Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 12

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 12[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 12, 2021.

Wikipedia:NO[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) Vaticidalprophet 12:15, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that redirecting the term "NO" (in Wikipedia) to the WikiProject does not seem helpful. I propose retargeting to Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, which is the more plausible target, because this lists specific things that Wikipedia is not. For example, I would assume that "no battlegrounds" in Wikipedia possibly means "Wikipedia is not a battleground". Also, I have redirected "Wikipedia:No" to the proposed target. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 21:58, 12 March 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.

Wikipedia:DIE[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. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:49, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a longstanding redirect that was retargeted to Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians a while back, before being reverted. I think the discussion is worth having. Sure, if someone says, "Die!" to you, I can see this as an avoided double redirect for Wikipedia:No personal attacks/Death threats, but that doesn't sem like a very common form of death threat. One of only two mentions of death threats on the target page links to Wikipedia:Responding to threats of harm, which may be a more appropriate target. I'm not so sure about Wikipedia:Deceased Wikipedians—it doesn't seem like a likely search term for that. I'd like to see consensus on what to do with this, whether it's keep, delete, or retarget. --BDD (talk) 21:09, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete none of the past targets are really that great confusing shortcut. Possibly also disambiguate, but iffy. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:27, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. None of the proposed targets are particularly good in my opinion. I oppose retargeting to WP:Deceased Wikipedians because it seems rather disrespectful, and I think getting from "Die" to "No personal attacks" is more confusing than helpful. Despite being around since 2006 this currently has 17 incoming links, about 6 of which are resulting from this RfD discussion, so it doesn't seem to have been used in the first place. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:58, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and maybe protect from recreation. This is an odd case, in that the normal markup, with the colon indicating the namespace, reads here like a message telling someone to die. The case for targeting to NPA is poor, because there is no need to make a redirect out of every possible personal attack. And "die" is an illogical verb tense to target to deceased Wikipedians. It ends up just being an odd and uncomfortable one-off of markup that really doesn't have any particular usefulness, no matter where it gets targeted. --Tryptofish (talk) 18:58, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Tryptofish, I don't see proof or indication that the redirect was repeatedly recreated. The redirect has been around since 2006, and it was not deleted multiple times. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 21:55, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • That's perfectly fine with me, and I don't feel strongly either way. My thinking is that we don't have experience with what happens after it is deleted, and it may be tempting to users unaware of a previous deletion discussion to (re)create it. But we could certainly cross that bridge if/when we come to it. --Tryptofish (talk) 21:59, 14 March 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.

Locker room talk[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 soft redirect to Wikt:locker room talk. There seems to be an emerging consensus for this. (non-admin closure) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:05, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The target article is an example of the phenomenon - a prominent such - but does very little to explain the overall concept. This is a WP:RWPOSS that really should be its own article, but just replacing that with "such an occurance" ain't helping the reader. The incoming links are very few, so I say delete and leave open for someone create the proper article instead. Gaioa (T C L) 18:00, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep "Locker room talk" was a famous phrase uttered in relation to the event, CTRL+F shows that the phrase appears on the page 19 times (though some of them are in reference titles), and it seems to be a reasonable search term. Someone can create a proper article for it, but that's no reason to delete the redirect in the interim. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:13, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – as Gaioa says, this incident in this article is just one example of "locker room talk", not an explanation of the concept in general. —Granger (talk · contribs) 18:31, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Soft redirect to Wiktionary (Wikt:locker room talk), which has a definition of the phrase? I suppose it depends if other editors think there's the potential to expand this into an article or if it would just end up being a dictionary definition, 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's a wikt entry of the term? That's awesome and would be a great solution, I give nom support to this. Gaioa (T C L) 20:42, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sounds like a good solution to me. —Granger (talk · contribs) 21:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seventyfiveyears (talk) 19:16, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • soft redirect per the above. This didn't need relisting. Thryduulf (talk) 00:13, 13 March 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.

Mohamed Kunp[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 19:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does not seem to be mentioned in target page. Onel5969 TT me 17:26, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete – All top Google hits for the name are sites that have scraped from Wikipedia. —jameslucas ▄▄▄ ▄ ▄▄▄ ▄▄▄ ▄ 19:09, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I created this redirect as a typo of Mohamed Kuno, which redirects to "Garissa University College attack". 053pvr (talk) 04:21, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Unless the name typo is either well used or well documented in reliable sources I would generally avoid making typo redirects from peoples names to events like terrorist attacks. There are significant WP:BLP considerations when making these types of redirects due to the possibility of collateral damage - it is possible that some unrelated person with a similar name now has internet search engines thinking they were involved in the event. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 02:04, 14 March 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.

99.999999999999999999999...[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 G7 -FASTILY 00:22, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Really? Seems an implausible search term. Onel5969 TT me 17:22, 12 March 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.

Template:Taxonomy/Strigosella[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 26#Template:Taxonomy/Strigosella

Wikipedia:Ad hominem[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:No personal attacks#What is considered to be a personal attack?. signed, Rosguill talk 19:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is a hatnote at the mainspace article Ad hominem that says '"Personal attack" redirects here. For the Wikipedia policy, see Wikipedia:No personal attacks.' In that context, the 3 nominated redirects ought to target the same page, and I think that ought to be Wikipedia:No personal attacks, although I can see why Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions#Arguments to the person would also be appropriate. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:41, 12 March 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.

Sauerstoff[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 19#Sauerstoff

Waterstuff[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 Uncleftish Beholding. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 09:32, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is a name for Hydrogen that was created by Poul Anderson to demonstrate what element names would look like if English didn't use loanwords from other languages. In my opinion someone searching for this term is more likely to be looking for Uncleftish Beholding (the book that introduced the word), Linguistic purism in English or Poul Anderson than the article on hydrogen. I propose retargeting to Uncleftish Beholding as it's the only article I could find that mentions the word. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:40, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also nominating Sourstuff here for the same reason. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:45, 12 March 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.

Workability[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 23#Workability

Titanic steel[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 24#Titanic steel

Secession War[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 War of secession. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 09:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Although this name is used to refer to the American civil war I think it's pretty ambiguous, and a google search shows it is also used to refer to the war of 1812 and numerous fictional events. I propose retargeting to the dab page at War of secession. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 09:53, 12 March 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.

Australasian relations[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 27#Australasian relations

Super mutant[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 24#Super mutant

Keyway[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. Ixfd64 (talk) 21:52, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion the primary topic of keyway is Key (engineering), as the name of the slot that a key fits in. I'm listing this here because the keyhole article was at this title for ~7 years before being moved. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 09:12, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate. They are both plausible targets. More people use keys in everyday life than work with rotating shafts, so I'm not sure which more readers would be trying to find. Without some more evidence of a PT, we should just make it a dab (I created one at the redirect). MB 19:59, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per MB. CycloneYoris talk! 09:37, 19 March 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.

List of massacres in the United Kingdom[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 19#List of massacres in the United Kingdom

Erdviper[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 19:17, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

German term for several species of snakes (see e.g.) that don't occur in Germany Plantdrew (talk) 04:37, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • I should say delete. As the snakes have no German (or Swiss or Austrian) habitat, I see no reason why an Erdviper would ever be called that in English. Moonraker (talk) 23:59, 13 March 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_12&oldid=1014533245"