From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< January 15
January 17 >

January 16

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 16, 2023.

List of Registered Historic Places in Los Angeles County, California/Temp

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. Jay 💬 02:30, 24 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Unused implausible redirect. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 23:19, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

I concur. The redirect is a legacy of material having been developed there, at first, by me apparently. Material and all edit history was moved long ago. --Doncram ( talk, contribs) 23:22, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Delete A draft page that has no purpose. History was also moved. Carpimaps ( talk) 01:21, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Architectural endoscopy/tmp

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. As an unopposed deletion nomination. The talk page is retained though. Jay 💬 02:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Histmerge leftover, all potentially useful history is the content of the relevant talk page. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 23:16, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

The Brian Jonestown Massacre/Temp

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 CSD G7 as creator ... I would normally not leave these behind and this case was an accident. Graham 87 23:23, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Implausible title, no useful history. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 23:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Real Networks/Temp

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 CSD G7 as creator ... I would normally not leave these behind and this case was an accident. Graham 87 23:27, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Unused histmerge leftover. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 23:13, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Guantánamo Bay/Draft

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. Jay 💬 02:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Unused redirect from bad title. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 23:07, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Test Wikipedia

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 List of Wikipedias#Test. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 22:46, 23 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Exists from an undiscussed move by a blocked user, and is a CNR which doesn't really provide any info about Test Wikipedia. Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 March 24#Test Wikipedia reached a consensus to move the target (which was a mainspace redirect) to projectspace, and it was moved without a redirect. Clyde! Franklin! 22:42, 16 January 2023 (UTC) (Amendment: I now support a retarget to List of Wikipedias#Test. I was unaware of any encyclopedic mention at the time. Clyde! Franklin! 04:22, 20 January 2023 (UTC)) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Christian church directory of the United States

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 24#Christian church directory of the United States

Yvj

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 Yeovil Junction railway station. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC) reply

There is no use of "Yvj" at this capitalisation. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 19:42, 9 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should this be retargeted to Yeovil Junction railway station, or would it be best to keep and restore the DAB at YVJ?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:18, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Comment: On the issue of the restoration of YVJ, I am find keeping it as is. It was only disambiguating one page before being turned into a redirect. Tartar Torte 13:51, 19 January 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

International Cricket in 2024-25

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. As noted in the discussion, moving a retarget under RfD discussion makes a wreck of the process and is bad form. Luckily, a consensus was already fairly clear from the discussion prior to that point. signed, Rosguill talk 16:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Unhelpful to the reader as not discussed in the article. J947 † edits 03:29, 9 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL. It can be recreated next year (in late 2024). Duckmather ( talk) 03:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • None of the events mentioned in that section looks like they'll definitely happen in the 2024-25 cricket season (which by convention will be September 2024 to April 2025). Of the items mentioned there for 2024 or 2025, 2024 ICC Men's T20 World Cup is in the 2024 season (which will be May to September 2024) not the 2024-25 season, the 2025 Women's Cricket World Cup and ICC Champions Trophy don't yet have a date (so maybe will be in the 2024-25 season, but maybe not), so nothing definitive about actual events happening in that specific time period. Thus, I support deletion over redirection. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 12:09, 13 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Vikram Maingi By you, unilaterally. Incredibly bad form to change the target of a redirect during a discussion about the redirect. Feel free to contribute your thoughts here, but please don't just unilaterally change the redirect again. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 18:12, 15 January 2023 (UTC) reply
    Page was moved as per the correct naming convention and REDIRECT target was changed as per the comment mentioned above. I am npt making any changes and waiting for your revert. Thanks, Vikram Maingi ( talk) 04:36, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Redirect was renamed by Vikram maingi and moved to International cricket in 2024–25 where the RfD tag still remains. So, I'm relisting this nomination in order to include both here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 19:26, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

And the change of target was reverted by Joseph2302. @ Vikram maingi: I don't know what to make of your change. Did you modify the target because you were not aware of the Redirects for Discussion process, or are you a participant in this discussion with an opinion on what to do with the redirect? Jay 💬 02:13, 24 January 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Republic of Ukraine

