Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 22

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 22[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 22, 2023.

England's Rose[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 30#England's Rose

Wikipedia:NART[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 💬 10:12, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Somewhat misleading. I typed this in, looking for the notability guideline on art pieces (there isn't a specific one, it turns out), and I get... a user's draft/essay of a notability guideline on newspapers that hasn't been edited since 2013? Delete unless a better target can be found. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 23:42, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep; shortcuts aren't deleted unless actively harmful. J947 † edits 00:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    This is actively harmful, in that it sent Edward-Woodrow down a garden path. He's unlikely to be the only one to make that mistake, and the target deserves to be forgotten, so delete * Pppery * it has begun... 01:28, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak retarget to Wikipedia:Notability (published works). I'm surprised there isn't a notability guidelines page for art, actually. I wouldn't be sad to see this redirect deleted, either. 〜 Askarion ✉ 01:35, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oppose that retarget - that's yet another dead proposal with almost all of the same problems as the current target. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Change to delete per Toll Booth Willie's comments below (as the redirect's original creator). My proposed target was only to find a target out of userspace, but perhaps it's time to let this redirect be deleted. 〜 Askarion ✉ 00:30, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment There's also WP:ARTN which targets a specific section of the larger notability guideline. I don't have an opinion on the proposed redirect, but it might be worth keeping in mind that the similarity between this redirect and ARTN might be confusing. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:42, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • As far as I can tell, the only uses of this in discussion are referring to the essay itself (as opposed to the content in it), or are editors mistaking the shortcut as a shorthand for WP:NARTIST, a shortcut to Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Creative professionals (an approved notability guideline, not an essay nor a proposal). That could serve as a useful target, though I also wouldn't oppose deletion (we don't have to find targets for every combination of letters). Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:53, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, given that E-W and Ivan have now both found plausible independent instances in which this redirect is actively misleading. Bernanke's Crossbow (talk) 07:01, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. As the original creator of this redirect and of the draft/proposed guideline to which it points (thanks for the ping Edward-Woodrow) I see no continuing need for the redirect, particularly if it is causing confusion. The point of the redirect was to provide a concise link for folks in WP:JOURN to use while discussing the proposal; discussion fizzled out in 2013. While it stings a bit to acknowledge that, as User:Pppery has said, it "deserves to be forgotten" ... well, it has. ``` t b w i l l i e ` $1.25 ` 19:57, 26 August 2023 (UTC) (former username Wiki Wistah)[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).

Lisa Simpson giving head[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) J947 † edits 01:56, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target GnocchiFan (talk) 14:02, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – It is mentioned in the linked section: It was suggested that the logo resembled the American cartoon characters Lisa Simpson and Bart Simpson performing fellatio. I'm not entirely convinced this is a plausible enough search term to refer to this logo in particular, however. Randi🦋TalkContribs 22:51, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I highly doubt that it's plausible, especially since it could be easily interpreted as a bad-faith redirect. Millows! | 🪧 05:48, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 † edits 23:23, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as an unclear nomination. As others have commented, there is mention. It could be easily interpreted as a bad-faith redirect, but is not. Note that giving head is a valid redirect too, in case the words in the title are seen as a concern. Jay 💬 11:02, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Duckmather. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 20:17, 2 September 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).

The Attack (TV Series 2015)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 30#The Attack (TV Series 2015)

👨‍💻[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 29#👨‍💻

Wikipedia:MIXEDCAPS[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 Wikipedia:Template index/Redirect pages#MIXEDCAPS. (non-admin closure) CLYDE TALK TO ME/STUFF DONE 02:12, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unused shortcut to a nonexistent anchor. No relevant content in the page about mixed capitalization (as opposed to alternative capitalizations in general). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:38, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'm surprised I can't find another suitable place for this. MOS:TMCAPS has some discussion of mixed capitalization, but the context is too specific for this to point there. --BDD (talk) 21:00, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Editors have not yet presented a clear path forward.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep with other changes: at the time the redirect was created, the anchor existed (see Special:Permalink/298473222#othercapitalization) and was placed in a table of rcat templates, alongside a description of {{R from other capitalisation}}. The table disappeared a long time ago, but the information in it generally corresponds to the "purposes of redirects" section in the current guideline. If there are no better targets, I suggest adding the anchor back to that section at the "likely alternative capitalizations" bullet, to preserve the intent of any past uses of this shortcut in discussions. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 01:16, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Wikipedia:Template index/Redirect pages#MIXEDCAPS (where I’ve just boldly added an anchor) per Ivanvector’s reasoning. As far as I can see, this is the current home for the table of rcat templates. A smart kitten (talk) 15:19, 26 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).

CPRR[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 Central Pacific Railroad with a hatnote pointing to the current target. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:15, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note that Cprr targets to the Central Pacific Railroad rather than Carolwood Pacific. I advise retargeting CPRR to Central Pacific Railroad because of the following (in no particular order):

  1. Cprr -> Central Pacific was created first (2011 v. 2018)
  2. My quick Google search showed more results related to Central Pacific than Carolwood Pacific.
  3. Central Pacific's on-wiki page views surpasses that of Carolwood.

