Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 7

< Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion | Log

November 7

edit

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on November 7, 2024.

Wikipedia:OPENLETTER

edit

There have been multiple open letters on Wikipedia (e.g. 1), and there likely will be others in the future long after this controversy passes, so it doesn't make much sense for this shortcut to go to this particular one. Sdkb talk 21:43, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. EF5 21:43, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Disambiguate per below I'm not familiar on how redirect discussions work, but I'd suggest changing the shortcut from WP:OPENLETTER to WP:OPENLETTER2024 for this specific open letter or something similar.❤HistoryTheorist❤ 21:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:2024OPENLETTER used instead. Disambiguate per comments below. CNC (talk) 21:47, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate as there were, are, and will be more in the future. Tavantius (talk) 00:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate — This is not the first open letter to WMF nor will it be the last. Disambiguation seems to be the most reasonable course of action. Ratnahastin (talk) 07:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

History of the United States (2008–2024)

edit

This redirect is the result of a bad page move but I don't think any CSD criteria applies to it. It is the result of an editor writing a new article that states that 2024 ushered a new era into American history. The article has now been moved to Draft space. Liz Read! Talk! 21:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - whether this redirect would be useful is just based on WP:CRYSTALBALL BugGhost🦗👻 08:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mongola

edit

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Waliugi

edit

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Counrty

edit

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete. possibly also ambiguous with county cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:06, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Kentuchy

edit

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reccomend

edit

Ok this misspelling has like two errors. I don't think that's very plausible. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:39, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gardern

edit

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:38, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Stephoscope

edit

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:37, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Monterrey La Raza (current)

edit

Outdated title. (CC) Tbhotch™ 18:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak delete. This is the former title of the page and may have been accurate from when it was created (in 2006, interestingly, when there was talk of this team being created) to when the team folded in 2010, but it's still an outdated one. Regardless, for some reason, the redirect still seems to be getting a surprisingly high number of pageviews (like 61 last year and 79 this year). Regards, SONIC678 06:26, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Relable sources

edit

Unlikely misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:12, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:AUTOCONFIMRED

edit

Unlikely misspelling created due to an incoming link that probably should have just been corrected rather than having this redirect created. Steel1943 (talk) 16:43, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pauletta Brupbakher

edit

Double typo, unlikely search term, originated from a Wikidata error apparently Fram (talk) 16:35, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Double error (on my part): turns out it wasn't a wikidata error, but rather the spelling of her name transliterated from Russian. Since she was Russian (ish), it makes sense that we had it that way originally. I've fixed the Wikidata item and added the Russian spelling to the article now. -- asilvering (talk) 16:38, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Racially motivated violence

edit

Only four articles currently make use of this redirect. In all four cases, "hate crime" would be a more appropriate target than "ethnic conflict". So I suggest retargeting the redirect to "hate crime". Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 15:57, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blind tasting

edit

Ambiguous name, as you can do a blind tasting of any alcohol. Plausible search terms for this include Blind wine tasting and Beer tasting#Blind tasting, so I suggest converting this into a DAB page. No evidence that wine tasting is the primary topic for this name. Joseph2302 (talk) 12:28, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FC Türkiye II

edit

This could refer to the B-team of the target club, but it isn't mentioned in that page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:04, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Show Business (TV series)

edit

Not mentioned in the target page. Aidillia(talk) 05:10, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I, as the creator of the redirect page has added it on target with a secondary reliable source. 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 09:16, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Love Me (TV series)

edit

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 withdrawn per [1]. (non-admin closure) Steel1943 (talk) 02:24, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned in the target page. Reports only mentioned that it is an adaptation of Swedish drama of the same name and actors were offered a role but no official confirmation. Also no news that neither production nor principal photography started. 𝙹𝚒𝚢𝚊𝚗 忌炎 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 04:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Wikipedia:Picture turorial

edit

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. asilvering (talk) 18:53, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely misspelling of "turorial". Fix here should have been to correct the link (or left it standing incorrect) rather than creating this redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 03:59, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

