Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 11

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion‎ | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Neveselbert (talk | contribs) at 17:07, 16 July 2024 (→‎North West Leicestershire by-election, 2010: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

July 11

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 11, 2024.

Gusty Garden Galaxy

Soundtrack not mentioned in the target. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:21, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

North West Leicestershire by-election, 2010

Never happened. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 22:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Did the preparations for the by-election actually start? The Banner talk 11:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    AIUI formal preparations can only start once the writ for the election has been issued (which it never was), but it is very likely that at least some informal ones were. Given that those same preparations would have just become preparations for the general election when that was called, and most of them wouldn't have been newsworthy I'm not sure how you'd go about ascertaining, especially at this distance. Thryduulf (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sonic Wiild Fire

either an implausible misspelling or an implausible pun. i don't know which outcome is worse, but the term doesn't seem to see much (if any) use in the context of sonic, with or without a space cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment/Weak Keep - Article has mention of "Sonic Wild Fire" as the game's original working title, and a single doubling of a character is a potentially plausible typo, so I don't see a need to go out of our way to delete this thing, but I'll grant that searching the original working title to begin with is a rare proposition, so it's not like I feel strongly about this one. (Entirely possible the redirect creator was making a Wii system pun) Fieari (talk) 06:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mystic Ruins

either vague, or more closely associated with sonic adventure cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:20, 4 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Biographies of living persons

This should be a CNR to WP:BLP. All of the 304 links to this redirect are in reference to the Wikipedia policy, rather than the Biography article. It seems unlikely that anyone searching for this would be looking for the encyclopedic article, especially considering the term is never mentioned. It was retarted to Biography from a CNR in 2009. C F A 💬 18:34, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I suppose this could also be retargeted to an encyclopedia article about Wikipedia, like Wikipedia#Policies_and_content, Vandalism on Wikipedia, or List of Wikipedia controversies (Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident), though a project redirect would make the most sense in my eyes. C F A 💬 18:47, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget (or add encyclopaedic content) This is a very high profile policy that does get referenced frequently off-site so I'm surprised we don't have some encyclopaedic content about it that could host a hatnote to the policy, although finding sources will be tricky due to the large number of Wikipedia mirrors and many other sites that have policies/guidelines with the same title. If we don't have encyclopaedic content then a cross-namespace redirect is the way to go - this is something that needs to be very easy to find, particularly by prospective editors and article subjects who shouldn't have to learn about namespaces first. Thryduulf (talk) 20:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I was wondering if there would be enough coverage to write a separate article on the policy. I found it surprising that even the Policies and content section in the main Wikipedia article only briefly mentioned the policy (in reference to the Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident). If someone is willing to do that and they can find enough coverage, then that (with a hatnote) would be my preferred outcome over retargeting. C F A 💬 21:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Its not really a Wikipedia specific term but all Google results are for the policy. Maybe it should be kept as with a link on the DAB page to the BLP policy as well as the current MOS page. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:23, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's what I was considering doing before listing it here, but I decided against it. Do you really think anyone typing "Biographies of living persons" into the search bar is looking for Biography? It is obviously directly referencing the policy and the term isn't even mentioned in the article. C F A 💬 03:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Extoskelitan

that's 3 separate spelling mistakes cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:14, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: per WP:CHEAP. C F A 💬 19:01, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    will disagree with this specific one per wp:costly. aside from wikipedia, there seem to be only 3 other instances of this typo being made, two of those are on user-generated sites, and the other one cites this redirect for some reason cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I see no reason why this should be deleted (or even listed here). It does no harm, has a valid target, and is obviously not stealing a red link from a future article. Unless misspellings are so bad that it's not clear what the target should be, I don't think they should ever be listed at RfD. As WP:COSTLY says: "the mere fact that a redirect is listed and discussed at the Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion page creates work for others" and "[don't send] redirects to RFD, unless there is a serious problem that can't be solved any other way (e.g., WP:BLP violations)." It has received 74 pageviews over its 9-year history, probably mostly crawlers, but it has most likely helped someone at least a few times before. C F A 💬 19:53, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There are 2,578,125 possible typos of "Exoskeleton" that misses 3 letters, only counting the alphabet, and discounting insertions/removals. You would need to hire 10 people for 8 hours everyday, entering one unique typo per second, for 45 days to have an 50% chance of arriving at this typo. So likely, this redirect have never seen actual human traffic. Ca talk to me! 04:10, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    if it's discounting insertions, this typo would be out of the question, as there's an added t
    on cfa's note, i doubt the views could reasonably come from any source besides people using the "what links here" tool (like i did), mashing, or somehow finding the 3 instances of this specific misspelling and searching it here for a quick laugh. if someone has to do mental gymnastics to maybe find a possible reason for any given misspelling, there's a good chance it's not plausible cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:52, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure, but that was hardly my point. I obviously don't care if this useless redirect is deleted, and I don't imagine anyone else on Wikipedia does either. But there's really no point in listing harmless misspellings here as long as they are targeted appropriately: all you're doing is cluttering RfD and making more work for the voters, relisters, closers, etc. Tag them for R3 if you catch them early, but otherwise don't bother. C F A 💬 16:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree with you on that on useless but harmless redirects, no need to nominate for deletion; but might as well delete this useless redirect since it have been already nominated for deletion. Ca talk to me! 17:01, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, implausible error, not used in practice. Rusalkii (talk) 21:43, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:39, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete implausible error that's so incorrect it looks like it's from a different language 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 17:38, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Compounding two errors is much less plausible than a single error. I might accept "exoskelitan" as a plausible phonetic attempt at spelling it. I'd possibly accept "extoskeleton" under similar grounds, though it's a bit more of a stretch. But "extoskelitan" is just too far for me, and I'm a huge believer in WP:CHEAP. Fieari (talk) 00:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Skeltal

