Contents

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 11: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 10:14, 12 February 2022

February 11

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on February 11, 2022.

Fannia scalaris: Ento 431

• Fannia scalaris: Ento 431 → Fannia scalaris  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Leftover from Wikipedia:School and university projects/ENTO 431, but the tag is not needed for a mainspace version of the article. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:15, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hackney North Star

• Hackney North Star → Tottenham Mandem

 (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There’s nothing called Hackney North Star it’s just called North Star it was accidentally put down as Hackney North Star. BurudaKidd (talk) 19:54, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Caymanian

• Caymanian → Demographics of the Cayman Islands  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I'd like to review the target of this redirect, which might equally be Cayman Islands. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:28, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Query @Shhhnotsoloud: what would be the alternate target? You gave a link to the redirect itself. Place Clichy (talk) 22:49, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Place Clichy: Ooops, sorry, Cayman Islands. I've corrected my nomination statement. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:49, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Monarchy of Hong Kong & Monarchy of Gibraltar

• Monarchy of Hong Kong → Monarchy of the United Kingdom  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Monarchy of Gibraltar → Monarchy of the United Kingdom  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The pages "Monarchy of Hong Kong" and "Monarchy of Gibraltar", which can redirect to the article "Monarchy of the United Kingdom", should be deleted, here are the reasons:

There isn't any Hong Kong local monarch, but the Chinese monarchs from QintoQing (ruled Panyu County and Bao'an County, at that time included Hong Kong), the British monarchs from VictoriatoElizabeth II (ruled British Hong Kong from 1841 to 1941 and from 1945 to 1997), Manuel I of Portugal (ruled Tamão from 1514 to 1521) and Emperor Shōwa (ruled Japanese occupied Hong Kong from 1941 to 1945) ruled Hong Kong during different periods respectively, thus the term "monarchy of Hong Kong" is original research, and the thing that refer the monarchy of Hong Kong to the British monarchy is confusing and makes no sense.

There isn't any Gibraltarian local monarch, but Gibraltar was firstly under Phoenician, ancient Carthaginian and ancient Roman rule, then under Visigothic rule from 409 to 711, under Moorish rule from 711 to 1309 and from 1333 to 1462, under Castilian and Spanish rule from 1309 to 1333 and from 1462 to 1704, and under British rule from 1704, thus the term "monarchy of Gibraltar" is original research, and the thing that refer the monarchy of Gibraltar to the British monarchy is confusing and makes no sense.--Joker Twins (talk) 11:23, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: could be converted to a disambiguation page or redirected to some other relevant article like History of Hong Kong. Barring that, it should probably be deleted. The current target does seem too narrow. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 16:55, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete monarchy of Hong Kong given that Hong Kong has been subject to a variety of monarchs throughout history, the pages on those monarchies mention Hong Kong either extremely minimally (monarchy of China) or not at all (e.g. the current target or list of emperors of the Qing dynasty), and Wikipedia is basically the only place on the internet where the phrase "Monarchy of Hong Kong" appears [1], I don't think this is worth a disambiguation. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 05:19, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also Delete monarchy of Gibraltar for the same reason. Again, Wikipedia is the only place on the internet where this phrase appears [2]. See WP:R#D8. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 22:22, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• RetargettoHistory of Hong Kong and History of Gibraltar respectively. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:21, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all per nom. Veverve (talk) 12:10, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget the second to Kingdom of Gibraltar. Delete the first. Jay (talk) 15:31, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:07, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget the second to Kingdom of Gibraltar. Delete the first. --Heanor (talk) 06:53, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is a weak consensus to delete the first redirect, and consensus to retarget the second but is History of GibraltarorKingdom of Gibraltar the better target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:31, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Factor IV

• Factor IV → Calcium  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Factor 4 → Calcium  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete Neither term appears in target article. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:06, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RetargettoCoagulation#List of coagulation factors where it is mentioned, and which links to other extant articles like Factor V, Factor VII etc. eviolite (talk) 18:28, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be fine with that retargeting, and thanks for pointing that out. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:33, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per Eviolite. Thryduulf (talk) 21:40, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per above IAmChaos 02:03, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Deputy editor