It's time to d-d-d-d-duel

edit

There is no mention of "d-d" at the target article. Per the RCATs, this is apparently a related meme quotation, yet does not appear anywhere as written within the article. People looking for Yu-Gi-Oh! can reach the subject by typing Yugioh. Hyphenating between all the d's, just to reach an undiscussed meme subject, does not seem particularly useful or helpful here. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:59, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Helpful to whom exactly? Personally, I search for a meme expecting information about a meme. 90% of people familiar with the meme know it's from Yu-Gi-Oh (or seems to be that way from [2], where it is discussed on KnowYourMeme). At the very least, readers expect to read about the thing they searched about. So readers get here thinking "oh so the meme is discussed on this page, great!" One then spends the next 50 thousand bytes searching and searching and nope, zero context, zero benefit. We don't need a redirect for "it's time to d-d-d-d-duel" if all it's going to imply is "this term is synonymous with the entire concept of the Yu-Gi-Oh! general topic article, with no specific section or anchor implied."
Memes are novel. I'm not surprised that people WANT to learn about it here, yet still not useful as a 1-to-1 redirect as it currently leaves people lost on a page without any information for their meme search term, and no mention of "meme" at Yu-Gi-Oh. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Monsters. This isn't simply a meme-- it's a direct quotation from the original opening sequence for the English dub of this specific anime, with most meme-ification of this quote simply extending the "d-d-d-d-d-d" stuttery part, or otherwise playing around with it and the Yu-Gi-Oh anime's characters in general. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 06:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
So, it's a meme then. I'm well aware of the Yu-Gi-Oh sequence in question, and the associated meme and its derivations. It's clearly not a "direct quotation", else this text (hyphens and all) would appear in the episode transcript here: [3]. Regardless, thank you for suggesting a more-related option. But it's still an unmentioned meme. How does this have any bearing on the likelihood of typing a d, followed by a hyphen, followed by a d, followed by a hyphen, followed by a d, followed by a hyphen, followed by a d, followed by a hyphen, followed by a d, followed by "uel"? And all to end up at an article for the series where the meme being sought isn't mentioned, nor any of the meme-spellings? Even in the anime and the video you linked, they stutter like 9 times, so even that aspect isn't accurate within this redirect, and none of It's time to duel, It's time to d-duel, It's time to d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-d-duel (is nommed), It's time to d-d-d-d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-d-d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-d-d-d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-duel exist, or It's time to dduel, It's time to ddduel, It's time to dddduel, or It's time to ddddduel for that matter. Past precedent has indicated that random hyphens inserted into words is not useful, obfuscates the terms that are actually spoken, and makes searches impractical. And at least for these precedent discussions, they were for quotes which appeared at the target, iirc (in an unmodified/natural state that is, I think). The quote is officially "it's time to duel". Anything beyond that, makes it a meme/meme version. Someone committing to the 5 ds/4 hyphens combination is deliberately typing in a meme into the search engine, so if maintained, the content should reflect that. Neither the real version nor any of the meme variations are covered at the new suggested target either, and Wikipedia is not a collection of memes. Utopes (talk / cont) 16:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: There's It’s time to du-du-du-du-du-du-du-du-duel!, btw. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 19:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for finding this hyphens, Hyphenation Expert; imo you have definitely earned the title of "expert in hyphenation" for this one 😌 lol.
    For that redirect, the title stutters 8 times, which that number happens to have a bit more basis in reality, compared to this one which stutters 4. (Side note, the edit summary for that redirect is... certainly interesting...). I'm hesitant to bundle these though, as the redirect you found here at least sounds a bit closer to what occurs in the Yu-Gi-Oh sequence, with the ~correct amount of 8 or 9 ds, so slightly more plausible. There may be a case for deletion there (no other du-du-dus exist), but I think the smaller scope and just one redirect here is fine for now. Utopes (talk / cont) 19:46, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 14:28, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conerve

edit

No mention of "conerve" at the target article. Possibly a portmanteau of "complex nerve"? But without a definition, is confusing. I'm getting mixed results when I type in "conerve" in search engines, which say something about a "conerve capsule"(?) (but are generally about being one letter off of "conserve"). In any case, without a mention, there is currently nothing suitable for incoming readers using this search term. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:06, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:17, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cowboy Luttrell

edit

No mention of "Cowboy" or "Luttrell" at the target article. Not a helpful redirect if we have no content on this supposed individual wrestler at the target article for the NWA. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:16, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 31

