Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 29

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) CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:45, 6 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Template:French intervention in Mexico infobox → Template:Second French intervention in Mexico infobox  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

unused and has implausible name "X infobox" instead of "Infobox X" TerraCyprus (talk) 23:31, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per RHARMFUL and K4: this is an {{R from move}}, the template was at this title for over four years, and breaking links here is not optimum. The redirect doesn't seem to be ambiguous – there's no Template:First French intervention in Mexico infobox – and unused is not a valid rationale for deletion of redirects. On having an implausible name "X infobox" instead of "Infobox X": it's hardly implausible if the template title follows the same method. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 02:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @J947: you may like to sign your text. The incoming links are:

  1. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion
  2. Wikipedia:Database reports/Unused templates/9
  3. User talk:Lieutcoluseng
  4. User talk:Srnec/Archive, 15 March 2014–28 March 2016
  5. User:Underlying lk/Misc infoboxes
  6. Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 March 27
  7. Template talk:Second French intervention in Mexico infobox
  8. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 29

  Redirects aren't kept only because there are incoming links from pages like these. Re unused is not a valid rationale for deletion of redirects - I know, that is why the nomination had a different rationale. TerraCyprus (talk) 02:07, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Normally the links that are broken are outside Wikipedia. My point is that the redirect isn't harmful, so it shouldn't be deleted. This aligns with the guideline on the matter. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 03:17, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @J947: I fixed the name of the template by moving it to a name that doesn't conflict with MOS, it is now at Template:Infobox Second French intervention in Mexico TerraCyprus (talk) 02:15, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep There's nothing implausible about putting the word "infobox" after instead of before the title. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 02:48, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Clearly not an implausible name, the page history shows that another user previously "moved page Template:French intervention in Mexico infobox to Template:Second French intervention in Mexico infobox:". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:40, 1 November 2020 (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.

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 Procedural close. An article has been created so this is no longer a redirect. If someone still thinks this page should be deleted, please file an AfD request. @CycloneYoris: creating an article on a notable topic is welcomed during an RfD, especially since the calls for deletion were to encourage the creation of an article. -- Tavix ^(talk) 12:38, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Judy Hofflund → Artemis Fowl (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

She's produced numerous films, and this creates a misleading blue link, this film is just the most recent, are we going to adjust the redirect every new release? JesseRafe (talk) 18:03, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Judy Hofflund has been the producer for a number of notable films, including Murder on the Orient Express (2017 film), As You Like It (2006 film), Panic Room and Death on the Nile (2020 film). I don't see any particular reason to single out that one as a redirect target, and the search results would at least give you a list of film articles which mention her. Hut 8.5 18:12, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Hut 8.5. Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 19:03, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this to encourage article creation (if possible), as this smells of WP:RECENTISM right now. Regards, SONIC678 22:46, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:RFD#D10. Even if this was the only film she had worked on I'm not convinced this would be a suitable target as she is barely mentioned. Delete to encourage article creation. A7V2 (talk) 00:41, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Procedural comment it is a stub now. If someone wants to delete the stub/article they should file at AfD. TerraCyprus (talk) 01:55, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @TerraCyprus: I’ve now restored the redirect. Please refrain from creating an article until this discussion is closed. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:10, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have restored the stub article. There's no need for this discussion to hold up the creation of an article. A7V2 (talk) 12:21, 30 October 2020 (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.

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:20, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Gears of war Achievements → Gears of War  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Originally created as a list of achievements. Violates WP:NOTGAMEGUIDE and irrelevant to the article as a redirect. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 16:46, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 19:04, 29 October 2020 (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.

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:G7: sole editor blanked the page (twice), does not oppose deletion, and there is no opposition. Primefac (talk) 10:18, 31 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Christina Gandía → Por ella soy Eva  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No one by this name listed at the target, an internet search didn't turn up anything relevant. Delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:34, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. SMB99thx my edits 02:38, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• The redirect was fixed, everything should be fine. If you would still like to delete this page, I don't see much of a problem with doing so, but please do not delete the page it currently redirects to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trevortnidesserped (talk • contribs) 11:27, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Trevortnidesserped: Please do not remove the RfD tag from this redirect until this discussion is closed. Deleting the target article is not even considered as a possibility here, since it’s completely out of the scope of RfD, so there’s no need to worry about that. CycloneYoris ^talk! 19:33, 30 October 2020 (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.

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:20, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Bunker Level → GoldenEye 007 (1997 video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Dam Level → GoldenEye 007 (1997 video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete - Obviously, there are hundreds of such levels in video games. Too vague to redirect here or anywhere at all. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 16:34, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete There are many levels named "Bunker" or "The Bunker", including in Borderlands (video game) and the original LittleBigPlanet, and many search results refer to levels in actual bunkers. Presumably, the same is true for "Dam" and "The Dam". –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:16, 29 October 2020 (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.