Silcox (talk) 14:51, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:37, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget CPRR being a historical name for the Canadian Pacific Railroad is not mentioned in the article nor could I find any source confirming this. :3 F4U (they/it) 05:25, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Central Pacific Railroad as the primary topic; the other suggestions are not important enough or backed up with enough evidence for disambiguation. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 12:49, 5 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per 67.70.25.80. When I first saw that, I thought CP rail. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 13:28, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:16, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget per nom. CPRR is not a shorthand for the Canadian Pacific Railroad; British North American and Canadian railroads did not use "RR" for railroad in their shortcodes, that's a USA convention. A hatnote would handle that error. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 01:32, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Ivan; non-railfan users are much more likely to search for the first transcon than any other railroad company. Bernanke's Crossbow (talk) 06:57, 26 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).

Coach Harbaugh[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 5#Coach Harbaugh

Coach Gruden[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 5#Coach Gruden

David Larson (casual/amateur/quarter-professional poker player)[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 article created. (non-admin closure) The Micronesian-Corsican Revolution (talk) 11:22, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was no consensus. (non-admin closure) The Micronesian-Corsican Revolution (talk) 11:22, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was redirect to David Larson (WPT winner). (non-admin closure) The Micronesian-Corsican Revolution (talk) 11:22, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The result of the discussion was redirect to David Larson (poker player). (non-admin closure) The Micronesian-Corsican Revolution (talk) 11:22, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These redirect were created all around the same time. Thre out of four of which target different places. It seems that these are the same people. I also question if "quarter-professional poker player" is a disambiguator that would be likely used. I can't find use of it as a phrase on the internet. TartarTorte 14:44, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • David Larson (poker player) and David Larson (quarter-professional) is the same person but just different ways of defining the player. Of these, I can see the "quarter-professional" defining to be the one going down. The other two, of which the causal player may not meet notability (and with the other one a World Poker Tour winner (probably notable)), are two other David Larson's. See this page for clarification --> https://www.thehendonmob.com/search/?q=david+larson TheElvisBelievingBumbleBee (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 14:57, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, my mistake. I had assumed all the David Larsons playing at WSOP were the same, but it appears to just be a common name in poker. I don't think they necessarily need to be unified in their target then, as that would be incorrect, but maybe there are ways of creating slightly different disambiguators that would be a bit more clear to differentiate between them, but I can't figure that out myself. Thanks for the explanation! TartarTorte 15:13, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I've now created a second set of disambiguators (included as David Larson (circuit player (equivalent w/ David Larson (quarter-professional poker player))); David Larson (WPT winner (equivalent w/ David Larson (amateur poker player))); and David Larson (aria casino player (equivalent w/ David Larson (casual poker player)))). I suggest using both sets for ultimate clarity. I've also created David Larson (poker player) (as a fullength article) - David Larson (quarter-professional poker player) should now link to that article instead - and David Larson (WPT winner) (fullength article) - David Larson (amateur poker player) could so be redirected here. Hopefully this is'nt too elaborate. TheElvisBelievingBumbleBee (talk) 13:04, 27 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).

Project Blueprint[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 Supercars Championship#Project Blueprint. signed, Rosguill talk 01:57, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target. Most things on wikipedia related to Project Blueprint are related to Australia Supercar Racing. It seems if there is a target that maybe Supercars Championship#Project Blueprint would be the best retarget? I'm not sure if there is a better target as I don't follow supercars as closely as otherforms of motorsports, or if there is a good non-motorsports related retarget. TartarTorte 14:40, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See the RFC here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Bryan_Johnson_(entrepreneur) Vontheri (talk) 14:56, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps a disambiguation page listing both the supercar racing and the Bryan Johnson pages would be best. I wouldn't have created the redirect page (yet, at least) if I had known there would be a new objection in the RFC I linked to. Vontheri (talk) 15:04, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that. I missed the RFC on the talk page. I think that if the mentions are restored/retained on the page then it would make sense to DAB between the two as well. I don't think one is overwhelmingly a WP:PTOPIC. TartarTorte 15:14, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So if no one objects, then either you or I can change the redirect to the Australia supercar article, then when/if the mentions to the Bryan Johnson page are restored, (which I'm quite confident will happen), then we can make it a disambiguation page. If you want to go ahead and change the redirect to the supercar article for now, then I'm fine with that. Vontheri (talk) 15:38, 22 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).

ALF (comics)[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 ALF (character)#Other media. Non-admin, self closure as pointed out. (non-admin closure) FMecha (to talk|to see log) 18:24, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No longer mentioned in target page. FMecha (to talk|to see log) 11:04, 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).