edit

The only reasoning for this appears to be "Java (specifically the java.util.Calendar class) allows dates such as February 0 (= January 31) and April 31 (= March 1)." The problem is that that particular class in Java seems to accept any integer for the date. I tested "April 366" which showed up as March 31 of the next year. The internet does say that there is a reference to "April 31" in the The Long Walk by Stephen King, but it is purposely supposed to be a fictional date, even within that universe. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:47, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - the target mentions Excel, but doesn't get into the use of these nonstandard dates in formulas (it only mentions the weird 1900 problem). In Excel and programs like it, if you add one day to the last day of a month, it returns the first day of the following month. It doesn't recognize April 31 as a valid date if you write it in a cell directly, but April 30 + 1 = May 1. I'm not sure if that could fit into content in the article, or if it's more prominent than other uses that have been suggested here. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:26, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget. May 1 was the 2014 discussion outcome. But April 30 might be the likely sought-for page for users who simply forgot April's last date. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 22:20, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ambiguous "planet 3" redirects

edit

Earth is, unsurprisingly, not the only "planet three". This is a highly ambiguous and fairly implausible search term. Ditto for the rest. Delete. Cremastra (u — c) 01:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete the first one, keep the three others, there is no ambiguity, except in the first one.
21 Andromedae (talk) 18:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@21.Andromedae Why is only first one ambiguous? Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 19:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Planet three isn't the same as 3rd planet, and nobody calls Earth as planet three. 21 Andromedae (talk) 20:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Comment: I have bundled "1st planet", "2nd planet", and "4th planet" in this discussion. Cremastra (u — c) 19:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Other planetary systems do exist, but none is so ingrained into popular knowledge as ours so that random people would be able to name all of its planets, and in order to boot. Right now and for a very long time in the future, "first", "second", "third" and "fourth" planet, said in isolation, will always mean implicitly "...of the Solar System". Cambalachero (talk) 19:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the ordinal ones per Cambalachero. I'm unsure about Planet Three. Looking around there's definitely other uses for this term. There is a publisher (for example redlinked on Mad About Boys), an internet(?) company mentioned on .cx, and probably most notably Arthur C. Clarke's "Report on Planet Three And Other Speculations". In that case it clearly is referring to the Earth. Given it is only a partial title match and given there's no actual articles about any of these things I very weakly lean keep but don't have a strong objection to deletion or targeting somewhere else. A7V2 (talk) 00:58, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete all. It is not inherently obvious that a reader is intending to determine the order from the Sun. Maybe they are looking for an estimated time when each planet was actually created, or some other chronological construct. And even then, why this solar system? Steel1943 (talk) 18:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete all, mercury was not the first planet to exist. Earth was the first planet to be inhabited by humans. The gauge for determining a scale of "what planet is first" is WP:OR and these descriptions do not seem to be mentioned as "first planet" at the target articles of Mercury (planet) and etc, without the necessary context of "first planet away from the sun". Without the context, this is ambiguous. Utopes (talk / cont) 09:29, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:05, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Her Royal Hotness

edit
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

This designation is not mentioned at the subject. Redirect is confusing, misleading, ambiguous and undiscussed. People looking for this term are looking for encyclopedic coverage of such a buzzword "her royal hotness", which is not currently found at the page for Pippa Middleton nor anywhere on Wikipedia. This is a novel term, and hasn't ever been mentioned at the subject's article, since the last bout in 2020. No coverage of the phrase "her royal hotness" anywhere on Wikipedia, so this WP:Surprising non-RS term should be removed. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:01, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • My !vote was previously based on personal experience of hearing this term generically applied to nearly any "hot girl", particularly those seen as "higher class", by peers. Google, on the other hand, makes it fairly clear that this is attested to refer to this one person, so extremely consistently it makes for an overwhelming WP:PTOPIC. No, it's not mentioned in the article, nor should it be, as the vast number of sources that use it so overwhelmingly often are not reliable... but redirects are not article content, and need not be held to the same sourcing or inclusion standards. This redirect will help users who encounter the term in the wild find out who is being referred to. Fieari (talk) 05:53, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:04, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, not mentioned at the target, and apparently pretty ambiguous about whom it could refer to anyway. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:25, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete if WP:RSURPRISE applies, which it seems it currently does; in my experiences, if there's not a good reason to add a term to an article, it either doesn't apply or is some sort of combination of WP:NEO, WP:SEO and/or WP:OR, which we don't want here. Also, to respond to the struck vote above, if it's not mentioned, the redirect would continue to be a {{R without mention}}, which puts the redirect in a maintenance category prompting the redirect to eventually end up on RFD ... which is exactly what happened here, and there's no reason to repeat the same steps that were prompted by the same problem. Steel1943 (talk) 17:50, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - searching for "her royal hotness" on various search engines returns many results for Pippa. Purposely omitting her from those results returns practically nothing: one novel by a not-well-known author, and a few non-notable shades of lipstick. Not really that ambiguous at all, and we're here to help readers find the information they're looking for. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:29, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Site-specific Comedy Opera

