Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 10[edit]

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

Mancession[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 4#Mancession

"Transitional work" and "Transitional job(s)"[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 18#"Transitional work" and "Transitional job(s)"

2023 USSC ethics disclosures[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 18#2023 USSC ethics disclosures

List of BL drama[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. Note that Key of G Minor is a blocked sock so they have been ignored. -- Tavix (talk) 23:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"BL" is ambiguous anyway, but the current date-limited target is inappropriate. I suggest delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:22, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article (before redirect) was merged into its current target, and redirect should be retained for attribution history for authorship of merged content. Schazjmd (talk) 13:37, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete on List of BL drama
Weak delete on List of BL dramas
"BL" is too ambiguous. If consensus is keep, I then suggest refine to just the whole article. Sincerely, Key of G Minor. Tools: (talk, contribs) 23:04, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom. BL on its own is too ambiguous and the 2010–2015 date range seems very arbitrary. 〜 Askarion ✉ 16:35, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For a clearer consensus, and to close an old log page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:07, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Either delete or restore and send to AfD(?). While I'd lean towards BL being sufficiently disambiguated by 'drama' the target essentially does not list what most people would think of as Boys' Love. For example, calling Law & Order or Borgia BL is easily a surprise. The date range is way too specific for this redirect as well. As for the original list, it was largely specific to Thailand and wasn't exactly well sourced? Pretty sure the merge decision was flawed when it went to AfD. Moreover, the content from that list isn't at the target anymore and one entry is at the 2016-2019 date range. Not sure what the best procedure for this would be, either delete or restore and send to AfD. ― Synpath 17:50, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the singular as a page move redirect from a misspelling. Move without redirect the plural to some valid title like List of dramatic TV series with LGBT characters: 2010–2015. Jay 💬 15:08, 10 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 23:34, 10 July 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).

Javanese Dragon[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 18#Javanese Dragon

Multi-headed dragon[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 18#Multi-headed dragon

Great Sea-Centipede & Cetacean Centipede[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 18#Great Sea-Centipede & Cetacean Centipede

Willowdale,Pictou, Nova Scotia[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 05:15, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely, WP:COSTLY redirect due to the lack of a space after a comma in the title ... which is odd due to the inclusion of a space after a comma elsewhere in the title. Steel1943 (talk) 21:30, 10 July 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).

M,egabyte[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 02:27, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely misspelling/variation due to the odd placement of a comma. For reference, similar titles such as T,errabyte and K,ilobyte do not exist. Steel1943 (talk) 21:26, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I can’t see how this typo is even remotely likely.--65.93.194.183 (talk) 23:30, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. With , being next to M on many keyboards its easy to see why this isn't exactly an unlikely typo. But let's be real, this isn't the kind of confusing typo that might result from unfamiliarity with a topic like Megabite. ― Synpath 00:43, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 01:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, perfectly harmless. J947 † edits 08:08, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as implausible misspelling. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:33, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per J947. It's harmless (as opposed to misleading), and is plausible, as , is located right next to m on QWERTY, as Synpath said. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 23:00, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Plausible misspellings make good redirects, not typing mistakes. We should not have redirects from any conceivable typing error, only from misspellings someone would plausibly intentionally type. Where a key is on the keyboard should not be a consideration. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:36, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Unlikely / not plausible redirect. A random comma in the middle of a word is not useful. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:44, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Unlikely and implausible. CycloneYoris talk! 00:08, 18 July 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).

The Lion, The Witch,and The Wardrobe[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 02:28, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely, WP:COSTLY redirect due to the lack of a space after a comma in the title ... which is odd due to the inclusion of a space after a comma elsewhere in the title. Steel1943 (talk) 21:24, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. In addition to the incorrect space, this is not written in correct title case, the combination of which makes this highly unlikely to be useful. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:35, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete although its been in since 2006 its always been a redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:43, 13 July 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).

