Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 26

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 26[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 26, 2020.

Urdu Bazaar (Lahore)[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. No consensus prior to the relist, and no comments after the relist. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 22:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no indication that Anarkali Bazaar is known as Urdu Bazaar. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:16, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep According to Google Maps they are the same place.[1] -- Toddy1 (talk) 05:30, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:33, 26 July 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.

Paycheck to paycheck[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 Wiktionary. A satisfactory encyclopedia article that covers this does not seem to exist at the moment, but the Wiktionary page live paycheck to paycheck does cover the general meanings. ~ mazca talk 16:49, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this is the best target for this redirect. Paycheck to paycheck is more of a lifestyle. There are some rich people that live paycheck to paycheck. Interstellarity (talk) 15:11, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment – This is true. Many people living paycheck to paycheck or middle or upper-middle class, who have expenses for mortgages they can't afford, university tuition for children, or consumer debt related to "keeping up with the Joneses". I saw a report on the PBS NewsHour. I think they used a term related to lack of savings for emergencies. What articles with that theme are possibilities? Senator2029 “Talk” 08:38, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Senator2029: I am unsure what article it could possibly link to. If there aren't any good articles, we could always delete the redirect, but I would rather not do that if we can find a good article to link to. Interstellarity (talk) 11:36, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 11:45, 16 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:29, 26 July 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.

Reballing[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 Rework (electronics)#Reflowing and reballing as the location where the respective content is currently located. Any concerns with the content at this target, including splitting content from the target to another article and/or title, can occur on the target article's talk page. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 22:33, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The redirect name has no mention on the current target. I came from Nokia N900#Known issues, which has a link to reballing, and I was confused. A bit more searching showed that reballing is mentioned at Rework (electronics)#Reflowing and reballing, though it takes some reading to get into reballing being defined. I propose making an anchor at the Reballing involves dismantling, heating the chip until it can be removed from the board paragraph of the Rework (electronics) article and retarget the redirect to there. pandakekok9 (talk) Junk the Philippine anti-terror law! 08:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to anchor per nom. Narky Blert (talk) 11:16, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Narky Blert, I argued that wikilinks that redirect to a subsection should be deprecated from article space at #Classical Irish, above. You wrote "Retarget to anchor". If all fans of redirection to subsection (1) knew how to use anchors; and (2) always used anchors; and (3) every other contributor knew how to recognize those anchors, and steer clear of mucking with them, some of my concerns over this highly disruptive practice would be addressed. But it would still be better to split out the targets of wikilinks to subsection heading, and make every one a standalone article. Geo Swan (talk) 13:32, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Split the Rework (electronics)#Reflowing and reballing section out of Rework (electronics) into a standalone article. The reballing section is about half of that article. What should it b called? Maybe Reworking Ball Grade Array electronics? Maybe it should be at Reballing. Geo Swan (talk) 13:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:28, 26 July 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.

Hypersine[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. --BDD (talk) 14:38, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is incorrect. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:48, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:02, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete to encourage article creation. None of its senses appear to have an article on Wikipedia currently. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:22, 14 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try to get a clearer consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:28, 26 July 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.

M$ Windoze[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 3#M$ Windoze

Toxic Gr@fity[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. --BDD (talk) 14:38, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another Kenny Strawberry creation. Not mentioned in target article, doesn't seem to be a common usage, creator had a history of vandalism.Hog Farm Bacon 20:19, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I can't find any uses of this term that did not originate at Wikipedia. Thryduulf (talk) 00:15, 27 July 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.

Daniel Uhlfelder[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. --BDD (talk) 14:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that this is the name of the guy dressing up as the Grim Reaper to protest people going to the beach. He's not mentioned at the target, though. I would suggest deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 20:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note I've added the lowercase Daniel uhlfelder to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 00:20, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not mentioned anywhere on the English Wikipedia as far as I can tell. However this recommendation is without prejudice to recreation if a mention is added somewhere (I have no opinion on whether it should be). Thryduulf (talk) 00:20, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Yes, he is the Florida Grim Reaper, if anyone thinks him worth a mention. Narky Blert (talk) 12:45, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both per above without prejudice against recreation if someone adds a mention somewhere appropriate. This guy may or may not be notable enough for his own article, but he might be worth mentioning somewhere. Regards, SONIC678 15:43, 27 July 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.

