Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 10

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

February 10[edit]

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

Samuel Moore (Australian politician) (disambiguation)[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 20:17, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Double-disambiguated redirects like this one have been deleted in the past, but I can't find an example right now. (Note: This redirect formerly targeted Samuel Moore (Australian politician) before I merged the target into Samuel Moore#Politics.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:38, 10 February 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).

Victor Amadeus I of Sardinia[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. Still no agreement between keep, retargeting to Victor Amadeus I, Duke of Savoy, disambiguation or deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 20:16, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The only reference to "Amadeus I" in the target article is a wikilink to Victor Amadeus I, Duke of Savoy. There doesn't seem to be any discussion of "Amadeus I of Sardinia". ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 20:16, 3 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

”Victor Amadeus I” was the 1587-born Duke, there is no discussion. The correct title of this topic is Victor Amadeus II of Savoy. Italian Minister of Culture --Revolution Yes (talk) 01:03, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, SONIC678 20:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as confusing. He was the first of his name to reign over Sardinia, but he is always called "Victor Amadeus II". Srnec (talk) 00:40, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or retarget. Given the existence of a person known as "Victor Amadeus II of Sardinia", "Victor Amadeus I of Sardinia" is always going to be a plausible search term from people who don't know the topic area (who are always going to be a sizeable proportion of people looking it up in an encyclopaedia) and so this should not be a redlink. The current target is far from great, but I don't know what would be better. Thryduulf (talk) 11:11, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 13:55, 18 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment – While this RfD was ongoing, a requested move to the target article has started and ended, with Victor Amadeus II of Sardinia being moved to Victor Amadeus II. If the redirect is kept the same, it should be corrected to avoid the double redirect. This move also makes "Victor Amadeus I of Sardinia" a less plausible search term, since the article being called Victor Amadeus II would instead prompt searching for the regular Victor Amadeus I, which redirects to Victor Amadeus I, Duke of Savoy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Randi Moth (talk • contribs) 21:45, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Srnec, and incorrect and misleading per the redirect creator (it became a redirect in a page move from an incorrect name) who summarized it as Never called as such, nor at [any] time nor now.. Victor Amadeus I was not associated with Sardinia, his grandson Victor Amadeus II was. Jay 💬 11:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Victor Amadeus I, Duke of Savoy and tag with {{R from incorrect name}}. Per Thryduulf, a reader who sees a reference to Victor Amadeus II may well search this, even if the grandfather never led Sardinia. --BDD (talk) 14:15, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus still a bit split ...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:31, 10 February 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).

Houston Havoc[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 appears to be a consensus that this topic area set of redirects needs a broader look by editors more familiar with the subject, but also that the specific redirects nominated should be deleted. Legoktm (talk) 04:13, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect topic isn't mentioned in target article. Redirect should be deleted. Dan Bloch (talk) 04:14, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I should add that this team has next to no mention on the web. All the top search matches for "Houston Havoc" are for other (not ABA) teams with the same name. Dan Bloch (talk) 14:50, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 05:31, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have bundled Houston Takers for the suggested restore-AFD long-term solution. If the nom disapproves of this bundling, please strike it off. Jay 💬 06:02, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm neutral on deleting vs. restoring, but my concern is that there might be an indefinite wait for restoring. The problem with the status quo is that a user is much more likely to be searching for the UBA Houston Havok or the AUDL Houston Havok than the defunct ABA Houston Havok, and they would be better served by no link than by the current ABA redirect. Dan Bloch (talk) 18:33, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@A7V2: Do you think this pre-BLAR version can be restored per your plan? Jay 💬 02:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Jay: I'm not sure I had a plan... it's not a good article but it does at least have one reference so is certainly restorable I think. Given what Danbloch has said, for the originally nominated Houston Havoc it perhaps should be deleted due to ambiguity also. But as I said, 100 bad redirects, many of which the result of BLARs, aren't going to be solved by one action here, and I don't have a strong view on this redirect. A7V2 (talk) 07:47, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Unclear what should be done with these redirects…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:24, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment The present situation is clearly not suitable, and individually I would definitely say to revert the BLAR and send to AfD if desired. However given the existence of many redirects that are both without mention and also quite ambiguous that's clearly (per A7V2) not going to solve things. I think what needs to happen is for there to be a systematic review at a WikiProject level to come up with a consensus about the desired end state and a plan of how to get there - I don't know anywhere near enough about the topic area to have a useful opinion about what is desirable content wise. Thryduulf (talk) 22:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The key point in this thread (that might have been missed by others) is this team has next to no mention on the web, which I have confirmed myself. I have found a couple of brief mentions in articles, basically enough to establish existence, but nothing of substance. The one reference in the former article also fits that category because it was lifted from a league news release—not a secondary source. This team is clearly not notable, so there is no benefit to restoring the article simply to delete it elsewhere. As for ambiguity, the primary topic is easily the American Ultimate Disc League team. I'd suggest to retarget there, but given the fact that other teams in the league have articles, I prefer WP:REDLINK deletion pending creation of an article on this team. -- Tavix (talk) 19:28, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more time...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:29, 10 February 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).

