Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 September 7

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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:26, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Ryan Cramer → Zone 66  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Who is Ryan Cramer and what's he got to do with Zone 66? This redirect appears to violate WP:NOTPROMOTION. KalHolmann (talk) 18:57, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

According to the previous redirect history, Cramer was associated with the Renaissance demo group which developed the Zone 66 game. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:18, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as non-notable association with the game (not listed in the major infobox credits), and potential confusion with so far non-notable voice actor Ryan Kramer. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:21, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: not mentioned in the article, no particularly good reason for him to be mentioned. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:11, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:28, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Donetsian Coal Basin → Donets Coal Basin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Donetsian Black Coal Basin → Donets Coal Basin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. These names for the Donets Coal Basin were invented/coined by the redirects's creator, when he/she made an article move. A Google search made at the time of the move discussion for the article revealed only sources that got their content from Wikipedia.[1]. Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day Toddy1 (talk) 06:11, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, per nom. First of all no supporting references, second of all inconsistent with other names for similar entities worldwide, dubious word morphology. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 11:42, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete. This was a leftover action following an article rename to Donets Coal Basin. Attempting WP:CSD G6. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:18, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom + valid policies and rationales provided by editors above. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 06:13, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. "Donetsian" doesn't seem to be used at all in this context, but it is a demonym used in geological and archaeological scholarship to refer, as far as I can tell, to the area in which the coal mining region sits. Appending "ian" to the name of a place or region in order to create a demonym also strikes me as a plausible error in this and other contexts. These titles couldn't, to my knowledge, plausibly refer to any other search term, so there's no risk of confusion. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 13:39, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense. The first link is a translation from a Ukrainian paper at Research Gate, which does not make it recognisable or intuitive in English. It doesn't appear anywhere else. The second reference is to "Dniepr-Donetsian" as a specialist archaeological region, not 'Donetsian' on its own in reference to the coal basin. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 21:00, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out with regard to the first link – I hadn't realised I could access the full paper and assumed it was in English. The word obviously isn't used frequently in English-language geology, but there are a few mentions: e.g. [2] (quite an old source, but least there's no risk of citogenesis). As far as the second, I'm aware that it isn't referring specifically to the coal basin, which is why I said it "refer[s], as far as I can tell, to the area in which the coal mining region sits". I don't claim any expertise in geology, archaeology or eastern European geography, nor that these are necessarily likely search terms, but they don't strike me as especially implausible search terms either and – vitally – they don't strike me as redirects that are likely to cause confusion or that cause any harm in any other way. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 00:03, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Arms & Hearts: I don't have access to the entire 1977 article, but the usage there is extremely obscure... or, perhaps, you're citing it to demonstrate how specialised areas of research can sometimes create their own lexicology where existing terminology doesn't accommodate the research being translated without becoming extremely awkward(?). While I'm usually on board with the 'redirects are cheap' approach, 'Donetsian' as a descriptor is so unlikely that encouraging such stretches of the imagination become strained to the point of being disruptive. Wikipedia already has likely search strings - such as "coal in donets" - in place. There are multiple (in fact, innumerable) potential permutations of so many nouns from languages other than English that Wikipedia could choke on them: they're not quite as cheap as they may appear to be. For me, it is not a matter of whether such a redirect will cause confusion but a question of whether there is even reasonably plausible that such a search string would actually be used, and of any use. I guess it's a matter of our personal views as to the function of redirects. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:58, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia should not be perpetuating neologisms - particularly ones that have no existence outside Wikipedia (and sites that get their content from Wikipedia). WP:NOTNEO-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:14, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The two terms were created here:

• Donetsian Black Coal Basin 22:33, 20 July 2018
• Donetsian Coal Basin 22:37, 20 July 2018

One of the weird leftovers following the article rename to Donets Coal Basin is that it acquired a revision history from somewhere else the redirect called Donets Coal Basin.-- Toddy1 (talk) 07:27, 31 August 2018 (UTC) modified 13:04:31[reply]

