Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 11[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 11, 2023.

Carmen Winstead[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 urban legends#Carmen Winstead. (non-admin closure) Clyde!Franklin! 05:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, because the relevant paragraph was removed all the way back in 2009. I recommend deletion. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 05:28, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Can be recreated if the relevent part is re-added and is appropriate. A7V2 (talk) 05:52, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of urban legends#C or create an anchor there. There is more description at Chain letter, but there it is used only as an example. Jay 💬 09:34, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget? Relisting for further discussion of these opinions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, SONIC678 22:23, 11 February 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).

2701[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 19#2701

Muslim rule in South Asia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 21#Muslim rule in South Asia

Michael Bauer (Anthroposophy)[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 💬 19:59, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bauer isn't mentioned in the target. He's mentioned in passing in Anthroposophical Society and Friedrich Rittelmeyer, but neither seems likely to be a useful target. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:03, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Agreed. Not of sufficient importance or need to require a redirect. — Shibbolethink (♔ ♕) 19:26, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as REDYES BhamBoi (talk) 08:25, 12 February 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).

Islamic empire[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 most, delete (disambiguation) and retarget Muslim Empire to match others. signed, Rosguill talk 21:20, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest it be turned into a DAB with:

What do you think? Veverve (talk) 16:55, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. This is trickier. Hard to define where this list would end. The Mamluks and Ottoman Empire, for instance, would definitely need adding, and there were quite a few Indian Empires - not sure it's balanced for these to be grouped. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:33, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch. I have added the two of them to the list. Veverve (talk) 17:45, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The Indian Empires are listed at Muslim period in the Indian subcontinent. Veverve (talk) 17:47, 11 February 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).

Caliphizing[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 💬 20:07, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is this word? I found nothing on it. Veverve (talk) 16:30, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Yep, totally made-up words. Iskandar323 (talk) 17:30, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 19:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment 2 relevant hits on the internet, so technically this isn't the only use of this term: "Would I be very wrong in supposing that Amira Elghawaby is a jihadi apologist who would caliphize this country in a heartbeat if she could?" ; "Dear BFS, please dispose of Dominic Liu Chu Tzer's business licence and business qualifications. He is seeking to amass enough wealth to caliphize himself. His business is in the I.T. but he does not have an I.T. degree, no relevant qualifications at all. His I.T. service business serves up redundancy in the I.T service sector by operations and is a waste of client's money, who pay them to basically run the broken down system through and through consecqutively before getting experts outsourced to tackle the issue. There are means and ways to make money for him. That man has made a lot of profit this amatuer way by calling it serviced, through the years. Its time to put a stop to this kind of bluff way of doing lucrative "business"." BhamBoi (talk) 08:30, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Those are WP:SPS. And two hits is not even enough to create a Wiktionary article. Veverve (talk) 13:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. 141Pr {contribs/Best page} 19:27, 13 February 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).

She-Hulk/Temp[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 to She-Hulk (Jennifer Susan Walters) per the discussion and an indication that the 2004 history (a single diff) should be kept. This was not a copy/paste pagemove, so a histmerge is not appropriate, hence the alternate option. Primefac (talk) 17:12, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

2004 attempt at a duplicate article. Improbable title. No significant history besides the initial creation and redirect, which should have been cleared at the time. Likely delete. TNstingray (talk) 15:08, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since it was the first article, it can be history merged to She-Hulk. No need to bury it in an obscure redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 16:35, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move per Peter James. The pre-redirect content was merged to the target, it was not a cut-and-paste move. The target was started independently, and had more content and history than the source at the time of the merge. The source was a temporary/working version stub which was an attempt to replace the first version which was marked/deleted as a copyvio. It'll be wrong to do a history merge. Jay 💬 08:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • History merge the revision from 22:08, 3 August 2004‎ to She-Hulk and delete the rest of the revisions. This is the first attempt at a She-Hulk article, and this can and should be documented in the history of the She-Hulk article. As I mentioned earlier, I oppose a move to an obscure redirect. This would bury the history, and in a location the author did not intend their work to be. -- Tavix (talk) 18:27, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • History merge and delete, per above. — The Anome (talk) 22:47, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move per Jay. Just for clarity, my understanding of the timeline is:
    So I agree with Jay that this was not a cut-and-paste move, but a standard merge. This was not the first attempt at a She-Hulk article, rather the second. It's unclear why Gtrmp didn't do the merge themselves on 4 Sept 2004, but a history merge now would be incorrect from what I can tell. Legoktm (talk) 04:39, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    One other suggestion, if there's not a clear consensus here it might be worth listing this at Wikipedia:Requests for history merge, or soliciting input from the regulars there on whether this qualifies for a history merge or not. Legoktm (talk) 04:43, 3 March 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).

