Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 7

July 7

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

Brohoof

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! 21:12, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brohoof → My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fandom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Useless redirect — the term is not mentioned in the target article at all. (The article i was looking is for is Fist bump — it's a non-neutral name for that, and not mentioned in that article either) 2002:57CF:EE0A:1:E989:4C91:CB45:4CA (talk) 21:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - not mentioned anywhere, no clear target BugGhost 🪲👻 11:48, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now corrected: keep. Drmies (talk) 16:24, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as it is now mentioned at the target and is heavily associated with the brony fanbase. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 01:21, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per well sourced due-weight addition to the article. Fieari (talk) 06:28, 11 July 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).

Blagger

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 disambiguate. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:45, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blagger → Social engineering (security)#Pretexting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This was flagged up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation#Searching for "Blagger" currently redirects to a page with no mention of the word. by user:Oathed with the comment seems weird that it doesn't link or disambig to Blagger (video game). Not sure how to mark a page for "Disambig page needed". At the very least this does need a hatnote to the video game, but I'm not acutally sure the video game isn't the primary target. Neither the present target nor Pretexting (linked as the main article) use the term. The only other uses I'm finding (Blaggers ITA (formerly known as The Blaggers) and The Blaggers Guide would be at most see-alsos on a dab page.
The video game article was created at this title but moved in March 2018 by Zxcvbnm with the summary "Merge, in order to disambiguate" but they just changed the redirect target and added a hatnote. The hatnote was removed without explanation by an IP in 2020, but the mention of "blagging" had been removed in July 2018 as part of a cull of unreferenced information by Michaelgt123. None of "blag", "blagging" or "blagger" has ever been included in the Pretext article. Thryduulf (talk) 20:27, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and move Blagger (video game) to it.

The redirect made at least some sense at the time it was created. The article Pretext, as it appeared at the time, was about the general well-understood meaning of a "pretext"; a reason given in justification of a course of action that is not the real reason. It had only a single paragraph describing the social engineering trick.

Meanwhile, the article Social engineering (security), as it appeared at the time, in the section Pretexting, said "Pretexting..., also known in the UK as blagging". So that made at least some sense as a target (although even then, I think the video game article would have been a more appropriate target).

The video game seems pretty clearly to be the primary use for "Blagger"; if the "blagging" text is re-added to the Social engineering (security) article (as it probably should, there seems to be sufficient documentation of that, e.g., [1] at the BBC), it can be dealt with by ordinary disambiguation (hatnote or a Blagger (disambiguation) page, as appropriate). TJRC (talk) 02:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The page mover / redirect creator Zxcvbnm was notified in the nomination, however I have just notified at the talk page as well. Jay 💬 11:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate "Blagging" is another term for social engineering (see here and here). If that isn't the primary topic, then it should be disambiguated between social engineering (security) and the game, not have the game moved back here. That would be the height of folly when it could simply be re-added with a single sentence referenced to a reliable source. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:00, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should the page Blagger be a disambiguation page?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ca ^{talk to me!} 08:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there a primary topic?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:26, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, move Blagger (video game) to it, then add a hatnote. "Blagging" is an informal term in UK that has similarities to social engineering, but it's not quite the same thing - it's just a phrase that sort of means "bullshitter", someone who can make up lies quickly - social engineers will blag, but not all blaggers are social engineers. For example most improv comedians are good blaggers, but that doesn't mean they are doing anything nefarious. Seeing as Blagger (video game) exists, it should be the primary topic. BugGhost 🪲👻 13:53, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's also not exclusively lying per se - it includes things like asking for something you know you aren't entitled to on the off-chance that the person you're asking wont check, presenting truths misleadingly or selectively. It is very significantly broader than social engineering. Thryduulf (talk) 11:51, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With The Blaggers now thrown into the mix, I wouldn't be against a disambiguation page. I still think Blagger (video game) is the primary topic here (it is the only topic being discussed that actually universally uses the name "Blagger"), but a disambiguation is far better than keeping the existing pretexting redirect. BugGhost 🪲👻 15:24, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and move the video game here, for lack of any other acceptable outcome as the social engineering article does not mention it and nobody has been willing to add a mention in weeks of being at RfD. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Move back the video game to Blagger per others, and hatnote to The Blaggers. Whether or not the current target has a mention, there needs to be mention at Pretexting, for disambiguating or hatnoting, and we don't. Jay 💬 05:35, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate per my draft. An important factor here is "blag" at Glossary of British terms not widely used in the United States, and The dictionary definition of Blagger at Wiktionary. A disambiguation page gives the reader access to those. Social engineering (security)#Pretexting can be added only if there's a legitimate mention. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:44, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate per Shhhnotsoloud since there is no primary topic. There appears to be 3-4 terms it could refer to: the game, the band, the British slang term (with an entry at Glossary of British terms not widely used in the United States) and the social engineering definition which does appear to be referenced in sources. A disambiguation page also gives the reader access to the Wiktionary definition. C F A 💬 04:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I have added a referenced mention to blagging at Social engineering (security)#Pretexting. C F A 💬 04:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Apologies for relisting this again after being open so long, but I would appreciate additional comments considering CFA's recent addition of the term at the target. So, disambiguate or move the video game article to this title?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:41, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate or move the video game here, no clear primary topic. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:50, 8 July 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).