• Deputy editor → Editing  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Deputy Editor → Editing  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not specifically explained at the target. Perhaps there is a better option, as with Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 2#Associate editor?~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:01, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both. Could apply to the deputy/assistant of any type of editor. I think it would be better to defer to search results rather than targeting Editor (disambiguation), though that would probably be an improvement over the current target. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:40, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin Sellers

• Kevin Sellers → Murders of Abigail Williams and Liberty German  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. There are passing mentions of a seemingly unrelated screenwiter in various articles. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 17:45, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, retarget or create article - The case of German and Williams brought him in. His name can also be retargeted to a suitable page, or an article can be created for the screen writer. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:20, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• @Jax 0677: What do you mean by The case of German and Williams brought him in? -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete to reveal search results. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pink Friday 2

• Pink Friday 2 → 2020 in hip hop music  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

no mention at target -- dylx 17:39, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

0rz

• 0rz → orz  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible Mixed script redirect, the first charecter here is the number zero rather than the letter o (I suppose 0 vs O isn't really mixed script, but the same arguments apply and it's just as implausible as a search term).192.76.8.77 (talk) 17:03, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

•  Comment: Similar redirects have previously been kept at RfD as "plausible", though I can't link any specific cases right now. ~~~~
  User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:03, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• RetargettoEmoticon#Orz which is probably the only plausible use of "orz" that could have the o replaced with a 0. eviolite (talk) 18:29, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

伦敦

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

Delete per WP:RLOTE, no special affinity between London and Chinese. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:40, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. London does have a notable Chinatown, but this term refers only to the city as a whole and so redirecting it to Chinatown, London (伦敦唐人街) would not be appropriate. Thryduulf (talk) 21:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1977 Republic of the Congo coup d'état attempt

• 1977 Republic of the Congo coup d'état attempt → Joachim Yhombi-Opango  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Listing this one separately from the other coup attempt redirects, as the target does mention that Yhombi-Opango took power in 1977 following the assassination of his predecessor, Marien Ngouabi. However, neither article calls this a coup attempt. Searching on GScholar, I can't find evidence that this was considered a coup. Delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:38, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

William Jackson (cricketer)

• William Jackson (cricketer) → William Jackson  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A redirect to a DAB page with no relevant entry. Twice WP:BLARedbyDissident93 despite passing WP:SNG WP:NCRIC. Linked in List of English cricketers (1841–1850), List of Nottingham Cricket Club players and List of Nottinghamshire County Cricket Club players. Restore article and take to AFD if anyone wants to argue notability, the current redirect is worse than useless. Narky Blert (alt) (talk) 16:16, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Restore article AfD is the only appropriate venue when someone objects to a deletion-by-redirection. UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:58, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy restore per WP:BLAR and trout Dissident93 for redirecting to a disambiguation page with no relevant entry. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:52, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore per the above to correct inappropriate BLAR, send to AfD if desired. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:31, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Restore per everyone above. Thryduulf (talk) 21:58, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Misisng coup d'état attempts

• 1989 Ugandan coup d'état attempt → Yoweri Museveni  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 1970 Libyan coup d'état attempt → Muammar Gaddafi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• April 2013 Libyan coup d'état attempt → Nouri Abusahmain  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 1987 Libyan coup d'état attempt → Mifta al-Usta Umar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 2013 Comorian coup d'état attempt → Azali Assoumani  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 1994 Lesotho coup d'état → Ntsu Mokhehle  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 1994 Liberian coup d'état attempt → First Liberian Civil War  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 1998 Guinean coup d'état attempt → Lansana Conté  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention of coups in these years at the targets, delete unless a justification can be provided. N.b. that the April 2013 Libya attempt is not to be confused with 2013 Libyan coup d'état attempt, which occurred in October and makes no mention of April. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:12, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Moqua well

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 retarget. All retargeted to Moqua Well by nominator after their improper close as keep. (non-admin closure) Mdewman6 (talk) 00:23, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Moqua well → Nauru  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Moqua Caves → Nauru  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Moque Well → Nauru  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Moqua Cave → Nauru  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

delete, not mentioned in the target. Heanor (talk) 15:47, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

RetargettoMoqua Well. These are all misspellings/alternate names. UnitedStatesian (talk) 19:59, 11 February 2022 (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.

