Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 September 21

September 21

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 21, 2019.

Bảo Lâm District, Lam Dong

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:30, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is a really awkward redirect. The redirect should either has every diacritics in it (like Bảo Lâm District, Lâm Đồng), or none of them at all (like Bao Lam District, Lam Dong). No one is going to search for a key word like this. There's no way a user knowing the spelling with diacritics of the district does not know that spelling of the province, as a province is definitely better-known than a district. It can be seen that no article links to this redirect at all. Cn5900 (talk) 23:21, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, nothing wrong with these. We should have redirects from all reasonable spellings, with an without diacritics – particularly as our own encyclopaedia does not consistently follow either option. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:06, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nominator. The fully diacriticless redirects Bao Lam District, Lam Dong and Binh Tan District, Vinh Long already exist. Half-diacritic/half-diacriticless redirects are just confusing and stuff up the search results. 59.149.124.29 (talk) 12:09, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Useless as search term and promotes sloppiness in usage of diacritics. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:53, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No user is going to type a keyword like this. If he/she is able to type the name with diacritics for the first half, there's no reason why they would type the rest of it diacriticless. In fact, if you look at the pages that links there, no other articles link there at all. 2600:1700:CCD0:5790:2946:7E8F:358F:60BC (talk) 16:01, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • And also, Justlettersandnumbers, I don't know how well the idea of creating all possible spelling of the name works in other languages. But doing that for Vietnamese name is the worst idea ever. Take Bảo Lâm District, Lâm Đồng for an example:
    • For Bảo there are 3 possible spelling: 'Bao', 'Bảo' and 'Bão' (the last one is the most common misspelling of 'Bảo')
    • For Lâm there are 2 (with and without diacritics), and 'Lâm' occurs twice, so there are 4
    • For Đồng, apart from the diacriticless, people are likely to misspell it: Dông, Đông, Dồng, Đong, Đòng.... (so there are 6 at least, including the orginal diacriticless)

If you want to create redirect for all alternative spellings, there are 3 x 4 x 6 = 72 redirects to create. That's just for one article. My point is, for Vietnamese articles, there should only be two main alternative spelling, diacritic and diacriticless; and for some cases that the name is very likely to be misspelled, we will create another one or two redirects for diacritic misspelled names. Half diacritic and diacriticless for Vietnamese name is just the worst idea ever. Cn5900 (talk) 16:16, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per Cn5900. The redirects are implausible, unused (based on stats), unusable for linking, and have no useful history. We do not need redirects for every possible variant of a title, and R3 should have prevailed in this case. -- Black Falcon (talk) 15:56, 28 September 2019 (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.

Italy of the Centre

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:30, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Italy of the Centre → Third Pole (Italy)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Italy of the Centre, or Italia del Centro, seems an inexistent name, I have not found any source about it. Scia Della Cometa (talk) 22:22, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete no evidence the term is used. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:51, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Not used in the target article or, apparently, outside of Wikipedia; similarly, I could find no related results for "Italia del Centro". -- Black Falcon (talk) 16:00, 28 September 2019 (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.

Maccabi Hadera B.C.

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:30, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maccabi Hadera B.C. → Maccabi Hadera F.C.  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A user attempted to request deletion by blanking the redirect in this nomination. The redirect is implausible, and was created as a result of a hijacking in 2015. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 22:16, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as misleading. The target article is not a basketball club. -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:54, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 08:35, 23 September 2019 (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.

C15H32O

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. Justifications were provided, withdrawing nomination. (non-admin closure) signed, Rosguill talk 18:12, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • C15H32O → 1-Pentadecanol  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This doesn't seem like an appropriate redirect. It's been a while since I took chemistry, but given that this is an organic compound with the formula CH3(CH2)13CH2OH, I'm pretty sure that changing the order of the elements changes the compound, and that the formula in the redirect thus does not necessarily refer to the target. I'd like editors more familiar with the subject matter to confirm or deny this, but if my hunch is correct then either deletion or disambiguation between other possible targets is appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 22:14, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