Conservative Hinduism[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. The current target is clearly felt to be too specific, but no genuinely satisfactory alternative target has been agreed for such a general phrase. If someone with knowledge of the area wishes to create a disambiguation page covering the potential meanings, they are very welcome to do so. ~ mazca talk 16:46, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure it's helpful to have a redirect from this search term to a specific facet of one (albeit significant) organization that can be considered to be politically conservative and Hindu. Hindu nationalism may be a better target, but is still an imperfect fit (for one, while it discusses right-wing Hindu nationalist groups, it never uses the phrase "conservative Hinduism"). Ideally, we could redirect to a relevant section of an article on Hinduism and politics, but no such article exists. I would thus lean towards deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 18:39, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't think either work. Conservatism isn't Fascism or Nationalism. At best, Sanatani which refers to the closest thing we have to "Hindu orthodoxy" would be the best target if we are to have this redirect at all, that is. Tayi Arajakate Talk 11:31, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: involved relist to add a related redirect
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:56, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd suggest making it a disambiguation page instead of a redirect. "Conservative Hindu" could be a term applied to politically conservative Hindus, Hindutva, or possibly religiously conservative Hindus. Heck maybe even Conservative Hindus could be used in the sense of the many Conservative parties in Commonwealth countries. This term seems infrequently used although I could find some examples by Binging, so it's something we may wish to have a page for. [2] [3] Chess (talk) (please use {{ping|Chess}} on reply) 05:54, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for now, with no prejudice against a future disambiguation page. --BDD (talk) 14:37, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, since no ideal target exists. CycloneYoris talk! 03:30, 6 August 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.

Eight thousand one hundred ninety-second note[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 5#Eight thousand one hundred ninety-second note

Sfcrowsnest[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. --BDD (talk) 14:34, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"SFcrowsnest" is a website. The subject of the target was an editor, but the article doesn't help now: the section was deleted [4] . Delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:30, 26 July 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.

1940-49 Pacific typhoon seasons[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 Pacific typhoon season#1940s. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 06:02, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unneeded cross-namespace redirect (doesn't qualify for R2 because the target is in the category namespace) DannyS712 (talk) 15:10, 26 July 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.

1829 United States elections[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 Template:1829 United States elections. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:41, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unneeded cross-namespace redirect (doesn't qualify for R2 because the target is in the category namespace) DannyS712 (talk) 15:10, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Template:1829 United States elections. Yes that is still cross-namespace, but as the target is a reader-facing navigation template that lists and links to all the articles we have about United States elections in 1829 (and a couple of redlinks) it gives the searcher exactly the same information that a list article would do (which is the only other thing that could be at this title). Thryduulf (talk) 16:50, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget per Thryduulf, as a better alternative. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:22, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Template:1829 United States elections per Thryduulf. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 22:09, 27 July 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.

1676 establishments in Denmark[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:39, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unneeded cross-namespace redirect (doesn't qualify for R2 because the target is in the category namespace) DannyS712 (talk) 15:09, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. This takes the reader to exactly the information they are looking for that we do not have in any other location that I've found. The reason the category namespace is excluded from R2 is that such redirects are sometimes desirable. Further, "unnecessary" and "unneeded" are not reason, in isolation, to delete a redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 16:52, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 22:09, 27 July 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.

108 Siva Temples[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 108 Shiva Temples. This one just seems so obvious that I'm closing it early. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 18:30, 27 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unneeded cross-namespace redirect (doesn't qualify for R2 because the target is in the category namespace) DannyS712 (talk) 15:09, 26 July 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.

1952 disestablishments in Wales[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:38, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unneeded cross-namespace redirect (doesn't qualify for R2 because the target is in the category namespace) DannyS712 (talk) 15:07, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep perfectly harmless redirect that takes anyone using this search term to exactly the information they are looking for. We don't have this in any other location so the category is the best target - which is why such redirects are excluded from R2. Thryduulf (talk) 16:56, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Thryduulf. Both sides of the redirect are reader-facing so the CNR status of it isn't harmful. It's also an {{R from move}}, albeit the category was at this title for a negligible period of time. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 21:00, 26 July 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.

