Cannabis Sativa

thcscience_admin
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Line 363: Line 363:
*::The most basic principle behind redirects is that not all readers will take the same approach to find a given piece of information. <span class="nowrap"> <span style="font-family:courier">-- [[User:Tamzin|<span style="color:deeppink;">Tamzin</span>]]</span><sup>[''[[User talk:Tamzin|<span style="color:deeppink;">cetacean needed</span>]]'']</sup> (she/they)</span> 03:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
*::The most basic principle behind redirects is that not all readers will take the same approach to find a given piece of information. <span class="nowrap"> <span style="font-family:courier">-- [[User:Tamzin|<span style="color:deeppink;">Tamzin</span>]]</span><sup>[''[[User talk:Tamzin|<span style="color:deeppink;">cetacean needed</span>]]'']</sup> (she/they)</span> 03:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per Tamzin and Walter Görlitz. [[User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] ([[User talk:Thryduulf|talk]]) 22:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per Tamzin and Walter Görlitz. [[User:Thryduulf|Thryduulf]] ([[User talk:Thryduulf|talk]]) 22:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' per Tamzin, Walter Görlitz, and Walter Görlitz. [[User:Neel.arunabh|Neel.arunabh]] ([[User talk:Neel.arunabh|talk]]) 17:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)


====Stan (fan)====
====Stan (fan)====

Revision as of 17:25, 19 January 2022

January 14

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 14, 2022.

Harghita Mădăraş

Strange redirect with no views in the last 30 days. This redirect is as if we had one called Utah Salt Lake City (Harghita is a province of Romania, and Mădăraș is a village on the country). Useless in my opinion. Super Ψ Dro 23:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help:Ref and similar

I linked to H:REF expecting it to take me to a help page on references, and, when I went to go create the redirect, was surprised to see there's no consensus on what help page to target. This is a mixed-target conflict going back over a decade, but I don't give much weight to age or pageviews, since all of the targets except Help:Reference point to content on the same topic, and in many cases people may have linked one of these without actually looking at where they point to. As such, I think we should take readers to the broadest target available. I think Help:Reference is suboptimal but it gets decent pageviews and would be a significant substantive change in target topic, so probably better left untouched; but I've included it for the sake of completeness. So: Weak keep Help:Reference, synchronize rest at Help:Footnotes as broadest target available, but I think syncing at Help:Referencing for beginners or Wikipedia:Inline citations (target of WP:REF and WP:REFS) would be reasonable too. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 23:08, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ack, this is a mess, although maybe not quite as much as it might seem. The singular Help:Reference being the one to go to the ref desk makes some amount of sense, as we wouldn't have Help:References going there. Help:Referencing for beginners isn't that different from Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1; it just transcludes that page plus the others in that tutorial module. Help:Footnotes is the more advanced page. I think in this situation we should prioritize newcomers (meaning go with Help:Referencing for beginners or Help:Introduction to referencing with Wiki Markup/1), since most editors looking for help with references are newcomers learning how to add them. Experienced editors also have an easier time navigating to the page targeted at them than vice versa. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Help:Reference; retarget the rest to Help:Referencing for beginners or Help:Footnotes. I'm surprised Help:Referencing for beginners doesn't have a hatnote mentioning Help:Footnotes. ― Qwerfjkltalk 10:18, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bundling Help:Referencing. Courtesy pings @Sdkb and Qwerfjkl; no need to reply unless it changes your !votes. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 20:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UN Global Coronavirus Fund

Seems like United Nations response to the COVID-19 pandemic exists as a more specific target now, but this exact phrase is not used anywhere on the English Wikipedia. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:13, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CH3CH2Cl

This is the chemical formula of chloroethane; not sure what exactly it has to do with the current target. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:46, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

United States women's national under-15 soccer team

This redirect should be deleted to encourage actual article creation Seany91 (talk) 20:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Novax Djokovic

