Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 2[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 2, 2023.

Quantity of electricity[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 Etymology of electricity#"Quantity of electricity". (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 15:59, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It makes no sense. --2001:16A2:E6DE:D202:C018:C01:B021:8328 (talk) 21:56, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:58, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Spinningspark for possible input as I believe this is within the realm of their knowledge. Steel1943 (talk) 21:09, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the ping. The standard symbol for electric charge is still (standing for quantity), as is the cumulative amount of electricity delivered by a source such as a battery (measured in units of charge). It's a similar situation to the symbol for electric current; everyone has forgotten what the stands for (intensity of current). As the target of the redirect says, "quantity of electricity" is now an ambiguous term. It will more often mean, especially in an informal context, the amount of electrical energy consumed rather than the ampere-hours consumed. The target of the redirect explains this adequately, I see no reason not to keep it. It should be targeted to the specific section though, so retarget to Etymology of electricity#"Quantity of electricity". Having said that, it's slightly off topic in that article, but offhand I can't think of a better place to put it.SpinningSpark 14:29, 5 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).

Williamson System[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. UtherSRG (talk) 23:28, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Remove overly broad redirect to allow for creation of an article for the Williamson System. PK-WIKI (talk) 23:55, 2 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).

Color graphics[edit]

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

The House of the Dead (vide 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 delete. ✗plicit 21:36, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is a leftover from a move back in 2010 to fix a spelling mistake in the title, because of which it doesn't seem to be getting very many pageviews since 2015, and that doesn't have meaningful history besides that. Delete this unless someone can provide a justification or a suitable alternative course of action. Regards, SONIC678 19:41, 2 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).

Template:WikiProject banner[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 9#Template:WikiProject banner

Digix[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 DigixDAO to List of highest-funded crowdfunding projects#5–10 million and delete the other. ✗plicit 02:14, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:06, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Clyde!Franklin! 10:28, 2 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).

USA 1994[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. Liz Read! Talk! 06:37, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The title is too ambiguous to refer to the FIFA World Cup, retarget to 1994 in the United States or weak delete.) - Ricciardo Best (talk) 10:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as vague --Lenticel (talk) 10:45, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is vague and ambiguous and any target is likely to cause confusion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:31, 2 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).

Danger noodle[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 9#Danger noodle

Crypto asset[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. Without prejudice to the creation of a standalone article, or to expand the current target if necessary. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:42, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think that crypto asset should not be redirected to cryptocurrency. Crypto asset includes non-fungible token (NFT) and NFT is a highly notable concepts. On the other hands, many scholarly articles describe crypto assets. Therefore we should have standalone article for crypto asset per Wikipedia:Notability. Cryptopia (talk) 06:50, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep for now as there are discussions about crypto assets in the target. I've no prejudice against the creation of a standalone article. --Lenticel (talk) 10:53, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep since NFTs are mentioned at the target. Perhaps there should be an article, but making this a redlink to encourage article creation would not be helpful here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:35, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Opinion We can restore this version to encourage article expansion. Cryptopia (talk) 05:33, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The merge to target happened per Talk:Cryptocurrency/Archive 2#Proposed merge from Crypto asset, and David Gerard had said We can split the article out again if third-party RSes show up. The latest restoration attempt two days back was reverted by Pppery who said as far as I can tell the sources have not improved since the previous merge.... Jay 💬 13:43, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    yeah, the sources aren't here yet. The best encouragement to expansion will be sources sufficient to make a separate article worth the effort - David Gerard (talk) 15:13, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per others and expand the target, and/or create Draft:Crypto asset with content copied from the redirect's history. Jay 💬 07:26, 12 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).

Facetious[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 soft redirect to Wikt:facetious. Jay 💬 11:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This should probably be a soft redirect to Wiktionary, as that seems more helpful to anyone searching the term than current target. An anonymous username, not my real name 06:49, 2 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).

Refined oil[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, retarget, and keep.

