Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 12

< Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion | Log

January 12

edit

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 12, 2023.

Self-Defense Forces

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 Self-defense force. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 23:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Although [they have] the same title (excepting the plural), [these redirect to different articles]. In my opinion, both should redirect to Japan Self-Defense Forces, as "Self-Defense Force" is the literal translation of the name of that organization. Alternatives are redirecting to the DAB page Self-defense force, or redirecting to Military, the current target of [the plural title], but whichever way we go both redirects should point to the same place. Toadspike (talk) 22:51, 12 January 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).

See Talk:Self-defense force. If there are any other SDFs in the world, someone kindly list them and add them to the dab so this looks less like a huge mistake. As is, militias are militias and SDF should be pointing at Japan's army-that-doesn't-want-to-say-army. — LlywelynII 23:58, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Co-dominance (reptiles)

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. I have confirmed there is still no mention at the target. Should one be added, these redirects may be recreated or restored. -- Tavix (talk) 19:31, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very specific subtopic ("co-dominance in reptiles") when reptiles aren't mentioned in the co-dominance section at all. Rusalkii (talk) 04:47, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Codominance (reptiles) as well, not sure how to properly format a double listing. Rusalkii (talk) 04:49, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To include Codominance (reptiles).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Clyde!Franklin! 04:57, 29 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 05:32, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: Sorry for the confusion! I created these redirects because I wanted to clarify how in herpetology, what we call co-dominance refers to incomplete dominance in other fields of biology PetraTheFloof (talk) 04:43, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Huh, interesting. I'd suggest adding that to the subsection there, but that might be too much specific detail for the general article. Not sure what a good home for that fact would be. Rusalkii (talk) 19:26, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both unless there is a mention at the target. No incoming links where the context could have been clarified. A redirect called Co-dominance targeting a page section not called Co-dominance despite the page having a section on Co-dominance is overall confusing. Jay 💬 02:56, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:27, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Conditional delete per Jay (and noting that with the current Vector 2022 section-anchor glitches, readers are actually shown the "Co-dominance" section at the target page, with the actual linked section out of view above), but taking into account that if a sourced mention of the alternate usage attested by PetraTheFloof above can be added to the target it would make for an appropriate redirect. signed, Rosguill talk 17:07, 27 January 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

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 February 10#Houston Havoc

By-wire

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 By-wire car, disambiguate rest at By-wire. (Technically a WP:SIA, but same diff.) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 01:23, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion due to strongly general nature of those redirects, which could lead to confusion with fly-by-wire, and lack of use: in the article; only being used in the lead, in terms of page views and in terms of links except for X-by-wire - which has 2 links. - nathanielcwm (talk) 17:24, 28 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]

  • Keep. These are commonly used terms in the automotive industry. Some of the terms might be ambiguous, in this case we should expand the (already existing) hatnote at Drive by wire with additional targets, or retarget the corresponding redirect to a disambiguation page. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 13:49, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:21, 12 January 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).

朱子家禮

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 19#朱子家禮

Bret Ryan (Character)

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 and send to AfD. (non-admin closure) –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:06, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect should be deleted, there is not a character named Bret Ryan in the Percy Jackson & the Olympians book series. Treetoes023 (talk) 19:58, 12 January 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).

MSTS Editors & Tools

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 💬 20:43, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MSTS Editors & Tools is probably unambiguous, but not mentioned in the target and probably not a plausible search term. Route Editor is more likely to be ambiguous and also not mentioned in the target. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:31, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment – This redirect has history of being an article dedicated to the "Editors & Tools" feature in Microsoft Train Simulator, before being BLAR'd to the main article ~10 days later. Route Editor has a very similar history – except it lasted roughly an hour before the BLAR – so I would propose adding it to the same RfD. Since neither spent a significant amount of time being a separate article and these aren't addressed in the main article due to a lack of notability, I support deletion. Randi Moth (talk) 18:07, 12 January 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).

DeLong Pier

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. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:48, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A DeLong pier is a type of structure used at Cam Ranh Bay, but also at other places, which makes the current target a confusing one. I'd suggest this subject is unlikely to be notable in its own right (though there was a stub at this ___location from 2014 to 2016), and isn't one that anyone's very likely to be searching for, so we can probably safely delete this redirect. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:21, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep and restore the stub for expansion. The stub was redirected without discussion long ago but searching in a few Wikipedia Library sources, like jstor, finds likely sufficient sources to meet WP:GNG (and there are more than this if you search):
The Story of the DeLong Piers: The Task Was Unprecedented, Vol. 28, No. 2 (MARCH-APRIL 1972), pp. 24-29 (6 pages) and The Story of the DeLong Piers: The Task Was Unprecedented, Defense Transportation Journal Vol. 28, No. 3 (MAY-JUNE 1972), pp. 40-49 (10 pages)
Dredging Using DeLong Piers, The Military Engineer Vol. 67, No. 438 (July-August 1975), p. 211 (1 page)
And newspapers.com finds many moderate mentions and a few fairly signifciant ones:
'Raft' Pier May Be Answer to H-Bomb, The Knoxville News-Sentinel, 15 Mar 1956, Thu, Page 7
Fort Belvoir's Floating, Evening Star, Washington, DC, 07 Feb 1954, Sun, Page 147
And more sources exist. Skynxnex (talk) 22:33, 12 January 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).

Arny of Yugoslavia

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 19#Arny of Yugoslavia

Arab Armenians

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 and send to AfD. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:15, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion: Misleading redirect: Armenians do not simply become Arab if they reside in Middle Eastern countries Red Phoenician (talk) 07:08, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Potentially misleading, as Arab doesn't mean "People who reside in Middle Eastern countries" Someone-123-321 (talk) 07:35, 28 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Very misleading. Carpimaps (talk) 11:04, 28 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 05:28, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further opinion on the page history.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:04, 12 January 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).

