Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

March 19[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on March 19, 2021.

Panji[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 move Panji (disambiguation) to Panji. -- Tavix (talk) 01:31, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Had redirected to Panji tales, which has a hatnote to Panji (disambiguation), which lists the "Panji tales" as primary topic and doesn't even mention the new target. However, Panjika says right in its lead "colloquially known as Panji" - so I think this needs some discussion. MB 22:42, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • The obvious solution is of course to add Panjika to the disambiguation page, and revert the change. I see no indication that the primary topic is otherwise than Panji tales. --Paul_012 (talk) 00:43, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, it is obvious that Panjika should be added to the dab. But why is Panji tales the PT? It doesn't get substantially more page views. Perhaps the dab should be at the basename. Searching doesn't give me a clear indication that there is a PT. MB 21:51, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • MB (and Certes), doing a Google search for "Panji", I see first page results that are almost exclusively about the Panji tales. Excluding Wikipedia and mirrors, these include UNESCO[1], The Jakarta Post[2], the British Library[3], University of the Arts Helsinki[4], and the British Museum[5]. A comparable number of page views doesn't say anything about which page is more likely expected to be referred to by the term Panji, since very few hits were coming via the redirect. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • A good point, which certainly rules out a primary redirect to Panjika or anywhere else. If there is a PT then it's the tales. However, when two different editors (who have a clue) see two different PTs, that normally indicates that the dab should occupy the base name. Certes (talk) 21:51, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move Panji (disambiguation) → Panji, because there is no clear primary topic. I've added Panjika to the dab and diverted the incoming links. Certes (talk) 21:34, 25 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    To clarify: moving the dab is better than keeping Panji as a redirect retargetted to Panji (disambiguation), per WP:MALPLACED. Certes (talk) 23:52, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move the dab page to Panji, reversing the bold move from November. Arguments for any particular primary topic can be hashed out in an RM. – Uanfala (talk) 15:32, 1 April 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.

Poccnñckar Øeaepaunr[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. Hog Farm Talk 14:25, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as implausible Latin approximations for written Cyrillic. These are nonsense though, as a Google search confirms. There are no languages that use both an ñ and an Ø and a 6 is not a letter, so it is not natural to search in this fashion. -- Tavix (talk) 22:39, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. Implausible pseudo-Cyrillic transliterations. No-one is going to be searching using a combination of Danish\Norwegian, Spanish and number characters. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:06, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: A combination of spanish and norwegian cannot redirect to Russian 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 15:45, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is Volapük encoding, not Spanish/Norwegian. But there are too many ways to do Volapük encoding to make them reasonable search terms. Delete. —Kusma (t·c) 19:42, 23 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.

Broadway subway[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 Broadway#Transport. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 06:57, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This could also refer to Broadway Subway (IRT) or Broadway Subway (BMT), which have many more page views than the current target. I recommend disambiguating this. CrazyBoy826 22:14, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Broadway#Transport. Note that I have added the capitalized variant to this discussion. -- Tavix (talk) 22:54, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget There is no WP:COMMONNAME for the SkyTrain extension yet, and it likely will not be Broadway subway, but it may be Broadway extension. The associated Canada Line is not referred to as a subway line, and I doubt this will be. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:47, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Broadway#Transport as per Tavix. —Joeyconnick (talk) 04:00, 20 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.

Future-in-the-past[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 26#Future-in-the-past

Sauerstoff[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. Hog Farm Talk 14:27, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RLOTE. Oxygen has no particular affinity to the German/Luxembourgish language as far as I am aware. There's no content explaining why the German name for this element is relevant to the article, and this name isn't mentioned in the article. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Uncleftish Beholding per below discussion. This is the only known page that mentions the redirect. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 19:58, 14 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Uncleftish Beholding where the terms are discussed --Lenticel (talk) 01:16, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not sure that it's a good idea to target this to the article on the book - this is the modern German word for oxygen, and it doesn't seem to be particularly related to that book in my opinion. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:14, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:FORRED. (I think Kohlenstoff should also be nominated, BTW; it's the German word for carbon.) Double sharp (talk) 15:11, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Chemical element#Element names which discusses German chemical terminology generally, and specifically mentions this term. I'm also fine with deletion, but redirecting a real scientific term to a work of fiction seems like a bad idea. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 03:29, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The connections to the proposed retargets are too tenuous, I think. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 08:53, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:18, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. While the proposed target Uncleftish Beholding mentions the word, this can be taken care of by the search function. Making the German word for oxygen point to a story that is a somewhat obscure example of linguistic purism makes little sense. Especially so as the story apparently doesn't even contain the word, just an invented English cognate. The proposed target Chemical element#Element names is much better, but I'm still slightly on the side of deletion. —Kusma (t·c) 22:46, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: per WP:R#DELETE, the German word for oxygen is unrelated to oxygen itself. 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 15:48, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete following WP:FORRED. Regarding Chemical element#Element names, the term appears only as an incidental example, among any number of examples that could have been chosen there. Adumbrativus (talk) 06:19, 25 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]