Both petroleum oil and vegetable oil can be refined, so it shouldn't be assumed the "oil" refers to one or the other. Oil covers all types, but only mentions refining in passing. Oil refinery is only about petroleum, but that seems OK to me. Not sure about these six redirects though. MB 04:52, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:27, 2 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).

Brandon Roberts (musician)[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 💬 10:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Musician-to-band redirect for a musician not named in the band's article to provide any context for why he redirects there. To be fair, at the time this was created his name was in the article with a claim that he was a very shortlived early member when the band was first formed but left before the band had actually attained any notability -- but that was later removed as unsourced and unsourceable, and the name has never returned to the article since. So there's no point in retaining this if its original purpose is impossible for us to verify. Bearcat (talk) 15:41, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note to closer (in case the outcome is to delete): the talk page lists 3 prior deletion discussions, none of which are for the musician, hence it may be moved back to Talk:Brandon Roberts. The talk page move may have happened when Tassedethe moved the corresponding page, probably as part of a disambiguation effort. Jay 💬 17:45, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    What may happen next is Brandon Roberts (American football) will be moved to Brandon Roberts, in which case the talk page's content can be copied over one of the existing talk pages. Jay 💬 17:51, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:39, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, SONIC678 05:07, 2 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).

Pera the Gate[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 03:24, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I dont see any point of this redirect. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:52, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

He got such a nickname because during the May Coup he allowed the rebels to enter the palace by opening the gate.--Savasampion (talk) 18:52, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional keep per Savasampion provided the nickname's history is supported by a reliable reference, otherwise delete. --Lenticel (talk) 01:19, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:VERIFY no such alternative name found in article sources. Aeengath (talk) 21:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A sourced mention was added to the target, and reverted, both by particpants of this RfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 02:59, 2 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).

Pseudoephedra[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 Ephedraceae#Genera. ✗plicit 02:12, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Pseudoephedra" is not a term that as far as I tell is widely used for Pseudoephedrine. I checked google scholar [1], and there were no results. In 2015, a genus of extinct plant was given this name [2] so it cannot be considered an unambiguous redirect. Hemiauchenia (talk) 22:22, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 02:50, 2 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).

Qualified independent contractor[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! 21:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No explanation of qualifications given at redirect, and qualifications may differ by country. An unhelpful redirect in its current form, probably best deleted but maybe retargeted if a suitable page exists. Gingermead (talk) 11:10, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:11, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:21, 2 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).

Kristne[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 03:22, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not an especially Swedish topic. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:39, 18 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Religion_in_Sweden#Christianity, which is specific to Sweden. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support LaundaryPizza - as primary topic. Carpimaps (talk) 12:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually it can also refer to Christianity in Norway, see no:Kristendom - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:33, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:51, 25 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Swedish speaker here to describe the mess. Kristne is an inflected form of kristen, the adjective for 'Christian' in Danish, Swedish, and Norwegian (in Danish and Norwegian the corresponding noun is either definite or in the plural, but in Swedish it has to be both definite, singular, and semantically male). Kristendommen is another inflected form (here it's the definite noun, corresponding roughly to "the Christianity" in English). The catch for kristendommen is that it's only the correct spelling in Denmark and Norway; we use kristendomen for that form in Sweden. Kristendom is the correctly spelled lemma for Christianity in all three languages.
  • Kristendom is a reasonable search term, but if kept, we'll have to convert it to disambiguation page that points to the articles for Christianity in all three countries (a bit like how we already handle the shared words Norge, dansk etc.). Kristendommen is slightly less plausible since it's an inflected form, and will also have to be disambiguated (probably by redirecting it to a hypothetical Kristendom (disambiguation)). Kristne is probably the least useful due to how specific it is as an inflected adjective; if we really want to keep that one (I'm fine with deleting it), we should add links about Christianity in Scandinavia to Kristen and then redirect it there. Glades12 (talk) 22:55, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: We don't have Christianity in Scandinavia but have Christianization of Scandinavia. Jay 💬 09:18, 1 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:20, 2 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).

Solangi[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 25#Solangi

3D art[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 24#3D art

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_January_2&oldid=1135575792"