edit

According to the internet "site-specific theatre refers to a theatre performance which is staged in a non-traditional space". This needs to be re-targetted, but I'm unsure where. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 11:17, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:23, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak Keep - If you're being specific enough to type this entire phrase, I don't think you'd be WP:ASTONISHed to end up at this target. I'm not sure we have better. Fieari (talk) 02:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete, definitely do not keep but open to retargeting as necessary. No mention of "site-specific" or "opera" at the target article, so people searching for this term would be misled by the promise of content on this term that we don't have. No mention of "Site-specific Comedy Opera" anywhere on Wikipedia, so honestly this should probably just be deleted as the RfD default (no valuable history being lost), but OP seems to think there could be another target possibility. I can't think of one so I say delete for now. Utopes (talk / cont) 09:49, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I meant retarget if there is a good target. If not, then deletion would be my !vote. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 10:50, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:02, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Dutch general election

edit

There is no election planned in 2025 Dajasj (talk) 18:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Refine to Elections in the Netherlands#2023 general election. According to 2023 Dutch general election, that election was expected to take place in 2025 but was called early on short notice, so this is a very plausible search term. I've added a summary to the target article that explains this. Thryduulf (talk) 13:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Would then be more sustainable to link to redirect to 2023 Dutch general election, because the section header will be changed after the next election (and we will have forgotten about it). Also avoids duplicating content.
    More generally I disagree with redirecting with a hypothetical situation, but in this specific case it is also ambiguous because 2025 could also refer to a hypothetical snap election after 2023 (if the cabinet fell today, that would be the earliest moment). Dajasj (talk) 13:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The cabinet failing before the next expected election is different to the expected next election unexpectedly not happening. Sources regularly talk about the next expected election, so there will be sources from pre-July 2023 talking about the 2025 elections that people will see and search for information about. Sources since that date don't expect 2025 elections, they talk about 2028 elections in the expected manner. If elections do happen in 2025 then obviously this redirect will be correctly usurped by an article about those elections. That article will mention the circumstances and explain things for those who arrive looking for what became the 2023 election. Thryduulf (talk) 13:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:01, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

