Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 8

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) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 19:41, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Solomon Islands at the 2020 Summer Olympics → 2020 Summer Olympics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete redirect to encourage article creation Joseph2302 (talk) 17:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Both of these redirects were articles before being redirected by Onel5969. So the nominator's rationale for deletion is rather flawed. Don't delete the redirect because that would be back-door deletion of an article. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 21:51, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The current redirect doesn't give any subject information, so red link is perfectly fine until someone wants to create a decent article. Which is likely to happen once some competitors from the country are qualified. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore the article in the page history per WP:BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 15:45, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, redirecting individual country's participation articles to the article about the general sporting event is reasonable, especially given that the event has not yet occurred. Restoring the article only to send it to AfD and have it deleted, only to have it recreated in a few months seems like a lot of bureaucracy to little benefit. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:18, 6 May 2021 (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 keep. (non-admin closure) —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 19:41, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Nauru at the 2020 Summer Olympics → 2020 Summer Olympics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete redirect to encourage article creation Joseph2302 (talk) 17:33, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Both of these redirects were articles before being redirected by Onel5969. So the nominator's rationale for deletion is rather flawed. Don't delete the redirect because that would be back-door deletion of an article. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 21:52, 27 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The current redirect doesn't give any subject information, so red link is perfectly fine until someone wants to create a decent article. Which is likely to happen once some competitors from the country are qualified. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore the article in the page history per WP:BLAR. This is without prejudice to AfD if anyone desires. Thryduulf (talk) 15:46, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, redirecting individual country's participation articles to the article about the general sporting event is reasonable, especially given that the event has not yet occurred. Restoring the article only to send it to AfD and have it deleted, only to have it recreated in a few months seems like a lot of bureaucracy to little benefit. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:18, 6 May 2021 (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 no consensus. ✗plicit 14:00, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Deceased inventor → Inventor (patent)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This just strikes me as very unlikely search term. No incoming links at all, so it isn't used anywhere. Not mentioned in target article, and if someone was searching this, it is not a safe assumption that they were curious specifically about patent law. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:07, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• If anything I think List of inventors would make more sense since I believe it’s more likely thy someone using this as a search term is looking for a list of dead inventors and since the list does mentioned the date of birth and death (if applicable) the list could be used in that way. At the very least it makes more sense than the current target.--67.70.101.238 (talk) 21:54, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to List of inventors per IP (is this our regular IP friend gone dynamic or is it a new one? I haven't been around here for a few days). Not a particularly strong retarget, but this does seem like something people could reasonably search, and the proposed location is much more intuitive. Vaticidalprophet 06:00, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: The target article contains a discussion of the legal requirements for handling a patent application when an inventor is deceased. So the redirect makes more sense than it might appear. — BarrelProof (talk) 23:30, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok so not completely irrelevant but I’m still confident that someone looking up patent requirements wouldn’t use deceased inventor as their search term.--67.70.101.238 (talk) 06:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, both the current target and the suggested redirect target seem less than helpful. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:49, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Although there is not much at the current target there is a mention and reference. Without the plural unlikely that this would be expected to redirect to a list. Peter James (talk) 17:15, 30 April 2021 (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.