Botswanan

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 disambiguate. Botswanan (disambiguation). wbm1058 (talk) 18:38, 2 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

It should redirect to Motswana. Not sure why this got reverted, the authority is wikitionary or however you spell it. Botswanan is not a proper word. [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] OK I think I’ve made my point. 48 JCL 01:54, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oops wrong place 48 JCL 01:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@48JCL: I have reverted your bold retarget and restored the redirect with the RfD tag as nominated to allow for proper consensus to be reached on where to target this. As stated at WP:RFD, please do not unilaterally rename or change the target of a redirect while it is under discussion. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 04:27, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment 48JCL I think you maybe need to give a bit more of an argument for why it should be retargeted. Even if Botswanan isn't a "proper" word I think for most readers the main Botswana article is a good target; it also mentions the Tswana people in the lead paragraph for example. Skynxnex (talk) 15:22, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Botswanan" not being 'a proper word' isn't really an issue-- the question is if it's *a plausible word*. Adding an -n, -an, or -ian suffix to the name of a place is a typical English way of signifying "from this place" or "people from this place", see American, Mexican, Canadian, Italian, ect, just like "-ish" (English, Spanish, ect) or "-ese" (Japanese, Chinese, Portuguese, ect). I can easily see someone unfamiliar with the term Batswana to invent terms like Botswanese, Botswanish, or, yes, Botswanan.
That said, I would ~~Retarget~~ to the Tswana DAB, simply to match the other 'from this place' words above. The searcher is clearly looking for information on *something* from Botswana- let's both inform them of the correct term, AND offer up the multiple meanings for said word. After all, who's to say they're not looking for the language they speak in Botswana? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Lunamann, the proper denonym is at Motswana. 48 JCL 13:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That... definitely presents an issue, given part of the reason I targeted the Tswana DAB was its link to Tswana language; many demonyms also serve as a name for the language that group uses (see English, Chinese, German, ect); and given Botswanan is a made-up and incorrect demonym, there's really nothing stopping someone from also using it as an incorrect name for the language.
The only idea I have is, to retarget to the Motswana DAB, and then add a See Also that targets the Tswana DAB? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 14:10, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Lunamann: Yes, that does seem to be a problem; I will ping Lefcentreright and John, who were able to somewhat eradicate the term from the Wikipedia and replace it with proper terms. 48 JCL 22:33, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to the dab per Lunamann. The word appears in dictionaries (Cambridge, Oxford) and is used by reliable sources such as the United States Mission to the United Nations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, Cardiff University and Florida State University among others as well as lots of other sites I haven't bothered to assess for reliability. Even if it isn't a "proper word" (which seems doubtful given that evidence) it is very much a plausible search term. Thryduulf (talk) 16:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What about creating a disambiguation page that points to Botswana, Tswana people and Tswana language? --Error (talk) 09:48, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is the better solution. The sources that Thryduulf has included in their comment show that "Botswanan" refers just as much to the country itself as it does to the people or language. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 18:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't be opposed to this. Support. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:39, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objections to this. Thryduulf (talk) 10:36, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support this, sounds like the most helpful solution. BugGhost 🪲👻 09:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have no objections. If this is closed, the result would probably be like merge 2 articles and retarget to disambiguation. 48 JCL 01:48, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is leading to agreement on a disambiguation page but it is unclear if the current redirect will be converted to it, or be targeted to a new disambiguation page that needs to be created.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate at the current title ("Botswanan"), since this could plausibly naively refer to the ethnic group (Motswana), the nationality (Motswana), or the language (Setswana or Tswana). _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:26, 1 August 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).