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 Ukrainian Republic. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Target was arbitrarily changed from Post-Soviet transition in Ukraine. While I agree that that's not the best target, the modern country isn't called the "Republic of Ukraine" either. This redirect could conceivably refer to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic or the Ukrainian People's Republic, but neither are commonly known as this, so there's not really justification for disambiguating. I think deletion retargeting to Ukrainian Republic is the best path. An anonymous username, not my real name 18:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Retarget to Ukrainian Republic (a disambiguation page), though I think that article probably needs a slight rewrite if the name was never actually "Ukrainian Republic". But in any case I definitely think this could be a plausible search term for in particular the current country and the various communist states, which are all listed on the DAB page. A7V2 ( talk) 03:13, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Retarget to Ukrainian Republic per A7V2 as this is a highly plausible search term for the various states called Ukraine that are/were republics. Thryduulf ( talk) 15:23, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Keep  Ukraine is a republic for 31 years, it was a Soviet republic for 73 years before that, and it is also successor of the Ukrainian People’s Republic and West Ukrainian People’s Republic. This is precisely the main article for this term.  — Michael  Z. 15:50, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
If I'm understanding you correctly, it sounds like you would support retargeting, since you bring up earlier governments of Ukraine. If that's the case, your vote should reflect this. An anonymous username, not my real name 16:38, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
pinging @ Mzajac: so they see the above message. A7V2 ( talk) 22:32, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Hm, I see. I guess my solution is of broader scope.
The title Ukraine is used for the primary topic, and separately we have Ukraine (disambiguation).
Both “republic of Ukraine” and “Ukrainian republic” are exact synonyms for Ukraine. Every subject listed on Ukrainian Republic is also called Ukraine. Both of these names should redirect to the main article Ukraine. Most or all of the other articles are already linked from it, in summary style.
So I do prefer keeping it as is.  — Michael  Z. 02:09, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply
I understand your point, but to quote our article on the name of Ukraine, "Ukraine is the official full name of the country, as stated in its declaration of independence and its constitution; there is no official alternative long name." Therefore, it is no more or less correct to use this name for the modern state than any of its precursors. An anonymous username, not my real name 03:24, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Ukrainian republic and republic of Ukraine (caps thus) are not proper names but accurate descriptive phrases, Ukraine being a republic. Presumed search terms should be permissive in their interpretation.  — Michael  Z. 05:04, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Retarget to the disambiguation page, presumably a reader searching this is looking for something more specific than just Ukraine. CMD ( talk) 09:14, 22 January 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Emerald Palms

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! 21:46, 23 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Okay, so this redirect is to the former name of the property used by the Island of Bryan television show. As far as I can see this is incredibly obscure and entirely non-notable. I don't see readers being confused here.

As a secondary proposal, let us remove the hatnotes at Island of Bryan and Zamioculcas. They draw attention to this search term in a way I can't see is appropriate.

Again, yes, the redirect phrase is currently mentioned by the target article, but all those former resort names are obscure with no established notability (the only source ref is their mention in the show itself). They could easily be removed, and this redirect with them.

Finally, a question: is it really proper for a redirect creation to be reviewed and approved by the very same editor that created the redirect? (As in this case) CapnZapp ( talk) 16:10, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep - redirects are not subject to notability requirements. Emerald Palms is discussed at the current target, and the hatnote is there to help someone searching for the plant. A7V2 ( talk) 03:07, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Emerald Palms was never "discussed" at the current target - it was a mere trivia mention. I have now edited the article to remove the list of previous names. (No notability or relevance or importance was ever shown, and the only source of those names is a reference to an episode of the show itself). CapnZapp ( talk) 13:46, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Please also consider answering my question, A7V2: is it really proper for a redirect creation to be reviewed and approved by the very same editor that created the redirect? Thank you in advance. CapnZapp ( talk) 13:47, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
@ CapnZapp: I'm really not following: "facts" don't need to be notable. WP:DUE is the relevant policy for determining whether content is suitable for inclusion in an article. Also it is often fine to have primary sources for information but just not ideal. If you think that the target article Island of Bryan fails notability then nominate it at AfD. But editorial matters about the article, and notability concerns about the article are outside the scope of RfD. Emerald Palms is still briefly discussed in the article (as it probably should be). As to your question, I don't really know or care. I'm not that familiar with how Wikipedia:Articles for creation works, but for such a simple redirect as this, if an IP user requested this be created then I don't see any issue with any user in good standing, as I've no doubt DannyS712 is, creating this redirect. If you have any issues with the process you're better off taking it up at their talkpage or at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation but it's not really relevant here as the manner it was created doesn't make much difference. A7V2 ( talk) 22:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Keep Mentioned at target. - Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback) 19:00, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Comment the old incarnation of the hotel may be notable separately from the TV show due to its history: it's located in the constituency of former Bahamian PM Lynden Pindling, and revelations of corruption in the purchase of that (and other) hotels there by the Hotel Corporation of the Bahamas were a big part of why his party lost the 1992 elections. Scant trace of this remains online, aside from the Privy Council case over the royal commission of inquiry against Pindling [1], but it was a big deal at the time and resulted in a lot of coverage of the hotel. Not sure whether that means we should delete it per WP:R#D10 or what; I suspect adding this much detail about a three-decade-old political scandal would be WP:UNDUE on an article about the TV show. Note also that there are a large number of other similar redirects to the same target (I put them in a collapse box below). 59.149.117.119 ( talk) 09:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply
    • This is a good point actually. But I don't think we should be adding 10 or 15 new redirects to this now, better for a separate discussion. Of course those Emerald Palms redirects should share the same fate, and similarly for the Ritz Beach ones. Note that Ritz beach is not currently mentioned, but it was recently [2]. Also potentially I think it would be better to refine rather than just keep, targeting the section Island of Bryan#Caerula Mar Club and putting a bolded use of the old name. A7V2 ( talk) 22:24, 20 January 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Belarusian Agricultural Academy

