Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 7

November 7

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 7, 2020.

Citizenship question

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) CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:42, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citizenship question → 2020 United States Census#Citizenship Question Debate (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

"Citizenship question" is so ambiguous, it could mean any of the thousands of censuses that have, will, or are happening. Nothing links to this page either. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 23:15, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's potentially ambiguous, yes, but we only disambiguate (or delete) when we have multiple (or too many) potential targets. I'm not seeing other articles with meaningful descriptions of citizenship questions. I've only spotted passing mentions in other articles. Have you found other potential targets for this? - Eureka Lott 01:04, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@EurekaLott: The phrase "Citizenship question" has nothing explicit to do with the census though. I could understand if there's any use for it, but it's never been linked to, there doesn't actually seem to be any connection between "citizenship question" and "Citizenship Question Debate" (as in, I can't find any source that refers to the debate as simply the "citizenship question"), and "citizenship question" is so unbelievably random that no one would reasonably search that when looking for 2020 United States Census. I feel as though this quite easily meets #8 on WP:RFD#DELETE, maybe even WP:R3. ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 07:00, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Citizenship question" was commonly used to refer to this subject, and the first page of Google results (for me, at least) are exclusively about the 2020 Census, including pieces from the New York Times, Washington Post, NPR, Vox, Reuters, and the Pew Research Center. I don't know why you were unable to find a connection. - Eureka Lott 14:42, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Eureka Lott: The first page of results for me are largely results from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, with scatterings of US debate through them. I'm not debating that there isn't a connection, but rather that the redirect serves no real purpose, has never been used, and is a very ambiguous title (if I was looking for a redirect to that section, I would think "Census citizenship debate" or something, not "Citizenship question"). ItsPugle (please ping on reply) 07:52, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Since you seem to be having trouble finding reliable sources that use the phrase "citizenship question" to refer to the 2020 US Census, here are a few links for you. There are plenty more that can be easily found. With no other potential targets identified, I think we should keep the redirect as-is. - Eureka Lott 20:26, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep even if there is content about other citizenship questions (I haven't found anything that could support a redirect), this US question is by far the primary topic. Looking at my results from the UK only 1 of the results on the first three pages of Google is about anything else (and that's "British Citizenship - question" a procedural question asked in the House of Lords to open a debate (not a question)). Thryduulf (talk) 18:34, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Park, Cornwall

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. MBisanz ^talk 23:54, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Park, Cornwall → Par, Cornwall (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely typo. There are at least four places in Cornwall called Park, none of which are in Par. (Source: Cornwall County Fire Brigade Index of Places, Truro, 1974) DuncanHill (talk) 18:43, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Retarget to Cornwall. Indeed, if someone is looking for a park in the Cornwall county why should they be redirected to a village? I was looking for a possible article to retarget, but there's nothing better than Cornwall. Less Unless (talk) 09:33, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There are settlements called Park. Better a redlink than a useless redirect. DuncanHill (talk) 13:23, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:REDLINK. List of places in Cornwall only lists 1 Park (although there are also Park Bottom, Parkengear and Parkfield), but I agree a redlink is better. Thryduulf (talk) 18:37, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There only seems to be 1 OS settlement called "Park" in Cornwall[1] which is in the parish of Egloshayle so maybe redirect there, otherwise delete and an implausible error. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:08, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

24 Hour Run

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 24-hour run. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:04, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

24 Hour Run → 24-hour race (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Any reason for this not to redirect to 24-hour run? 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 18:33, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per nom, although I'd be in favor of adding a hatnote to the top of the proposed target pointing to the current one. Hog Farm _Bacon 20:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget and hatnote per Hog Farm BlackholeWA (talk) 08:27, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to 24-hour run per nom. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:26, 11 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to 24-hour run per nom. I'll put in a hatnote about 24-hour races. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 17:46, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Lucius Marcius Censorius

