Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 8

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

August 8[edit]

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on August 8, 2022.

Dark olive drab[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 16#Dark olive drab

Dark Olive[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 16#Dark Olive

Grooming conspiracy theory[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 16#Grooming conspiracy theory

Gray-asparagus[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 16#Gray-asparagus

Wikipedia:LOSS[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. WP:SNOW also applies here. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target. Seems highly ambiguous to be redirecting this to a page about deceased Wikipedians. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 19:10, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Shortcuts need not be mentioned, rather that they are related to the page. If someone has suffered a "loss", then someone close to them died. By analogy, that can hold true for Wikipedians as well. -- Tavix (talk) 20:47, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tavix. As long as it doesn't conflict with other similar redirects, no problem. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 21:15, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The target list is clearly a list of unfortunate losses to the project. Steel1943 (talk) 22:59, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a useful shortcut and stylistically in line with similar such pages in the WP namespace. Central and Adams (talk) 18:25, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Wikipedia:GONE[edit]

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the discussion was retarget to Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 00:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect is not mentioned in the target. No pages link to this redirect. The last view was on July 6, 2022. Seems insensitive to be redirecting this to a page about deceased Wikipedians. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 19:05, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Wikipedia:LATE[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 per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 07:17, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at target. I'm not sure how "Wikipedia:LATE" can refer to a page about deceased Wikipedians. I suggest disambiguating. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 18:57, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: I think that the term "late x" is valid enough that WP:LATE isn't a surprise. TartarTorte 19:06, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • What other conceivably WP:LATE-related pages would the disambiguation page link to? Dr. Duh 🩺 (talk) 19:15, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It sounds like the nom is unaware of "late" referring to the deceased? See wikt:late definition Adj.6: Deceased, dead. Disambiguating shortcuts is unhelpful because then they cease to be a shortcut, even more so here without other options to consider. -- Tavix (talk) 20:40, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. —CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 21:18, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. FWIW, my first thought when thinking of "late" in terms of project pages is Wikipedia:Wikitime or some similar time-related page in the project space considering that edits aren't usually ever late. (Maybe there's an essay saying that somewhere?) Steel1943 (talk) 00:06, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    WP:THEREISNODEADLINE? TartarTorte 01:35, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    That target was likely what I was thinking about. FAdesdae378 (talk · contribs) 23:37, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There's WP:RECENTISM (of late, lately, ...) -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 23:20, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This is a useful shortcut and stylistically in line with similar such pages in the WP namespace. Central and Adams (talk) 18:27, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tavix. Disambiguating shortcuts is rarely a good suggestion; hopefully it will become a late idea someday. Retargets are a poor suggestion at this point, because this has pointed to the current target since 2006. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 19:33, 13 August 2022 (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.

DikuMUD Nilgiri (disambiguation)[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) 00:13, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

DikuMUD Nilgiri does not exist (deleted in 2007). Delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:27, 8 August 2022 (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.

David F. Leavitt[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) 00:11, 16 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. None of the entries at the disambiguation page is shown as known as "David Leavitt". There is apparently a David F. Leavitt (1897-1945) who was an artist, but there seems to be nothing about him on Enwiki. A link to a disambiguation page that doesn't list him is misleading. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:07, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: This has a very weird history where this was the original location of David Leavitt but then there was no WP:RS to back that up leading the article to be moved then this was retargeted to the disambiguation. TartarTorte 19:17, 8 August 2022 (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.