@Iryna Harpy: I was citing it mostly just to make the point that "Donetsian" is sometimes used outside of Wikipedia, so speaking of a "Donetsian coal basin" is neither totally implausible nor a neologism invented by a Wikipedian. I agree of course that the issue boils down to our respective views on the function of redirects, and specifically the effects of keeping them – as I've argued in other discussions, the idea that keeping a given redirect "sets a precedent" that leads to the creation of others (which you seem to be invoking by referring to "encouraging such stretches of the imagination") is rarely if ever supported by any evidence. Editors, in my experience, simply don't behave that way: people create redirects because they think they will be useful, and occasionally for vandalistic or POV purposes, not because they think that a precedent exists to which they must conform. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 11:47, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Arms & Hearts. A further Google scholar search shows that "Donetsian" is valid adjectival form for the Donets.---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 20:41, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep both - While obscure at best, the fact that the term "Donetsian" is indeed used by some reliable sources means that I'd rather we retain these. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 19:01, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the first one as plausible and tag with {{R from incorrect name}}. – Uanfala (talk) 22:33, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. Not exactly an overwhelming consensus here, so this could just as easily be a "no consensus, delete" close. I still think the question as posed in the initial relist is worth discussing, but I don't think another relist will be fruitful so perhaps this isn't the time/place to have it. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:16, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Mota Varachha → Varachha  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Term not present in target article - no indication that this is a useful redirect. PamD 23:04, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Surat this is a different suburb from Varachha. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 01:03, 17 August 2018 (UTC) updated 19:22, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Striking vote per my comment below AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:22, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, unless a mention can be added to Surat. Mota Varachha seems to be (1) a place in Surat and (2) a different place from Varachna. But the only articles to mention it are Olpad (Vidhan Sabha constituency) and Ashadeep Group of Schools, neither of which are viable targets. The tenth point of WP:RDEL also applies, insofar as "Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable" per WP:GEOLAND. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:07, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It really depends on whether Surat's major neighborhoods / suburbs are going to be listed. Right now only the Varachha area has its own article. The article already suffers from an excessive number of non-notable redirects to List of tourist attractions in Surat. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 18:16, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. If someone wants the content to start a draft, happy to provide. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 11:13, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• List of racist attack on Africans in India → Ethnic relations in India  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Misspelled, and subject is not discussed at target.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  17:55, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Hard to be non-neutral about this unless this is a significant section mentioned in the article. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:08, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm not finding such content anywhere. Demographics of India mentions Africans in some other context; Afro-Asians in South Asia mentions the slave trade, but not incidents of racist attacks, much less a list of them. --BDD (talk) 01:54, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep extensive national and international media coverage of topic. 2016 Economist article on murder of a Congolese student, 2017 Economic Times article on mob assault on African students in Delhi Eaglewolfspirit (talk) 21:33, 14 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Eaglewolfspirit, that's an argument for adding content to the article. If it's not there, the redirect isn't helping anyone. Of course, you're welcome to be bold and add content, with references, yourself. --BDD (talk) 14:36, 15 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• There was a list in the page history. Restore article [3] (and maybe send to AfD). If we think the article has no chance of surviving AfD then delete since the current target doesn't contain any details about racist attacks against Africans. Deryck C. 13:01, 16 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The redirect is not pointing to the content. the Content in the article history will not survive AfD per WP:NOTNEWS --DBigXrayᗙ 21:46, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Is the issue here that, fundamentally, we need a kind of general concept article called something like 'Anti-African prejudice in India' that doesn't simply list attacks but describes the larger context? CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:11, 3 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The issue is that the Title is pure OR made up with cherry picking of crime incidents. you can see my comment below for further elaboration on this. --DBigXrayᗙ 21:32, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Personally, I see consensus to delete before this was ever relisted, and if anything, the consensus got even stronger after the second relist. There's absolutely no need to have this sit in RfD for over a month. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:40, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Consider adding India to List of ethnic riots if there are notable events covered by Wikipedia. Note: an article List of racist attack on Indians was created by same user in April 2017 along with redirect List of racial attack on Indians. It reads like and thus fails WP:NOTNEWSPAPER AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:00, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: author was also blocked for sockpuppetry Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Abc-wtf-def/Archive around this time. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:11, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Somebody (maybe myself) probably should write an article specifically about anti-African prejudice in India. Barring that, we appear to have what's somewhat of a WP:REDLINK situation. Coupled with the lack of consensus here, I'd rather we go ahead and delete the redirect as it stands. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 19:03, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify (that is, restore article and then move to draftspace without leaving behind a redirect). The article was a list of incidents (with sources), and even though it's minimal, it could be of some use to whoever gets around to writing a proper article on the topic of racism in India. If no-one starts working on it, then the draft will more or less automatically get deleted in six months. – Uanfala (talk) 22:38, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Uanfala, should List of racist attack on Indians be moved to Draft as well? It's got a list of incidents as newspaper coverage? Should it be renamed to "Racism in India" ? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:58, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That looks even less mainspace-worthy. I'm not sure its scope is well-defined: it's about racist attacks on Indians, wherever they might be in the world. We do have "Racism in ..." articles, but no "Racism against ..." ones that I'm aware of. – Uanfala (talk) 15:06, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, there are in fact such articles, like Anti-Indian sentiment. – Uanfala (talk) 21:17, 13 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment in continuation of my delete !vote above, I see some editors are trying to find a better alternate to preserve this, I do appreciate the efforts but I would just want to remind that this are not cases of ethnic riots but "Crimes" in which one of the parties was African. The list was made with cherrypicking of News articles completely disregarding WP:NOTNEWS by a SPA who was on a crusade to add -ve material on Bangladesh and India. Draftifying is not a feasible option because the notability is not established. There is nothing to say that the subject will become notable in 6 months or so. The redirect as it stands is redundant and deletion is the only best alternative in my opinion. --DBigXrayᗙ 20:24, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not that keen on preserving this article – after all, if anyone wants to create a proper article, this will be of limited use. But racism directed against Africans is a real thing in India and the topic is notable; I did check the sources for one or two of the incidents, and the racist nature of the incident was pretty much the centerpiece of the news. – Uanfala (talk) 21:18, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to respectfully disagree. We are going offtopic, but FWIW I was closely following some of the events via news when it actually happened. In one of the case related to a road accident, the African driver was mobbed up and beaten. the cause was not him being african but the accident, even local drivers are regularly roughed up by locals in India. A few of the cases in Delhi was related to drug cartel wars among the Africans. And locals anger against the drug syndicate. Indian TV media and Print media is also notorious to fire up incidents to get more TRP and grab eyeballs. Of course these incidents i gave example are not exhaustive list of cases. Racism exists in the world but not everywhere, we have to follow Notability to decide something on wikipedia. Using these cases as a Racism against Africans will be WP:SYNTH and analysis. regards.--DBigXrayᗙ 21:28, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. While a previous AfD appears to have been closed as Merge, there doesn't appear to be any content in the target, so we don't need to keep the redirect's history. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 01:25, 17 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Raymond Kertezc → Scientific control  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Raymond kertezc → Scientific control  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It's redirecting to a non-existent section in an article that doesn't mention his non-existence! Celia Homeford (talk) 13:48, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete "Raymond Kertezc is my favorite poet" was an example control statement in the Personality Assessment Inventory [4] and Validity scale [5] but this is no longer discussed at either page. Reconsider if the reference and explanation is added back. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 23:52, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per AngusWOOF. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:42, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - While somewhat interesting, this non-existent person's role in a bunch of tests isn't particularly notable. It's a minor trivia point. I also support deletion. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 19:47, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 disambiguate. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 11:41, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Quipper → Quipper (company)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The current redirect to Quipper is about Index of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st edition monsters#TSR 2012 - Fiend Folio (1981). If you will search Google, the first search on the list on Quipper is about Quipper (company). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carlojoseph14 (talk • contribs) 06:54, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Move redirect and edit history to Quipper (Dungeons & Dragons) and then retarget Quipper as per above. BOZ (talk) 11:34, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Move Quipper (company) to Quipper and hatnote to the Dungeons & Dragons usage. There is no substantial edit history that needs to be preserved, so we don't need to move this redirect to a new title first (although Quipper (Dungeons & Dragons) would be a fine redirect should anyone want to create it). -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:57, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Disambiguate. Good finds, Uanfala. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:42, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Dabify. In addition to the company and the D&D thing, there's also Quipper (programming language), and the lexical meaning of the word (which could be either a wiktionary link, or an entry of itself pointing to Quip (wit)). – Uanfala (talk) 14:28, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate as above. No primary topic among these items. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 15:59, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate the links pointed are applicable for the dab as above.--DBigXrayᗙ 00:05, 8 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Dabify per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:41, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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