A G10 attempt was declined. This entire redirect is an attack on the subject, where there's no useful relevant information from the source used on creation that can be used in the target. Jalen Folf (talk) 19:27, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep: Used in reliable sources [1][2][3]; per WP:RNEUTRAL, "perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion". Launchballer 19:43, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's a typo and a stupid pun. I don't see how it is an attack on someone apparently proudly unvaccinated. —Kusma (talk) 19:44, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    (Full disclosure: I was the admin who declined the speedy deletion. However, I assumed that the reason for the G10 nomination was the content added by an IP vandal after creation, not the original redirect.) Basically I don't care very much. If it is kept, it should be tagged {{R from typo}} and may need to be protected. If it is deleted, it may need to be salted for a while. In two years, nobody will care either way. —Kusma (talk) 21:20, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a typo, which is accidental. It is a deliberate misspelling to link Novak with the unvaxxed. WWGB (talk) 01:20, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - this is a derogatory pun and really has no business being a redirect in this encyclopedia. No one is searching this name. I can't believe this wasn't done as a speedy delete. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:03, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, or Retarget to Novak_Djokovic#Views_on_diet,_medicine_and_science - While appreciating the point that people using this name will be aware his name is actually Novak, non-neutral redirects are permitted, see Wikipedia:Redirect#Neutrality_of_redirects. There are examples of other silly nicknames being redirects to tennis players, see The King of Clay, while obviously not derogatory it is a subjective view of Nadal's clay court dominance. Bonoahx (talk) 21:13, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refine per Bonoahx as a {{R non-neutral}}. Elli (talk | contribs) 22:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Non-neutral redirects are allowed, but whenever possible should be targeted to something that explains their non-neutrality. Thus refine per Bonoahx, although I would prefer a slightly narrower refining to § Opposition to COVID-19 vaccine. But I don't want a quibble of three paragraphs to prevent consensus here, so I'm fine with the proposed section as well. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 23:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Temporary pun with no evidence of lasting significance. About as useful as a redirect for Joe Bidet. WWGB (talk) 01:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    If the term "Joe Bidet" were covered somewhere (perhaps List of nicknames of presidents of the United States § Joe Biden), I would support a redirect to that place. In that case, there's nothing that term represents other than a childish insult, so it wouldn't make sense to redirect anywhere it isn't mentioned. Here, though, "Novax" is a substantive insult, one meant to criticize Djokovic's views on vaccines, and we have coverage of criticism of said views. For a similar example, the article on Jim Jordan (American politician) discusses criticism of his handling of the Ohio State University abuse scandal. It does not use the nickname Gym Jordan, popularized about him; but because that term is associated with that subtopic, it redirects to that section. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 01:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WWGB. No evidence of lasting significance, and we should err on the side of caution for what is potentially libel. 123.243.127.71 (talk) 04:27, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure "Novax" could be considered a libellous statement. It is on public record that Djokovic is unvaccinated against COVID-19 and it has been stated on various court documents signed by himself and other appropriate authorities. There is perhaps an argument to suggest that "Novax" implies he is against routine vaccinations like MMR and polio, which there is no evidence for, but nobody has used it in that context from where I've seen it. The lasting significance is the ongoing pandemic and the possibility of him being effectively banned from playing in a major tennis tournament that he has won nine times for three years.Bonoahx (talk) 18:33, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Djokovic being deported will have lasting significance, particularly if the automatic associated 3-year ban is not waived in future, but that does not mean that the derisive moniker "Novax" will have lasting significance. At the very least, I think permanently associating Djokovic with the antivax movement is unfair considering he set up vaccination clinics at his Belgrade tournament [4], and hasn't said a peep about vaccines since well before the covid vaccines were made available other than that he didn't think they should be mandatory in order to travel, which is a commonly held view of fully-vaccinated pro-science civil libertarians (non-antivaxers). 123.243.127.71 (talk) 06:05, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I think these are good reasons to strive to provide a balanced view of what he has said in the past about vaccination and contemporary medicine in the article itself, and if there's a primary source for that tweet it should be included (if it hasn't been already), but this is a redirect. I am not arguing on the basis that calling him an anti-vaxxer of the same ilk as people like Piers Corbyn is fair, but that non-neutral redirects are permitted (see Tony Bliar below; the article strives to provide a balanced view of Blair's actions during his premiership yet the non-neutral redirect is a direct attack on his actions during the Iraq War). As a result of him being a high-profile figure and one of a few people to directly challenge a government's COVID border protection policies, he is intrinsically linked to vaccine hesitancy, unwittingly or otherwise.Bonoahx (talk) 12:43, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. BLP. And we are an encyclopedia, not a tabloid. Not even a newspaper, though we have clearly forgotten that by now. No reliable source uses it; they just refer to others using it. Not the same thing.99.13.228.225 (talk) 05:00, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a redirect, not an article. As per WP:RNEUTRAL I would think it appropriate to retarget to the relevant subsection per Tamzin. The article itself should aim to provide a balanced view on his vaccination stance, which is difficult but is a separate concern.Bonoahx (talk) 19:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: It is a reliable and informed position that Novak is an antivaxer and it's one of the primary reasons why he is soon to be removed from Australia and banned from entering for the next three years, that is significant in and of itself --202.168.9.108 (talk) 05:03, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Note This is obviously a single-purpose IP troll. 1 --Griboski (talk) 19:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete We can do better than Trump-style playground nicknames for everyone, plus it's exceedingly unlikely that somebody has seen the wall-to-wall coverage and knows only this insult nickname and not his real name. I can find 8,050 Google results for the similar "Tony Bliar" and despite my less than favourable views on that man, I would never cheapen and stain an encyclopedia by adding that as a redirect. Unknown Temptation (talk) 00:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • In a bit of a self-own I'm now aware that "Tony Bliar" is an existing redirect but that's beside the point, I don't think that's suitable for an encyclopedia either Unknown Temptation (talk) 00:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refine per Tazmin, and Wikipedia:RNEUTRAL. ― Qwerfjkltalk 08:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is not a term that will be actively searched for on Wikipedia with the expectation of reaching Djokovic. There is no clear reason for this redirect and should be deleted. Mannysoloway (talk) 20:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed; the purpose of a redirect is to help readers reach an article based on a term they have seen in an RS. There is no RS, or even an unreliable source, that refers to this player as just Novax Djokovich. 99.13.228.225 (talk) 21:16, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Everybody that uses this "nickname" would already know his real name. Therefore, nobody would search up "Novax Djokovic", they would just search up his real name. Steelkamp (talk) 12:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete As other users have noted, this is a derogatory pun with no encyclopedic value. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 05:26, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refine as WP:RNEUTRAL. Neel.arunabh (talk) 17:24, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Another Word

