Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 31

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

December 31[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 31, 2020.

COVID-19 Pandemic[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 speedy keep. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 08:09, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unnecessary redirect since search is not case sensitive JsfasdF252 (talk) 23:25, 31 December 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.

Medicare for All[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 Single-payer healthcare#United States. signed, Rosguill talk 17:56, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably should be targeted to United States National Health Care Act which actually discusses the bill and policy known as Medicare for all. Currently only Medicare for all targets there. –MJL ‐Talk‐☖ 20:06, 31 December 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.

UFC on ESPN 18: Blaydes vs. Lewis[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. ~ mazca talk 22:40, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to have this redirect because it's incorrect and doesn't conform to the other previous 17 redirects like it. — 121.220.209.34 (talk) 08:15, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:31, 31 December 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.

UFC on ESPN 19: Hermansson vs. Holland[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. ~ mazca talk 22:41, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The same also applies to this redirect as well, given Holland was subsequently removed after testing positive for COVID-19. — 121.220.209.34 (talk) 08:15, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:31, 31 December 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.

Agonistes[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 11#Agonistes

Janatha Sevaka Pakshaya[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 in the absence of any objection to the nominator's rationale. ~ mazca talk 14:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned anywhere but the template at the bottom. Searching online, it seems that this subject is likely notable in itself and thus the redirect should be deleted to encourage article creation. signed, Rosguill talk 17:36, 31 December 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.

Technology platform[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. Consensus is that this is too generic and likely to be surprising to readers, as it has many vague uses outside of vaccination. A well-thought-out disambiguation page is not excluded by this discussion, but neither is it encouraged - this is a very vague term. ~ mazca talk 22:40, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This term does not necessarily refer to vaccines. Google Scholar search results include articles about language processing, web development, electrical engineering, and CO2 capture. I think that deletion is the correct course of action, as the only appropriate target would be something extremely broad like Technology. signed, Rosguill talk 17:31, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Keep, or turn into disambiguation page. The jargon "technology platform" is used sometimes in vaccine articles. It is helpful to the reader to be able to link this jargon so they know what it is, or be able to type it and get to the vaccine#Types article. Examples of its use on Wikipedia in vaccine articles: COVID-19_vaccine#Technology_platforms and [1] –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:34, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The term absolutely should not be linked to something vaccine-specific. It is far too broad a term. --Srleffler (talk) 00:44, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong delete clearly there are many tech platforms. MediaWiki for example -- 67.70.26.89 (talk) 03:03, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:SURPRISE. A general user would not expect to land on a page about vaccines. Natg 19 (talk) 00:56, 5 January 2021 (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.

Cu6upb[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. -- Tavix (talk) 18:15, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a Latin-alphabet approximation of Сибирь. While that is part of the airline's name, it's also just the Russian word for Siberia, and Сибирь redirects to Siberia. I'm generally in favor of deleting faux cyrillic redirects, but aligning it with Сибирь would also be an acceptable solution. signed, Rosguill talk 17:23, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. While I don't think faux Cyrillic should be deleted on sight, how does и become u? HotdogPi 18:53, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment и looks like u due to the stylised font that S7 used to use on their aircraft. Passengerpigeon (talk) 23:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, looking up their previous livery you can definitely see why the и became a u in the approximation because of the font they used - so I think this would have previously been a decent approximation and I could totally imagine some curious non-Cyrillic reader at an airport looking it up by this approximation. However, they're no longer using that livery, and the faux-Cyrillic is clearly inaccurate yet ambiguous with any other usage of Sibir/Siberia. ~ mazca talk 22:50, 8 January 2021 (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.

Percipient[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 8#Percipient

Sheep-goat effect[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 withdrawn, and retargeted to Psi hit. --BDD (talk) 23:15, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects to a nonexistent section, not mentioned elsewhere in the article. --BDD (talk) 17:04, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Psi hit which does seem to actually discuss it specifically. ~ mazca talk 17:16, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Good call! I should've thought to search on this one. --BDD (talk) 23:15, 31 December 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.

ESPPP[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 23:04, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unclear on what the second P stands for, let alone the third. BDD (talk) 16:36, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, I looked unnecessarily deeply into this because I was idly curious as to if there was some niche pseudoscience use of it with the extra Ps, but the creation of it seems to have been by the incidentally now-banned Martinphi immediately after making a comment linking to it at Talk:Psychic/Archive_6, with no context justifying it at all. Given he was simultaneously complaining about his terrible internet connection, my best guess is it might have been an accidental mistype with no justification at all. I'm now disappointed I spent all that time looking for a better answer. ~ mazca talk 16:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Mazca, with thanks for their efforts. Thryduulf (talk) 18:05, 31 December 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.

