Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 19

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

January 19[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 19, 2024.

Episode 6007[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. ✗plicit 00:37, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Besides the fact that there are some soap operas that may have had this many episodes, this number is mentioned nowhere in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 23:07, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Episode 6004[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. ✗plicit 00:37, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Besides the fact that there are some soap operas that have had an episode of this number, thus making this redirect ambiguous, it also seems that this redirect targeting this page is erroneous: The target page makes mention of a "604", but not a "6004". Steel1943 (talk) 23:06, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Episode 209[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. ✗plicit 00:37, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lots of shows with an "Episode 209". No evidence this is what readers are looking for. Steel1943 (talk) 23:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, let's remove it. Ian Manka (my talk page) 07:31, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Episode 201[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 28#Episode 201

3-Octanol[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) Duckmather (talk) 22:56, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This redirect should be deleted, because the target page has no information about it, and it would be better to keep this a redlink so we know which octanol isomers need pages. Michael7604 (talk) 00:44, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and tag as {{R with possibilities}}. This redirect is used in 3 articles:
  • in C8H18O it should be removed entirely, along with the other subtypes of octanol, just leaving the link to Octanol;
  • in Octanol it just redirects back to the same article, so it should be removed, as should the redlink 4-octanol (there are 89 isomers of octanol, so there's no reason to list these specific two as redlinks but not list the remaining 85);
  • however in Caloboletus calopus the redirect serves a useful purpose as the redirect target octanol does have a brief explanation of what an octanol is, and that there are many subtypes. Colonies Chris (talk) 14:31, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree with your argument that there are so many isomers that there is no need for a list of 89 redlinks anyway. Michael7604 (talk) 17:57, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Monosexism[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 29#Monosexism

Camille Camille[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. --BDD (talk) 19:35, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Suggesting deletion. The article was previously under this incorrect duplicated name. She is referred to as simply "Camille" in Estonian media. The duplicated name may have come from the discogs.com page linked in the article, possibly originating from someone entering "Camille" to both first name and surname fields somewhere. Unfortunately the error has spread to Wikipedias in various languages and at least one Eurovision Song Contest trivia fansite. Abc347834 (talk) 11:46, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edited to add: there are numerous links to the redirect, which will need to be changed before deletion. Abc347834 (talk) 11:51, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Links to the redirect have now been fixed. Abc347834 (talk) 12:15, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The page was at the original title for over 3.5 years. Thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:27, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per {{R from move}} and the evidence that this name is in widespread use. Where and why the error originated is irrelevant, what matters is that someone could see this name being used and use it to search for information on Wikipedia. Thryduulf (talk) 20:45, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the talk of the target and creator's pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 19:05, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. (as a creator). In general, I usually tend to support deleting of misspelled or suspicious redirects. For me this is obvious infoclutter for enwiki database. But I have seen, that it is very hard to delete even obviously misspelled redirects--Estopedist1 (talk) 07:02, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment (from nominator). If there is no consensus to delete, a better alternative to keeping the redirect could be redirecting to the disambiguation page Camille, which includes the musician, and would also be a better situation in the (rather unlikely) case the duplicated name ever comes to use in some other context. Mats84 (talk) 17:26, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @Mats84: I'm confused: You are not the nominator... Steel1943 (talk) 22:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Excuse me, I've been having a bad practice of using two accounts interchangeably on different computers. This comment is indeed from me. I'll try to stick to a single account in the future. Abc347834 (talk) Abc347834 (talk) 20:03, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:27, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Camille Camille is still used in Vennaskond and Van (band). My search on Google gives 241,000 results, but do we know if they primarily are meant for the violinist? I see the name used for Camille (Belgian singer) also. So keep until we have an ambiguity concern. Jay 💬 07:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I fixed the references in Vennaskond and Van (band). The latter cited an Estonian-language newspaper web archive that has simply "Camille". 10:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC) Abc347834 (talk) 10:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Sfio[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 29#Sfio

Screenlife Games[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 26#Screenlife Games

One.one.one.one[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. Jay 💬 17:19, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think anybody who would be looking up the IP would be doing so with the numbers instead of writing them out. I don't believe this to be a helpful or useful redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:46, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as just seems like an unlikely search term. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 18:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a domain name under .one (domain), not an alternate spelling of the IP address. If there's scope for an article on 1.1.1.1, keep, as this redirect is a valid {{R from domain name}}. If there's not scope for an article on 1.1.1.1, merge 1.1.1.1 into Cloudflare and redirect there instead. DefaultFree (talk) 22:04, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per DefaultFree. The redirect refers to https://one.one.one.one and is not just a respelling of the IP. Nickps (talk) 23:58, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per DefaultFree, and also because spelling out "one" doesn't seem too impossible to imagine; teeters between harmless and seemingly helpful. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:49, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

I'm sorry Dave[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 26#I'm sorry Dave

Strigosella (gastropodl)[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 delete. Deleted via G6 by User:Justlettersandnumbers (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 17:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Gastropodl" is not a plausible typo. What likely happened here is that an attempt was made to move Strigosella (animal) to the current title "Strigosella (gastropod)" [1] but the "l" was accidentally left behind. There is no instance of this typo anywhere on the project. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 11:35, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete it is a error I made when trying to replace "animal" with "gastropod", but it is not a typo somebody would make when trying to type "gastropod". Plantdrew (talk) 17:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Cartoon 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 delete. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:35, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target page, and I don't see any relevant content at the target page. Tea2min (talk) 09:50, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. "Character" is barely mentioned at cartoon, so I don't see any point in redirecting it there or anywhere else.—Anita5192 (talk) 14:37, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete to promote article creation. Character animation is the closest article we have to this topic, but it is really more about the process of creating the characters. Doesn't seem like a suitable target to me. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I've added the plural Cartoon characters to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 15:51, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete to encourage article creation. I'm surprised we don't have this, or even an index to the various lists of cartoon characters, but if we do I can't find it. Thryduulf (talk) 15:58, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