Petapixel

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. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 13:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Petapixel → Gigapixel image (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Aside from the "Petapixel redirects here", not mentioned in page. I can't find any discussion of the concept of a petapixel image to see if it should be mentioned in the page, search results are completely shadowed by PetaPixel. Possibly this should redirect there? Rusalkii (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment peta- is an SI prefix. JoshuaAuble (talk) 19:15, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Fieari JoshuaAuble (talk) 02:21, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The target doesn't discuss petapixel images by name because, to my knowledge, such a thing does not yet exist... yet if it did/when it does, it's basically the same thing as a gigapixel image except... moreso. As Joshua said above, peta is just an SI prefix after all. So I feel like the current target is a pretty good choice, and probably a better target than PetaPixel, which is a pretty low notability organization (not saying it needs to be AfD'd, just that it wouldn't make good WP:PTOPIC fare). Fieari (talk) 07:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not even mentioned, much less explained or expounded upon, in the target article. Until such time as that occurs, this needs to be deleted as misleading and confusing. Softlavender (talk) 23:52, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Totally implausible search term and pointless redirect. As Rusalkii and Softlavender said, it's nonexistent and confusing. Fieari agrees with that as an equally elaborate rationale for deletion as the nominator's rationale, but with the inexplicably wrong conclusion. It's just another of this user's bunk redirects in a campaign to attempt to coin some pet jargon, so stop making them. — Smuckola (talk) 01:42, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not me making up new words, as petapixel image has redirected to gigapixel image since 2011. JoshuaAuble (talk) 19:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My conclusion is the opposite of your simply because my criteria for conclusion has only two components: firstly, is it a plausible search? Peta is an SI prefix, two steps up from giga, and while nothing currently goes that far I can see someone using it a speculative fashion, so that checks plausible off for me. Secondly, is the target accurate? The target describes images with a very large number of pixels, which would cover what a petapixel image is. No other criteria for a redirect is really meaningful, and since this one meets both those criteria there's no harm in keeping it. Fieari (talk) 02:43, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The harm in keeping it is that is worse keeping it than deleting it, because it is not mentioned, much less explained, in the target article. If you want to add the term to the target article and cite it as relating to Gigapixel image, then this discussion would be moot. As it is, encyclopedic integrity demands that it be deleted. Softlavender (talk) 04:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, Fieari's ability to describe how wrong he is changes nothing. I'll note that the offending user has been blocked for this kind of noise and more. — Smuckola (talk) 09:30, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or retarget to PetaPixel. Yes, you can probably figure out what this hypothetical term means if you land on the target. But it's not mentioned, and being a redlink or pointing to a different topic would convey it doesn't exist. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:54, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (effectively redirecting it to PetaPixel). Worth noting that other redirects to Gigapixel image include: Terapixel, Terapixel image, Petapixel image, Exapixel, Exapixel image, Zettapixel, Zettapixel image, Yottapixel, Yottapixel image. If this article actually covered giga (10^9) all the way up to yotta (10^24) then the article should be renamed to "High pixel count imagery" or something instead. Seeing as the article doesn't mention anything over terapixels, the Exa-, Zetta- and Yotta- redirects probably should be deleted too. BugGhost 🪲👻 12:05, 8 July 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).

Trial by jury

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. An RM should be opened at the talk page of Trial by Jury to see if a move to the disambiguated title is viable, since there isn't enough support here to perform the move as a result of this RfD. CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:16, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trial by jury → Jury trial (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Trial by Jury and Trial by jury go to completely different articles (the Gilbert and Sullivan opera and the legal system respectively). It's absolutely insane to have disambiguation by capitalization; clearly, the links from here to Jury trial should be replaced with a piped link. I don't think there's any other redirect where capitalisation makes a difference to which article you go to.

Trial by Jury has 581 uses, Trial by jury about 100. It would be far less disruptive to simply redirect to Trial by Jury. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 11:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:DIFFCAPS. You may feel that the policy is insane, but it's actually standard practice. Jury trial and Trial by Jury both have appropriate hatnotes, so there's little chance of confusion. - Eureka Lott 13:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per Eureka Lott rationale. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 16:41, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. If anything, Trial by Jury should be moved to Trial by Jury (opera), and the undisambiguated title then pointed to Jury trial. BD2412 T 03:17, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above. Caps policy feels odd sometimes but it makes sense when the difference in caps distinguish the topics. There are a lot of articles/redirects that are separated by caps, eg. Lightning strike vs Lightning Strike; Silent Alarm vs Silent alarm, Holy fuck vs Holy Fuck, etc BugGhost 🪲👻 13:02, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep - It is, actually, not uncommon for a situation like this to arise; this is already handled properly as is outlined by others above. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 09:06, 12 July 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).

Voi.id

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. ✗plicit 14:52, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voi.id → Voice of Indonesia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Wrong target, and there isn't a right one: Voi.id is an entirely different entity from Voice of Indonesia (which uses voinews.id). Herostratus (talk) 06:39, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Voice of Indonesia is a public news channels under Radio Republik Indonesia, while Voi.id is a private news channels. Despite their similar names, they are unrelated entities. Ckfasdf (talk) 15:33, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 16:43, 7 July 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).

2025 FIVB Men's Volleyball Nations League

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 16#2025 FIVB Men's Volleyball Nations League

2025 FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 16#2025 FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League

Nabbit

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 Mario franchise characters#Nabbit. ^Complex/_Rational 02:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nabbit → New Super Mario Bros. U#Gameplay (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The most recent RfD was closed as retarget based on Nabbit not being mentioned in List of Mario franchise characters. However, a section List of Mario franchise characters#Nabbit was added in September 2023. Should this redirect be changed to List of Mario franchise characters or should it remain at the current target which only mentions Nabbit twice in passing? Mia Mahey (talk) 02:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think it's controversial to redirect to List of Mario franchise characters#Nabbit. In the (likely) event that the section is removed again, it would make sense to restore the New Super Mario Bros. U#Gameplay target, where the character is mentioned. czar 03:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is consensus against removing the section. Mia Mahey (talk) 03:26, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per Czar. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:45, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget. We should always be as helpful as we can to readers, which in most cases means targetting the place they can find the most information about what it is they are looking for. That place has changed since the last time this was discussed so retargetting is clearly the best option. Thryduulf (talk) 09:41, 10 July 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).

Harry Patterson

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 15#Harry Patterson