Malformed XY. Created as a redirect to Another World, now targets synonym. It's either a typo/misspelling for Another World or unnecessary capitalization of "another word" Plantdrew (talk) 18:45, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not sure it’s a real XY case here. Granted it was originally created as a redirect to another world but that changed to the current target a little over 3 hours after creation and has stood unopposed for over 6 years. I believe the fact that no one, in that period of time, has brought this issue up strongly indicated that people lookup up Another World are not misspelling it as Another Word meaning this appears to be an nonissue.--65.93.195.118 (talk) 19:22, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the ip editor. There appears to be no ambiguity in actual usage. Thryduulf (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - plausible search term for synonym. A7V2 (talk) 03:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decimal chess

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a duly-sourced mention can be added at the target. signed, Rosguill talk 15:26, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decimal chesses are chess variants on 10 by 10 board. We should keep this redirect. Sharouser (talk) 15:31, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 18:21, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete due to a lack of mention. -- Tavix (talk) 04:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • My delete !vote has been withdrawn. I'm not to a full "keep" though because the addition is unsourced. -- Tavix (talk) 17:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

French ship Saint Pierre

The target article does not concern French ship Saint Pierre. Another ship of that name is mentioned in a footnote, but I don't think that's enough for a redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, seems I had a brainfart when creating that. It could be deleted, or turned into a shipindex page, as the French Navy had at least five vessels of that name, according to Threedecks. Mjroots (talk) 13:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per Mjroots. Acad Ronin (talk) 16:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but redirected to the right article, which I have done (as well as the wrongly-directed French brig Saint Pierre). Good idea to also have a shipindex page (personally, I favour a comprehensive List of ships named Saint Pierre, as there only seems to be this single French Navy one covered by an article at present. Davidships (talk) 15:05, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note user:Davidships changed the target to French brig Colibri (1802). It is usually discouraged to change the target of a redirect while it is being discussed here as that just leads to confusion - you should recommend the redirect be retargetted instead. Thryduulf (talk) 15:32, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for not appreciating that.Davidships (talk) 22:07, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Do we agree on French brig Colibri (1802) as the target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 18:17, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Red Tory Party (UK)