2022 Texas Trailer Truck[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 💬 16:23, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Created, not as a redirect, but as a poorly named article. After learning the target article already existed, it was redirected instead of just deleted. I don't think anyone would search on this. Texas instead of San Antonio yes, but without "deaths" this is just too vague. MB 04:11, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that it is an unlikely search combination, and propose that it is moved as a redirect to 2022 Texas trailer deaths which is much more likely for those who do not know or remember the name of the city. Davidships (talk) 22:43, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Just go ahead and create 2022 Texas trailer deaths if you think that would be useful. No need to couple that to this. MB 22:17, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Davidships, I've gone ahead and created this redirect and tagged it as alternative name. CLYDEFRANKLIN 16:17, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:32, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. What a nightmare, facing reality to death. I think it would be respectful to not make this about trucks, and remember this was a collective human tragedy where illegal migrants died in an outcome of human trafficking. Before this is about trailers or lorries, it's also an article about human trafficking. The true subjects aren't represented in the redirects or article name. I'm sure this outcome is one they must have knowingly risked; of course the actual horrors were unknowable, but staking life and death must have been the regret. Louis Waweru  Talk  00:04, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This discussion is not about the title of the actual article; it is only about whether this redirect is useful and should be kept. MB 00:41, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I want to avoid creating another like it, my comment addresses why it's not as useful as it should be. You suggested another that my comment is addressing: 2022 Texas trailer deaths. Louis Waweru  Talk  00:48, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's too vague without "trafficking", "death", or "immigrant". CLYDEFRANKLIN 01:32, 4 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:37, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Jay: Why was this relisted? I don't see anybody supporting this redirect, much less to the point where consensus would be unclear. -- Tavix (talk) 15:49, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Tavix: You are correct. Do you want to close this as a Delete instead? I may have been side-tracked by the redlinked title from Louis Waweru's comment, and thought there is more to discuss. Jay 💬 15:58, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, it looks like a clear delete to me. -- Tavix (talk) 16:01, 8 August 2022 (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.

Lambda sond[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 16#Lambda sond

Vertex (urinary bladder)[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 keep. Nominator withdrew without any arguments other than keep, so it is a speedy keep. (non-admin closure) TartarTorte 18:49, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Vertex" is not mentioned, making this redirect unhelpful or confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Google Scholar finds some 250 hits for "vertex of the bladder", so it appears highly relevant. I added a mention to the target (the correct fix, rather than just deleting information because of a technical error). —David Eppstein (talk) 16:39, 8 August 2022 (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.

Vertex (topography)[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. ✗plicit 14:12, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Vertex" is not mentioned at the target and there may therefore be a better target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:44, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Nomination is factually incorrect. It is mentioned and relevant. "The vertices of these triangles ... A TIN comprises a triangular network of vertices, known as mass points". Nominator is apparently unaware that the plural of "vertex" is "vertices". —David Eppstein (talk) 16:36, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • @David Eppstein: Since you're far more aware than me: does the article give a definition of "vertex" in the context of topography, and is it different from the common meaning of "vertex" or the use at Vertex (computer graphics)? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:17, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yes, it's different, because it is an object with geographic information rather than graphics-rendering information. Both of these start with vertex (geometry) and add extra information, but the information they add is different. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:30, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Mentioned (in the plural) at the target. XOR'easter (talk) 17:26, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I find "vertex" mentioned twice in the article Triangulated irregular network. The second instance explains what the term means: "A TIN comprises a triangular network of vertices, known as mass points, with associated coordinates in three dimensions connected by edges to form a triangular tessellation." 2601:449:8301:B10:0:0:0:204F (talk) 15:09, 9 August 2022 (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.

2034 Winter Olympics[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. Cabin has a lot more time on their hands to keep edit warring over this, and I don't, so I'm gonna leave it. – numbermaniac 03:47, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do we really need a page or a redirect for this, 12 years in advance? We don't even know what city will be the hosting the 2030 Winter Olympics yet, let alone 2034. – numbermaniac 07:54, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: While it's extremely likely there will be a Winter Olympics in 2034, this feels a bit WP:CRYSTALBALL. After the year shift of the Tokyo games, I feel less certain in saying regularly scheduled events will take place in the year in which they would be scheduled normally. I think that this should be deleted and recreated when the games are announced. TartarTorte 13:23, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Restore article - bidding is going to happen in 5 years and the 2026 Winter Olympics article was created 6 years before bidding actually happened. [1] Cabin134 (talk) 05:16, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The standard for redirects of this type is if we have any information at the target to direct searchers to. There is no information about 2034 at the target, so the redirect should be deleted. -- Tavix (talk) 13:53, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
i thought that since 2036 Summer Olympics is alredy an article and 2032 Summer Olympics is also alrdey an article. It is a good to make the article in 2022 since NBC annonced that Salt lake city is now for bidding. https://olympics.nbcsports.com/2022/06/24/salt-lake-city-winter-olympic-bid-2030-2034/ Cabin134 (talk) 16:48, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore article - This listing is completely inappropriate. The nominator BLARed what was an existing article ([2]) then three minutes later listed it for RfD ([3]). Article currently restored, it should stay that way and the nom or someone else can send it to AFD. A7V2 (talk) 00:07, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I was simply restoring the redirect that was present earlier before it was replaced by a largely unreferenced article. – numbermaniac 03:47, 9 August 2022 (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.