that's the "doot" meme. doesn't seem like a plausible misspelling of "skeletal" otherwise, as e is just close enough to t where it'd be hard to forget to type one letter cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:09, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: per WP:CHEAP. C F A 💬 19:02, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Skeltal is a variant name of a popular internet meme [1]. Our article on skeleton lack information about this meme, neither do any other article. The intro of WP:REDIRECT, a guideline says Redirects are used to help people arrive more quickly at the page they want to read. A generic article about skeletons are not what readers would want to see when they are searching about a meme. Ca talk to me! 05:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One PIece

that's an uppercase i cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:54, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Implausible misspelling. Our search function automatically handles different capitalizations. I tend to agree that effort of listing redirects with minor errors can be used elsewhere, but we might as well delete them as they are listed to reduce maintance work for useless redirects. Ca talk to me! 05:47, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

M-Block

'm (or 'm block) is a glitch pokémon that shares missingno's "sprite", index number, and some functions, but is otherwise a different glitch. it's not mentioned in the article aside from an offhanded mention in the translation for source 1 cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:15, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. AFAIK we don't discuss the 'M glitch in any other capacity, the most common method of finding MissingNo will also turn up 'M, and it doesn't just copy SOME functions, but PRACTICALLY ALL functions. For our intents and purposes, 'M and MissingNo. are the same thing and should be treated accordingly by redirects. Leave further details to Glitch City Labs and Bulbapedia. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:33, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
for pedantries that would border on fancruft if there weren't actually a couple of sources behind them...
missingno (the form everyone recognizes, that is) can be obtained via the old man and mew glitches and the time capsule exploit with certain names, special stats, and gen 2 pokémon respectively, adds 128 items to the item in the 6rd slot of the player's bag, and corrupts hall of fame data
'm (specifically 00, as fe and ff are just hybrids) can only be obtained via the old man glitch and shares missingno's sprite, item cloning, and hall of fame corruption as a result of sharing its index number, but has (slightly) different data, such as moves and cries, can evolve into clefairy or kangaskhan, and lets you catch phantom ditto. according to some old stuff i found, it can also apparently spontaneously turn into a rhydon if you have another 'm in your party
from a quick-ish look, those two sources mention 'm and its differences compared to missingno in some level of detail, an archive of the latter currently being source 9 in missingno's article, so if a mention could be added or discussed, i wouldn't be opposed to it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Lunamann.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pokémon incident

extremely vague. requires that "pokémon" and "incident" be defined in a way that somehow narrows it down to only this particular episode of the anime generation that also featured jynx and hypno, while excluding every other controversy the franchise has seen cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:42, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

should mention that i would favor retargeting it to an article or section of an article detailing most controversies, no such thing exists (yet). the closest i found was pokémon episodes removed from rotation, but even then, that's only for the anime cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

EP038

vague. i can name at least one other thing with more than 37 episodes cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heartless Angel

a recurring attack for sephiroth in a lot of his appearances since his debut... but also for kefka. if both appear in a playable or boss form in any given game, heartless angel tends to go to whoever pops up first, which is usually kefka. if you want to be technical, sephiroth gets it more often overall because he gets more appearances, but results seem to associate it equally with both (give or take sephiroth being mentioned more often overall). even then, heartless angel isn't mentioned in either of their articles. if not deleted, i don't know if it should be kept there or retargeted to kefka, to final fantasy#gameplay, or to recurring elements in the final fantasy series#gameplay, because it'd be hard to cram an unsourced mention (or worse, a mention with a guide as the source) into those otherwise good or featured articles cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

바나나

rlang seems to apply. i haven't found anything about the koreas in any banana article cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:44, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There have been reports of bananas growing in Seoul due to climate change, but bananas are not closely affined to Korea. Delete per nom. Ca talk to me! 16:07, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ramshackle

'Ramshackle' (whatever that is) isn't mentioned anywhere in the target article. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 11:04, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Australia national soccer team

Procedural nomination; I'm not leaving an opinion. This redirect was converted to a disambiguation page by Thrakkx, back to a redirect by Macosal, back again by Joeykai, and then back to a redirect by The Banner earlier today. Keep or disambiguate? —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:03, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Unfortunately, the men's team is the primary topic (I would love to see the women's team with the same status, but alas). Beside that, it solved a lot of links to disambiguation pages. The Banner talk 09:06, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ZeroNaseone

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 per WP:CSD#G6 and WP:CSD#G7. Thryduulf (talk) 12:35, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained and possible test move resulting in this redirect creation. Also not mentioned nor reliably sourced at target, a quick BEFORE also returns nothing other than COMMONNAME results of target nor non-COMMONNAME results showing otherwise. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 04:24, 11 July 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).

Naked Rugby League 2007-08

Implausible redirect. Zinnober9 (talk) 00:26, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_July_11&oldid=1234887095"