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:08, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Eicosen → Eicosenoic acid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is an ambiguous term that at best refers to a functional group derived from the alkene eicosene, but could refer to other compounds such as a eicosenol. Due to the potential for confusion, I recommend deletion. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:49, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. This might I suppose be a trademark, but one thing it is not is any sort of valid chemical name. Narky Blert (talk) 17:48, 2 November 2020 (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.

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:08, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Myristol → Myristoleic acid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is an ambiguous term that is not an accepted alternative name or abbreviation for the target article and can cause confusion. A Google search brings up numerous hits for what appears to be a veterinary supplement. I recommend deletion. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:46, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Mdewman6. An acid is not an alkohol.--Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 15:30, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. The suffix "-ol" means an alcohol, except in some trivial names (and this isn't one of them). Narky Blert (talk) 17:50, 2 November 2020 (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.

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:08, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Polish war myth → Charge at Krojanty  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is a weird redirect. It likely refers to the Polish_cavalry#Cavalry_charges_and_propaganda but it is a term unsused in literature, and very imprecise (which war?). I thought about redirecting it to the link above but it is too generic and ORish to be of much use, it is just a weird Easter Egg. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:39, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete there are a lot of myths about Polish wars. Too vague for a dab (t · c) buidhe 08:24, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Far too vague to be useful. Thryduulf (talk) 11:38, 29 October 2020 (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.

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:08, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Romeo Lacoste → Keemstar#Controversies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirects to the Keemstar article, which makes no mention of Lacoste at all. Greyjoy ^talk 05:22, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well they did mention Lacoste as related to Keemstar until very recently actually. See this reversal for example by user Grayfell on Keemstar page. [1] dated 6 September 2020. I have no issue at all with the amendment or its removal. All I can assert is that there was actually a mention of Romeo Lacoste suing Keemstar after the latter refused to remove an item pertaining to Romeo Lacoste. On its Drama Alert section, Keemstar alleged inappropriate messages by the tattooist Lacoste for underage girls. Lacoste denied and demanded retraction of the gossip news demanded huge payment for millions of dollars. This was clearly mentioned in the Keemstar article back then when I added the redirect to the "Controversies" section. Here are some links about the legal case. [2][3][4] But then it was removed from the Controversies by some fellow editor colleague making the redirect redundant now. So you can remove the redirect unless you want to reinstate the Lacoste affair back to the page. You may if you want. But it will not be me as I am personally reluctant to add the lawsuit back to the page althoiugh it is a hugely mediatized and covered affair. Incidentally Keemstar claims he won the court case eventually against Lacoste. If you want to add back info, go ahead. If you don't want to add info back, remove the redirect. For me, both have their merits... werldwayd (talk) 06:28, 29 October 2020 (UTC) werldwayd (talk) 06:44, 29 October 2020 (UTC) werldwayd (talk) 17:37, 29 October 2020 (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.

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 no consensus. The prior discussion was closed and follow-up tasks were not completed due to a script error. No real motivation for a novel discussion has been proposed. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:07, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ȫ → Livonian language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Ȫ → Livonian language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The previous RfD nomination of 'Ȫ' and 'Ȭ' was closed and the RfD message has not been removed, so I relisting the RfD nomination. 180.183.23.213 (talk) 03:19, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Refine to Livonian language#Alphabet, or maybe retarget to Ö and Õ, respectively. 180.183.23.213 (talk) 03:27, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Courtesy ping to Rosguill who closed the previous discussion as no consensus. Thryduulf (talk) 11:41, 29 October 2020 (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.

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. Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 03:12, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• 1941–44 Pacific typhoon seasons → Pacific typhoon season#1940s  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unnecessary redirect, I could have split this decade into articles rather than keeping rump "1941–44 Pacific typhoon seasons" article in 2017. SMB99thx my edits 01:51, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. "Unnecessary" is never a reason on its own to delete a redirect, this page is a {{R from move}} and contained content until last month so in addition to being required for attribution history incoming links are very likely. Finally anyone using this redirect will be taken to the content they are looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 11:46, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Thryduulf. Another chapter ensues in the history of this niche. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 02:09, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Withdraw I wish I had not done it. My regrets. SMB99thx my edits 02:37, 30 October 2020 (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.

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 Re-Align. (non-admin closure) Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 17:43, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Re-align → Andrew Sega  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Current target doesn't mention this album and the band itself redirects to the same. Perhaps delete and recreate & retarget to the article for the Godsmack song Re-Align. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 00:18, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I think we can make this a {{r from verb}} and retarget it to the disambiguation page at Realignment. - Eureka Lott 01:10, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per EurekaLott. Thryduulf (talk) 11:42, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to the existing song article per nom as an {{R from miscapitalization}} (but there's no point to delete the history). This is a much more plausible match than "realignment"; missing an odd, but correct capitalization is going to be way more likely than inserting an unusual hyphen and searching for the verb of an inherently ambiguous term. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:44, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Godsmack song and add hatnote to Realignment disambiguation. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 20:02, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I'd be OK with this outcome, as well. - Eureka Lott 15:56, 4 November 2020 (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.