Injuries in netball[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 7#Injuries in netball

Google Zeitgeist[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) 13:39, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is no entry anymore for Zeitgeist. From what I remember of Zeitgeist and of the research I have done of it, I can't really find a suitable target. There are some google products that are in certain ways successors to Zeitgeist but none direct successor and none that mention google zeitgeist on their wikipedia article. The closest article I can find that mentions in it a somewhat explanatory way is Timeline of Google Search but that's not a great target in my view because it doesn't fully explain it. TartarTorte 23:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I think Google Trends is the product's successor, though I don't know if it's a direct or indirect one. See the stub in the redirect's history and pages like this for more information. - Eureka Lott 14:00, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:46, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Probably notable, or at least close enough that it should be covered somewhere in the encyclopaedia. Restore article and slightly beef up with NPR, Wired for starters. J947 † edits 00:16, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the talk pages of Timeline of Google Search and Google Trends.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:40, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Timeline of Google Search, though not a great target per nom. Second choice: retarget to Google Trends after adding a mention, if it is a successor per Eureka. The content of Zeitgeist was merged to Google search in 2006. Jay 💬 08:28, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I don't think there's any good target for this. InfiniteNexus (talk) 16:50, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless a suitable target is found or an article is created. Pretty typical WP:R#D10 for now. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 21:02, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - If the content was previously merged to Google search, then I'm wondering where it went. Maybe it was later moved to some sub-page, like the ones noted above? Anyway, if, as J947 notes, there are sources, then some editor should be able to restore the text and add sources, and wherever that is done, that's where these should target. In the meantime, Timeline of Google Search, seems to be the page for the history of it, and there's a mention of it there, so I guess that seems the best target for now. - jc37 05:56, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The merging user MamboJambo removed it an hour later! However the user was consolidating everything at List of Google products which at the time had mention of Zeitgeist, but I don't see him making use of the merged/removed content at that list page. Jay 💬 07:27, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, in that case, it sounds like we have the content, so let's decide where best to merge it to (if anywhere) and point the redirect there? - jc37 18:42, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further input, as participants have yet to decide what should be done with this redirect…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:27, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete and oppose restoring. The mainspace content is an unsourced directory listing from 2006 that would clearly not survive NPP/AFD. Of the targets suggested only Timeline of Google Search mentions it, and that has far too little substance to warrant a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 01:28, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I understand your point, but if a reader is looking for Google Zeitgeist, we ought to send them "somewhere". - jc37 21:42, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per InfiniteNexus. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:07, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Skarmory. Interestingly, the term seems to refer to two different Google services: a TED-talk–style YouTube channel; and a former service that showed a "snapshot in time by week, month and year of what people were searching for in Google"[5] similar to Year in Search, hence why https://google.com/zeitgeist – which strangely seems inaccessible through archive.org – redirects to https://archive.google/trends/2014. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 19:35, 10 September 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).

Erlenmeyer rule[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 Emil Erlenmeyer. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:46, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The former is not mentioned at its target; the latter was retargeted from that article to one where it is mentioned, but where the former is linked. I suppose aligning the first with the second would currently be the best solution, though the then-circular-links would need to be removed. 1234qwer1234qwer4 19:36, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. A cursory examination reveals merely that "The Erlenmeyer rule states that all alcohols in which the hydroxyl group is attached directly to a double-bonded carbon atom become aldehydes or ketones." The intent seems to be that this statement, properly amplified and referenced, should appear within the Enol article. Some chemistry-savvy Wikipedian will eventually do so, one hopes. Urhixidur (talk) 14:22, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • If Enol had a history section one could mention this rule there, but very few (i.e. likely no one) teaching tautomerization refer to the rule as it is not helpful in understanding what is occurring chemically/mechanistically. It is no longer relevant to the modern understanding of enols, but it will always be relevant to Emil Erlenmeyer; retarget there. ― Synpath 17:52, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:03, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 05:21, 22 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).

Wikipedia:Lindsay Moshesh - van der Byl[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 delete. CSD G6 Liz Read! Talk! 03:04, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete this cross-namespace redirect. It was created as a result of page moves. A well-meaning but inexperienced editor mistakenly moved his/her draft article to Wikipedia-space; he/she meant to move it to article-space. -- Toddy1 (talk) 02:47, 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).

Wikipedia:Darren Isaacs[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 delete. CSD G6 Liz Read! Talk! 03:23, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete this cross-namespace redirect. It was created as a result of page moves. A well-meaning but inexperienced editor mistakenly moved his/her draft article to Wikipedia-space; he/she meant to move it to article-space. -- Toddy1 (talk) 02:47, 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).

Capitalization of the Web[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 29#Capitalization of the Web

Capitalization of Web[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 World Wide Web#Nomenclature. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:49, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Web and the Internet are two different things. The Internet powers the Web. The article also doesn't mention "Web" (save for saying that "Web site" has turned into "website" which isn't that related) Aaron Liu (talk) 02:19, 22 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_22&oldid=1175353501"