Earth flag

• Earth flag → Flag of the United Nations  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

delete, the term 'earth' is not mentioned in the target. Heanor (talk) 15:20, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The only plausible target, Flag of Earth, was deleted by AfD in November 2021. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:30, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Medaillon

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

This delete request is to help avoid perpetuating ongoing confusion between two very similar English words with very different meanings. For background, a medal is a small coin-like object without monetary value. A medallion has two very distinct meanings: 1. a large medal, often suspended by a chain or ribbon, and 2. a very large wall ornament used on buildings and monuments. To make things confusing, most awards are presented in the form of the first meaning of medallion, but are usually called "medals" (Think gold medal in the Olympics.) The second meaning of medallion can be found at Medallion (architecture).

This request involves a redirect that is often mistaken for "medallion", but is, in fact, a separate English word with a very different meaning. The similarity in spelling causes frequent confusion. A medaillon (spelt aill versus alli) is a small round cut of meat. I attempted to create a mini stub article out of the redirect but was quickly reverted for two reasons: 1. I had forgotten to review pages linked to the redirect. My bad, I was trying to rush it through and simply forgot. I have since corrected those links to either the large medal or the wall ornament meanings, as appropriate. The remaining links are disambigs to my former stub article. 2. The reverter cited Wikipedia:NOTDIC, which I actually agree with.

This all being said, our choices can be to: A) Keep the redirect, which is pointing to the wrong meaning of the word. B) Point the redirect to a better article. That would be preferred, but I have been unable to find such an article. That is exactly what prompted me to draft the mini-stub in the first place. C) Go back to my mini-stub, in defiance of Wikipedia:NOTDIC, or D) Delete the redirect entirely.

I feel strongly that it would be better to have no redirect at all than to have a redirect to the wrong meaning of the word. This is not an alternative spelling, it is a different word with a different meaning. It is not a misspelling, it is the correct spelling for a different word. It is not an incorrect name, it is a correct name for a subject that we find not notable. Since we don't have the usual option of B, because there is no better article to redirect to, and we don't want to do C for lack of standing, and since A is incorrect, we are left with option D, to delete the redirect.

If a butcher or chef can find a mention of a medaillon in an existing article, I'm open to turning this into a section redirect. Can anyone come up with a fifth alternative? Sincerely, PoundTales (talk) 14:05, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• According to Wiktionary, "medaillon" is an alternative form of specifically the cooking meaning of "medallion". As such if a new article were to be created, it should probably be at a title such as Medallion (cooking). Otherwise, I think the best option is either {{Wiktionary redirect}}orkeep as plausible typo. eviolite (talk) 14:31, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep redirect as redirect from common misspelling / alternative name. We have 4 incoming links, all meaning to go to medal/medallion, showing that this is a common misspelling. There are books like this showing that the use of it in art is not uncommon (mainly because it is the standard term in French, which was a major language for art literature for a long period). Things like a "medaillon painting" are uncommon but used terms[3][4], and see also e.g. thisorthis. All in all, it seems to me to be a logical redirect. Fram (talk) 14:34, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Fram. The assertion that "medaillon" refers to the meat doesn't seem to be founded. Perhaps it's called that in French, but in English the evidence suggests it's simply spelled "medallions". e.g. [5][6][7] - that being the case, it seems best to simply keep it as a redirect from a misspelling of medallion  — Amakuru (talk) 17:44, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let's take a step back here. This seems to have the potential of becoming a "hot" issue, and I'm not sure why. Rapid reverts without discussion does tend to make things hot, and I've seen a few of them, already, on this issue. Let's all take this slowly and civilly and keep to the facts. First of all, the 4 incoming links comment: This is true. But two of these four links are from this discussion, and one of them is from a User page. The only incoming link presently of concern is from Medallion (architecture), where it is used in a {{distinguish}} hatnote. None of the incoming links support an argument one way or the other. Secondly, the not well founded comment: I think this reference, which I'll cite as "MWCD", can establish the usage:

Mish, Frederick C., ed. (2003). Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (11th ed.). Springfield, MA: Merriam-Webster. ISBN 0-87779-808-7.

Also, I had submitted an uncontroversial technical move request for the page Medallion (disambiguation)toMedallion per standard naming conventions. The move was made and then undone without discussion. I'm not quite sure that was the proper procedure, but it is clear we need to bring this move into the discussion now.

I do believe that MWCD is a well-established Wikipedia:Reliable source. Wiktionary and Wikipedia articles are not, because that is a case of circular logic. An error on one page can not be used to justify an error on another page. Google search results are also not a reliable source. There is plenty of bad information on the Internet, and the mere presence of bad information does not make it correct. That being said, MWCD tells us that Medallion (alli) has three distinct meanings:

1. a large form of medal (MWCD does not specifically add "suspended from a ribbon or chain", but this is a common usage)
2. a wall ornament (MWCD uses slightly more general terms terms here, indicating possible multiple meanings in Wikipedia terms, e.g. "portrait medallion")
3. a round cut of meat (MWCD does not specifically say "boneless", though I've seen it in some other definitions, e.g. Medallion (disambiguation))

MWCD also informs us that in the 3rd sense, and only in that sense, there is a variant spelling "medaillon" (aill). This spelling applies exclusively to the cut of meat, and not to the large medal or the wall ornament.

That being established, I believe the proper way to model this in Wikipedia is as follows:

1. Medallion (alli) should go to a disambiguation page. This is why I submitted the uncontroversial technical move request, and why it was granted. The large medal meaning is not the exclusive or primary meaning of the word. Furthermore, there is an additional redirect, Medalion, a misspelling, that currently points to the large medal. Due to double redirects, it cannot presently point to the correct spelling, Medallion. I had intended to redirect both Medallion and Medalion to Medallion (disambiguation), but while doing so, I discovered that it is not the correct naming convention. So to follow the correct naming convention, I submitted the uncontroversial technical move request that was implemented and then undone. I believe that the move is well supported, and that the misspelling Medalion should point to the disambiguation, not to just one of the three meanings.
2. Medaillon (aill) should either go to an article on the cut of meat or be deleted. If someone can find a proper article where we can use a section redirect, I would support that and I am actually encouraging people to find that article, as my own search came up short. An alternative would be to create an article, Medallion (meat cut), and have aill redirect there. I attempted to create such an article and had it reverted for Wikipedia:NOTDIC, which I actually agree with. If we don't have the basis for an article, then we're left with creating a redirect to a redlink. Such a redirect would qualify for a G8 speedy delete. This is exactly why I opened this discussion in the first place. Aill is not a misspelling, nor is it an alternative for all three meanings of alli. It an an alternative only for the cut of meat meaning. Currently, Wikipedia is telling users that aill is an alternative only for the large medal meaning, which is incorrect per MWCD.

As I write this, I believe I may have come up with possible compromise for aill, but it depends on the alli move that was implemented and then undone: Redirect aill to alli, which would now be a dismbig page. On the disambig page, we have the redlink Medallion (meat cut) followed by "also spelled medaillon" to indicate that the spelling applies only to the one usage.

As for the name of the redlink, I've seen Medallion (cooking) proposed and Medallion (food) has been used on the disambig page. A medallion is neither a cooking technique nor a kind of food. Perhaps "meat cut" is not the best possible term, and I'm not wedded to it, but it should not be overly generalized to the point that it takes on an incorrect meaning. Perhaps I should renew my call for a butcher or chef to help expand on this third meaning of medallion and perhaps direct us to a better place to land this redlink/redirect. I do think, however, that we've clearly established that this word is not the exclusive domain of numismatists and architects, alone.

