many hits. Colgatepony234 (talk) 01:18, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Clear, and thus likely, phonetic misspelling. Steel1943 (talk) 01:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - unambiguous and helpful, considering that the file extensions start with ".xl". XL is a shirt size, but not Microsoft XL. Jay 💬 02:21, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Seem WP:CHEAP enough. Pizzaplayer219TalkContribs 17:17, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - The logo of Microsoft Excel prior to 2013 resembled a crossed "XL", which was more apparent in the 80s and 90s versions of the logo, see [1]. Therefore "Microsoft XL" is a perfectly plausible name. MightyArms (talk) 02:35, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I never thought of that back when I looked at the logo for it before... in that case please withdraw this discussion and speedy keep the redirect, like back when I jumped the gun with the Microsoft Office 2002 redirect discussion. Colgatepony234 (talk) 19:25, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://logos.fandom.com/wiki/Microsoft_Excel
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.

Disambiguated Three Worlds Cycle plot points[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 28#Disambiguated Three Worlds Cycle plot points

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_October_21&oldid=1119013710"