Social surplus[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 – a mention has been added to the target. (non-admin closure) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:54, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target article unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 21:17, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I added this redirect in December 2008‎ after taking Econ 101 in college because I heard the term in class, didn’t see an article for it on Wikipedia, and found what I needed at the economic surplus page. If you Google social surplus, you get a highlighted top result of “Community surplus is also known as social or society surplus. It is the sum of consumer and producer surplus at a given price and quantity in a market.” And, from Khan Academy: “Social surplus is the sum of consumer surplus and producer surplus.” The economic surplus page does talk about consumer and producer surplus, and at the time I added the redirect, the page (Dec. 2008) explicitly mentioned (and bolded) social surplus: “Combined, the consumer surplus, the producer surplus, and the government surplus (if present) make up the social surplus or the total surplus.” But you’re totally right that today that phrase has been lost, making the redirect confusing! I just added a sentence explaining the connection to the economic surplus page. (I had forgotten about making that redirect; it’s nice to revisit, and thanks for flagging!) Tophtucker (talk) 17:07, 15 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, now that a mention has been added at the target. CycloneYoris talk! 00:27, 18 July 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).

Surplus,Supply and demand[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 02:28, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Title missing a space that's filled with WP:XY issues Steel1943 (talk) 21:06, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete due to the combination of missing space and excess capitalization. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:36, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Mdewman6 --Lenticel (talk) 06:29, 13 July 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:POPCORN[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 18#Wikipedia:POPCORN

Writ of error[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 Coram nobis#writ of error. signed, Rosguill talk 05:13, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This originally targeted Coram nobis, but was retargeted by Pmadrid in 2009 (and again in 2012 after a revert by U193581) on the basis that (per Talk:Writ of error). The writ of error and the writ of error coram nobis are two completely different writs. The former is the writ that was historically issued for an appeal in cases at common law, which is the sense used in every article linked here. I haven't checked what these articles looked like back then, but at least currently, the writ of error is not mentioned once at Appeal, whereas it gets a subsection at Coram nobis to provide context for the related concept of the writ of error coram nobis. While this is arguably a strange place to have our most in-depth discussion of the writ of error, it is nonetheless the most in-depth, thus I suggest we retarget to Coram nobis#Writ of error (i.e. revert but refine) and tag as {{r with possibilities}}. (One such possibility would be to take that subsection, spin it into its own article, and reduce that background info at Coram nobis to a sentence or two.) Second choice would be to retarget to Writ#Other writs, where it gets a one-sentence mention. -- 'zin[is short for Tamzin] (she|they|xe) 20:42, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Glad to see that someone is finally tackling the challenge of identifying and cleaning up this mess. Like most attorneys with appellate experience, I have always thought that it was odd that "writ of error" redirects to "appeal" when writs and appeals are fundamentally different. I concur with your second to last proposal to create a separate article on "writ of error" as the most logically coherent solution. --Coolcaesar (talk) 16:07, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Coolcaesar: Since RfD can't mandate the creation of an article, and since it's not something I personally have the space for among my content to-dos, do you have a preference for what to do pending that? If my nomination was too jargony, my suggestion, to be clear, is to retarget to Coram nobis#Writ of error but use the {{r with possibilities}} tag, which indicates to other editors, "This is a redirect right now but someday should probably be an article" (sort of like a middle ground between redlink and article). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 18:45, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would not object too strongly to a retarget to Coram nobis#writ of error. That section did not exist when I made the redirect back in the day. My concern at the time was that there were many Wikipedia articles on old cases before the Supreme Court of the United States that correctly identified that they reached the court on a writ of error, not an appeal, because they were cases at law and not cases at equity or admiralty. But this redirect ended up sending readers to an article not on appeals but on a different procedure with a different purpose. Some examples where this is still the case: United States v. Moore, Evans v. Eaton (1818).
Until the unification of equity and law practice, the writ of error and the appeal were technically different procedures with the same end: asking a higher court to review the judgment of a lower court. On the purpose of the writ of error being an appeal of an action at law, see William Blackstone, Commentaries on the Laws of England, bk. 3, ch. 25. As further proof that the writ of error was in fact a thing and was in use in the United States, it's all over the Judiciary Act of 1789 and distinguished as the remedy to review judgments in actions at law versus suits in equity or admiralty (see particular §§ 21–25, 1 Stat. 83-87).
I grant that appeals are nowadays, for the most part, different from writs, the exception being certiorari. As long as readers get to an explanation of what the writ of error was, and that it was what we call an appeal today, then there shouldn't be a problem. Alternatives could be expansion on the history of appeal in the Appeal article, though because appeal also covers common law and European civil law, that might not be the right place for it. Perhaps a separate writ of error article should be attempted at some time. Pmadrid (talk) 13:20, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The section Coram nobis#Writ of error would need some editing, though, as it gives the impression that the writ of error was used solely in medieval times when, in fact, it was a remedy available until at least the 19th century. Pmadrid (talk) 13:22, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Pmadrid: That could probably be added as a single sentence at the end of that section, if you have a good source in mind. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 18:45, 14 July 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).