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. Jay 💬 01:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Please, no soft redirects interlanguage links, only soft redirects to English-language projects (and even then only occasionaly). Fram ( talk) 15:59, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Why? Google translate does a perfectly coherent job. Oculi ( talk) 17:05, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per WP:SRD] Soft redirects to non-English language editions of Wikipedia should be avoided because they are generally unhelpful to English-language readers.. They also falsely imply we have English-language content about the target which misleads readers and discourages the creation of wanted articles. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:07, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Thryduulf. A7V2 ( talk) 03:03, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete as per WP:SRD. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 14:07, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Kalashnikov Izhevsk State Technical University

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. Jay 💬 01:44, 24 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Not helpful for English-language users. Fram ( talk) 15:57, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Why? Google translate does a perfectly coherent job. Oculi ( talk) 17:03, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply
    • See also my comments at #Belarusian Agricultural Academy regarding misleading users, but Google translate (or other machine translators) are not available everywhere and cannot be relied upon to be accurate. If someone is able to and wants to use them however then they can do so just as well by visiting the Russian (or whatever language) Wikipedia directly without any of the downsides of a soft redirect. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:11, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per nom, WP:SRD and my comments at #Belarusian Agricultural Academy. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:11, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete per Thryduulf. A7V2 ( talk) 03:02, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Delete. WP:NOT a directory, and I’m not aware of a precedent to redirect titles to other Wiki projects. (If anything, it should provide all the foreign-language project links as articles do, or link to Wikidata.)  — Michael  Z. 16:10, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: Interlanguage redirects are generally to be avoided as it cannot be assumed a reader on the English language wikipedia will speak the language linked to. The best to do in this scenario would be to use {{ ill}} wherever this is linked which which would link to the Russian article, but red link the English article to encourage creation. Tartar Torte 13:55, 19 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete: per WP:SRD. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 14:29, 19 January 2023 (UTC) reply
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Template substitution

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. Rough consensus for deletion over the retarget proposal that primarily received weak support. signed, Rosguill talk 16:53, 25 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Not what the target disambiguation page is about at all. Delete due to this (preferred option) or weak retarget to Wikipedia:Substitution Template processor as the most likely intended target (not preferred since it would make the nominated redirect a WP:XNR). Steel1943 ( talk) 17:45, 29 December 2022 (UTC) reply

Updated nomination statement per information presented below. Steel1943 ( talk) 21:04, 6 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Retarget to Wikipedia:Substitution; this would be helpful for newer editors Template processor per 59.149.117.119 as an {{ R from related topic}}. Duckmather ( talk) 18:29, 29 December 2022 (UTC); edited 21:19, 8 January 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Delete or weak retarget to template processor. The concept of template substitution is not Mediawiki-exclusive, but is found in multiple programming and markup languages [3]. An XNR would be both unhelpful (misdirecting readers who are trying to find e.g. C++ template substitution) and unnecessary (understanding namespaces is a very basic threshold level of editing competence, something that editors should understand long before they start worrying about which templates need to be substituted). 59.149.117.119 ( talk) 22:20, 29 December 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Delete. This term has only 2 mentions in Enwiki and Search would find them. Certainly do not create an unnecessary cross-namespace redirect. Shhhnotsoloud ( talk) 22:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 18:04, 5 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:11, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Midnight Rain (Taylor Swift song)

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 Moot. The draft has been moved over the redirect by Ingenuity. Thryduulf ( talk) 17:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete to make way for Draft:Midnight Rain (song) to be moved in Tantomile ( talk) 09:34, 16 January 2023 (UTC) reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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).

Nueva York

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 23#Nueva York

Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_January_16&oldid=1135591906"