WOWY (AM)[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 💬 06:52, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Obviously WOWY is an FM, not AM, radio station. As best as I can tell, no AM station (at least in the last ~40 years) has used this call sign (only three FM stations). WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 16:48, 10 February 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).

Baylor University Press[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 17#Baylor University Press

Wikipedia:CLIMATE[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 21#Wikipedia:CLIMATE

Saint John Vianney School[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 20:15, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Saint John Vianney High School is a dab page, and I don't think that dropping the "high" makes a PTOPIC exist. A dab at "Saint John Viaanney School makes sense", maybe with merging the high school dab into this page. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 05:40, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • There is no information about the school at the target, except for the name, and it is unsourced. We don't need a redirect for that. Delete. I don't think changing the dab title to accomodate this school is a good idea. Jay 💬 05:33, 21 February 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).

Machiato[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. Jay 💬 16:15, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This page should be deleted as an implausible typo. Mast303 (talk) 05:02, 10 February 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).

Human goat sexual intercourse[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 without prejudice to the nomination of additional related titles. signed, Rosguill talk 20:15, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at all of the other "goat sex" redirects that were deleted tonight and decided to look at the contributions of the editor who created at least some of them. I don't think this is a likely search term though it technically is correct. Liz Read! Talk! 04:34, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely, delete BhamBoi (talk) 08:40, 12 February 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).

Jupa cabra[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) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:18, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Highly unlikely/improbable search term based on a phonetic misspelling. Should never have been made in the first place. Delete. TNstingray (talk) 13:36, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. Spelling not mentioned in Chupacabra and even if it would be mentioned it would need multiple sources to prove that this is more than an accidental misspelling. --Zinnmann (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. What else could this clear phonetic misspelling mean? It's not like it's ambiguous or anything. I've heard the "ch" sound like a "j" quite often when this word is said. Steel1943 (talk) 20:33, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Plausible phonetic misspelling. No harm in keeping. CycloneYoris talk! 19:18, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Plausible enough phonetic spelling. Clyde!Franklin! 17:48, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 03:49, 10 February 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:KINDLE[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 17#Wikipedia:KINDLE

Metal Masters Tour[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 17#Metal Masters Tour

Narmadapurm district[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) TartarTorte 18:04, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Implausible typo. Note the redirect is missing an A. Jalen Folf (talk) 01:04, 10 February 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).

Hans "Long John" Zimmer[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) CycloneYoris talk! 09:02, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Joke redirect. Simple as that. Delete. TNstingray (talk) 01:02, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:32, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: A Google search shows he's been credited like that in the past, like for the Pirates of the Caribbean film series. It might be worth considering. Regards, SONIC678 04:51, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep given he was credited with that name on the sound tracks for those movies. Seems somewhat commonly used among the Pirates movie discussions on the Internet and it's not a negative nickname. (See [2] and [3] for some concrete examples.) Skynxnex (talk) 18:03, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as used nickname (at: [4][5][6][7]) BhamBoi (talk) 08:44, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as he was credited this way. Probably could be added to the article. A7V2 (talk) 07:35, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Used as a nickname, as shown by BhamBoi. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:55, 14 February 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).

Regional Center[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 21#Regional Center

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_February_10&oldid=1142567184"