World Wide Wiretap[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 05:12, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

not used at target or on enwiki. Does not seem to be a term in use. Delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:57, 10 July 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).

Aquatic ogre[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 Merrow#Popular culture. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:06, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The word "aquatic" is mentioned nowhere in the target article, leaving the connection between the target article and the nominated redirect unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 19:39, 10 July 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).

Ogre (Dungeons & Dragons)[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. Relevant content has been added to the target. The content is not in a section, so these redirects will now point to Ogre without a section heading. (non-admin closure) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:05, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The term "Dungeons & Dragons" is mentioned nowhere in the target article, leaving readers unable to find the information they are attempting to locate wants her to for these redirects. Also, the target section no longer exists. (However, Ogre (Dungeons & Dragons) was formerly an article that was redirected as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ogre (Dungeons & Dragons) in 2020. At this point though, it does not seem that the current state of the target article does not include any information which may have formerly been in this article to warrant the redirects targeting the target article.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:35, 10 July 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).

California Laureate[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 💬 06:56, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could also refer to List of municipal poets laureate in California or Nobel Prize laureates from California. I don't think disambiguation is worth it or makes sense to attempt, so delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 18:02, 10 July 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).

Ass-whuppin'[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 19#Ass-whuppin'

Imitation City[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. After discounting the arguments made by the CU-blocked sock, I'm reading this as deletion based solely on Steel1943's WP:REDYES argument. signed, Rosguill talk 05:12, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article, and apparently not mentioned anywhere else on Wikipedia. Steel1943 (talk) 14:51, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and add to target - A quick google search shows that it is

    An early 1987 cyberpunk adventure game created by Jiro Ishii, who later went on to direct 428: Shibuya Scramble in 2008 and Time Travelers in 2012.

    "Imitation City (game)". Giant Bomb. Retrieved June 25, 2023. So it is verifiable that it exists, but is not in the target. Sincerely, Key of G Minor. Tools:     See reply to Steel1943 below. (talk, contribs) 15:19, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Even then, it would be inappropriate to add the subject of the redirect to the target since this subject is a game that may be of the target genre, but the subject of this redirect is not wholly represented of the target subject. This seems like a WP:REDLINK situation, considering that adding the subject of this redirect to the target is like having a notable actor's entire description in the article Actor without there being an article for the notable actor, which does not make sense. Steel1943 (talk) 15:49, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Then retarget and add to List of graphic adventure games. Sincerely, Key of G Minor. Tools: (talk, contribs) 00:34, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Adding it there may be okay, but probably not retargeting the redirect there. As it stands, the list of incoming redirects towards List of graphic adventure games includes no such related redirects that are name(s) of a game. It may be preferable to delete this redirect per WP:REDLINK. Steel1943 (talk) 12:44, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vitaium (talk) 00:43, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:18, 10 July 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).

Department of Chemistry[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 Academic department. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:03, 18 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This doesn't make sense that way. Hildeoc (talk) 13:01, 10 July 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).