C15H32O is the chemical formula of 1-Pentadecanol. Many compounds exist with this formula and are called isomers. Such as 2-Pentadecanol, but there are no articles about them.
The formula is an important and simple feature of a compound: it is easy to find a compound by its formula.
About 10 years ago was started creating chemical formula pages (User:Edgar181 started it, if I know well). There are ~10,000 such pages on the English Wikipedia. C15H32O is one of them. The formula pages list the compounds of the given formula, see e.g. C8H9NO2. If there is only one article about a particular formula, then we create a redirect to that particular compound instead of "real" page. 80% of the formula pages are redirects.
A conceptual question is whether we want formula pages. I started correcting the errors that had accumulated in last 10 years. If the community chooses I quit, but then it is wise to delete the existing ones, because without checking errors will accumulate. However, the correction will require creation of ~3000 new redir. Gyimhu (talk) 07:58, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Molecular formula redirects are common and useful. There are many thousands of them in Category:Redirects from molecular formulas. Where there are more than one chemical compound with the same molecular formula, {{Molecular formula index}} is used. There are also many thousands of these in Category:Molecular formula set index pages. The order in which the elements are listed in a molecular formula is standardized using the Hill system. -- Ed (Edgar181) 10:35, 22 September 2019 (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.

Kukubird

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:31, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target article, I can't for the life of me figure out how this redirect relates to the target. Delete unless a justification can be provided, or perhaps redirect to Cuckoo. signed, Rosguill talk 21:33, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some context for non-Singaporean or non-Singapore based editors. 1. Kukubird is a derogatory term in local parlance. It refers to penis. 2. One of NTU's 2019 freshman camp orientation leader made his freshmen perform a cheer based on 'kukubird' and it was recorded.[1] This redirect was done at best, as a joke; at the worse, a malicious act. I suggest one of the following actions to be carried out:
* Delete the redirect
* Change the redirect to Singlish vocabulary, but with an additional entry defining the term.
Additionally, the user, The Toad who made this redirect should be called out and warned for doing a joke edit. robertsky (talk) 07:40, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, this redirect should be in discussion as well: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kukubird_Kukubird&redirect=no robertsky (talk) 08:32, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "NTU investigating video of students performing obscene cheer during freshman orientation camp". Mothership.sg. Retrieved 2019-09-22.
  • Delete both and trout the creator. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:45, 25 September 2019 (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.

Ninjago.ep

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. TheSandDoctor Talk 16:25, 28 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not clear what the purpose of this redirect is, almost no usage history. Note that the title is not a url. Delete unless a proper justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 21:32, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete I was about to nominate it for deletion but Rosguill beat me to it. Not a useful search term and unlikely to be used in running prose. Wug·a·po·des​ 21:34, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: or speedy delete as an improbable typo or abbreviation. The creator of this redirect seems to be obsessed with (disruptively) making bizarre redirects. See [1]. Toddst1 (talk) 09:27, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete useless, no wkipedia history. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:48, 25 September 2019 (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.

List of Jurassic Park characters Alexia Murphy

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:31, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unconventional title with no usage history, I would suggest deletion. It also appears to be a typo, as the target article says that the character's name is "Alexis" Murphy. signed, Rosguill talk 21:21, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete: Serves no purpose. BattleshipMan (talk) 21:52, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as pointless. The redirect title is both longer and incorrect. -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:53, 21 September 2019 (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.

What's Happening in NYC?

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:32, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • What's Happening in NYC? → Seen in NY  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This doesn't appear to be an alternative title for the target, I would suggest deletion unless a proper justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 18:24, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. I can't find an appropriate target; this redirect or any potential target also seem to fall under WP:NOTNEWS. ComplexRational (talk) 00:16, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as misleading per se. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:49, 25 September 2019 (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.

Piccolo (Hero)

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:32, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Piccolo (Hero) → Piccolo (Dragon Ball)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
  • Cell (Villain) → Cell (Dragon Ball)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These are not good disambiguators, there's no usage history, and created by a blocked NOTHERE user. I suggest deletion. signed, Rosguill talk 18:15, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete especially the Piccolo one since he goes from villain to hero.Tintor2 (talk) 20:51, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per as unused (no significant links, few pageviews), potentially confusing redirects that have not been and are unlikely to be used. -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:50, 21 September 2019 (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.

Template:Berks

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:32, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. It does not follow the standard convention for redirects of Wikiproject banners Magioladitis (talk) 14:01, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom as an unused (no significant links, virtually no pageviews), non-standard, and potentially confusing (Berks is ambiguous) project banner redirect with no useful page history. -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:38, 21 September 2019 (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.

Template:WPO&F

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 06:32, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Unused. It does not follow the standard convention for redirects of Wikiproject banners Magioladitis (talk) 13:58, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom as an unused (no significant links, virtually no pageviews), non-standard project banner redirect. -- Black Falcon (talk) 23:36, 21 September 2019 (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.

Boy next door (stock character)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 4#Boy next door (stock character)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_September_21&oldid=919624105"