Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

April 19[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on April 19, 2023.

FE17[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 27#FE17

Ocen[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. --BDD (talk) 21:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per ... multiple issues. For one, this could be a misspelling for other words, like Oken. Also, as a WP:FORRED issue, the subject doesn't necessarily have affinity to any language ... but also, the connection may be wrong anyways since the only connection I could find is for Polish, but if so, this redirect doesn't translate as the target subject. Steel1943 (talk) 21:06, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Per nom, translates to "ratings" in Polish according to Google. OCEN can also refer to ISPIRT's Open Credit Enablement Network. Heavy Water (talk) 02:10, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete multiple possibilities for the proper spelling this is a typo for -- 64.229.90.172 (talk) 04:47, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prior precedence have shown that we don't create redirects for mere non-notable typos. This redirect has the additionally issue that it can be a typo of words other than "ocean", making it ambiguous. Therefore I support the deletion. Carpimaps (talk) 05:06, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Per nom. EMsmile (talk) 08:19, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 08:28, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Ocean and Oceanography[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. --BDD (talk) 21:02, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:XY: Ocean and Oceanography are separate articles. Steel1943 (talk) 21:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Channel(geography)[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. --BDD (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RDAB due to lack of space between title and disambiguator. The target contains the proper spacing in its title. Steel1943 (talk) 20:59, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Inland waterway[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 Waterway. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:46, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of lost here, but ... wouldn't it make more sense for these to retarget to Waterway? Steel1943 (talk) 20:41, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Canals and Inland Waterways[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 Waterway. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:45, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:XY, considering that Canal is an article and Inland waterway redirects to Navigability (though I don't understand the latter, but it doesn't redirect to Canal, thus the WP:XY.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:38, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to waterway as above; that article also discusses canals. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:39, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Waterway per Pppery. Canals and inland waterways are frequently discussed together (as for many purposes the distinction is not particularly relevant, and the only encompassing term ("waterway") is too broad) so its a plausible search term. Thryduulf (talk) 01:20, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Navigations[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 Navigation (disambiguation). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:44, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems the current situation could be considered a bit of a WP:SURPRISE since Navigation exists. However, with that being said, I don't think the concept in Navigation is traditionally referred to in the plural form, so maybe retarget to Navigation (disambiguation) is the way to go here, but weak retarget to Navigation works too. Steel1943 (talk) 20:33, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Dam lake[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 Reservoir. ✗plicit 23:57, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems unclearly ambiguous. "Dam" is mentioned in the target article, but it seems bodies of water that are created by building dams are reservoirs. But, the phrase "dam lake" isn't mentioned there either. Steel1943 (talk) 20:22, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Reservoir lake[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 Reservoir. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:42, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:XY: Reservoir or Lake? Steel1943 (talk) 20:18, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would suggest to keep and redirect it to reservoir (which didn't exist yet when the redirect was created). · Naive cynic · 20:24, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I was originally thinking that, but decided it's probably more of an unclear phrase since I've never seen reservoirs referred to specifically as "reservoir lake" in context, and if someone is taking the time to search this phrase, there is a chance they may be more interested in the "lake" portion of the phrase than the "reservoir" portion of the phrase, so we can't really assume one over the other. Steel1943 (talk) 20:28, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • retarget to reservoir. A reservoir is a lake created by a dam, and also called reservoir lake -- 64.229.90.172 (talk) 04:50, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per WP:XY. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:09, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Except it isn't. Reservoirs are lakes, so the proper target is reservoir -- it's the equivalent of saying Orca Whale, or Fennec Fox -- 64.229.90.172 (talk) 04:33, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Reservoir, partly per Naive cynic and the ip but also because in some contexts "reservoir" can refer to the whole infrastructure including dam, spillway, etc with the body of water referred to as the "reservoir lake". Thryduulf (talk) 01:25, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Thryduulf: not implausible. I can't imagine any reader searching for "reservoir lake" and expecting to be taken to an article about lakes that are not reservoirs. – Uanfala (talk) 11:40, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Kirby and the Lost City[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. --BDD (talk) 21:05, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:17, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Can't find anything about this, seems like the product of the creator's imagination. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:04, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I can find no evidence that the game was ever known by this title. I also looked up the original Japanese title just in case by that wasn’t close to this name either.