Paula Räikkönen

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 💬 07:54, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target, internet search results don't turn up anything helpful. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 02:40, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep One of the first results was [2] this FB page. No idea if "Kimi7Iceman" actually belongs to Kimi kimself or a fangroup (especially hard to tell, since parental control devices block FB :P) Someone-123-321 (talk) 02:49, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: While Paula seems to have a connection without a citation available this seems to be a sort of WP:BLP violation. Kimi7Iceman appears to be a fan account; however it sources it to a book by Kimi. I assumed the referenced book is "The Unknown Kimi Raikkonen"; however, I do not have access to this book. If someone can get access to this book and confirm that Kimi7Iceman's assertion about the connection between Paula Räikkönen and Kimi than this should be kept; however, as it stands known deletion on BLP grounds. TartarTorte 14:22, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:49, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I'm not necessarily convinced by the above mentioned BLP concerns but whoever this Paula is, they are not mentioned at the target leaving a would-be searcher confused as to the connection, if any. A7V2 (talk) 08:03, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete unless mention is added. I've found a reliable source (in Finnish) the verifies that Paula Räikkönen is Kimi Räikkönen's mother [3] (Google translates the headline as "Kimi Räikkönen's mother Paula tells about the family's special life [...]"). I'm certain therefore that this is not a BLP problem. Searching the same source for "Paula Räikkönen" in quotes [4] provides multiple other articles so that there is very likely enough to write content in the article about Kimi's family, especially as other articles are referenced in unreliable English sources. However, unless a mention is added the redirect is unhelpful per A7V2. Thryduulf (talk) 13:33, 12 January 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).

Daily life in ancient india

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 💬 20:40, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear what "daily life" is meant to represent. Steel1943 (talk) 03:06, 12 January 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).

History of India and Pakistan

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 India–Pakistan relations. (non-admin closure) — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:46, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WP:XY: History of Pakistan is a separate article. Steel1943 (talk) 03:05, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to India–Pakistan relations, and add a hatnote to the current target if necessary. It cannot be assumed that readers know about the history of India an Pakistan as a group topic before reading about it, both due to the WP:XY titling issue amongst existing article title, though the history of India and Pakistan is rather connected as shown in the current target (thus the hatnote). Steel1943 (talk) 13:10, 12 January 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).

Washington D.C. press corps

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 💬 07:46, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

After a recent Rfd for this redirect ended in no consensus without any discussion after two relists, I am renominating with a more specific nomination. The term receives some sporadic use in enwiki, but nowhere is it described. The closest target would seem to be White House press corps, but I think it is somewhere between misleading to incorrect to conflate the two, as there are members of the press in D.C. who do not cover the White House. Therefore I think the best course of action here is deletion, absent the identification of a better course of action. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:52, 12 January 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).

Thien Hau Temple (Ho Chi Minh City)

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 List of Mazu temples#Vietnam. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 23:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or retarget to a more appropriate article. These redirects are extremely ambiguous and confusing, as there are at least 6 Thien Hau temples (Mazu temples) in Ho Chi Minh City, and they are also well known. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 23:07, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:41, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep all unless the other temples are proven to be mentioned in Wikipedia in a way where any of these redirects could reasonably target them the article(s) where the other temple(s) are mentioned. Otherwise, these redirects are currently de facto unambiguous. Steel1943 (talk) 02:13, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Clarity added. Steel1943 (talk) 13:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • On List of Mazu temples#Vietnam, only two are listed as being in Ho Chi Minh, the other being Quan Am Temple (Cholon) which as the (unnecessary, will move shortly) disambuguator suggests is also in Cholon anyway. So keep per Steel1943. If there are others which can at least be mentioned in that list then it would be a potential target, however. A7V2 (talk) 08:16, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of Mazu temples#Vietnam. Thiên Hậu (天后) is an alternative name for Mazu, so we should retarget to the list of Mazu temples, as there will most likely be more than one Mazu temple called that in Ho Chi Minh. Mucube (talk • contribs) 21:29, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    The list at that section apparently mentions the current target of these redirects in the list, but no other temples named "Thien Hau Temple" are mentioned in that list. Traditionally, we don't update redirects to target a page where there is hope that it will prove the redirect ambiguous in the future (see WP:CRYSTAL), but rather should target what currently exists on Wikipedia. Unless more temples named "Thien Hau Temple" are added to that section, the status quo is the current best for our readers, considering the redirects target the article about the temple mentioned in that list. Steel1943 (talk) 21:42, 12 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Steel1943: The name "Thien Hau Temple" itself is just a translation, Thien Hau = Mazu, any Mazu temple can be referred as "Thien Hau Temple". That Thien Hau Temple being targeted, it is in fact a Chinese guild hall. Its official name is 穗城會館/Tuệ Thành Hội Quán/Tue Thanh Guild Hall, and because it worships Mazu (Thien Hau), people call it Thien Hau Temple, not because the temple is named "Thien Hau". You will never find any sign that writes "Thien Hau Temple" there, neither in Vietnamese nor Chinese, but only its official name (穗城會館). Since you have been asking for other Thien Hau Temple, I just added to List of Mazu temples#Vietnam, looks good enough now? Đại Việt quốc (talk) 03:49, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks like I was ignored. Đại Việt quốc (talk) 00:37, 15 January 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).

Misc Christianity redirects

edit

  Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 24#Misc Christianity redirects

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_January_12&oldid=1138637906"