Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 10[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 10, 2023.

Kush Patel[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. BLP issues in old revisions noted; no prejudice against creation of a new redirect. Complex/Rational 23:08, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This started out in 2005 as an unsourced bio stub, which simply claimed that someone named Kush Patel was the youngest living recipient of the Clara Barton Award [1]. If it were an article it would now be subject to BLPPROD, but it was tagged as a stub and then redirected to the unsourced stub Clara Barton Award, which has itself since been redirected to American Red Cross. The Red Cross article does not mention the Clara Barton Award, although such an award does exist. I have been unable to verify that Kush Patel was awarded the Clara Barton Award, let alone that he was the youngest living recipient in 2005. I think we should delete this redirect. Meters (talk) 21:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nomination. App Academy contains some information about a person by this name (who may or may not be the same person), but if a redirect there is warranted (I have no opinion at present) it can be created fresh to avoid the BLP issues in this redirect's history. Thryduulf (talk) 22:07, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination 141Pr 17:33, 11 January 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).

Singular "Window" 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. Complex/Rational 23:03, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As the creator of those other "Window" redirects back in 2018-2019 which have since all been deleted (and yes, I moved on from making all those bizarre/nonsensical redirects 4 years ago and learned from it), I hereby nominate these, which haven't been created by me, to be deleted as well. Colgatepony234 (talk) 21:08, 10 January 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).

Victor Amadeus I of Sardinia[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 18#Victor Amadeus I of Sardinia

Wikipedia:TOP10[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:Overcategorization#Published list. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:32, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects should point to the same place, or to a new disambiguation page if that is impossible. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like Wikipedia:Top Ten Wikipedias's last talk page entry was also from 2008. Do we anticipate ever needing the TOP10 redirect for that meta discussion? - RevelationDirect (talk) 03:09, 11 January 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).

Taiyuan Station[X][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. Complex/Rational 23:02, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A series of redirects left over from either pagemove- or copypaste-vandalism many years ago, which were already declined for speedy deletion as test page vandalism and were left as redirects instead. They were tagged for speedy deletion again just now by User:Astro.furball, which I declined procedurally as WP:G6 was invalid criteria for this, the redirects themselves are not obvious vandalism (G3) and are not recently created (R3). However, none are valid search terms or navigational tools, and none have pageviews at all; all should be deleted. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:24, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom, although redirects created when reverting page move vandalism are eligible for G3 speedy deletion it is not immediately clear if that was the case here so listing at RfD was the right call. Thryduulf (talk) 22:10, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:34, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom as unreasonable redirects that serve no valid purpose. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:17, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per nom. 141Pr 17:39, 11 January 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).

Inceptor[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 17#Inceptor

Cyberden[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 17#Cyberden

Talk:1930–1945 in Western fashion/Archive 2[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 per WP:G6. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 20:01, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I created this redirect by accident. Llewee (talk) 10:06, 10 January 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).

My Face"/"Making Love With My Wife[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 Henry Badowski#Singles and move without redirect to My Face/Making Love With My Wife signed, Rosguill talk 17:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Besides the odd use of a slash and improper use of quotation marks, there is no topic named "Making Love With My Wife" in the track listing of the target article; "Making Love With My Wife" is mentioned in the article, but in a way where the mention has more affinity with Henry Badowski than the target article's subject. (This redirect was an article for 3 years [2007–2010] prior to being subject to a WP:BLAR; apparently, the article was about a 2-sided single with two songs by these names.) Steel1943 (talk) 07:41, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Revert to the article and move to My Face/Making Love With My Wife to fix the title issues. The article does not meet any speedy deletion criteria and so should not be deleted at RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 22:19, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    It was redirected over 13 years ago I don't really see why something redirected that long ago and not appearing controversial can't be discussed at RFD. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Because RfD does not assess notability or the availability or reliability of sources or other things that AfD does, RfDs also do not generally attract the attention of those with relevant subject knowledge who are frequently among the best placed to contribute to that assessment. Thryduulf (talk) 16:01, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The target article is a mess. We don't know where it talks about the subject and where about Henry Badowski. As for the redirect, the issue with the missing first and last quote may be because of a wiki software bug - this was created in 2007, so it is possible there was a bug with titles having quotes and a forward slash. Move without redirect to Thryduulf's suggested title, and retarget to Henry Badowski#Singles. Jay 💬 06:41, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have cleaned up the album article at Life Is a Grand... because it largely repeated biographical info from Badowski's personal article. As it turns out, there is nothing else to say about the album and now that article is nearly empty. I suggest that the album be redirected to Badowski, but that can be a later decision in light of the present discussion. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:08, 19 January 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).

Jaegaseung genocide[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 consensus is that this is not a term in use outside Wikipedia and so does not make a good search term. Thryduulf (talk) 11:13, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Term appears to be coined by the redirect's creator. I have found no reliable sources in English or Korean which describe a "Jaegaseung genocide" or even use the term "genocide" in relation to the Jaegaseung's assimilation into Korean culture. As the term "genocide" has a very specific legal and scholarly application, I am quite certain this was self-coined, but perhaps I have been looking in the wrong places. This redirect should be kept if reliable sources are provided contrary to my own research. Yue🌙 05:58, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Yue: If the name "Jaegaseung genocide" is inappropriate, should the redirect instead be named "Jaegaseung assimilation", "Assimilation of the Jaegaseung", or something similar? I unfortunately don't know of a WP:COMMONNAME for this event, but believe that "Jaegaseung genocide" is a possible search term for the event (redirect names do not have to be neutral or even factual, see WP:RNEUTRAL). CJ-Moki (talk) 06:13, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's not inappropriate per se, but I don't think a term as specific as "genocide" should be thrown around. And from a Google search of the exact phrase, it seems like the only use of "Jaegaseung genocide" on the internet right now is this very discussion, so hardly a common or likely search term for the event. Yue🌙 06:15, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Yue: If this is "hardly a common or likely search term for the event," do you think the redirect should be re-named, or deleted? I would like to have a redirect for this event, but it unfortunately seems like there isn't a common name for it in English or Korean. CJ-Moki (talk) 06:22, 10 January 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).

Cinderella (upcoming film)[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 💬 13:02, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No longer upcoming. MusiBedrock (talk) 02:18, 10 January 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).

Doom (video game)[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 Doom (franchise). (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 05:16, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All should be consistent, and ... all should target Doom#Entertainment franchise, the current target of 2 of the 3 considering that target explains why the phrase "game" or "video game" is ambiguous. However, my edit on Doom (video game) to make all three consistent was reverted. Steel1943 (talk) 07:20, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would argue that all three should target Doom (franchise), as that target covers the entire Doom franchise, including both the video games and the tabletop game, and pointing the three redirects to that target allows readers to be taken directly to what they're looking for without having to click through the disambiguation page first. Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty ⚧️ Averted crashes 21:17, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:20, 15 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 22:27, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural relist due to Doom (computer game) being brought up very late in the discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 00:13, 10 January 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_January_10&oldid=1135751430"