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 List of massacres in the United Kingdom and delete List of massacres in Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Both are clearly technically inaccurate, given the varying meanings of the terms over the history of the events, but the consensus here is that the terms "United Kingdom" and "Great Britain" are interchangeable enough in casual use to make that one helpful, while "Great Britain and Northern Ireland" is expressly misleading and runs afoul of WP:XY, and appears unlikely to be used anyway. There's general support for a rethink of how these articles are organised, but as far as the scope of this RfD discussion goes, this first step is clear. ~ mazca talk 08:53, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The UK and Great Britain are not the same thing, but the content is organised geographically (List of massacres in Great Britain and List of massacres in Ireland) as both lists go back several hundred years before the formation of the United Kingdom. Is the current set-up where UK redirects to GB with a link in the header prose best or would a two-item disambiguation page be better? Currently my preference is weakly for the dab but I'm happy to be persuaded otherwise. I'm also nominating the GB&NI redirect for the same reason, although this has XY issues it is for obvious reasons a commonly searched grouping. Note these are the result of page moves. Thryduulf (talk) 05:12, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It seems that appear to be a WP:RM for me, so the article needs to be moved. You can nominated it to moved via RM request. 36.77.65.74 (talk) 10:34, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No the articles are at the correct titles for their scope, and given the scopes the geographical split makes sense. Thryduulf (talk) 11:39, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the first, delete the second (I agree WP:XY applies). I think we'd be better off reorganizing the lists by modern geography, but if that's out, this is my preferred solution. I'm American, and have heard even highly educated Americans say "Britain" or "Great Britain" when they mean the UK, so redirecting to a list that covers the majority of what the search term does seems just fine, especially with the quasi-hatnote pointing to the Ireland list. --BDD (talk) 21:15, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Britain" is generally shorthand for the UK, but "Great Britain" is the name of the island. That's the common usage. MClay1 (talk) 23:28, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep both, as quite a few pages use them to get to one of the lists, which are correctly named, as Thryduulf says. But the first is a bit absurd, bearing in mind that for more than a hundred years the United Kingdom included the whole of Ireland and GB, and the second isn’t needed. I doubt if anyone would think to look for either. So if someone has the time to correct all those links, both are best deleted. Moonraker (talk) 22:28, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:17, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep first and delete second per above. If it’s geographically ordered then UK probably should point at Great Britain. But the other seems confusing. -- Eraserhead1 <talk> 22:00, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the first one as it's not confusing and potentially useful, and Delete the second one as an unlikely search term. However, the scope of the articles should perhaps be changed, as the other pages in Category:Lists of massacres by country are defined politically rather than geographically. MClay1 (talk) 23:28, 4 April 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.

Rondelle[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. signed, Rosguill talk 22:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FORRED. Nothing particularly French about washers 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:13, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - harmless and possible search term. Bearian (talk) 14:31, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • (edit conflict) @Bearian: If people are searching for this they I don't think they would necessarily be looking for the French translation of washers. This word is also used in English to mean "a round object" and it's used in loads of places for that meaning, e.g. A way of cutting vegetables, a type of bead (Rondelle beads), a descriptor of circular images (e.g. Air Canada's logo is described as a "Maple leaf rondelle") and a load of other uses. There's also a band this could be ambiguous with (The Rondelles). Generally redirects in languages other than English aren't kept unless there's a specific connection between the concept and the language, per WP:FORRED, because words become ambiguous when you move between languages, and I don't think there's a specific connection between French and washers. In this case I think the search results would do a better job of helping people find what they want. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:02, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate (drafted) Clearly no good as a redirect even leaving aside the WP:FORRED issues, since this word has numerous different senses in French (see fr:Rondelle). In English there are far fewer meanings (and translations of the French meanings wouldn't belong on a dab page per MOS:DABOTHERLANG), but English Wikipedia discusses two topics actually Rondelle in English, plus The Rondelles. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 14:56, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:16, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate as drafter under the redirect. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 21:55, 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.