I don't think this should be a redirect; "Red Tory" does not refer to a specific political party, so this redirect is misleading and probably unhelpful. Proposed deletion. AFreshStart (talk) 22:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Red Tory#United Kingdom or Delete. I would have expected this to point to the Labour Party (UK) as a political insult, but google hits relevant to the UK are mostly about the Conservative Party (UK) under David Cameron's leadership and Red Tory#United Kingdom adds the Scottish Labour Party to the mix. That section does a good job of linking to wherever someone searching for this will be looking for, so it's probably the best target. I don't think a disambiguation page would work as it's not the proper name or a common nickname for any organisation. The (UK) suffix is plausible as "Red Tory" seems to be a more prominent political term in Canada, and it would not be unreasonable to expect Red Tory Party to lead to something relevant to that country )I've not looked in enough detail to opine on whether that link should be blue). Thryduulf (talk) 00:56, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 18:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Miami Miracle

The vast majority of uses of "Miami Miracle" are for the NFL football play also called the Miracle in Miami. The baseball team which used to be called the Miami Miracle (now the Fort Myers Mighty Mussels) is little-known and hasn't played under that name since 1991, so Miracle in Miami is probably the primary topic. Beefaloe (formerly SpursySituation) (talk) 07:01, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 18:01, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy Duty (Transformers)

Not mentioned in the target or any of the (many) lists in Category:Lists of Transformers characters. It's hard to determine if there are any other articles mentioning the character in sufficient depth to retarget as the name's a common phrase, but I don't think we'd lose much by deleting this. (I don't know anything about Transformers.) – Arms & Hearts (talk) 17:48, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-Marxism

SenseiAC has suggested Anti-Marxist target Criticism of Marxism. I am added related redirects to consider for consistency. Also note that Anti-bolshevism is a dab (while the upper-case version listed above is a redirect). MB 14:25, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the same way, I suggest that Anti-socialist target Criticism of socialism. (Note: Anti-Leninist already targets Anti-Leninism.) For the "anti-bolshevik" series, maybe target them all to the dab page if the dab page is relevant, otherwise it is open to discussion. SenseiAC (talk) 15:22, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Get Morebooks!"

179 redirects to OmniScriptum

Each of these is apparently either an imprint or trade name used by OmniScriptum or an author who's published with them. None of them are mentioned in the target, though, so the reader is left none the wiser as to the connection between the term and the target (lists of imprints were in the article at the time the redirects were created). Several are additionally ambiguous, e.g. The (imprint) or Part Press, and several like these that are based on common words don't turn up any Google results indicating any connection at all (though others do). – Arms & Hearts (talk) 13:38, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: Only the first page was tagged; I did the rest on behalf of the nominator. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 14:12, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep any that are unambiguous. An imprint or trade name isn't the kind of thing that always needs to be mentioned in an article. Given how many redirects are nominated and the fact-intensive-ness of whether a term is unambiguous, I would suggest to the nominator that a TRAINWRECK seems likely here, and that it might be better to nominate in a series of closely-related batches. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 04:05, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all without prejudice per Tamzin. Group these into smaller nominations of similar redirects that each have the same desired outcomee (i.e. don't mix those you think should be deleted with those you prefer to see retargetted and keep both sets separate from those you aren't sure about). Thryduulf (talk) 22:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: the German-language article lists some of these. I will port over that list and its references. -- asilvering (talk) 22:40, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The English article has a table and list in its history, I went ahead and pulled that back in which goes a bit further in resolving the "not mentioned" problem, but it doesn't seem like we are all the way there... I am amenable to deleting any stragglers that still aren't mentioned because I fundamentally disagree with Tamzin's idea on redirects without mention. Also delete "Get Morebooks!" due to the quotes. -- Tavix (talk) 03:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Unless anyone objects, looks like it's for the best if I withdraw this to avoid a trainwreck and renominate some or all of these in batches in due course, probably pending a discussion regarding whether the list and table restored in the target should be kept. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Paul (singer)