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 Marcius Censorinus. There's a clear consensus to (a) not delete this redirect, and (b) not keep it at its current target. The two suggested targets, Marcius Censorinus or Marcia gens#Marcii Censorini, are both pretty much equally reasonable, have similar content, and are hatnoted to each other anyway. I've picked one fairly arbitrarily on the basis that an article is preferable to a section, but there's no particular preference in this discussion after being open for a full month. ~ mazca ^talk 13:12, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lucius Marcius Censorius → Lucius Marcius Censorinus (consul 149 BC) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Marcius Censorius → Lucius Marcius Censorinus (consul 149 BC) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete. The spelling is wrong and in any case there is more than one person with any of these names. Avis11 (talk) 15:38, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete – Many people would think about Censorius to match with other -ius endings in Latin. I have no opinion on keeping or dabifying the redirects. --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 10:20, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose deletion. These are appropriate redirects for likely searches—although the most appropriate target may be debated. The consul of 39 BC seems to have significantly more coverage, and we have an article on just this stirps of the Marcia gens, although the article on the gens lists a few more of them. Retargeting may be appropriate, but deleting is not—the spelling is a likely error. P Aculeius (talk) 13:37, 24 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If these are not deleted, I would think we'd want to retarget to Marcia gens#Marcii Censorini, where Lucius Marcius Censorinus redirects. It's as likely a misspelling for one as it is for another. --BDD (talk) 20:18, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 18:32, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Marcii Censorini, and maybe also the one mentioned by BDD. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 19:41, 2 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:02, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

No personal attacks

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 November 16#No personal attacks

Gulielmus Shakspere

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 withdraw. (non-admin closure) Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 10:30, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gulielmus Shakspere → William Shakespeare (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Incorrect Latinisation of William Shakespeare. Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 05:45, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Latinisation of Shakespeare's name will result "Wilhelmus Shakspearius"! --Soumya-8974 ^talk _contribs ^subpages 05:49, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Correctly or not, it appears this name was his baptismal name, as attested in several sources, for example [2] and [3]. A7V2 (talk) 06:37, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. 16th Century spelling was not as consistent as it is now. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:47, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- And @Soumya-8974: you might find https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Latin_forms_of_English_given_names interesting. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:51, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Steve Feak

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 21:58, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Feak → Defense of the Ancients (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Feak, Steve → Defense of the Ancients (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Steve "Guinsoo" Feak → Defense of the Ancients (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is a request for deletion. There's about the same on Steve Feak in the DoTA article as there are in other games he worked on (like League of Legends). It’s a strange redirect that really threw me off; at first it wasn't clear why I was there. It doesn't seem like it meets any of the criteria, and isn't an overly prominent topic of the target article. ImaginesTigers (talk) 04:14, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, as nominator. ImaginesTigers (talk) 04:14, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

2nd and 3rd nominations added by me. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:57, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Using Search does present a couple of alternative article which mention him. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:58, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If the same designer is mentioned for multiple games, should we have an article on him? BD2412 T 15:47, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- On further review, I see that an article on this subject was deleted in 2018. BD2412 T 19:12, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feak is definitely notable, but he's also a fairly underground figure. It'll be very difficult to find anything past 2016 (hence why it was likely deleted). ImaginesTigers (talk) 12:31, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Fleshhouse

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. MBisanz ^talk 23:54, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fleshhouse → Vampire Rodents (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of this band in the target article. Only shows up on Wikipedia in a few minor industrial music compilation albums, so no obvious redirect target per WP:XY. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 01:35, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, seems to have producer/writer credit on multiple tracks. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:21, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per lack of a good target. Yet another one of the many redirects produced by User:Soul Crusher. Hog Farm _Bacon 01:28, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Sean Ryan Fox

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. MBisanz ^talk 23:54, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sean Ryan Fox → Henry Danger (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is another of those redirects for a non-notable actor that links to an article where he has a credit, but no further information. There are now 3 articles where he is credited none of which give any actual information about this person. Redirect is pointless, better to just have nothing at the location. AfD is on record as delete the original article. No reason for the redirect either. Geraldo Perez (talk) 00:14, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete to facilitate uninhibited Search. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:00, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete he's no longer associated just with Henry Danger. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 21:19, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.