Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 5

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< May 4
May 6 >

May 5[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on May 5, 2023.

Child sex ratio[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 Human sex ratio#Natural ratio at birth. ✗plicit 23:49, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Child sex ratio is found in multiple other articles, the one on India is the only stand alone. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 23:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Human sex ratio#Natural ratio at birth Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 03:56, 6 May 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).

Niagara Falls: The Great Whirlpool[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 23:47, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Does not appear on the article that this redirect points to. I was able to find the film in question but I could not find proof that it was directed by Birt Acres. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 23:34, 5 May 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).

Ubiràquá[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 23:48, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Name does not come up with this species of snake. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 23:32, 5 May 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).

Lev Libeskind[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 Daniel Libeskind#Personal life. ✗plicit 23:50, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lev Libeskind is the child of Daniel Libeskind. The name only comes up in passing in section of the article. Dr vulpes (💬 • 📝) 23:27, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and refine. There are several articles where Lev Libeskind is mentioned collaborating on multiple projects with his father Daniel Libeskind.
https://www.internimagazine.com/design/projects/architectural-kitchen-1-en/
https://www.internimagazine.com/fuorisalone-en/fuorisalone_2015/future-flowers/
https://archinect.com/news/article/150013334/lev-libeskind-produces-a-prefab-home-design-for-revolution-precrafted
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoOvgkr1zhM Zack Crisostomo (talk) 22:29, 8 May 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).

This Very Wiki[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 23:48, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

TV Tropes doesn't really have a feature called This Very Wiki that transcends other websites and wikis. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 23:27, 5 May 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).

Phoenician ex-votive inscriptions[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 12#Phoenician ex-votive inscriptions

WLWT building[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 12#WLWT building

Jantra (album)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 18#Jantra (album)

Department of Natural Resources & Environment[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 12#Department of Natural Resources & Environment

Trudeau ministry[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. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 01:46, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous with Trudeau's father's ministries. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:15, 5 May 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).

Next South Australian state election[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 13#Next South Australian state election

Baby Q[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 QAnon#Other hypotheses. Basically a keep, but refined to section where a mention was added. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 01:54, 13 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently no apparent reason for this redirect. The term is not mentioned on the target page, and a google search does not turn up anything obvious · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 12:58, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Its the nickname of Qanon incluencer Austin Steinbart (see here) who doesnt have a page but is mentioned in the article. I can make it a bit more clear in the article if you want but I think its worth keeping since Steinbart is also featured prominently in Will Sommers new book on Qanon. --jonas (talk) 13:40, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Steinbart's been in the article for a while, but yes, he would be the moniker for Baby Q. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 19:26, 5 May 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).

MESCO[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 Mangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited. Jay 💬 08:07, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't find any relationship between MESCO and Panasonic. Search on the terms showed a site named "Mesco Electrical Supply" selling Panasonic products, but that didn't show that MESCO is somehow closely related to Panasonic. ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 11:40, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

.usarnamechoice (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2023 (UTC) edited to add archive to bypass paywall 21:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep, and redirect Mesco to Panasonic. or create a disambiguation page. Panasonic's parent company, Matsushita (aka Matsushita Engineering and Service Co., or MESCO) is about 100 years old and their products include Quasar, Technics, Panasonic, National, and branding agreements with numerous other brands particularly North American Philips VCRs and televisions. the electric company in India has 5,800,000 customers since its founding in 2003, and i would wager most people have never heard of it, whereas Panasonic and Panasonic products are known worldwide. .usarnamechoice (talk) 20:57, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • perhaps referring to Matsushita as MESCO is outdated verbal shorthand or jargon. therefore i support the proposal to redirect MESCO to tbe Mangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited. :) .usarnamechoice (talk) 19:53, 7 May 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).

Jenõ Ambrózi[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. Nomination withdrawn.. (non-admin closure) – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 13:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible typo: Õ does not exist in Hungarian, and only eight pageviews since it was redirected a year ago. – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 04:53, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, no evidence of harm given. R from move, and it's how the proper diacritic looks from afar. J947 † edits 03:14, 6 May 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).

Arrest or arrests of Ulysses S. Grant[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 May 21#Arrest or arrests of Ulysses S. Grant

Template:Prose timeline[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. A late rally for keep after the third relist seals the fate of this discussion for now. Editors remain divided on whether these redirects are harmful or useful. signed, Rosguill talk 00:25, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

and related Template:Proseline and possibly others.

