[go: nahoru, domu]
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JoshuaAuble (talk | contribs) at 19:06, 1 July 2024 (→Petapixel: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

June 26

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 26, 2024.

Charville Lane Estate

Not mentioned in target. It is briefly mentioned in Hayes, Hillingdon, but only as a bus stop name. Rusalkii (talk) 22:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rajeshwari Vilas Coffee Club

Not mentioned in target. Is a series aired on that channel, may belong at List of programmes broadcast by Zee Telugu but that page is up for deletion. Rusalkii (talk) 21:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise Seethe Ramudi Katnam Rusalkii (talk) 22:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
...and very very many others, all of which created by an editor blocked for paid editing User talk:RahulBodke. Propose to delete the lot. Rusalkii (talk) 22:40, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If it belongs there, someone needs to add an entry. (And maybe add some sources, that list article is rather light on those.) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:39, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:TITLETYPOCON

I'm wondering if this discussion is significant enought to have its own redirect from main space to an archived project talk page. There are only a handful of these as you can see here and I think that they should be limited to ones that editors might commonly use. I doubt whether anyone but the redirect creator knows about this one. Liz Read! Talk! 18:31, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - Looks like this is in use by multiple users on their user pages, drafts, etc, and I highly suspect it is also being used in edit comments. On that note... is there a way to search for edit comments in a user's contributions page? The search feature at the top of the contributions page only seems to allow for refining date ranges and possible vandalism. Fieari (talk) 23:31, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Unfortunately I don't know of any way to search or filter edit summaries (other than tags) and from a few minutes browsing of the available datadumps, etc it seems there isn't an option to download only edit summaries (unlike e.g. page titles) for offline searching other than getting a complete copy of the whole encyclopaedia (even just the text is noted as being several terabytes). Thryduulf (talk) 14:04, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Fieari. Thryduulf (talk) 14:04, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: I'm the creator of this redirect. I've been away from my computer for about four days and was unable to respond earlier. The most likely place this redirect would be used is in edit summaries, and I know I've used it in that way many times, but I have no way of knowing if others are using it. The redirect was created and proposed with the edit summary "I've boldly added the shortcut MOS:TITLETYPOCON to the top of this discussion". No one objected to it (or supported it ). The model I used for the redirect was Wikipedia:BIRDCON which has been in place without objection since 2014. I am open to other suggestions, but I have found this to be a good, quick way of linking to a consensus that was not considered important enough to be added to the Manual of Style. SchreiberBike | ⌨  20:47, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand the details of the Quarry query in @Liz's note above. Why doesn't WP:BIRDCON come up on that query?
Also, this is not that important and there is an easy work around. If this does not fit into an existing rule and we delete it, I would just refer to Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive 228#Silently correct an error if it's in a title? in edit summaries. Perhaps having MOS:TITLETYPOCON like that makes it look too much like ||policy||. SchreiberBike | ⌨  00:41, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Petapixel

Aside from the "Petapixel redirects here", not mentioned in page. I can't find any discussion of the concept of a petapixel image to see if it should be mentioned in the page, search results are completely shadowed by PetaPixel. Possibly this should redirect there? Rusalkii (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment peta- is an SI prefix. JoshuaAuble (talk) 19:15, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in some form per Fieari JoshuaAuble (talk) 02:21, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The target doesn't discuss petapixel images by name because, to my knowledge, such a thing does not yet exist... yet if it did/when it does, it's basically the same thing as a gigapixel image except... moreso. As Joshua said above, peta is just an SI prefix after all. So I feel like the current target is a pretty good choice, and probably a better target than PetaPixel, which is a pretty low notability organization (not saying it needs to be AfD'd, just that it wouldn't make good WP:PTOPIC fare). Fieari (talk) 07:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not even mentioned, much less explained or expounded upon, in the target article. Until such time as that occurs, this needs to be deleted as misleading and confusing. Softlavender (talk) 23:52, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Totally implausible search term and pointless redirect. As Rusalkii and Softlavender said, it's nonexistent and confusing. Fieari agrees with that as an equally elaborate rationale for deletion as the nominator's rationale, but with the inexplicably wrong conclusion. It's just another of this user's bunk redirects in a campaign to attempt to coin some pet jargon, so stop making them. — Smuckola(talk) 01:42, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This is not me making up new words, as petapixel has redirected to gigapixel image since 2011. JoshuaAuble (talk) 19:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sydney Powell

Delete. "Sydney" is an unlikely misspelling for "Sidney". Sydney is a convicted murderer who is in the news now, and I suspect most people searching for "Sydney" are looking for the murderer, not the attorney. GA-RT-22 (talk) 18:00, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Sydney is actually an extremely likely misspelling for Sidney-- given "Sydney" is how the city in Australia is spelled, I would expect most people who have heard of Sidney but haven't seen the name written out (perhaps they learned of her over the radio) to assume the name was written as "Sydney"-- and I would also expect people to forget that it's spelled Sidney, remember how it's pronounced, and write it Sydney expecting it to be spelled the same way as said Australian city. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 20:46, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Horse with a horn

