This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on December 13, 2020.
Condominiums and the Jewish community
- 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
22:55, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
Not sure why this redirect exists. "Condominiums and the Jewish community" is a broad topic that is not specific to Chicago, and it is not a topic that would warrant an article unless it meets
WP:N.
Edge3 (
talk)
18:03, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- I agree that it doesn't make sense to redirect this broad topic to an article on a Chicago bimonthly newspaper, but I also don't think that the issue of mezuzot being banned by condominiums or homeowners associations should be covered in an article on a Chicago bimonthly newspaper either. The content might belong in
mezuzah (which I see has a section on legal issues already). –
Roscelese (
talk ⋅
contribs)
18:35, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- leaning delete The redirected to currently duplicates part of the passage in mezuzah, including some word-for-word copying. I'm really having a hard time seeing why a rather vague statement of an issue should redirect to one specific difficulty.
Mangoe (
talk)
02:19, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per Mangoe. This could probably be its own article. In particular, mezuzot aren't the only religious issue, and they're not only an issue in the US; see e.g.
[1] regarding a Canadian case about a
sukkah on a condo balcony.
61.239.39.90 (
talk)
02:29, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- I would presume that similar issues arise anywhere there is an HOA, not just with condos.
Mangoe (
talk)
03:49, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
- 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
Boris Johnson. There's an overall lack of enthusiasm for most outcomes - this is clearly not a common nickname, but it's also a very rational abbreviation. The point is made that
Boris Johnson is several orders of magnitude more viewed than
Boris Jordan, who has not done a great deal of note recently, so most participants consider that Johnson is the primary "Boris J" at the moment, with or without the slightly tenuous Trump nickname. This may indeed need to be revisited in future if there are other notable Boris Js - but all we can do here is be as helpful as we can in the present. Notability isn't temporary, but redirect popularity can be! ~
mazca
talk
12:28, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
This is a better target than in previous discussions where it was deleted: this redirect previously targeted
Boris Johnson and
List of nicknames used by Donald Trump#Boris J. I think this is still an unlikely search term, even for the current target. feminist
(talk) | free Hong Kong
15:32, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Keep given that a redirect has been created multiple times the evidence would suggest it is actually a likely search term and the current target seems the most helpful.
Thryduulf (
talk)
01:30, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
reply
- You have a point, but even without the redirect, anyone typing in "Boris J" in the search box would see search predictions including Johnson, Jordan, Jorgen, etc. feminist
(talk) | free Hong Kong
04:18, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
reply
- The search box is only one of many ways people find Wikipedia content, and the majority of them don't have search suggestions - even the search box doesn't if you are in an environment without javascript. Search suggestions also cannot be relied upon to list the desired target on every occasion.
Thryduulf (
talk)
12:23, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Boris Johnson since it's a nickname used for him. Nickname aside, he would easily be the primary topic for the abbreviation. --
Tavix (
talk)
02:58, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Boris Johnson per Tavix. --
Soumya-8974 (he)
talk
contribs
subpages
05:34, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget or Keep either works for me. All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough
18:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC).
reply
- Do not retarget to
Boris Johnson unless evidence is provided that he's ever called "Boris J". I follow UK politics, have seen him called many things, and have called him many things myself; but have never seen him called "Boris J".
Narky Blert (
talk)
08:30, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- While Boris Johnson is weakly the most common result when searching for "Boris J" with no other context, I don't see that as clearly the primary topic so I remain opposed to retargetting to Boris Johnson.
Thryduulf (
talk)
16:57, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Lake harriet (hennepin county, minnesota)
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 20#Lake harriet (hennepin county, minnesota)
- 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. --
BDD (
talk)
17:02, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
Mentioned at multiple pages, none of which have all that much coverage. Deletion to allow for uninhibited search results seems appropriate. signed,
Rosguill
talk
18:19, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
As I mentioned, Ryza Cenon was redirected because she portrayed the main character of the show. Read more here:
https://www.manilatimes.net/2020/11/14/lifestyle-entertainment/show-times/make-way-for-bella-bandida/796152/ — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
KapamilyaAdventurer (
talk •
contribs)
04:06, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per reason by
Rosguill. Creating these page that only redirect to a specific "biographical" page is not really necessary needed, plus the person itself is not only the cast of the said series but more than one. We all know that not all TV series have an existing pages, but creating a "standalone" page with a supportive citations is okay. In this case, just only to create a redirected page for the person's page "as a main character" shows pointless and has no significance by either the topic of a person or by the series.