I don't know why this was merged instead of deleted after the 3rd nom in 2009[permalink], but its existence is still causing problems. Money quote from that Tfd is in the nom:

Template masquerades as a policy/guideline-based cleanup tag, but is not. It is simply one editor's neologistic opinion about "proseline". — SMcCandlish [talk] [cont] 22:49, 28 August 2009

That's still true, and now we have a minor kerfuffle at Tucker Carlson because of it, after my removal of Template:Proseline from Tucker Carlson#Media career in this edit, followed by active discussion at Talk:Tucker Carlson. Inviting User:Thebiguglyalien from that discussion. (Pinging User:SMcCandlish, as I'm uncertain if use inside a {{talk quote}} will mask the notif or not.)

There are 11 redirects to Template:Prose, of which five have the problematic proseline term in the name. There are 21 transclusions of 'Template:Proseline', so maybe we can just hard-delete it and fix up the existing uses; or maybe convert it to a soft redirect instead, with an added "Notes" section with additional comment right on the redirect page, explaining why maybe you don't want to follow it? Or, do we just carry on as is, and put up with the occasional confusion?

Possibly related (or maybe just confusing detail?): an earlier life of 'Template:Proseline' was moved to Template:ProseTimeline per Tfd in 2007. How do we get out of this mess? Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 23:05, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have struck off the "related Template:Proseline" above as redundant, as I have bundled it with this Rfd. Jay 💬 07:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Or maybe an additional, "When to use" section at Template:Prose/doc might help, or in particular, "When not to use", which exist on some templates, and which I find very helpful, sometimes. Mathglot (talk) 00:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I'm not entirely sure what can be done to fix this, but WP:XFDCloser seems to think this is eligible to be closed because of the 2009 timestamp in the quote from TfD. Not an issue per se, just a note. TartarTorte 01:18, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    TartarTorte, thanks; I've masked the original 3rd nom link, and replaced it with a permalink; hopefully Xfdcloser won't see it now (unless it peers inside the comment). Mathglot (talk) 03:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I see; you mean the one inside the talk quote, which you SMcC already hid; thanks for that. Restored it, entity-encoded; hopefully will work. Mathglot (talk) 03:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks all good to me now. Thanks! TartarTorte 12:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Still hoping to get feedback on this. Imho, best option is to adjust the 21 transclusions, and delete the redirect Template:Proseline as misleading, confusing, and unrelated to any P&G. Mathglot (talk) 23:14, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think there's an issue that requires them to be deleted (though I don't care about them being kept). I think the spirit of {{Prose}} and WP:PROSELINE are compatible. I think the issue with the Tucker Carlson example is that the editor just misused the template – the way the section is written doesn't seem to match the issue described in WP:PROSELINE. All redirects of {{Prose}} are listed in WP:AWB/TR so could be easily replaced with AWB if need be. MClay1 (talk) 15:28, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 21:34, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled Template:Proseline as this discussion is more about it and its 21 transclusions. Did not bundle the other three (Template:Prosetimeline, Template:ProseTimeline and Template:Prose-timeline) as they do not have transclusions, and to keep this RfD simple.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:55, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all per nom. Veverve (talk) 15:16, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "proseline" is a misnomer for the contents of the template. Walt Yoder (talk) 02:18, 23 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per MClay1. The minor disagreement on the Tucker Carlson article resulted from the addition of the template to a section there example) and was briefly touched on in this talk page thread. This was an accidental misuse of the template, and as far as I can see, it could have just easily occurred as a misuse of Template:prose. I don't see the redirect as a misnomer: it evokes WP:PROSELINE, an essay whose point appears at least broadly compatible with the target template. Templates can be useful even if what they're based on is project documentation that's not elevated into a policy or guideline. – Uanfala (talk) 14:32, 28 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 03:33, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Seems like a reasonable redirect. I am unsure what harm it does; the template it is redirected to, IMHO, describes the problem well enough. --Jayron32 11:06, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Mathglot: What do you think of the target now that around the time of the third relist, JPxG added a hatnote at MOS:PROSE to WP:PROSELINE? The target template leads the user to MOS:PROSE. Jay 💬 14:05, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep because of the new hatnote. Jay 💬 09:53, 18 May 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).