Expansion of the Arab empire[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 21#Expansion of the Arab empire

Patriarchal Caliphate[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 21:15, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what this is supposed to refer to. All I found is this and it does not say anything about what this expression is supposed to designate.

Therefore, I propose deletion. Veverve (talk) 11:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a meaningful term, and I second deletion. Iskandar323 (talk) 14:14, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 19:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Suffice it to say I have no memory whatsoever as to why I created this over a decade ago, so while I'm not active enough here to want to vote on it, you certainly have my blessing if you want to delete it. Mnmazur (talk) 22:09, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
At the time it was created, the target had a sentence which said It is also known as the Patriarchal Caliphate., which was added to the lead by an IP. Delete. Jay 💬 20:28, 18 February 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).

Muslim occupation[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 💬 20:33, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not really get what it is supposed to refer to. I propose deletion for vagueness and lack of a good retarget. Veverve (talk) 11:54, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is not meaningful. Every ancient conquest could be called 'occupation' via this logical stretch, but that would be anachronistic and nonsensical. Muslim/Islamic conquest is the term, just as it is Roman conquest etc. Delete. Iskandar323 (talk) 14:18, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 19:23, 11 February 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).

Arab colonization[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. The comment regarding use at Juba Arabic does not suggest that this would make for a good redirect target, leaving no opposition to deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 21:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I do not really get what it is supposed to refer to. I propose deletion for vagueness and lack of a good retarget. Veverve (talk) 11:53, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: As with the above, this is anachronistic and vague. Historians do not use these terms. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:15, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 19:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not sure how this would be "anachronistic" given there were indeed Arab colonies (mentioned once in passing in the current target). I would have thought there would be some discussion at Arabs or History of the Arabs but since there is not,delete per WP:REDYES. A7V2 (talk) 07:06, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The redirect is used in Juba Arabic where it is suggested that South Sudan was an Arab colony. Perhaps the term there should be replaced with "Arab rule"? Jay 💬 20:43, 18 February 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).

Arab expansion[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 22#Arab expansion

History of Islamic conquests[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 💬 21:00, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This calls for a deletion per WP:REDYES. Veverve (talk) 11:20, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. delete. No one is going to search for it like that. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:20, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 19:23, 11 February 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).

Islamic Crusades[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 💬 21:05, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what it is supposed to refer to. I propose deletion. Veverve (talk) 11:19, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Just plain nonsensical. Crusades are Christian. No one uses these terms. Iskandar323 (talk) 16:19, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. InterstellarGamer12321 (talk | contribs) 19:23, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak retarget to Jihad since that article states it is effectively a synonym. Only weak though due to the plural, and hence the obvious potential confusion with The Crusades and topics such as the current target. (Second preference delete) A7V2 (talk) 07:11, 13 February 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).

Lauren Bernat[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 18#Lauren Bernat

Puppy-throwing Marine viral video[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 Chris DeRose#Life and work. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 15:57, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in target, because the paragraph about it was removed in 2015. Delete unless a suitable target can be found. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 04:21, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. A7V2 (talk) 06:20, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget. I have moved the deleted paragraph to Chris DeRose where this was mentioned, but was pending a citation. Jay 💬 08:41, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:22, 11 February 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).