BLPprod[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 16#BLPprod

Iron Golem[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 Iron Invader as the most acceptable target. Thanks User:Uanfala for coming back to change preferences and help establish the emerging consensus! Deryck C. 17:06, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Target has changed back and forth several times between different video games with no discussion. MB 03:06, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Disambiguate to all prior targets -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 07:41, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete As overly vague. It is also the name of a Dark Souls boss and a recurring Final Fantasy enemy. However, there is no specific page with the name "Iron Golem" it needs to disambiguate. However, I would also not be opposed to a disambiguation. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:45, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There are almost two dozen articles with mentions of iron golems, and as far as I can see from a quick glimpse, none of those entities appear to get anywhere close to being significant subtopics of those articles, and so are below the noteworthiness threshold for disambiguating, and the search results do a good job of revealing them. – Uanfala (talk) 13:20, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh well: should have looked closer: Iron Golem is the alternative title of the TV film Iron Invader, so that's one valid target. Disambiguation could work, with one entry for that, another for Golem (which unfortunately doesn't mention iron varieties but is the closest thing to a general article), and a {{canned search}} to reveal the search results. – Uanfala (talk) 13:26, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate between the possible targets, one of which has an article (the film). — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 00:24, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate When I made my initial redirect change to the Minecraft article, it was because most readers typically associate the Iron Golem with the mob in Minecraft which is more well known within popular media as well as the fact that most of the redirects history was redirecting to the Minecraft article. With that all being said, there are other fictional entities with the same name so a disambiguation is a more appropriate course of action than only focusing on one, especially since it doesn't even have a standalone article. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 05:50, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate per those above. BD2412 T 06:00, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Iron Invader, which looks to be the only cromulent target. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't see any of the other suggested disambiguation entries meeting WP:DABMENTION. -- Tavix (talk) 04:48, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 06:56, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:53, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Iron Invader since it's alternatively named as such. I don't see the point on a dab with entries about games with iron golems in it as it is a very ubiquitous enemy monster. --Lenticel (talk) 01:02, 2 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 05:59, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Iron Invader, none of the video game examples described in this discussion appear to be prominent enough to merit inclusion in their respective articles, and thus are not good dab-entries. signed, Rosguill talk 19:02, 16 August 2022 (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.

Fuckfest[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 16#Fuckfest

뻸[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 11:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This redirects to Hangul, it might make sense to redirect to Hangul Syllables instead as this is on that page as U+BEF8; however, seeing as no other symbols redirect to that page and there are many, many symbols, it seems like this could be deleted without harm. TartarTorte 00:26, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — It's a very specific Hangul block as well and has no common usage. I see no utility in keeping it as a redirect. Yue🌙 20:26, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Yue. Also there is no entry in Wiktionary. 2405:9800:BA20:AB7A:401B:6EE7:75D8:26B (talk) 08:42, 10 August 2022 (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.

Giant white shark[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 August 15#Giant white shark

Vincian[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.
Globally locked sock. The result of the discussion was keep. (non-admin closure) PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:18, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is a neologism. The Tumblr coining of this term determined it was a replacement of achillean (an LGBT slang for MLM (men loving men), which includes both gay and bisexual men, not just gay men, however some Fandom and Miraheze wikis treated this term as a word for gay men only). I propose this to be soft redirected to wikt:Vincian. Or similarly as Achillean, to be retargeted to Leonardo da Vinci — Tazuco ✉️ 00:14, 8 August 2022 (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/2022_August_8&oldid=1138583363"