Delete as an ambiguous term. Other animals have been called "horse with horn(s)" e.g. a deer in [1] (which relates to a quote from the 2001 Austrian Grand Prix) and the fact that some horses have a horn like structure [2]. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:05, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't this literally a reverse of the "Unicorn without a horn > Horse" redirect we were discussing a while back? In any case, adding information on horses with horn-like structures to the Horse article (with a potential hatnote to Unicorn) could be a worthwhile endeavor, like how we added the Hornless Unicorn section to the Unicorn article. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:21, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wasn't in that discussion, but does sound like it is a reverse of that. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:19, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I'm also in support of Keep. Even the article you linked to explaining that some horses have horn-like structures takes an aside to pay lip-service to the idea that a horse with a horn is a unicorn. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 20:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Overly vague, not helpful for search. The search function can do its job here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:36, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: This description is roughly mentioned at the target, and at a number of other reputable dictionaries:
  • Unicorn: In European literature and art, the unicorn has for the last thousand years or so been depicted as a white horse- or goat-like animal with a long straight horn...
  • Encyclopædia Britannica: Unicorn, mythological animal resembling a horse or a goat with a single horn on its forehead.
  • Oxford English Dictionary A fabulous and legendary animal usually regarded as having the body of a horse with a single horn projecting from its forehead...
  • Dictionary.com a mythical creature resembling a horse, with a single horn in the center of its forehead: often symbolic of chastity or purity.
  • Cambridge Dictionary an imaginary white creature like a horse with a single horn growing from the front of its head
  • Merriam-Webster a mythical, usually white animal generally depicted with the body and head of a horse with long flowing mane and tail and a single often spiraled horn in the middle of the forehead
  • Collins English Dictionary In stories and legends, a unicorn is an imaginary animal that looks like a white horse and has a horn growing from its forehead.
So, aside from the hundreds of examples online if you do any type of search for "horse with a horn", which lead to unicorns or memes or cosplays of horses with a horn being unicorns, I'd argue it's definitely the expected result and makes sense as a target. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:41, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Puddle thinking

Not mentioned anymore at the target page. Puddle thinking was merged to Fine-tuned universe in 2010 (diff), and the relevant content was removed in 2020 (diff). Tea2min (talk) 09:22, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trademark Law Treaty

Those are two different treaties. The redirection creates confusion. I suggest deletion of the redirection Anthere (talk) 18:00, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 09:07, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Woketard

While I am aware that WP:NPOV is less of a concern for redirects as they are less likely to face the general public directly, I do question the rationale for the existence of these redirects.

Surely anyone searching for woketard(s), will already need to type the word woke, and I am sure that any quote in an article that could possibly benefit from bluelinking woketard could surely just pipelink it.

I am not strongly of the mind that "These should not exist on Wikipedia", though I do feel as though they are needlessly inflammatory and likely unnecessary. The article for Woke does not mention Woketards anywhere including in the as a pejorative section.

Primarily, I am leaning towards deletion for these redirects, if consensus aligns with them being valid, I am not opposed to the target being narrowed down to the as a pejorative section. IceBergYYC (talk) 05:18, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Participants are split between deleting and soft redirecting. Relisting for further input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Emilia Romagna Grand Prix

WP:TOOSOON. Martintalk 02:20, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amanda the Adventurer

Here is another redirect created for another non-notable video game which probably doesn't meet Wikipedia's GNG. It has 3 backlinks, all of which are just Draft content. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:13, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quinton de Penis

No evidence this offensive nickname has actually been used to refer to this person. IMO an R3 but taking it to RfD instead per the creator's request. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:01, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, borderline G3, appears to have been created as a joke; implausible misnomer. I don't believe anyone with the surname de Kock has had it rendered as penis in any reliable source. Page creator has claimed without evidence that this is a valid mistranslation, despite the fact that none of the common machine translation services produce this rendering. The additional community scrutiny this will now garner will likely make them regret requesting an RFD, but some people just can't take a hint. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:AD5A:8B6:5AD6:C4BE (talk) 02:28, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a G3 - the G3 criterion is based on the mind of the creator. If it was their intent to harm Wikipedia, then it's vandalism and can be speedied as such. If it was their intent to help Wikipedia, even if you consider their actions misguided, then it's WP:NOTVANDALISM and not a G3 case. R3 is based (in theory) on an objective evaluation of the plausibility of the redirect rather than reading the creator's mind, so I think it does apply, but when I saw this at CAT:CSD I was willing to honor the creator's request to discuss it first. * Pppery * it has begun... 04:03, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A good deal of vandalism consists of jokes of various kinds, however juvenile, which I imagine in the minds of the jokers constitute improvements, or "help" if you will given they probably percieve Wikipedia as dull, staid, and in need of enlivenment. In this case the edit summary on creation here gives away the game with regard to the creator's mindset, and perhaps a certain demographic does indeed find this amusing, but as I said borderline.
I actually prefer RFD to speedy as it creates clearer consensus and is better in every way except volume management especially in creating clearer consensus. But when the community has designated certain pages for a flow that maximizes volume management that procedure should be followed unless there is a valid reason not to. And for speedy deletion the community has decided that bare objections by page creators don't count. But sometimes a third party will intervene and then there is a valid reason; happened a few times when I was doing the initial X3 runs earlier and IMO helped solidify community consensus in favor of X3, but it would have been improper to start those without valid reason, needed someone else object first. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:886A:FBAE:31BA:5FC9 (talk) 04:23, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I Am Fish

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was Speedy/snow keep. Redirects of non-notable pages are permitted and are useful for people who search them if they are mentioned in the target. The notability guidelines doesn't apply to redirects. (non-admin closure) JuniperChill (talk) 17:39, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A redirect created for the sake of a non-notable video game that does not have its own article. This following redirect has three backlinks though, which are:

Curve Games (the publisher of I Am Fish). List of Xbox One games. List of Xbox Series X and Series S games. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 02:01, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that the game is non-notable is completely irrelevant. This is still a valid redirect, and readers searching for this game will surely find it helpful. CycloneYoris talk! 05:29, 26 June 2024 (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/2024_June_26&oldid=1232063041"