CruzRamiss2002 (
talk)
06:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
Hi don't delete, just revert it back to redirection. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
KapamilyaAdventurer (
talk •
contribs)
11:44, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 16#Video Beyond
- 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. --
BDD (
talk)
17:02, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
Not a totally implausible misspelling, but internal search results return several pages that actually mention things named Byond. As none of these mentions are particularly prominent, deleting to allow for internal search results appears to be the best option. signed,
Rosguill
talk
18:08, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete I have had to advise
User:Childishbeat three times now against making innumerable pointless redirects. This is one of their
less egregious examples, but I see no merit in it. I also agree that allowing any user on Wikipedia to simply use the Search box without immediately redirecting them pointlessly to one single page is actually a far more effective way for that user to find multiple examples of where a name or word has been used within articles. The sooner they appreciate this, the less disruptive will be their contributions here.
Nick Moyes (
talk)
22:50, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Araz Junction, California
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 20#Araz Junction, California
Scottish English Wikipedia
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 20#Scottish English 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
666 (number). signed,
Rosguill
talk
22:53, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
This redirect is an inmate number, but the targeted disambiguation page does not mentioned "1010011010". Delete unless justification can be provided. Seventyfiveyears (
talk)
16:00, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
-
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
- 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
22:52, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
Misspelled, implausible redirect - the
PlayStation 5 only recently came out, and the target doesn't contain any information on this upcoming, completely speculative, console. Maybe
PlayStation 5 Pro could be a plausible redirect, but we don't need redirects for every upcoming, speculative product.
User:milkmankarlson (
Talk) 13:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
WP:STRIKESOCK. --
Tavix (
talk)
15:02, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
History of the Kashmir conflict
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 20#History of the Kashmir conflict
- 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. --
BDD (
talk)
17:01, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
I can't find any evidence of a connection between these two terms. "Spontaneism" isn't mentioned in the target, and
Googling the two terms gives a total of five results. All but one of the uses of "spontaneism" in other articles refer to
Revolutionary spontaneity. –
Arms & Hearts (
talk)
23:24, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- As we now have an article on
Spontaneous realism, it would be preferable to make the redirect to this.--
Ipigott (
talk)
10:09, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- @
Ipigott: Can you point to any sources that use "spontaneism" to refer to spontaneous realism? –
Arms & Hearts (
talk)
20:38, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- When I added the original redirect a number of years ago, it was based on redlink in a Wikipedia article (subsequently deleted) which provided sources containing the term "spontaneism". If I remember correctly, the term was used by a respected art critic. But as with so many internet links, I can no longer access it by means of a normal search. Those with special access to art journals, etc., would no doubt be able to find it. I would certainly not have entered the term if I had not found it in a reliable source. I am pretty sure that spontaneism is equivalent to spontaneous realism.--
Ipigott (
talk)
10:04, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Spontaneism is not a term that is commonly used by art historians or critics. There is no historically significant movement or style that is called that. When considering the relevance of
Spontaneous realism, take into account the lack of natability of its exponents, like
Françoise Nielly. Also note how odd it is that the same term can supposedly refer both to Tachisme and Spontaneous realism, which have almost nothing in common. To even have this at all gives undeserved legitimacy to a term we ought to be avoiding. Delete the redirect please.
Vexations (
talk)
12:54, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Knighthood Village, Indiana
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 December 20#Knighthood Village, Indiana
- 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
22:50, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
Implausible redirect.
Izno (
talk)
03:19, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete. Unused abbreviation shortcut and only plausible if struggling with the abbreviation for "WikiProject". (not
watching, please
{{
ping}}
)
czar
06:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
Keep. This is a plausible abbreviation and a useful shortcut, and
WP:WPVG exists as a shortcut to
Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games.
User:milkmankarlson (
Talk)
14:04, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- How is WG plausible? --
Izno (
talk)
16:25, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Strike blocked sock vote —
HELLKNOWZ ▎
TALK
11:10, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete it should be {{
WPVG}} instead --
67.70.26.89 (
talk)
16:43, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete 0 page views in past 30 days as well, and I don't see any reason to type WGVG instead of WPVG.
Skarmory
(talk •
contribs)
18:07, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Completely implausible. --
ferret (
talk)
23:34, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per above. "WikiProject" is abbreviated to "WP", not "WG". Seventyfiveyears (
talk)
14:04, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.
Wikipedia:CANSANFRANBANFRAM and Wikipedia:CSFBF
- 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 keep. No arguments given for deletion or retargeting. (If you don't know what something means, don't start a community discussion to find out.) –
bradv
🍁
02:22, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
I may be too reckless, but what is this redirect supposed to mean? It looks like an implausible redirect to me.
4thfile4thrank (
talk)
00:07, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- @
Jpxg: Who is san fran?
4thfile4thrank (
talk)
00:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
The Wikimedia Foundation, Inc. (WMF, or simply Wikimedia) is an American non-profit and charitable organization headquartered in San Francisco, California.[9]
jp×
g
01:04, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- @
JPxG: Sounds rather implausible to me. Was there any times it was used?
4thfile4thrank (
talk)
01:52, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
reply
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.