Delete per WP:RFD#DELETE: The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine One could imagine someone searching for Paul McCartney, sometimes referred to mononymously as "Paul" among Beatles fandom. What about other Paul's with given name or surname? It's not too unreasonable to expect a reader being able to search Peter, Paul and Mary for this "Paul". —Bagumba (talk) 13:16, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or DABify per nom. Veverve (talk) 15:24, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 February 17#Taylor (singer). Other cases can be made for Peter (singer) and Mary (singer). -- Tavix (talk) 16:04, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It is a likely search term as Tavix showed with Peter and Mary as the trio are a well-known folk group. I doubt that people would look for Paul McCartney by simply searching for Paul (singer) as he was also the band's bass guitar player. Nom does make a good case that they are more likely to search for Peter, Paul and Mary, but still this is the most likely target. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • If someone's looking to answer the question of "Who was the "Paul" in Peter, Paul and Mary?", this is a reasonable search term. Keep unless someone can provide evidence that there are other singers known mononymously as Paul, in which case setindexify (just for singers known by the mononym Paul, not for all singers named Paul). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Who was the "Paul" in Peter, Paul and Mary?" See Peter, Paul and Mary. An answer looking for a problem.—Bagumba (talk) 03:27, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The most basic principle behind redirects is that not all readers will take the same approach to find a given piece of information. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 03:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tamzin and Walter Görlitz. Thryduulf (talk) 22:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tamzin, Walter Görlitz, and Walter Görlitz. Neel.arunabh (talk) 17:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Stan (fan)

This was the result of a merge to Fan (person), targeting the resulting section Fan_(person)#"Stan"_fans as the outcome of requested move discussion and was recently boldly retargeted to its current target. I suggest it should be retargeted back to the target of the merge, where more detail exists. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:01, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 11:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support More logic target. Another option could be pointing it to Stan Twitter. Gaioa (T C L) 18:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reich Ministry of Justice

The topic is not covered on the linked article besides a bare mention. I think it should be deleted to encourage article creation (see de:Reichsjustizministerium) (t · c) buidhe 03:19, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • I agree, delete. —AFreshStart (talk) 22:07, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore to pre-redirect version and tag it for translation from the German article. Jay (talk) 03:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore per Jay. Almost always better to un-BLAR than to redlink. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 06:10, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 11:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Beit Shemesh Engines Ltd.

No substantial information about the company in the city article, misleading to redirect there. BilCat (talk) 04:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Refine to § Economy, where it's mentioned. Although that section is unsourced, so if the mention is removed, the redirect should be deleted. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 01:36, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • If the Western industrial zone mentioned at that section is the Lavi industrial zone, we can cite it with this Jerusalem Post article. Jay (talk) 04:18, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:59, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Photosensitize

These should be consistent. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 10:11, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • (Re)target all to Photosensitizer. These active forms of the word refer more to the chemical/physical concept rather than the broader, passive concept of photosensitivity. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:04, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

PRJ

This redirect is a name of the place but PRJ can refer to many things and acronyms, should we disambiguate it? Vitaium (talk) 05:17, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Männerbund

"Men's league" or "men's union" I guess is the English-language equivalent of this term? ('Bund' is cognate of 'bond' in English, I believe) "Fraternity" would probably be the closest equivalent in English (and seemed to be what this article redirected to in the first place), but I think it's probably best we delete this as a redirect on Wikipedia to possibly make way for a good, encyclopaedic article on the German concept. Thoughts? AFreshStart (talk) 18:08, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete more or less per nom, a GScholar search and my own familiarity with the term suggest that Männerbund is treated as a special term for the German concept in English, and is not reducible to Fraternity or Secret society, particularly given its role in Nazi ideology. signed, Rosguill talk 22:52, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Originally closed as "delete", I'm relisting after the existence of Mannerbund was brought to my attention.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 02:13, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Kóryos contains In Indo-European studies, the modern German term Männerbund (literally 'alliance of men') is often used to refer to the *kóryos. MB 02:27, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:REDYES (encouraging creation); the subject already exists in other version of Wikipedia, see wikidata:Q883801. Veverve (talk) 03:16, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete there is no suitable target right now, WP:REDYES to encourage article creation (t · c) buidhe 04:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aprotic solvent

Misleading redirect; source and destination are two different terms CrafterNova (talk) 11:31, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as a {{R from antonym}}. I think this gives the cleanest definition for aprotic solvent. I considered retargeting to Solvent#Solvent_classifications, but that is somewhat misleading in implying only polar solvents can be aprotic; technically, all non-polar solvents are also aprotic. There is a link to part of that section via the redirect polar aprotic solvent. Both of these pages could use a little revision vis à vis protic vs. aprotic. Mdewman6 (talk) 16:51, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:06, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_January_14&diff=prev&oldid=1066699319

Leave a Reply