First Grove[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 22:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I PRODded this years ago and it was redirected instead of deleted. But I can't find evidence that anything by this name exists in San Rafael, so I recommend deleting the redirect. —Granger (talk · contribs) 12:28, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep - I redirected it on case of a plausible search term. Not worth fighting over, just my two cents. Bearian (talk) 14:33, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Is there any evidence that anything called "First Grove" actually exists? I've never heard of anything by this name in San Rafael, and I can't find anything about it online. My guess is that the article was created as a hoax. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 15:48, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete No evidence that First Grove actually exists, and it isn't mentioned at the target page. Jackattack1597 (talk) 19:00, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:14, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete due to a lack of verification. Bearian, since you seem to be the only one "fighting" for the redirect, could you add reliably sourced information to the article to make the redirect actually useful? -- Tavix (talk) 22:48, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The original article appears quite clearly to be something WP:MADEUP one day, and could have been speedied. No redirect is warranted here. --Paul_012 (talk) 02:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per consensus, although the reasons vary. Bearian (talk) 17:04, 24 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.

Déjà vu (Dave Rogers 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 22:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Created as a redirect to a disambiguation page David Rogers, doesn't appear to be a page for the artist, so we have a redirect to a NN artist. Superfluous to requirements and no use to navigation. Richhoncho (talk) 19:11, 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.

Automagic[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 3#Automagic

Roman equivalent[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 31#Roman equivalent

Capital equipment[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 27#Capital equipment

Cylindricity[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 31#Cylindricity

Hyperworms[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 X-COM: Apocalypse. signed, Rosguill talk 22:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Hyperworms" are not mentioned at any of the proposed targets. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 18:52, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to X-COM: Apocalypse which does mention hyperworms. I think they are specific to that particular game. The section in the current redirect doesn't exist, but another solution might be if it did and had relevant content. Lithopsian (talk) 19:51, 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.

Ristorante[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 Italian cuisine#Food establishments. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:29, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like a case of WP:RLOTE, no special affinity between Italian and restaurants. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 18:31, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: word is defined at the New Oxford American Dictionary, 3rd ed. However, I must admit it is used infrequently in my expirence. P,TO 19104 (talk) (contribs) 19:07, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Italian cuisine#Food establishments. I think the term "ristorante" will be familiar to English speakers because there are so many Italian restaurants around that use it. The proposed target discusses what this term is supposed to distinguish in the Italian language. Admittedly, it isn't much. 50.248.234.77 (talk) 23:44, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per 50.248.234.77. I agree that this is a term familiar to some English speakers, and the proposed target does discuss it briefly. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 06:27, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per IP. Clearly more informative than the current target. -2pou (talk) 18:25, 29 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.

Creepy puzzle[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 26#Creepy puzzle

{ꭜ, ꭝ, ꭞ, ꭟ}[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 2#{ꭜ, ꭝ, ꭞ, ꭟ}

PbFtpClient[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 22:01, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE this Redirect page (and its Talk page).

pbFtpClient by Level5Software started in 2007. Its last version was 6.1 (August 8, 2009; 14 years ago (2009-08-08)).

The Level5Software website went away in 2016, but pbFtpClient is still downloadable on CNET.

The only mention of pbFtpClient was deleted from [Comparison of FTP client software] today. (Via this redirect, it amounted to a self-link.)

The [pbFtpClient] article was nominated for deletion, but sadly made into a redirect to [Comparison of FTP client software] instead, in 2010

The [Level5Software] article was deleted in 2008.

pbFtpClient probably never was notable. It looks like FileZilla. It is proprietary (unlimited trial) but presumably abandoned.

The same user account created [pbFtpClient] and [Level5Software] and edited [Comparison of FTP client software] on 2008-09-20, the only day it was active. - A876 (talk) 07:07, 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.

PRNews[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 22:01, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"PR News", as in "prnewsonline.com", is different company than "PR Newswire". Also, the "PR" in "PR Newswire" stands for "Press Release", while the "PR" in "PR News" stands for "Public Relations." A loose necktie (talk) 06:03, 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.

Oh Oh Oh Oh Zempic[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 22:01, 26 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect is not mentioned at the target, nor can I find any evidence that this term is related to Semaglutide. It's misleading and nonsense. Also, the redirect page was created more than a month ago and useless. Seventyfiveyears (talk) 01:19, 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_March_19&oldid=1016414276"