Right of sepulchre[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) 16:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Right of sepulchre" is not defined in the article and without an explanation the redirect is confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:57, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, soft redirect to Wiktionary or write an article. This seems like a very plausible search term, and while there is a dictionary definition at Wiktionary I'm really on the fence about whether to soft redirect there or delete to encourage article creation. There looks to be enough information out there to write an article, e.g. about differences between jurisdictions. Thryduulf (talk) 17:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd go with delete. It actually seems to be a notable legal topic, see, for example:
Katherine Calderon, The World of the Dead, the Right of Sepulcher and the Power of Information, 32 Tauro L. Rev. 785 (2016); and
Kimberly E. Naguit, Letting the Dead Bury the Dead: Missouri's Right of Sepulcher Addresses the Modern Decedent's Wishes Addresses the Modern Decedent's Wishes, 75 Missouri L. Rev. 1 (2010)
and others. I think it be better deleted than a redirect to an article not dealing with the subject matter (and I can find no other appropriate target articles). TJRC (talk) 20:40, 26 July 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.

Shuttleman[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) 16:48, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what Shuttleman means. --Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:08, 26 July 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.

Sci.space.history[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) 16:47, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why this redirects to Space Shuttle. Soumya-8974 talk contribs subpages 12:05, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I don't know either. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:36, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete this is (was?) a usenet group, and it does get a couple of mentions and uses in references/external links, including at Space Shuttle Columbia, but that doesn't explain the redirect and I can't find anywhere that would make a better target. Thryduulf (talk) 17:09, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not a helpful redirect at all. It was created contemporaneously by a now-blocked user (apparently not for anything related to this activity) with another newsgroup-name redirect, sci.space.shuttle, which probably also ought to be deleted. sci.space.shuttle is a little closer to the target, but as with sci.space.history, it's the name of a newsgroup, and someone searching specifically for information on the newsgroup is probably not looking for something on the topic that the newsgroup referred to. TJRC (talk) 01:10, 27 July 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.

ST Jacobs[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. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:42, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as ambiguous: this is either a badly-capitalised "Saint Jacobs" or a steam tug called Jacobs. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:56, 26 July 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.

Recipients of the Bangladesh National Sports Award[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 National Sports Awards#Awards. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 15:49, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Unneeded cross-namespace redirect (doesn't qualify for R2 because the target is in the category namespace) DannyS712 (talk) 10:33, 26 July 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.

Challenger Spacecraft[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 3#Challenger Spacecraft

Thunderwell[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 2#Thunderwell

Racist Winston Churchill[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 05:46, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Non-neutral term. There's a reason we don't have something like Winston Churchill (racist) targeting the main article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:01, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. From the linked guideline, "Perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is therefore not a sufficient reason for their deletion. In most cases, non-neutral but verifiable redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term. Non-neutral redirects may be tagged with {{R from non-neutral name}}." The redirect gets the reader what they are looking for, under a neutral title; there are no BLP issues since Churchill has been dead for many years. (t · c) buidhe 05:07, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This seems like a likely search term Nick-D (talk) 08:55, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per buidhe and Nick-D, this is a plausible search term that takes someone to directly relevant encyclopaedic content. The WP:RNEUTRAL guideline linked by the nominator explicitly says that redirects do not have to be neutral terms. Thryduulf (talk) 10:09, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per buidhe. Please read the pages you cite. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 21:02, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. If it were not for the existence of the target article, I'd go with delete. But in the absence of this redirect, readers searching (here or on google or the like) the plausible search term "Racist Winston Churchill" would be more likely to be directed to Winston Churchill than to the more on-point Racial views of Winston Churchill, which is a disservice to the reader. TJRC (talk) 21:19, 26 July 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.

Racist Murder of Altab Ali: A Bengali East End Garment Worker Murdered in 1978[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 5#Racist Murder of Altab Ali: A Bengali East End Garment Worker Murdered in 1978

Racist patterns[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 2#Racist patterns

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2020_July_26&oldid=971517582"