--65.93.193.94 (talk) 03:09, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This is not something that exist. This a completely made up title. CaptainGalaxy 11:27, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I looked for some sort of source claiming that this title may have been a {{R from working title}} since I thought this title looked familiar ... but alas, I came up empty handed, which means this title is most likely erroneous original research. Steel1943 (talk) 09:21, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Realart Pictures Corporation[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 💬 06:15, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Realart Pictures Corporation is also the name of a film company that produced films from 1919 to 1922 (see [1]). Maybe there's been a mix-up.--Ezzex (talk) 18:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - I added a hatnote at the target to distinguish from the older film company, although we have very little information about it. If there are sources for that company's notability then anyone can write an article over top of the redirect. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Now that a hatnote has been added at the current target. CycloneYoris talk! 22:50, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Sam Jackson[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 💬 18:49, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This should be retargeted to Samuel L. Jackson. He is/can be also credited as Sam Jackson. ErceÇamurOfficial (talk) 17:32, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Red hypergiant[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 Hypergiant#Red hypergiants. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:41, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect originally targeted hypergiant but an IP changed it to the current target a couple years ago. Both Blue hypergiant and White hypergiant target the hypergiant page. I am unsure about what the WP:PTOPIC is, meaning that disambiguation is a possible option. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 17:12, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It should redirect to Hypergiant#Red_hypergiants as that is the only heading on a article that talks about it PalauanReich (talk) 17:35, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Masacalla[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 mooted due to article creation. signed, Rosguill talk 18:49, 8 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Misleadint redirect. Turkish crescent is called es:Chinesco, while es:Masacalla is something similar, but different Lokys dar Vienas (talk) 04:35, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't a claim that these are the same instrument. However they are members of a family, having the same purpose (ceremonial staff and jingle). There isn't a good reason not to show one in the article about the other. Jacqke (talk) 11:53, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There are many instruments from the same family. Talk about drums and violins an accordions and whats not. These are different instruments. Period. There is no reason to propagate confusion describing them as same. Lokys dar Vienas (talk) 16:04, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:RLOTE There doesn't seem to be any particular connection between the target and Spanish-speaking cultures. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    RLOTE does quite not apply since this is mentioned in the "Argentina" section of the target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:43, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The instruments both use a crescent and horsetail; they have very specific attributes in common. These symbols in common point to a historical pattern behind the instrument's existence. The symbols entered European culture from Turkish, then European to Argentinian. 1899 image of Mascalla showing the Turkish crescent and horsetails as part of it's makeup.Jacqke (talk) 03:13, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Another example File:Candombe federal, época de Rosas.jpg also shows the horsetails, common to both Mascalla and Turkish Crescent. Further the Spanish article for Mascalla contains the statement (translated), "Currently, the Afro-Porteños interviewed do not remember the massacalla, the name is foreign to them, and they even tend to confuse it with chinesco." So the chinesco and massacalla are confused even in Afro-Porteños society.Jacqke (talk) 03:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Th greater the reason for wikipedia not to propagate this confusion and educate people. That's the purpose of encycliopedias, isn't it? Lokys dar Vienas (talk) 16:07, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: !votes are trending delete, but a relist seems appropriate given that there is some amount of support for keep in discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:57, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Expand into an article: I've drafted a stub below the redirect. My reading of es:Masacalla and Turkish crescent is that the former is similar to the latter, but not as far as I can see a subtype of it. A separate article therefore seems warranted. There appear to be quite a few sources when I search online, so I'm not particularly worried about notability. – Uanfala (talk) 11:36, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pinging all participants for a re-evaluation, considering the drafted stub: Lokys dar Vienas, Jacqke, Presidentman, Veverve. Jay 💬 06:58, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Turn into an article that is the draft. Veverve (talk) 13:36, 27 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the drafted article. Jay 💬 07:36, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Buddhism and other religions[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! 00:19, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No other religions at the target. Just the target subject. (The section target doesn't exist anymore ... I'm assuming it did at one point.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:55, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The section was removed in this revision by User:Aoidh; should the redirect be retargeted to Religious pluralism#Buddhism? Jarble (talk) 23:17, 4 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:55, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Galatic Republic (Star Wars)[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) – Uanfala (talk) 12:43, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion: error or non-English name--BB-9E Droid (talk) 16:17, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting in order to guarantee 7 days of correctly-listed discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:53, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Virginia L. Montgomery (VLM)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 28#Virginia L. Montgomery (VLM)