三州府

edit

There's two possible targets for 三州府: Straits Settlements and Suong. 三州府 is an old alternative Chinese-language name Straits Settlements, and 三州府市 (三州府 + city) is the name historically and currently used by Chinese-speakers and Chinese Cambodians people for Suong. The Chinese Wikipedia has chosen to solve this with a disambiguation page zh:三州府, so this term seemingly cannot be tied very strongly to one article. I'm not seeing how we could create a local policy-compliant dab page. Given the very high bar needed to have a non-English redirect page, we should probably delete this. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 20:22, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Cambodia is not a Chinese language subject. But the Straits Settlements are due to the high Chinese population of the region. Thus regardless of what Chinese Wikipedia does, on English Wikipedia, the only subject with affinity for Chinese is the Straits Settlements, and not Suong, Cambodia. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 12:11, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Update I stand corrected on the status of Chinese in Suong, being that there is a large population of such in Suong; therefore I recommend that this page be disambiguated per WP:CJKV {{Chinese title disambiguation}} and create a WP:2DAB like that on Chinese Wikipedia because both locations have large Chinese populations and both locations have carried this Chinese name. ;; So either Keep as is and hatnote Suong, or disambiguate -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:08, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the ip editor. A hatnote can be added if really desired, but I don't think it is required. Thryduulf (talk) 13:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, per the Chinese Wikipedia article for Suong, Cambodia, 80 per cent of the population in the city are of Chinese ethnicity, so the above rationale might not be valid. However, it doesn't appear to be cited properly (the current source does not provide such information). If there is some related reliable source found, then perhaps a dab, otherwise keep. Sun8908 Talk 15:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Anecdotal evidence- I mean if we compare the length and detail of the zhWiki article to the Khmer article, I wouldn't be surprised if the statement that 80% of the population are Sino-Khmer turns out to be true. Baidu Baike(keeping in mind WP:BAIDU and all) also repeats the statistic, citing it to what looks to be an offline database. (@Sun8908, does it look obviously unreliable in this case?)
    But back to the matter at hand- Wiktionary lists the Cambodian city first, emphasizing that the usage of 三州府 is "historical". Again, uncited, but I googled and the Promote Mandarin Council (in Singapore) seemingly confirms this, writing that the name was used most in the early days. The Cantonese Wikipedia lists their (unsourced) article for the Straits Settlement under the name 三洲府, but zhWiki only mentions once that it's an unofficial name. Our own article doesn't mention the name at all. It's clearly not a clear-cut matter.
    When I google "三洲府", my own results are pretty evenly split between the city and the settlement, which I think is why the editors on zhWiki chose to make a dab page in the end. They seemed to have the opposite problem as us, actually, with their initial redirect pointing, for four years, to the article about Suong. I'm not suggesting we should follow them, I'm just pointing out that there is unlikely to be a dominant topic. I suppose if somebody wants to make a dab page, they could, I suppose? Three States is a direct translation, and already a dab page, but I don't think we really make dab pages for direct translations where the direct translation is not used in English. A dab for the direct transliteration might be better, if anybody wants to make one? I'm not convinced it would aid people trying to navigate the English Wikipedia, but I suppose it wouldn't be harmful. A hatnote could be a solution, but I'm not sure how useful non-English/Latin hatnotes for unofficial names are.
    On a personal note, this is why WP:RLOTE based on unofficial nicknames can be problematic- the predominant argument to keep is that Suong, Cambodia has no affinity with the Chinese language. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 21:27, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Just want you to note that we indeed have dab pages with Chinese characters as title. We could do that if it turns out there isn't a main article between the two entries. That being said, a main article should be decided with the likeliness that English speaker would more likely want to search. I think there are Chinese-language newspapers in Cambodia using that name to refer to the Cambodian city, so it might worth a dab. Sun8908 Talk 05:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry I missed reading the reliability of the source on Baidu Baike. I am not familiar with the site but I cannot see a link for that citation. I cannot search any useful information about the database / centre by simply searching on Baidu or Google. (Note: there seems to be a lot of database with a similar name, I don't know which to look for) However, that citation seems to be used by a lot of articles on Baidu Baike. Unfortunately, only verified users can see the edit history, so I cannot get any further information from there. I don't feel like it is particularly useful as I cannot find information about the database / centre. Sun8908 Talk 11:25, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:01, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Licensing Letter

edit

Redirect title appears to be a company name that's loosely related? Not mentioned at target article, possible promotion LR.127 (talk) 01:07, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Like License Global that's mentioned in the article The Licensing Letter is a trade publication that covers the licensing industry. They used to publish their top brand lists from 2010 to 2018 (used here List of highest-grossing media franchises) and have been mentioned in reliable sources like The Hollywood Reporter. [15], The Morning Call [16],Chicago Tribune [17][18], Star Tribune [19] , among others. Timur9008 (talk) 05:25, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Żwaniec

edit

This article exists at Polish Wikipedia - therefore, appears to be a translated name that's not significant to the target article. LR.127 (talk) 01:00, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It is not a translated name, but a historical Polish name, as it was part of Poland for several centuries. The redirect is similar to many other towns, which were formerly part of Poland, Hungary, Lithuania, Romania, Denmark, Germany, etc, but whose state affiliation has changed since, and there are articles in which the town is mentioned under its Polish name as a reference to the history of that period. Marcin 303 (talk) 10:58, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Solidarity, Ecology, Left Alternative

edit

not mentioned at target article. Ironically, when searching this term on the internet, the article for Eco-socialism popped up. LR.127 (talk) 00:51, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Manush Shah

edit

No point in this redirect, there is no much coverage about him in this page. he is mentioned in some events. should be deleted until an actual article is made. Sports2021 (talk) 00:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_7&oldid=1256122315"
pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy