Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 20

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 20[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 20, 2023.

List of Demon Beasts/Monsters in Kirby: Right Back at Ya![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 💬 07:13, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are no entries like that here. This was an R from move, and the moved page was at List of monsters in Kirby: Right Back At Ya!, which was redirected and recently deleted at RFD. This should also be deleted. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:23, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete As housekeeping and due to it being unacceptably fancrufty to ever be an article or even a section. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:11, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Have sex with[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 28#Have sex with

Distributed Systems Architecture[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 💬 07:22, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The "Distributed Systems Architecture" section of General Comprehensive Operating System was removed in this edit, and that article now says nothing about DSA, so the redirect isn't useful. If no such section is to exist on that page, and if that page is not to be made into an article (perhaps one based on the French Wikipedia article on DSA, the redirect page serves no purpose and should be deleted. Guy Harris (talk) 22:27, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Stray pixel[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 💬 20:14, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This —as far as I'm aware— has nothing to do with defective pixels; maybe it is related to raster images (as an unwanted pixel disconnected from the rest of the pixels), but the term "Stray pixel" doesn't appear anywhere on Wikipedia (besides this redirect.) Doerakpoes (talk) 15:51, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nominator. Based on Google Books usage of this phrase [1], the current target is definitely wrong, and I doubt this is a coherent-enough concept that it could be covered in any other graphics-related article. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 00:10, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - As far as I can see online, "stray pixel" doesn't seem to actually have a clear-cut definition. It gets used in variety of different contexts. Deletion seems to be the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 17:36, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

B.A.[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 B.A., B. A., M.A., M. A.; retarget B.A to BA and M.A to MA. The primary options were either retargeting all, keeping all, or some median between these two outcomes. Consensus leaned towards maintaining the 4 redirects that include intact punctuation which correctly refer to the Bachelor of Arts & Master of Arts, being "B.A.", "M.A." and their spaced alternates. As for the remaining two redirects of "B.A" and "M.A", these were not included due to not correctly referring to the Bachelor of Arts & Master of Arts, so the retargeting applies. (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 08:30, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is confusing, given the existence of disambiguation pages BA and MA. Either "Bachelor of Arts" is the primary topic for the abbreviation "BA", alternatively written as "B.A.", or it isn't. I suggest B.A. etc and M.A. etc are retargeted to BA and MA respectively, as {{R from modification}}. If there's a primary topic discussion then that would require a page move (eg of BA to BA (disambiguation)), which is a matter for elsewhere. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:07, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget all per nom QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 20:45, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget all -Taras (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget all to BA and MA respectively per above. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 09:30, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to MA and BA dab pages respectively. --Lenticel (talk) 00:38, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep at least B.A. and B. A.: most (all?) of the entries at BA, with the exception of Bachelor of Arts, are specifically abbreviated as BA and not B.A. or B. A. Per WP:DIFFPUNCT, small details such as differing punctuation can be sufficient to distinguish between topics, so there is no requirement that B.A. and BA must point to the same target. I suspect that the same is true of MA/M.A. and we should retain that distinction, but I am less certain of that. I'm also less concerned about the malformed M.A and B.A forms. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 13:37, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Caeciliusinhorto's comment?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 21:38, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep B.A. and M.A. going to their current targets, as I think the perceived meaning is sufficiently altered by the presence of full stops, enough so to retain the difference in targets. I think if anyone goes to the effort of inserting such full stops in their search, we can assume they are looking for Bachelor of Arts or Masters of Arts; I can't seem to find anything on those dab pages which, having done so, they would otherwise be looking for (this might be the exception). It makes sense for B. A. and M. A. to follow suit, and I think the same logic should probably extend to B.A and M.A, as, having inserted a full stop after the B or M, someone searching is probably unlikely to be looking for any of the other options on the dab page (but perhaps didn't put in the effort to insert a second one). So keep all. – Michael Aurel (talk) 04:35, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all I am with Caeciliusinhorto-public's reasoning here. I have only to add that in making and editing pages these redirects are the bread and butter of linking degrees; a more efficient and shorter way to do so. GuardianH (talk) 18:12, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget all. These are not the only terms to use a B and an A or an M and an A with full stops. Separately nominating (M.A.), for which I cannot fathom a proper use. BD2412 T 20:01, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, except the misspellings "B.A" and "M.A". -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 02:34, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 15:42, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per Caeciliusinhorto-public, except for misspellings "B.A and M.A" per Michael Bednarek. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 18:21, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep except for the above-mentioned misspellings. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 13:21, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep except misspellings. Pretty unambiguous otherwise. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 00:58, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do the same to the misspellings as the others – with abbreviations, it is an extremely common error to omit the final full stop. J947 † edits 04:29, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Seget Donji[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 💬 20:12, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The edit from 2007 that made this said "is within the municipality of Trogir" but at least since 2011 it's actually in the municipality of Seget, Croatia, so it's been factually wrong for over a decade now :) Since it's a standalone settlement and a standard gazetteer entry like many other Croatian villages, it has WP:POTENTIAL to get its own article, and in fact this is a substantially large one in context, so this should be turned back into a red link in order to encourage the creation of a new article instead. --Joy (talk) 15:23, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bird app[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 31#Bird app

Astro QJ[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. procedural close wbm1058 (talk) 19:32, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to point to Astro QJ HD which points back here in a circular redirect, never ending, spiralling down into madness. scope_creepTalk 11:42, 20 August 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).

Astro QJ HD[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 Procedural close, restoring the article. We don't discuss circular redirects, we speedily undo them. Trout to User:Scope creep. wbm1058 (talk) 19:28, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Seem point to Astro QJ which in turn points back here. scope_creepTalk 11:40, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Procedural close: this is no longer a redirect – an editor has restored previous content to resolve the circular redirect. If the article needs to be deleted use a deletion method other than blank-and-redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:13, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I've restored back to redirect as it fail WP:SIRS after it was reviewed. Its junk. scope_creepTalk 00:04, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore and send to AfD Clearly there is a debate over whether this should be an article or a redirect. Since there was an actual article until it was BLARed, let's take it to AfD just in case this is a notable topic where sources can be found. BLARing seems unconstructive to me. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 02:53, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore: per Presidentman. CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 21:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore and send to AfD per Presidentman. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 09:47, 22 August 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).

ROI flag[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 27#ROI flag

Chip Gaines[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 28#Chip Gaines

Ilsa Koenig[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 💬 12:06, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a MCU character name but a comic book character. It was originally redirecting to List of Marvel Comics characters: K#Ilsa Koenig but it seems the entry has been removed. It is not mentioned in the current article nor at Eric Koenig. Gonnym (talk) 10:17, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Shortdesc helper[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; deleted under G7. (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 19:56, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cross-namespace redirect from article space to the same title in projectspace. A smart kitten (talk) 09:28, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as creator, not notable enough for an article-namespace redirect Lallint 14:40, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've nominated the redirect for CSD G7 on your behalf. Duckmather (talk) 16:02, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete G7, an unnecessary cross-namespace redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:17, 20 August 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).

Australium[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 Deleted by Materialscientist (non-admin closure) A smart kitten (talk) 09:47, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nonce redirect. No mention in article. 10100 New York (talk) 07:09, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete to facilitate uninhibited Search. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:18, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  •  On hold, please take a look of their global contribution before voting or commenting. -Lemonaka‎ 01:25, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lemonaka: I did, I don't see anything wrong. Why should we? Besides, the nature of someone's contributions shouldn't affect our !votes.Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:08, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    sockpuppetry -Lemonaka‎ 20:28, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Lemonaka: Okay, I notice that the user is banned from hu.wiki for what appears to be sockpuppetry, but, again, that shouldn't affect this discussion. The nomination is perfectly sensible. (!vote delete, by the way) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 19:53, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete It is a plot element of TF2, but a heavily minor one. Even after considering the nom's lack of previous contributions, I agree that it should be deleted, as I couldn't find any real source to integrate it into the article. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:17, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Zxcvbnm. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 09:45, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Zxcvbnm's explanation. --Lenticel (talk) 07:35, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Incriminating evidence[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 Evidence (law). Jay 💬 12:35, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

absolutely not the best target for this redirect. ltbdl (talk) 11:26, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A quick perusal of Category:Evidence and Category:Evidence law suggests a bunch of more useful targets. Evidence (law) is possibly the best; Smoking gun, incontrovertible evidence and self-incrimination are all related concepts. Though our article Pièces à Conviction translates that phrase as "incriminating evidence", French-English dictionaries instead seem to mostly translate it as "exhibit" (e.g. [2], [3]). Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 14:22, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • My first inclination is to delete: this is a common adjective-noun combination with no single target. If it is to be kept I suggest retarget to Evidence (law). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:57, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 21:40, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For an opinion on the late retarget suggestion. Also notified of this discussion at the talk of the suggested target pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Alonsomania[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 31#Alonsomania

Crashstappen[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. ✗plicit 02:31, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While this seems to be used to some extent, it never got particularly widespread usage and WP:RNEUTRAL states if a redirect represents an established term that is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources, it should be kept even if non-neutral, as it will facilitate searches on such terms and this does not seem to be used widely in mainstream reliable sources, per my WP:BEFORE. Having said that, I could have a poor understanding of WP:RNEUTRAL, so apologies if this is a poor nom. TartarTorte 19:53, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Googling the term it seems this nickname was sporadically used in the early phase of his career when Verstappen had some crashes he might have avoided; but even then (2018) the use of the name did not really catch on. He is currently one of the most stable drivers having finished all his races since 2022 Australian grand-prix (where a mechanical issue was the problem). So it seems that these nicknames are truly not relevant any more (if they ever were). Surprisingly they were added only in March this year without any justification of their creation. So I just do not understand why they exist at all. Arnoutf (talk) 11:07, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Both are valid nicknames for him used in reliable sources. The fact that they were used predominantly a few years ago doesn't invalidate them as valid search terms. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:53, 6 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 21:43, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:22, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

Edurne (snger)[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 02:30, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This was left over from a move in January 2019, with the correctly spelled Edurne (singer) being created 23 minutes later and redirected to the target. Not sure if we still need this thing. Regards, SONIC678 01:48, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We generally do not create typo redirects unless it is very common. This redirect is very unlikely to be searched for. I support deletion. Ca talk to me! 15:20, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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_August_20&oldid=1173114917"