Frederick Law Olmsted Park[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 21#Frederick Law Olmsted Park

Garfield Bound for Home[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. Attempts made during this discussion to add content that could make for a relevant target were unsuccessful. signed, Rosguill talk 21:14, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Game referred to by redirect was never released, does not exist, apparently was planned but was quietly cancelled, and is not mentioned at the target page nor in the List of garfield video games. There are three known, dubious sources for it, [1] [2] [3] which are used to support coverage of the topic on the Garfield Fandom wiki and the Dutch-language Wikipedia, but they get some key facts wrong and they do not appear reliable (a recent Quinton Reviews video exists that deconstructs this fairly thoroughly - though said video, while interesting, is obviously also not a reliable source, and even if it was, it doesn't reveal anything which would prove notability if it were published in a reliable source). As the topic of the redirect never existed outside of a single ad and is not a topic of any coverage in reliable sources, this redirect has no basis for existing and should be deleted. silvia (BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (inquire within) 20:43, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete for now: If there was a bit more evidence, it might have been able to be mentioned at List of cancelled Nintendo DS games, but there just doesn't seem to be enough here to do so at this time. If there somehow is enough evidence in the future, then I would support retargeting to the list instead. --Super Goku V (talk) 04:05, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For an opinion on the page history.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:31, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - It appears the only ever source was the external link to the IGN page, which looking at archives had no information at all [4], and searching online it seems as though this was long ago abandoned if it ever existed as a project at all. A7V2 (talk) 07:20, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note that an IP added mention to Garfield merchandise#Video games and retargeted the redirect there. Jay 💬 12:15, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The change at the redirect was reverted, but we can retarget to the merchandise page. Jay 💬 06:30, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    While I'm not necessarily opposed to such a retargeting, there is still the issue of the fact that we have no meaningful reliable sources to support any note of the game's existence as a project, or its cancellation. silvia (BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4) (inquire within) 06:53, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Right! I did not realize that the addition at the merchandise page was reverted as well. Jay 💬 07:41, 19 February 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).

How to[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 21#How to

KUTK[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 18#KUTK

Pingshan railway station (Sichuan)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 18#Pingshan railway station (Sichuan)

Keep my wife's name out your fuckin mouth[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 keep. Nominator proposed a speedy close if others agree and that is true. (non-admin closure) Skynxnex (talk) 01:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While the term does have meaning at the target, I think it's an unlikely search term. Therefore I think it might meet WP:RDELETE under #8? I would also like to note that this redirect is missing the "g" at the end of the fucking so it's even more unlikely than the actual direct quote. It's possible that I'm wrong about this so I have no objections to a speedy keep if people disagree. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 00:40, 11 February 2023 (UTC), edited 00:53, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Disclaimer: creator) I'm thinking that at least in America, it's pretty common to omit the "g" at the end of verbs, especially in casual speak. One could even argue that in Smith's quote, he didn't say "fucking" but rather "fuckin". I think this would be a case of a WP:CHEAP redirect. InvadingInvader (userpage, talk) 01:16, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, on second thought, I agree. TIL that G dropping exists so this isn't a typo. If the direct quote is considered a relevant redirect than I can see why this one would be too. If anyone else agrees, feel free to close this as a speedy keep. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 01:24, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep - seems a reasonable, if very long, way to search for this. Certainly a memorable part of what happened. A7V2 (talk) 07:23, 13 February 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).

Ikiribati[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 Micronesians#Kiribati people. There is agreement that the language redirect is incorrect. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know anything about Micronesian syntax, but do Ikiribati and I-Kiribati actually refer to distinct subjects or are they both ambiguous? —Lights and freedom (talk ~ contribs) 00:03, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Should be rd's to the people. Per the dict here, i- is a prefix "to names of places or categories. note. It designates persons originating or living in those places or members of these categories. Always a capital letter in this case and separate from the word. ex. te I-Buranti: a Frenchman." — kwami (talk) 00:31, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
To my knowledge Ikiribati refers to the ethnic group, using it to refer to the language as well is a mistake. --Glennznl (talk) 09:58, 11 February 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_February_11&oldid=1142838330"