Tapatalk[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 00:23, 21 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. 4 years ago, this page – then an article – was deleted via PROD and has now been recreated as a redirect to an entity which it acquired. I think that instead directing the reader to search results which cover the three mentions the site has is preferable. The other two mentions (at July 2 on 2018 in American television and 2018 in British television) cover the same incident. J947 † edits 01:03, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • The last version at Tapatalk is pretty stubby. That content could be merged up into Yuku to make the redirect more fruitful if retained. BD2412 T 02:27, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think the problem in this is that Tapatalk seems to be a lot bigger than Yuku – not merely a continuation. In-depth coverage would be undue. But by all means have a crack at drafting up a short paragraph on it. J947 † edits 04:16, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I'm the user who created the Tapatalk → Yuku redirect. Please be aware that the messageboards that originated on either ezboard or Yuku were automatically mass-migrated to the Tapatalk website and (as of this writing) are still hosted there. Therefore, from the perspective of an end-user of one of those old ezboard/Yuku messageboards, the Tapatalk messageboard hosting service effectively is a rebranding / direct continuation of Yuku (which itself was a rebranding / direct continuation of ezboard). (On the other hand, though, apparently Tapatalk is a different corporate entity from ezboard/Yuku, whereas Yuku was the same corporate entity as ezboard.) So, the main reason why I created this redirect was because I thought that the mass-migration of messageboards to Tapatalk from those older messageboard hosting services which are both (apparently) notable enough to have their own Wikipedia articles makes Tapatalk itself notable enough to have its own article or redirect in the main Wikipedia namespace, but I also thought that Tapatalk possibly shouldn't have its own article that's separate from the two pre-existing articles about ezboard and Yuku. A.M.~enwiki (talk) 05:12, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 02:32, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I combined the two televsion mentions and created a section Doctor Who (series 11)#Leak. The current target is not ideal because of the difference between the message boards and the corporate entity per A.M.~enwiki. Delete in preference to search. Jay 💬 09:04, 18 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For closing an old log page and to seek further input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 03:32, 5 May 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).