CAT:ASPERGER[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 💬 14:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

This is a list of users with an Aspergers userbox on their userpage. It's a fine category, but there doesn't seem to be a high need for a CAT PNR to frequently access it, one that's accessible in mainspace. CAT PNRs are more-or-less reserved for categories that have an understandable need for regular access, and where a shortcut might be useful for such categories. This list of userpages does not fit this bill, and should probably be removed for the sake of cleaning up the CAT space. If a link is needed to this category, WP:CATASPERGER or WP:ASPERGERCAT might be far more suitable project-space alternatives, as opposed to a CAT redirect which sits in a pseudo-namespace in the same location as articles. Utopes (talk / cont) 09:47, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

CAT:FRINGE[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 💬 14:27, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

A content category which has seemingly no need for a CAT PNR. Shortcuts work when they are adopted and used, and in this case, I can't really see a reason why the overarching parent-category for general fringe theories would need a CAT PNR to quickly navigate there. It was seemingly hand-waved there via a 2021 RfD, where it was decided that a category called "Fringe" would be most associated with fringe theory. Yet, such a category does not seem in need of a CAT PNR that artificially enforces this association, so it could be more appropriate to reserve this namespace for categories in need of higher maintenance. Utopes (talk / cont) 09:31, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

CAT:ANIMATION[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. ✗plicit 00:38, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looks to be a regular content category with very few articles in this top-level container. One of the few remaining CAT pages that don't really have a purpose, as its otherwise identically named to its category counterpart, and could not be intuitively understood that it's a thing that exists, without already knowing it's there. Utopes (talk / cont) 09:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

CAT:PHIL[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 💬 14:20, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Points to a top-level category that currently contains 5 pages. From a cursory glance, it looks like 3 of such pages aren't supposed to be in this category and should be recategorized, which is a function I presume this PNR can be used with. However, there are next to no other CAT PNRs that are similar to this, as this doesn't seem to need frequent access that would warrant the need to have a PNR, as it's just a regular content category. Utopes (talk / cont) 09:12, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Stupid cunt[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 29#Stupid cunt

Secular Jewish culture[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 Secular Jew. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:37, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Jewish secularism. Since these redirects were created, that article has developed into the main information centre for secular Jewish topics. Place Clichy (talk) 20:58, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Complex/Rational 00:33, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all per WP:XY due to multiple possible articles which these terms could refer to. Steel1943 (talk) 02:28, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per Steel's comment. too_much curiosity (talk) 03:28, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all per above, multiple targets, which seem quite obvious in the title, no need for a DAB. DankJae 01:54, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to disambig page Secular Jew which is the target of Secular Jewish, and which includes the nom's proposed target as well. Jay 💬 14:38, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That seems to violate WP:PTM in some way, considering the word "culture" is nowhere in the title of the recommended disambiguation page. In addition, the recommended target contains terms like "atheism", which I cannot see having any connection to these redirects. Steel1943 (talk) 22:39, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Secular Jew could be a SIA, where the threshold of title matching is lower, instead of a dab. Jay 💬 05:55, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to secular Jew, seems like best solution. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 10:45, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Secular Jew, as this is where someone using these search terms will find links to whatever topic they are looking for. It is thus the most helpful target for readers, regardless of whether it meets the letter of any guidelines. Thryduulf (talk) 13:32, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Secular Jew, which contains the important bit of the first two words (Secular Jew), which in this context I feel have higher priority than the last two (Jewish culture). The disambig page gives the most options from that point. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:16, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Urduwood[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) Utopes (talk / cont) 00:57, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This looks an old title of the page that was moved to a more neutral title. This is an exception to WP:RNEUTRAL, this is not an established term and unlikely to be useful so it fulfills the criteria D3. Tousif ❯❯❯ Talk 04:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, the term is mentioned in the lead of the target. Jay 💬 04:28, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:53, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Echo Lake, Washington[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 Echo Lake#United States. (non-admin closure) Utopes (talk / cont) 00:55, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am creating the page Echo Lake (Shoreline, Washington). There is also an Echo Lake in Snohomish County, Washington (the namesake of this CDP). This redirect is too vague to be useful. I created a better redirect at Echo Lake (CDP), Washington, and rerouted all incoming links there. This ambiguous one should be deleted. DirtyHarry991 (talk) 06:42, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:52, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

File:Phir Subah Hogi.jpg[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) Utopes (talk / cont) 05:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It is a spelling mistake. Not really a fan of filename redirects anyway, especially when they can't be made invisible. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:25, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per WP:FILEREDIRECT. In addition, the file was at the former title from when it was created in 2009 until today, so ... it was at the former title for nearly 15 years. Steel1943 (talk) 18:17, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Steel1943. Thryduulf (talk) 13:33, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

Innovation Party (Norway)[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 💬 06:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This targets Industry and Business Party, but is not mentioned in that article. There is also a Norwegian Innovation and Technology Party, and I'm wondering if that's the right target? Or neither? -- Beland (talk) 19:58, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. "Innovasjonspartiet" as would be the Norwegian name is not used anywhere. Well, I found a single hit, this piece describing the Innovation Party (Turkey). If it had to redirect somewhere it would have to be the Innovation and Technology Party. Geschichte (talk) 09:05, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Additional thoughts on potential alternative targets?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

University 'Dunarea de Jos' din Galați[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 29#University 'Dunarea de Jos' din Galați

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_January_19&oldid=1201026249"