"A list of" 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 12:23, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of redirects of the "A list of" type. None are {{R from move}}s, though the Fairly OddParents and fire stations in Hong Kong are BLAR'd articles, the latter due to an error during creation. Per precedent in the discussion on "A list of Visigothic Kings", such redirects are unlikely to be helpful due to not following the standard titling standards and so are more costly than they are useful. Delete. Randi Moth TalkContribs 08:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Some of the nominated redirects do not have equivalents that exist where the "A" is omitted:
...If these redirects are deleted, it could be considered unhelpful unless their non-"A" equivalents exist since that is apparently the point of this nomination. Steel1943 (talk) 00:26, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The first redirect is very unplausible even without the article in the beginning.
The second redirect doesn't entirely seem to make sense. Skimming just the Demonata article, "Demonata" seems to be the name for the demons in the novel, so "List of Demonata" does make sense. However, the character table makes no distinction on what role each character plays, meaning there is no way to tell which of the characters are Demonata and which aren't. The target doesn't actually have a list of Demonata, making the redirect unhelpful.
The third redirect does seem to be plausible, and NBA teams with the longest active playoff appearance streaks already points there. Recreating the redirect without the article in the beginning while deleting the one that does contain it appears to be the most useful outcome. Randi Moth TalkContribs 16:38, 21 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Zubair Ahmed[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 6#Zubair Ahmed

Manir[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. No connection between Manir and Oxyphencyclimine was forthcoming. Jay 💬 07:47, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target article unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 18:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate. Draft disambiguation page started on the nominated page. - Eureka Lott 23:25, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I was considering withdrawing this nomination due to that draft disambiguation page looking good. However, I did notice that the disambiguation page did not include the current target of the redirect; for that reason, I suppose I'm gonna leave this discussion and open to see if anyone can determine why the redirect currently targets what it does. Steel1943 (talk) 20:17, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The bot that made the redirect tagged it with {{R from trade name}} when creating it, so I assume the intent was to identify it as a brand name of Oxyphencyclimine. My very cursory searches didn't verify that, though, so I'd welcome input from anyone more knowledgeable. - Eureka Lott 22:54, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabify per current draft in nominated page. We can add the drug name there if needed in the future. --Lenticel (talk) 01:36, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further input on the draft DAB…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:15, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

White Kingdom[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 4#White Kingdom

Legazpi Boulevard[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 Legazpi, Albay#Land. Jay 💬 08:18, 26 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting deletion of an unrelated term redirecting to Philippines. Sanglahi86 (talk) 19:08, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Legazpi, Albay#Gallery. Though the mention there is very brief, based on the Google News hits I don't think this topic is independently notable, so it's not worth a WP:R#D10 deletion. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 22:58, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget or Delete. Certainly perplexing in its current form. CMD (talk) 07:54, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Legazpi, Albay#Gallery per anon. Not exactly the best entry but at least we have somewhere it can point to. --Lenticel (talk) 01:33, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For solidifying consensus on the retarget suggestion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_April_19&oldid=1154212145"