Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 2[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 2, 2022.

Flotsam and Jetsam[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 move the disambiguation page to this title. BD2412 T 03:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Surely people who take the effort to capitalize the J are looking for something else of which "Flotsam and Jetsam" is part of a proper name, like for instance any entry on Flotsam and Jetsam (disambiguation)? — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 23:43, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I thought of the characters from The Little Mermaid and thought of the Atlantica level in Kingdom Hearts 2. So maybe that would be a better redirect choice (Little Mermaid, not Kingdom Hearts 2) MightyArms (talk) 05:12, 3 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I added Flotsam, jetsam, lagan and derelict at the seealso section of Flotsam and Jetsam (disambiguation).~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anythingyouwant (talk • contribs) 23:23, 3 September 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 redirect help[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 9#Wikipedia redirect help

Star Trek 11, 12, 13, 14[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 23:44, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Same rationale as the Superman and Batman redirects I nominated a week or so ago. The Kelvin timeline films are never referred to by these names, as they're set in a completely different universe from the 1979-2002 film series. MightyArms (talk) 19:46, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete but note that in this case there is a fancruft purpose for this numbering (to keep track of the Star Trek movie curse), but yeah, these numbered redirects to unnumbered discontinuous franchise installments are usually unwarranted, and I don't see good reason for Star Trek to be deserving of an exception. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 06:55, 4 September 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.

Juiceslf[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was speedy deleted by Justlettersandnumbers per G5. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:23, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no mention of 'Juiceslf' at the target article so clearly this needs to be deleted. Spiderone(Talk to Spider) 19:37, 2 September 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.

Insect pest of grape[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 9#Insect pest of grape

Template:SUS[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 9#Template:SUS

Minor Attracted Person[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 9#Minor Attracted Person

Indelible spiritual mark[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 9#Indelible spiritual mark

Dragon flag[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 9#Dragon flag

Flora of New South Wales[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 9#Flora of New South Wales

Google Scholar and academic libraries[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 13:30, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weird X and Y redirect. Unlikely search term. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:26, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:48, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Deleteper nomination. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 06:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless a section about significant interactions between these two parties is written. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 21:32, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do not delete per the BLAR comment any content potentially wirth merging is still available under the article history. There was a merge proposal ongoing when the BLAR was done (2016). The merge proposal closed as No consensus in 2018. Jay 💬 06:32, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There is nothing in [1] worth merging anywhere. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 09:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Restore and take to AfD. Alternatively, restore and propose merge again, and see if we have consensus this time. Jay 💬 04:29, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should this be deleted or should it be restored and sent to AfD?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:47, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. I do not see anything worth merging to Google Scholar. The article for Google Scholar has existed since 2005 while this one has existed since 2010 with a redirect done in 2015-2016. It should have been merged or deleted upon first catch especially when it was created by a blocked user. Taking this to AfD would most likely point out the same thing. – The Grid (talk) 15:18, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete don't see any content worth keeping or merging (t · c) buidhe 17:43, 2 September 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.

Most massive[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 September 29#Most massive

Greatest Emperor[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 Greatest Emperor and retarget Emperor the Great. Jay 💬 09:26, 9 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, does not appear to be a literal translation of the Japanese or Chinese terms at the target. Google Scholar results appear to all be about different emperors alleged to be the greatest, and not the deification of the north star. signed, Rosguill talk 17:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. As noted, the English phrases are not translations of either the Japanese or Chinese target terms. Moreover, the English phrases are used more commonly to refer to other things.
By way of further context and background, this was created by a problematic editor, who is busy creating flawed machine-translated versions of content from other Wikipedias in languages that they cannot read, about subjects that they do not know. ‑‑ Eiríkr Útlendi │Tala við mig 18:50, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Agreed with the above comments. These are not good translations, nor are they common translations, and they could be misleading. – Scyrme (talk) 21:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For consensus on Emperor the Great.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:38, 2 September 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.

Schism of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church[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 21:18, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This might be a WP:R3 but I wasn't sure it qualified. Schism of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church was moved, and redirects to, Autocephaly of the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church. The target, in turn, has been merged and redirected to Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church. "Schism of the Ethiopian and Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church" is no longer useful as a redirect, because it refers to two different churches (i.e. two different articles), and to a schism that does not exist; more detail about that at Talk:Autocephaly of the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church. Gyrofrog (talk) 17:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment If the separation of Ethiopian and Eritrean churches is commonly described or referred to as a schism (correctly or incorrectly) then this should probably redirect somewhere. Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church#Recent history does use the term, and cites [2], and while the word "schism" doesn't appear on that page, the relevant section continues onto the next page (87) which is not part of the preview so I can't say whether it is verified or not. If we assume for the moment this is a useful search term, then we need to decide what the best target is - there is slightly more relevant information on the article about the Ethiopian church than the Eritrean one, but not by a lot. None of the higher level articles I've skimmed (which probably isn't all of them) have anything obviously relevant, but this is a long way outside my area of expertise so I may have missed something. Thryduulf (talk) 18:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I don't think that article should use the term "schism", for reasons I went into at Talk:Autocephaly of the Eritrean Orthodox Tewahedo Church, but that's outside the scope of this discussion. But it is what made it harder (for me) to decide where (or whether) to redirect this, since in one of those senses, it describes a schism that did not occur. I'm also not sure if or how someone's even going to land on this redirect at this point (the incoming links, unless I've missed something, are from "recent changes" types of listings). I'm not opposed to a redirect per se, just couldn't figure out one that made sense. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:09, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • What we need to determine is whether this is an appropriate search term or not - if it is then people will find it by searching rather than by internal links (and remember whatlinkshere cannot show links from places other than the English Wikipedia, although it's unlikely there will be many at the moment given how new it is, but the longer the redirect exists the more likely they are, generally speaking). For the purposes of people searching, whether the separation was a schism matters less than whether people call it a schism. As someone with almost no subject matter expertise it seems not implausible they might, so its worth looking to see if they do. My research so far has been inconclusive. Thryduulf (talk) 18:37, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • After a bit more research, I've found there was a schism between the Ethiopian church in Ethiopia and the Ethiopian church in the United States that began in 1991, before the 1993 split between Ethiopian and Eritrean churches. This lasted until 2018 when the two Ethiopian churches reconciled but I've not been able to work out how any of this affected the Eritrean church. Overall, the lack of clear evidence I'm finding of the Ethiopian-Eritrean split being called a schism means I'm leaning towards this not being a good search term, but I'm nowhere near confident enough to bold a recommendation. Thryduulf (talk) 16:25, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • You're correct about the Ethiopian schism; I went into that on the talk page but, again, I didn't think (much of) that was within scope of this discussion. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 18:24, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:05, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled other (nearly identical) redirect mentioned by Jay below.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:37, 2 September 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_September_2&oldid=1112979848"