Anomalous cognition[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 8#Anomalous cognition

ESPer[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 ESPer, delete others. signed, Rosguill talk 17:54, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The base "ESPer" might be acceptable as an {{R without mention}}, but with no discussion of fiction or mythology, I recommend deleting the other two at least. They were an article until deletion at AfD in 2016. --BDD (talk) 16:27, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I broadly agree with the nom in it's entirety, but I'd say keep ESPer - In the absence of a competing use, it seems like a fairly reasonable redirect that's definitely been used in that context - like a pseudoscientific variant of redirecting Jogger to Jogging. But delete the other two, they seem far more niche and, while I can totally believe they're fictional uses, it's not exactly helping anyone when they aren't mentioned. ~ mazca talk 16:56, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep ESPer, which I've definitely seen used in fiction and so is a potentially useful search term. Delete the other two as there is no particular discussion of the concept in fiction or mythology at the target or anywhere else I've found on Wikipedia these are not helpful redirects. Thryduulf (talk) 18:02, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Esper (fiction); I'm not evaluating the other two. There are various things called Esper in fiction, one of which is a shard (aka faction) from the Shards of Alara block in Magic: the Gathering. We also have a redirect Esper (Final Fantasy), which is another completely unrelated thing called Esper in fiction. WP:XY applies here. HotdogPi 18:44, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep ESPer, delete Esper (fiction) and Esper (mythology) as per the nomination (agreed with nomination, Mazca, Thryduulf, and HotdogPi). I have seen both ESPers and Espers in a lot of media, ESPers being people with ESP (extrasensory perception), also sometimes just capitalized as Esper or esper, and the other type of Espers being summonable spirits used as attacks in the Final Fantasy games which are something completely different. ESPers of the actual ESP type generally refers to people with psychic or other supernatural powers and is a common word used in Japanese media such as anime, manga, visual novels, and so on. I have seen this used in many, many different anime, manga, visual novels, etc., and while sometimes ESPer/Esper/esper is just synonymous with the English word “psychic”, sometimes it means “person with supernatural powers”. The most common abilities for ESPers to have in these fictional works are mind-reading/telepathy, being able to send other people telepathic messages without speaking out loud, various forms of mind control, telekinesis, remote viewing, etc., all of which, in the English-speaking world, are generally considered “psychic” abilities and the word ESPer (or its other various capitalizations) is generally used that way in media of Japanese origin. While it is a very, very common word in Japanese works of popular fiction like anime, manga, visual novels, etc., it would also be perfectly accurate in a majority cases to use the word “psychic” instead when translating such works of fiction into English, but usually the original word “ESPer” is kept when such works are translated, in order to be a more accurate translation. In some other works (less than half but still a significant number, as one example, The Melancholy of Haruhi Suzumiya), ESPer is NOT actually synonymous with “psychic” and instead refers to someone with supernatural powers of some strange variety that would not be considered psychic powers in English. I don’t know of any exact word in English with the meaning “person who has supernatural powers”. If I do online searches for this, I get words such as “wizard” but that clearly refers specifically to magic and usually ESPer powers are not considered magical but are more of a science fiction thing (although the dividing line between fantasy and science fiction is a bit blurry). So anyway, it is definitely a thing, but Wikipedia does has policies regarding notability of course, and the AfD for Esper (fiction) seems to have correctly followed those policies. I am a little fuzzy on how things work when there is a work of fiction (such as an anime or manga or visual novel) which is notable and is written about in multiple, reliable independent sources, easily meeting Wikipedia’s notability guidelines, but then there are things mentioned IN that work of fiction which are fictional and do not exist. As far as I know, the rules are that anything with an article about it has to be notable itself, and notability is not some type of inheritable or commutative property, i.e. just because a notable work mentions something or a notable person says something doesn’t make it notable. And for redirects, I think the policy is that the thing being redirected to obviously has to be notable, and the title for the redirect has to be... well, that is where I am not sure exactly how things work. But, regarding the mythology one, clearly that makes no sense, as ESP, extrasensory perception, is an idea that became popular some time in the 20th century and mythology typically refers to supernatural beliefs people actually had in prior times before modern technology, i.e. traditional folklore and superstitions and legends passed down over generations. So there is no such thing as an Esper in mythology as the concept did not exist back then. However, ESPer, referring to ESP/psychic powers, and someone who possesses those powers, is definitely a word that is used commonly in a lot of fiction and ESP is notable and the meaning of ESPer in this most common usage is basically equivalent to the meaning of ESP, and ESP is notable and has a Wikipedia article and is about basically the same exact topic. So that redirect should definitely stay. The one that I am ambivalent about is Esper (fiction) since in some cases the word Esper is used to have a different meaning than psychic/someone with ESP and just generally refers to someone with supernatural powers and can even refer to magical beasts or spirits you summon in Final Fantasy games (something entirely different from psychics), but this is not something that you can find written about in multiple reliable independent sources, so according to Wikipedia’s policies on notability and such, as well as the fact that Esper (fiction) has an unclear meaning and means different things in different works of fiction, I agree both with the nominator and with Mazca and with Thryduulf and HotdogPi. We can have the ESPer redirect for ESP-type ESPers and the Esper (Final Fantasy) redirect for the Espers of Final Fantasy games. For Esper (fiction) to make sense, it would have to be a disambiguation page to link to its multiple uses in fiction, such as the ESP one and Final Fantasy one. But we already have a disambiguation page that takes care of that at the Esper page, so having Esper (fiction) is unnecessary as it just is superfluous, it doesn’t have a consistent meaning in fiction, it would be a disambiguation if done correctly, and that disambiguation already exists at the Esper page. So, I am agreed with the nominator and others, to keep ESPer as a redirect to Extrasensory perception/ESP, keep Esper as a disambiguation for all the different meanings, and delete Esper (fiction) and delete Esper (mythology). —yetisyny (talk • contribs) 14:56, 4 January 2021 (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.