Josh Alcorn[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 largely per Tamzin’s argument. Note that there are unique facts for this biography justifying the redirect that may not apply to others. While the linked RFC on MOS:GENDERID is relevant, it will not close for a month or so, so there isn’t much point in waiting. If the result would materially affect this redirect, please make the necessary changes or ping me. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 03:36, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Third party request for user:WarriorPlate per misplaced thread at ANI Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Please speedily delete Josh Alcorn. Rationale was This redirect page violates Wikipedia's policy on deadnames, when the transgender individual was not notable under the deadname. This individual wasn't notable under her deadname, Josh Alcorn. This appears to be a valid concern. Meters (talk) 03:26, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding, one either knows why GID specifies "living" or one doesn't but the idea that it doesn't apply to a deceased person (particularly Leelah Alcorn) is really unsound. CityOfSilver 04:05, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The subject was not notable under the former name. The subject is notable as a transgender girl, but because of her suicide over transgender issues with her parents. MOS:DEADNAME (transcluded into MOS:GIDINFO) is very clear that it applies to a living transgender person. I don't see any particular need to keep this redirect, but we can't say that MOS:DEADNAME requires that it be removed. Note that the redirect target has zero mentions of the deadname, even in direct quotes that originally used the deadname. Meters (talk) 03:52, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment The above comment on DEADNAME not applying was a clarification of my comment when I copied WarriorPlate's concern. It was an edit conflict and was not in response to CityOfSilve's post. Meters (talk) 04:30, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Surprised to find myself coming down this way, but keep. Alcorn's parents posthumous deadnaming of her is a significant element of the article. The article includes a quote that does use the deadname, but someone has very wisely exercised some editorial direction there and substituted her birth name, bracketed, as we do for living trans and nonbinary people. The article also cites sources in which her parents refer to her by her deadname, e.g. [2] [3]. By default I would tend toward treating a deceased trans/nonbinary person's deadname the same as a living person's. However, because her deadname is a plausible search term, and because its existence is discussed in the article, and because its omission from the article is a matter of editorial discretion rather than due weight, I think that there is greater good than harm in keeping. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 04:47, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment You've provided me food for thought, Tamzin. I don't use "weak" or "strong" qualifiers, but I was definitely somewhat ambivalent about this one. I ended up here since I was the one to make the courtesy copy for a new editor: it's not my usual area, and I am certainly open to reconsidering. Are there any precedents for deadnaming a redirect where we don't even mention the name in the target article? Meters (talk) 05:00, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • @Meters: A precedent that's gone to RfD? None that I can think of, but maybe another of the regulars can chime in. I do see that Teena Brandon redirects to Brandon Teena despite that deadname not appearing in the article's body. (It does appear in some ref titles.) On that note, Alcorn and Teena were both buried under their deadnames, which a) is disgusting but also b) is another good reason to have the redirects.
        And, looking at this in another dimension, there is precedent for problematic terms to redirect to an article without being mentioned verbatim there, usually in cases of gratuitous profanity. At 2 AM I'm struggling to think of an example off the top of my head, but consider a hypothetical where a historical figure is known as "X the Negro", but a minority of sources use the much less acceptable variant of that descriptor; it would be reasonable to omit that word from the article as gratuitous under WP:OM, but at the same time would be reasonable to have a redirect for a plausible search term. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 05:56, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks for digging up the example (yes OSE/SSE but it's nice to know this isn't the only such redirect). It's not much earlier for me than for you so I'm going to have to revisit this later. Meters (talk) 07:14, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. First, I am the original proponent for deletion. Now, for my response.
Any notable transgender individual's deadname could be found after some research. Then, anti-trans sources (i.e. sources opposing transgenderism) will misgender the individual and use the individual's deadname. Even some pro-trans rights sources (i.e. sources tolerating transgenderism) may mention the deadname as it gains traction.
For example, some opponents of Montana State Rep. Zooey Zephyr's agenda have found her deadname. Anti-trans journalists, including one for The American Conservative have wrote articles where they misgender and deadname her. Because notable sources misgender and deadname her, this isn't a matter of true privacy, like (hopefully) your password(s). Rather, it is privacy in terms of not fueling transphobia (i.e. opposition to transgenderism).
Same thing here. Even though more sources mention her deadname due to her anti-trans parents, this doesn't matter. Providing a deadname arms transphobes who from then on deadname in addition to misgendering the subject. It shouldn't matter whether the subject is alive or dead. Wikipedia shouldn't arm transphobes. Even a redirect could confirm to a transphobe that they found the correct deadname, especially considering how many people consider Wikipedia reliable.
@Tazmin, mentioned the example of a historical figure known as X the Negro but a minority of sources substitute Negro for the more offensive term. This is different because racists often add the moniker "the N*****" to any Black person's name. Because stating that a person is part of a minority isn't offensive, there is no way to prevent a racist from adding a slur to members of that minority. If enough sources use that moniker, it should be a redirect.
Similarly, for transgenderism, a transphobe could insert the term "the pretend [new gender], who is really [birth gender]" or misgender the subject as a transgender's birth gender is virtually always known. However, deadnames are specific to each transgender individual. Let the transphobe find the deadname elsewhere instead of using Wikipedia to find it, especially through guess-and-check (especially when a transgender man uses the masculine equivalent of his deadname as his new name). Let Wikipedia not fuel transphobia by not confirming deadnames. Let's not arm transphobia, no matter how many sources mention the deadname.
The redirect of deadname of Brandon Teena should also be deleted. Even though he was buried under his deadname, most people won't visit the local cemetery to find out. Transphobic relatives shouldn't override our desire not to arm transphobia. Same goes for Josh Alcorn. WarriorPlate (talk) 11:56, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm on the fence. While the subject is indeed not notable under her deadname, Tamzin brings a great point about the parents deadnaming her (I would have an opinion on that, but I can't say it in wikivoice). I would rather have it deleted based on how disrespectful the parents were, but if that name has been used to refer to Leelah Alcorn, then I guess it's a valid reason to keep. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 05:31, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep If she were living, I would err on the side of deleting, but Tamzin's argument that the birth name is a significant part of the story and a likely search term, and the fact that she is not living or recently deceased push me to the keep side. While many will disagree with my opinion, I do think that given how policy and guidelines explicitly treat the living and recently deceased very differently from the long-deceased in many contexts, including this one, that it's problematic to categorically not include that difference as part of the consideration. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 09:06, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tamzin's sound analysis. The name is pertinent and a likely search term. Cavarrone 10:33, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Changed after revisiting this. As User:Tamzin pointed out, the continued deadnaming is a significant part of this incident. Meters (talk) 06:19, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tamzin; and Wikipedia is not here to WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS, not here to fight transphobia. Veverve (talk) 02:02, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Comment. Is it true that as long as a transgender individual is living, the individual’s deadname isn’t mentioned at all in Wikipedia but as soon as the individual dies, the individual’s deadname should become a redirect to the individual’s page if the deadname is notable? If the answer to my question is yes, I concede and would recommend a speedy keep. If the answer is no, when may the deadname of a transgender individual may be a redirect to the individual’s page? WarriorPlate (talk) 03:39, 7 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Participants in this RFD may be interested in Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#RFC:_MOS:GENDERID_and_the_deadnames_of_deceased_trans_and_nonbinary_persons as it seems like the results of that RFC could have policy implications for this redirect. ~ ONUnicorn(Talk|Contribs)problem solving 15:00, 8 May 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_May_5&oldid=1156056956"