Before we close this discussion out, I do believe we need to come to agreement on the language of the disambig page, lest we wind up in an editwar there, as well.

In that regard, if I may, I'd like to quickly delve into a little etymology. Per MWCD, the word "medal" entered the English language circa 1578. The word "medallion" is a case where the French word『médaillon』has been introduced into English not once, but three separate times, each with a different meaning. (Multiple introductions of a foreign word is a very common occurrence in language evolution.) The earliest date MWCD gives is 1658. (Unfortunately the dates appear only in the print version of MWCD, not the online version.) The French spelling has been completely anglicized for the first two senses, but the French spelling remains as a valid alternate for the third. Currently, the page Medallion (disambiguation) claims that Medal is a shortening of medallion. That is incorrect. Medal came to the English language nearly a century before medallion. Medal#Etymology is correct on that point and uses the same dates without citation. (I assume we both used the same source, MWCD, to establish those dates.)

In general, the article Medal is pretty balanced and well written. It could use a little expansion here and there, but for the most part I have no issue with it. What I do have issue with is the mishandling of the terms medallion and medaillon. "Medal" is not the only or primary meaning of those terms. That is the main issue of concern. Let's not get into a game of rapid reverts and circular logic. Let's take our time and figure this out civilly. Thank you. PoundTales (talk) 10:14, 12 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IPad Air (5th generation)

• IPad Air (5th generation) → IPad  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't think this is the best target. The iPad Air 5 has not been released yet and is still the subject of speculation, so there is no article on it yet. The iPad Air is an article only on the first model, while the article iPad seems too general. What is the best target here? (FWIW, the ideal is to rewrite iPad Air to be about the entire series instead of just the first one, but that is outside the scope of RfD) Oiyarbepsy (talk) 07:46, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Oiyarbepsy: As far as I know, the 5th generation of iPad Air is scheduled to be released in March 2022. So, I made the redirect page. --Hajoon0102 💬 07:53, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I think the best would be to add information to List of iOS and iPadOS devices#iPad Air and retarget it there. Thryduulf (talk) 14:01, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Thryduulf: I think your idea is good! I agree your idea. --Hajoon0102 💬 00:22, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete until enough is known for an article on the subject. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:09, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There're some rumors about the 5th generation of iPad Air. --Hajoon0102 💬 11:04, 31 January 2022 (

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is still no mention at List of iOS and iPadOS devices#iPad Air.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 09:27, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:CRYSTALBALL. There are rumours about new Apple devices every ten minutes, there only appear to be leaks and no official press release or similar from Apple. I'd wait until this is the case then make way for a new article. --Bonoahx (talk) 10:13, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete until the official announcement per above. The precedent from the 3rd and 4th generations has been to create the article after the product is announced (in the case of 4th gen, it was in draftspace for a week before the announcement.) Not convinced by "some rumors". eviolite (talk) 14:35, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chemical Bond Approach

• Chemical Bond Approach → Chemical bond  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Deletion, because the former refers to a now discontinued textbook, meaning it should not be a redirect to the latter. RekishiEJ (talk) 09:23, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Not particularly opposed to this deletion. I waited rather long time for someone to make redirects from some missing topics lists I had noticed and then decided to make them myself and there are bound to be mistakes. In fact, I would welcome help with my own lists of missing topics; some are certain to be just worthy of a redirect - Skysmith (talk) 11:17, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nomination. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:12, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• RetargettoOtto_Theodor_Benfey#Earlham_College where it is mentioned with references. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:46, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AdSeg

• AdSeg → Solitary confinement  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Administrative segregation → Solitary confinement  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