Taisch[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 23:03, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Linked at Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Hotlist of Mythology & Folklore/T, but not mentioned at the target article. (It's very close to a term mentioned in the footnote, but that's not enough IMO.) The only two instances of this term in mainspace are unrelated (a surname and a different word in Romansh). --BDD (talk) 16:24, 31 December 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.

Redirects to Eutropius (consul 399)[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 17:52, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both. The first is simply bizarre and an implausible search term. The second is probably not appropriate because 'Byzantine' is not generally used for the 4th-century Eastern Roman Empire, and there was more than one Eutropius in the record who can be called a Byzantine or East Roman official. Avilich (talk) 01:13, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment The redirect was created in 2006 from the "bizarre and implausible search term" as the term was in Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Hot/C9/Con, as redirects are cheap and presumably "Consul of East Roman Emperor Arcadius Eutropius" was the article title of whatever encyclopedia the list was generated from. --Canley (talk) 04:11, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seventyfiveyears (talk) 15:20, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the first, keep the second for now. The first is implausible, and while it may have been the former title of the article, it's been fourteen years since the article was moved—plenty of time for the tiny number of editors who might still remember it there to move on. The second is plausible, even though there might be more than one plausible target—it should go to whichever of them is most likely to be the one people are looking for under that title, and a hatnote at that target can serve to distinguish them (whether or not they all have articles). P Aculeius (talk) 13:47, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    No Eutropius (the historian or the consul 399) in particular seems to deserve the label any more than the other (in any event, "Byzantine official" is just about as useless a disambiguator as "senator"). The page was moved away from "Byzantine official" 11 years ago, not long after "Consul of East Roman Emperor Arcadius Eutropius", so whoever might've used it has probably moved on too. There's little to indicate that it's plausible: typing 'Eutropius (Byzantine official)' is infinitely less likely than simply 'Eutropius', which is a disamb page. Avilich (talk) 20:16, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both, once again. The first is plainly useless whereas the second is ambiguous and potentially misleading, and they're both orphans, so nothing is at stake here. Dragging this on for two weeks is plainly unreasonable. Avilich (talk) 20:31, 5 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both - the first one is so cumbersome as to be very unlikely as a search term, the second is just a completely useless disambiguator. Neither seems to have any benefit to a reader searching. ~ mazca talk 14:39, 8 January 2021 (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.

Goodnet[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. Withdrawing nomination now that a mention has been added at the target. signed, Rosguill talk 17:52, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target. Internal search results turn up a few pages that cite a Greek website called Goodnet that appears to be unrelated. Delete unless a duly sourced mention can be added to the target. signed, Rosguill talk 17:24, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a redirect from a node about a website to the website founder, who just happens to be the wealthiest woman in Israel. I created this redirect because I spent significant time to uncover what Goodnet / Goodnet.org is and who created it. I respectfully submit that creating this redirect will save a good many other from wasting valuable time to duplicate what I have already discovered. This is a redirect, not an article, it was created to help others find what they are looking for. The World Wide Web it as much the threads that connect nodes of information as it is the nodes themselves. I, naturally, vote to keep this redirect so as to keep this web of knowledge intact.
Enquire (talk) 04:14, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:01, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seventyfiveyears (talk) 15:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • In response to the comment above, if it's not mentioned at the target, the connection between the search term and the target will be unclear and thus of minimal use for people trying to figure out anything about it. signed, Rosguill talk 23:02, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In response to the above, I added a new section in Shari Arison to list her current and past business and philanthropic activities. So, the subject redirect target does now include Goodnet. Actually, links to that website already existed in the references - now it is in the body too. I suggest any future time and effort is more productively invested in expanding and elaborating on the target page rather than debating the feeder redirect at Goodnet.
Enquire (talk) 01:35, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, as a mention is now present in the current target and it doesn't seem like there are any better targets for this. ~ mazca talk 14:40, 8 January 2021 (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.