Most commented youtube video[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 18#Most commented youtube video

Gabbers[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 Gabber. Adding the nickname to the dab page, but view it likely to be removed. (non-admin closure) J947 † edits 11:05, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Appears to be a nickname for Marco Gabbiadini, but it's not mentioned in the article. Gabber is uncountable, but the subculture does seem to use "Gabbers" to refer to themselves, so it's probably the best target? Gabber (disambiguation) doesn't have any other countable targets, and I don't think the footballer would be what readers are searching for (he doesn't appear anywhere when searching "Gabbers" -wikipedia, or at least not until after the we have omitted some entries very similar message that pops up eventually). Skarmory (talk • contribs) 11:04, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Gabber. Searching 'marco "gabbers" gabbiadini' in google shows several, mainly UK, sites that use that nickname, but the second you take out their last name from the search it serves only music related hits. Between that, pageviews and a bunch of sociologists interviewing/surveying Gabbers in 2000 ([1]) I'd say Gabber is the better target. Maybe the nickname could be added at the DAB page. ― Synpath 21:19, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that's the ideal path forward (the DAB can definitely be converted into Gabber or Gabbers may refer to...). (I did notice the nickname was in at least slight use, but it took digging and I guess I forgot to mention it in the nom?) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 08:01, 13 July 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).

Kinsealy–Drinan[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 withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 07:26, 12 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect (and the alternate Kinsealy-Drinan) should be altered to Kinsealy, which discusses this urban area, as opposed to Swords, Dublin, which does not. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 10:05, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose There was discussion in the Swords article when I created the redirect in 2016, but it was deleted in 2017. I have added some back (with references and an anchor) and tweaked the DAB to link to the anchor. I believe the CSO came up with the name "Kinsealy-Drinan" between 1986 and 1991 because at the time Kinsealy Court was the main development in the northern part of the area; and I believe Kinsealy Court was so named because it was on the [Swords to] Kinsealy Road, not because it was in the parish or ED of Kinsaley. I did not add those claims to the article as I am unsure and have no references; nevertheless, I believe what is there now is enough to show the clear difference between the census towns of "Kinsaley" and "Kinsealy-Drinan", with Feltrim Hill separating them. jnestorius(talk) 16:37, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw After additions by jnestorius, the current redirect is now adequately explained on the Swords article. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 06:23, 12 July 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:Code of conduct[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 17#Wikipedia:Code of conduct

First-person adventure[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 4#First-person adventure

Tailspin (cocktail)[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 b:Bartending/Cocktails/Glossary#T. Most participants have concluded that a soft redirect to Wikibooks is indeed feasible. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 01:42, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not listed at target, or at List of cocktails, List of drinks or List of IBA official cocktails. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Soft delete. There is an old article in the history, but little chance it would be kept in its current form (WP:SNOWBALL) so probably not worth restoring and sending to Afd. That said, it does seem like a plausibly notable topic. But better to WP:TNT it probably. Treat the old WP:BLAR like an expired PROD and soft delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:05, 25 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The older content was copied to wikibooks and is now at b:Bartending/Cocktails/Glossary#T. Jay 💬 09:06, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Can we soft redirect to wikibooks? Mdewman6 (talk) 16:59, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I see only Bengal potatoes at Category:Redirects to Wikibooks. Jay 💬 17:10, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft redirect to Wikibooks. I have no idea how attribution is handled with these old Wikibook transfers, but even if unnecessary and/or rarely done, it seems like a good idea to maintain this link with a soft redirect, at least until/unless there is content on enwiki about the topic. Second choice: soft delete per my original comments. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:35, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:00, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is a Wikibooks redirect feasible?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 † edits 05:26, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see no reason why not, and I think this is a case where a Wikibooks redirect needs to be proven unfeasible; there clearly is precedent for having Wikibooks redirects, with the above-mentioned Bengal potatoes. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 08:58, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Wikibooks Ironically I think the only other wikibooks redirect, Bengal potatoes, shouldn't exist, as I suspect people searching for that subject are looking for an encyclpedia article , not a how-to guide. But the wikibooks content here is content that could easily belong on Wikipedia instead, so one makes sense here. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:43, 21 July 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).

Heterophylly[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 July 17#Heterophylly

Astro-Knights[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. There is a consensus to delete this redirect, and a suggestion to nominate several related redirects, but the other redirects have not been tagged. Rather than hold this discussion hostage to the addition of just under 20 more pages, I'm going to close this as delete now with no prejudice to the further nomination of the related pages. signed, Rosguill talk 16:05, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It looks as if this one was created for a section which has since been deleted. Cannot see any mention of such a title. Delete? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:02, 10 July 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_July_10&oldid=1168637019"