Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

September 10[edit]

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

Wikipedia:Wrong[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 18#Wikipedia:Wrong

Aprili[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) Edward-Woodrow • talk 16:11, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible redirect. There is no mention in the article of the word "Aprili". Engr. Smitty Werben 18:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep A simple Google search of "April 1961 aprili" showed me that Aprili is an alternative name for the film. I suggest a speedy close of this nomination. SilverserenC 18:50, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep it appears to be a romanization of the Georgian title "აპრილი" (Aprili), which is a Georgian-language film, demonstrating a relation between the redirect and the target. And IMDB calls it by this name [1] as do other site [2][3][4][5] -- 67.70.25.175 (talk) 18:53, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Comment if this is kept, a hatnote should be added for Corrado Aprili and Aprilis -- 67.70.25.175 (talk) 18:55, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate – I drafted a DAB per the IP pointing out Corrado Aprili (as Aprilis isn't a plural version of Aprili, I put it in see also). I don't immediately see the case for a PRIMARYREDIRECT here. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 03:35, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support dab per Skarmory. --Lenticel (talk) 09:30, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Incidentally, the article wikitext actually did mention Aprili all along. Originally it was there in the visible text, but in this edit seven years ago someone moved "Aprili" into the {{lang-ka}}. Actually that template doesn't take manual transliteration as an argument, so "Aprili" then disappeared from the visible text; I just fixed the article to use {{transl}} instead. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 10:02, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per the draft. Jay 💬 19:54, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Universal Sprout[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 19#Universal Sprout

Kasket cap[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. (non-admin closure) Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:58, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear connection with target. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:31, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep A black version of this cap, with a narrow crown and a band embroidered with foliage, was known as a kasket or Hamburg cap The reason for the redirect is in the article itself. Suggest checking in the future. SilverserenC 18:53, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, sorry! I skimmed the lead and then searched for "kasket cap", which wouldn't have picked it up, and the Google results were inconclusive. Will withdraw. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:57, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

2-cycle[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 19#2-cycle

Northern irish language[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 Languages of Northern Ireland. (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 00:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Even if this page does not need to be moved to Northern Irish language, redirect to Languages of Northern Ireland, due to being the most plausible. 176.33.246.14 (talk) 14:37, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support. Rreagan007 (talk) 15:45, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Retarget per nom. That miscap is awkward but the redirect can still be plausible. --Lenticel (talk) 00:25, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Languages of Northern Ireland. "Northern Irish language" could refer to (Ulster or Hiberno-)English, (Ulster) Irish, or Ulster Scots, but the article covers all of them thereby resolving any ambiguity. The article is more helpful than the disambiguation page because it's inclusive of Scots and is specific to Northern Ireland.
    Wikipedia can't distinguish the case of the first letter in any title so this redirect is actually identical to the consistently all lowercase northern irish language. Plenty of people don't capitalise when searching because search engines often don't distinguish case and not doing so is convenient; not capitalising any letters is considerably more plausible than capitalising inconsistently or incorrect/unusual capitalisation. – Scyrme (talk) 00:42, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Languages of Northern Ireland per above. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 00:55, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, the original page does not seem to be tagged with the RfD notice. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:14, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While there is clearly consensus here to retarget, the {{rfd}} template was not added to the page; thus attracting no attention beyond RfD regulars. I have added the template and am relisting the discussion to give other users and editors time to respond.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:14, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Shawarma poutine[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 19:49, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect from a related topic [6] with no mention at target; unhelpful to the reader. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:04, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Ticket to bollywood[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 Ticket to Bollywood. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:29, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Ticket to Bollywood. Not mentioned at target. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 17:09, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget Seems like a case of several confused bots not knowing where to redirect. Nate • (chatter) 21:11, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:52, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget. This was clearly pointed to Anand Tiwari in error following the previous RfD close. In my opinion, this change should have been boldly made, instead of adding to the RfD backlog to fix a bot's double-redirecting mishap from a deleted article. Utopes (talk / cont) 15:52, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom --Lenticel (talk) 01:06, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy retarget or possible just delete as unnecessary as the correct capitalization exists. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:46, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @CopperyMarrow15: What is it that you wished to discuss about this redirect? Did you think the retargeting would be controversial? Jay 💬 07:25, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • My lack of self-confidence often prevents me from being bold. Also, I didn't check the history before I listed the redirect, so I didn't know it was the result of a confused bot. I'm sorry for any trouble I've caused. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 11:22, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

