Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 7

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Brohoof

[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 keep. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 21:12, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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]
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

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

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

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

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. 48JCL 01:54, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oops wrong place 48JCL 01:55, 18 June 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

[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 delete. signed, Rosguill talk 13:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

[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 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 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 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]
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

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

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]

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]

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

[edit]

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

2025 FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League

[edit]

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

Nabbit

[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 retarget to List of Mario franchise characters#Nabbit. Complex/Rational 02:14, 14 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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]

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

[edit]

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