AdSeg (administrative segregation) is not necessarily solitary. AdSeg blocks often contain two-person cells. It's not the happy place to be sure but it isn't supermax solitary either. Doesn't appear to be mentioned at target article. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:32, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. No not necessarily, but for all intents and purposes that is what the term refers to. The very first reference used by the article is "Profile of Offenders in Administrative Segregation: A Review of the Literature". -- œ^™ 07:10, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That makes sense, since pretty much by definition any prisoner in solitary is in AdSeg, but not all prisoners in AdSeg are in solitary. My issue here is that I think this redirect might discourage development of a proper article on AdSeg by implying we've already covered it in the article in solitary confinement, which is not the case. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:10, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:REDYES as those are different situations. Veverve (talk) 09:08, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 08:10, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete WP:REDYES certainly applies here. UnitedStatesian (talk) 18:27, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Antinational

• Antinational → Treason  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Anti-national → Treason  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

As is, this redirect makes no sense - but, there may be a reasonable target for it, something about opposition to nationalism perhaps? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 08:55, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• RetargettoNationalism as "R from acronym antonym". --Lenticel ^(talk) 09:30, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  National and nationalism are different, though not with the wording, but with the meaning. So "R from antonym" if done should be redirected to the article Nation instead. Crashed greek (talk)

  I considered that too but it seems to be a loaded "enemy" word for nationalist factions not unlike "unpatriotic" according to my search. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:25, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  You both mean "antonym", right? This is not an acronym. Lennart97 (talk) 10:32, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  My bad, striking that part of my comment. --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:21, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - The current target is the closest thing to the meaning of the word, antinational roughly means traitor. Crashed greek (talk) 10:00, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The word has two meanings - first, to be opposed to the concept of nations, and second to be opposed to your own nation. Neither of these definitions have any resemblance to being a traitor. Being opposed to your nation and being a traitor are two radically different things. And, of course, in India, its usage has nothing to do with being anti-India, but instead being opposed to a particular type of Indian politics. So, no, it doesn't mean treason, not even close. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 07:35, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Opposed to your own nation is the same as treason. Crashed greek (talk) 09:24, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  No it isn't. Treason is an action, not mere opinion. The only thing that is unquestionably treason is violent action against your own country for the benefit of an enemy. And whether being a revolutionary (being opposed to your nation's government but not your nation) counts as treason is highly disputed. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 18:32, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Antinational is about action too. Crashed greek (talk) 08:21, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Is the word "antinational" limited to only applicable to one's own nation? C933103 (talk) 08:06, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Wiktionary redirect, a word that cannot be reduced to treason or opposition to nationalism, not least because its usage is different in Indian English than other varieties. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:19, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Wiktionary redirect, per Rosguill. Also, because I agree with Oiyarbepsy's comment on 07:35, 28 January UTC. Also redirect Anti-national accordingly. ---CX Zoom(^he/_him) (^{let's talk}|_contribs) 09:39, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Just added Anti-national, which FWIW is a Neelix redirect. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:26, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete both There is no clear definition of these terms, I don't see how the reader is aided by these redirects. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:47, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate between Anti-national (India), Anti-nationalism (which redirects to Nationalism#Criticism), and maybe also Treason or other topics. Deletion and redirecting to Wiktionary are no good because of the existence of the Anti-national (India) article. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 18:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambig per Mx. Granger. Thryduulf (talk) 22:39, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:43, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps Anti-national (India) is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here and that article should be moved to the "Anti-national" page? - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:40, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Wiktionary redirect per Rosguill. Veverve (talk) 09:09, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambiguate per Mx. Granger. We can't soft redirect to wikt if there's an article Anti-national (India). I've drafted one at Antinational. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:05, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: What do the Keep and Retarget voters feel about the drafted disambiguation that has no primary topic?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 08:03, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep drafted disambiguation. It still links to Wiktionary, and I agree that it is quite possible that readers are looking for Anti-national (India). eviolite (talk) 14:42, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Aleph

• Template:Aleph → Template:Rhr  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Rather misleading since the target is not necessarily a transcription of aleph in a Semitic script, and especially since it makes it harder to describe aleph numbers in mathematics. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 08:55, 4 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:29, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Unused template redirect. UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:08, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

🔴

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

Seems a little weird to me that we're assuming that people who specifically write in 🔴 want to go "Circle"—seems much more likely that if they're gonna take the time to copy and paste the unicode emoji, they'd want to be navigated to The Color Red. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 04:21, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment If you cannot see this emoji, it is a large red circle the same size as other emojis. On some platforms, it has a glossy specularity. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:38, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep without prejudice. This character is U+1F534 "LARGE RED CIRCLE", the similar characters 🟠 🟡 🟢 🟣 🟤 🔵 🔶 🔷 🔸 🔹 🔺 🔻 🟥 🟦 🟧 🟨 🟩 🟪 🟫 all redirect to Circle, Rhombus, TriangleorSquare as appropriate to their shape and this one should not be singled out from the set. All individual unicode code points that have a defined meaning are plausible search terms and should lead to somewhere. In this case I don't see any reason why that somewhere should not be the article about the shape, but if others prefer the colour or some other target then the set should be discussed as a whole. Thryduulf (talk) 21:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:AW

• Wikipedia:AW → Template:Wikipedia Awards  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Should this redirect to Article Wizard, like WP:aw? – AssumeGoodWraith (talk | contribs) 03:51, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AssumeGoodWraith: I would suggest bundling the other redirect into this nomination, since the aim here seems to be to syncronise them. I would be tempted to retarget WP:aw, since it was fairly recently created and has no real incoming links, as opposed to WP:AW which has been around for 15 years and has a few dozen links. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 17:13, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CCP virus

• CCP virus → COVID-19 misinformation#Wuhan lab origin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• CPC virus → COVID-19 misinformation#Wuhan lab origin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Chinese Communist Party virus → COVID-19 misinformation#Wuhan lab origin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Communist Party of China virus → COVID-19 misinformation#Wuhan lab origin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

According to online and offline usage I have observe, the term "CCP virus", and other similar terms, are not as a conspiracy theory, but rather an accusation of CCP's negligence and cover up and miscommunication that have resulted in failure at containment of the virus, with the origin possibly also come from CCP-related facilities, hence . Thus, I think it is inappropriate to point these redirects towards the current target of coronavirus conspiracy theory, and elaborate the term inside the section of Wuhan lab bioweapon theory, instead to redirecting and explaining it in more relevant dedicated article like Chinese government response to COVID-19, or COVID-19 lab leak theory, or Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2.

C933103 (talk) 03:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Ioppose retargeting. We have well-sourced content that covers the 'CCP virus" phrase at COVID-19 misinformation#Wuhan lab origin. So far, we do not have any demonstration that there is sourced, due content that belongs at either of the proposed targets. As noted at the misinformation article, 'CCP virus' was heavily promoted by Epoch Times and associated with conspiracy theories about the origins of the virus. Using Google News, I get 18,200 hits for 'ccp virus', of which 11,200 match ["ccp virus" "epoch times"]. Firefangledfeathers 04:07, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I get 664,000 hits for "CCP virus", and only 179,000 when "Epoch Times" is also added into part of keywords. Note that I am not talking about news agency usages since they, except Epoch Times, will tend to use more formal terms. But Wikipedia redirects aren't limited to only formal terms, and is intended to facilitate people reaching the article they want to read. C933103 (talk) 08:11, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• What is the proposed retarget? Would help to focus discussion if there is a concrete proposal. –Novem Linguae (talk) 04:37, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Proposed targets include Chinese government response to COVID-19, or COVID-19 lab leak theory, or Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by C933103 (talk • contribs)

Ferrari Japan

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

• Ferrari North America → Ferrari  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These divisions of Ferrari are not mentioned at the target or anywhere (that I could find) and were created as redirects so I think delete. There is also the similar Ferrari India but that has substantial edit history as a former article so I have not included it in this listing. A7V2 (talk) 01:25, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]