Freakish ((TV series)[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 deleted by Victuallers. Victuallers, you should've closed the discussion when you were deleting the redirect. (non-admin closure) Seventyfiveyears (talk) 13:35, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UNNATURAL. The article existed under this title for one minute. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:39, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted - Happy New Year Victuallers (talk) 12:58, 31 December 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.

Apple s 3[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 Apple S3. (non-admin closure) – numbermaniac 14:35, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect appears unlikely to be helpful to anyone. 0 views in the last 90 days, so it's not being used much. – numbermaniac 12:31, 31 December 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.

Elmshaven ((Ellen Gould White House)[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 deleted by Victuallers. (non-admin closure) Seventyfiveyears (talk) 13:34, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect was created in 2008 with the summary redirect for typo. The article never existed under this title, and WP:UNNATURAL applies. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:30, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

gone Victuallers (talk) 13:00, 31 December 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.

Bustan Ketab ((publishing)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 7#Bustan Ketab ((publishing)

Savage ( Thee Stallion song)[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 23:01, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:UNNATURAL spacing. Looking at the histories of this redirect an Savage (Thee Stallion song), the correctly spelt version, it appears that the page was moved as a redirect (in violation of WP:MOVEREDIRECT), which means that the actual article never existed under this title. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 12:14, 31 December 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.

Hog Kog[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 23:01, 7 January 2021 (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.

Tinseltown[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 Tinsel town. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 08:54, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Following recent discussion at Talk:Tinsel Town (TV series)#Requested move 16 December 2020, Tinsel Town was redirected to Tinsel town, a disambiguation page. I am not convinced that there is good reason to treat the versions with and without white space differently. I would retarget this to the DAB as well. Cnilep (talk) 10:06, 31 December 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.

Dogoso[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. Formally no consensus between retargeting and disambiguating, defaulting to disambiguation. signed, Rosguill talk 17:51, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The target does not mention this; there is a different language described at Dogoso language though. 𝟙𝟤𝟯𝟺𝐪𝑤𝒆𝓇𝟷𝟮𝟥𝟜𝓺𝔴𝕖𝖗𝟰 (𝗍𝗮𝘭𝙠) 11:36, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • There are apparently two languages with the name: Dɔgɔsɔ (a variety of Dogon) and the unrelated Dogoso language. I'm not sure if there is a primary topic. – Uanfala (talk) 14:12, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambig in addition to the two languages, Dogoso is the name of an ethnic group in Burkina Faso (who speak one of the Dogosos) but we don't have any content on them at present (Ethnic groups in Burkina Faso is very much a stub). Thryduulf (talk) 20:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • RD (responsible for this) Looks like the Gur language at Dogoso language is the primary topic, given that we have no article for the ethnicity. So I think rd there and add a hatnote to for this obscure alt name for standard Dogon. — kwami (talk) 01:19, 15 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 18:37, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per Thryduulf -- 67.70.26.89 (talk) 04:19, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Dogoso language per kwami. I was about to close this as disambiguate, along with a commented-out link for the ethnic group, but it really felt like a WP:TWODABS situation. I've left the draft around for reference. --BDD (talk) 23:22, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:42, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate, we could get an article on the ethnic group and we have 2 languages already to disambiguate between. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 17:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    We could get an article on the ethnic group, yes. If we do, disambiguation will be the better option. --BDD (talk) 15:51, 5 January 2021 (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.

Firefox beta2[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 23:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like a redirect that serves no clear purpose. Not sure how this is beneficial to keep. – numbermaniac 04:51, 31 December 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.

Logotron[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 23:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target article. IceWelder [✉] 02:38, 31 December 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.

Alex Evans (Video Game Developer)[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 7#Alex Evans (Video Game Developer)

The Full Moon Show[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 Restore article without prejudice to AfD. signed, Rosguill talk 17:48, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target article. IceWelder [✉] 02:19, 31 December 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.

Sally Cowfarts[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 23:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely search term for minor Death Dimension cast member Sally Conforte, who is not mentioned in the article. Recommend deletion. Phleg1 (talk) 02:07, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Per Phleg1, but also the term is possibly a WP:BLP violation.--Srleffler (talk) 00:50, 1 January 2021 (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.

Hermen Hulst[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 23:00, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:XY; Hulst is better known as the MD of Guerrilla Games for 18 years (2001-2019). IceWelder [✉] 01:58, 31 December 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.

Redirects to SIE Worldwide Studios[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 8#Redirects to SIE Worldwide Studios

No Heroes Allowed! DASH![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 Restore article without prejudice to AfD signed, Rosguill talk 17:46, 8 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target page. IceWelder [✉] 01:38, 31 December 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_December_31&oldid=999769998"