STiki[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 23:33, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cross namespace redirect from main to projectspace for a now defunct antivandalism tool. Unlikely to be of much use to general readers of WP. #prodraxis connect 14:59, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • On one hand, it's a cross-namespace redirect, as the nom said, to a defunct tool. On the other, STiki is very unlikely to refer to anything else. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 15:17, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:XNR and WP:NAVELGAZING. If STiki is notable software then this should be an article. We should (edit: not) be redirecting readers into the project namespace. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:27, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Ivanvector. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 18:05, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Ivanvector --Lenticel (talk) 00:56, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Dang, last I remembered STiKi was super useful and I dealt with it all the time 🥲 didn't realize it went out of commission... in the past I would have said "keep" mainly because the particular capitalization made it unequivocally in reference to the STiKi tool, but now this redirect is probably not needed (and also is a XNR). That being said I think I'm neutral mainly because this particular spelling and capitalization I feel will likely always be unequivocally in reference to the STiKi tool, but now it's likely not getting as many pageviews as it used to due to obsoletion, so its usefulness is questionable. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:51, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Ticket to Bollywood - The 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. ✗plicit 14:33, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Former title of Ticket to Bollywood (film) which was deleted at an RfD last month. Same arguments apply, and to paraphrase the earlier RfD: Film title to director redirects for a title not named in the target article. These were created in 2014 as articles, then got redirected to the director in 2019 as there was still no reliably sourced evidence that this film had ever actually been released or even gone into production at all, and as of 2023 that evidence is still lacking.

There's simply no point in hanging onto redirects for a film that's so dead that even the director's article doesn't deign to mention it at all anymore. If it ever does get completed and released, then we can start a new article when that happens. Jay 💬 13:10, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Bang(Harper's Island episode)[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 💬 11:55, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect title without a space between the title and disambiguation. Delete per WP:RDAB. Valid redirect at Bang (Harper's Island episode) so nothing is lost. Gonnym (talk) 11:13, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

PetScan[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. The late question regarding the hatnote at the target may have to be taken to the target talk page, or handled boldly. Jay 💬 12:00, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No one looking for Positron emission tomography is likely to search for this odd miscapitalized title. IMO Wikipedia:PetScan is sufficiently geeky that anyone who can use it usefully doesn't need a pointer from mainspace to find it, so suggest deletion. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:01, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Given the proliferation of camelcase in brand names and various abbreviations these days, it's not implausible for a reader to type PetScan in search for PET scan. And it does have views. --Paul_012 (talk) 06:42, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 15:18, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Paul_012. Undecided on which capitalization I prefer. Compare to Catscan, which exists and redirects to CT scan. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 17:07, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • But CatScan doesn't exist. Your argument would justify Petscan (which is oddly red), but not this redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:02, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • I was going to boldly create Petscan, but there are (oddly) few Google hits for it. Weakens the case for this redirect... Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 18:06, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • I have revised my reply, as I do not necessarily support the capitalization. I only support the joining of the words per PetScan's pageviews – which Paul_012 mentioned – and the existance of Catscan. Keep in mind that capitalization does not affect search results, so searching "CatScan" yields Catscan and searching "Petscan" yields PetScan. –CopperyMarrow15 (talk | edits) Feel free to ping me! 18:36, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep clearly it is known as a "pet scan", "petscan", "PETscan", "PET scan"; so the camelcased version isn't too different. And it is WP:CHEAP as an existing redirect -- 67.70.25.175 (talk) 18:45, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'keep This is how we refer to it in nursing, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deepfriedokra (talk • contribs)
  • Keep per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:43, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • While we're at it, does anyone else think that the hatnote at the top of Positron emission tomography should be removed as people searching mainspace are very unlikely to be able to make use of PetScan? * Pppery * it has begun... 04:47, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

David Larson (midstakes poker player)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 11#David Larson (midstakes poker player)

Matthew Heappey[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 Bath (UK Parliament constituency)#Elections in the 2020s. (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 04:33, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Heappey and James Heappey are brothers, but there is virtually nothing on James Heappey's page about his brother, nor would I expect there to be. I don't think it's expected to redirect sibling in this way? John Womble (talk) 11:21, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • There was some mention at the target, and Moondragon21 added some more 10 minutes after this was nominated. Jay 💬 09:30, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 15:46, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Bath (UK Parliament constituency). There's some info at both targets, but he's more likely to be known as the Tory candidate for Bath than for being James' brother, and the mention at the current target could be seen as a WP:COATRACK. Bath seems to be a rather safe LibDem seat, but it's at least plausible he could become notable per WP:NPOLITICIAN in the future. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:02, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:27, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 04:51, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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:Inappropriate pages[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:Content removal#Inappropriate content for Wikipedia. (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 04:30, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Pages can be inappropriate for many reasons other than being vandalism/hoaxes. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:01, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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:ImplausibleTypos[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 17#Wikipedia:ImplausibleTypos

Myth of the American Golden Age[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 01:33, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Primarily, WP:RDELETE #8. This is an odd redirect extant since 2008 - the targeted article, Baby Boomers, has a few passing references to a golden age, but no references to a "myth" of a golden age. There are other more plausible redirect targets, such as this or this, but none of them are particularly suitable. It gets about 10 hits/month, and has no incoming links in article space. —Ganesha811 (talk) 00:36, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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_September_10&oldid=1176120188"