This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 13, 2021.
- 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
Advocacy. There is no consensus to delete, with retargeting to
Advocacy being the most-supported alternative to deletion. It edges out
Lobbying due to concerns that lobbying may be too distinct. With -1 votes, disambiguation wins the
wooden spoon for being the least supported option. --
Tavix (
talk)
23:22, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
reply
See related nomination
below. Procedural nomination to keep these on the same day; still thinking about how to !vote. Not going to nominate
Paid advocacy on wikipedia, per Hog Farm's points below. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she/they)
22:08, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Advocacy or delete. There isn't a great target; if we had to pick one,
Advocacy is probably the most relevant. The current target is too Wikipedia-specific and likely to cause surprise/confusion. Also it barely talks about advocacy (as opposed to more general
conflicts of interest).
Lobbying is a reasonable suggestion, as it has more of a connotation of being paid than advocacy does, but it's distinct from advocacy in other ways too.
Adumbrativus (
talk)
08:29, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Delete the current target is too Wikipedia specific, no one is going to search for plain old
Advocacy this way, and
Lobbying isn't quite the same thing. There may even be an article to be written here. signed,
Rosguill
talk
05:04, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Advocacy. I agree with everyone that the current target is too Wikipedia-specific, but given how often the term is used on Wikipedia it is a very plausible search term (the stats tool isn't working for me currently so I can't put figures on this) so we can and should do better for searchers than a red link. There is nothing inherently different about advocacy and paid advocacy (the exchange of currency doesn't change the fundamental nature of the thing) so advocacy is the clear best target, the hatnote to Wikipedia space is sufficient for those who are looking for information about advocacy in a Wikipedia context.
Thryduulf (
talk)
10:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Delete per Rosguill.
Advocacy is tempting as a target, but really doesn't discuss the idea of paid advocacy, except obliquely in linking to
Lobbying. I agree that lobbying is a bit too specific and/or distinct from the broader idea, though. --
BDD (
talk)
20:40, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- In what way does paid advocacy need discussing separately from advocacy? Outside of a Wikipedia context there really isn't much to say beyond some people get paid to advocate things and so money may be a motivation rather than (or in addition to) belief, with a link to lobbying for that specific subset of advocacy. Heck even in a Wikipedia context the meaningful distinction is very significantly more between advocacy and not-advocacy than between unpaid advocacy and paid advocacy.
Thryduulf (
talk)
11:02, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- You may have misunderstood me. I don't mean to say paid advocacy needs to have a separate article. My thought is more that paid advocacy is a subtopic of advocacy. It's very likely that a reader using this search term knows about the general concept, and could find it without this redirect. Thus, the redirect suggests specific information we don't have. --
BDD (
talk)
18:25, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Lobbying as the most suitable target of the possibilities (this is a likely enough search term; it is the most likely meaning; and likely search terms don't always need to be mentioned directly in the target); with a hatnote to
Advocacy. I'm not opposed to the opposite proposition (retarget to advocacy with hatnote to lobbying), but I think this one is better.
RandomCanadian (
talk /
contribs)
00:29, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Make article or redirect to
Advocacy or
Lobbying. The 'paid' part should be a distinct thing, either in a section of Advocacy or something else, but not a redirect to
Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia.
SWinxy (
talk)
22:22, 15 October 2021 (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/2021 September 24#O.B.O Clothing Line Ltd.
- 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
05:00, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
Delete. Current use is
WP:ASTONISH. It links to a Filipino sketch comedy which is known, presumably by fans only, as "GB". This sketch show appears to have many sketches, some of which take the form of news programs. This tenuous link is in comparison to
GB News, an actual news channel, which does have programs, which could very rationally be considered to be "GB News Programs". I highly doubt that there is a
WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "GB News Programs", based on how tenuous the current use is, and how young GB News is as a channel, so I favour deletion.
Unknown Temptation (
talk)
17:53, 13 September 2021 (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.
Park Street District, Columbus, Ohio
- 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 Procedural close, article moved back to article space and sent to AfD. (
non-admin closure)
Natg 19 (
talk)
17:12, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
This is a redirect from the article namespace to the draft namespace and should as such normally be deleted per
WP:R2. However, I see that the target page was residing in the article namespace for many years and then an editor moved the page to the draft namespace, so I'm unsure if the redirect should be deleted or if the target should be moved back to the article namespace.
Stefan2 (
talk)
09:46, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Move
Draft:Park Street District (Columbus, Ohio) to
Park Street District (Columbus, Ohio) and send to AfD per Eureka Lott.
Mdewman6 (
talk)
20:00, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Move
Draft:Park Street District (Columbus, Ohio) to
Park Street District (Columbus, Ohio) as above, since it was an article in mainspace since 2014. Seems to have stub-level verbiage so as to not be a redirect to Columbus, Ohio. Discuss at AFD.
AngusW🐶🐶F (
bark •
sniff)
20:25, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- The R2 deletion has taken place.
AngusW🐶🐶F (
bark •
sniff)
20:26, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- I've reverted the move to draft-space. Suggest a procedural close here, as none of the objections to this redirect raised here apply to a redirect to the title in mainspace.
Elli (
talk |
contribs)
22:05, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- I've also gone ahead and
nominated the article for deletion.
Elli (
talk |
contribs)
02:25, 15 September 2021 (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.
Packing House Corner, Delaware
- 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
Route 54 (Maryland–Delaware)#Major intersections.
(non-admin closure)
Asmodea Oaktree (
talk)
13:36, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
delete: the article was deleted as a non--notable crossroads, and I don't see how redirecting to the enclosing county is helpful.
Mangoe (
talk)
04:29, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- The best way to get rid of such a red link is to de-link the name. Looking at the state place names list, I seriously have to doubt its merits, but it also would have the problem, assuming it only listed notable places, that the redirect wouldn't take a reader to a place with any information.
Mangoe (
talk)
20:54, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- There is a way to turn off links, so I did for this case. I’m indifferent at this point to whether this gets deleted or not. The reason I created articles for many of these places in Delaware that are simply road intersections usually named “X Corner” or “X Crossroads” was to rid road articles of redlinks. However, I think redirecting many of these non notable places in Delaware to the list article with limited information is a good idea, someone curious about the existence of such a community can be taken to the list with all the information there, which usually isn’t much.
Dough
4872
01:02, 8 September 2021 (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.
✗
plicit
12:19, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
Powell Gammill apparently ran in
2004,
2006,
2010,
2012, and
2014 as well, in addition to his 2008 run. So, I don't think this should redirect to the 2008 elections page but whether it should be redirected or deleted or what have you, I don't know. —
twotwofourtysix(My
talk page and
contributions)
08:12, 13 September 2021 (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/2021 September 20#F****
Argo ( Sword Art Online )
- 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
04:29, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:
These redirects all share another
WP:UNNATURAL format, one with two additional spaces padding out the disambiguators' words. With the exception of the Arbitration and Conciliation one, they were left over when the targets were moved to more policy-compliant titles, and they don't seem to get very many pageviews per year. Delete them unless someone can provide a justification. Regards,
SONIC
678
03:23, 13 September 2021 (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/2021 September 20#Gerald Little
- 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
Incivility.
✗
plicit
01:24, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
A 2017 radio show seems unlikely to be the primary topic for this term. Suggest retargeting to
incivility
* Pppery *
it has begun...
00:30, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
incivility per nom, with hatnote to current target. I've created
Uncivil (podcast) to point to the current target. --
Tamzin
cetacean needed (she/they)
04:02, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Incivility: This is the obvious main target. ―
Susmuffin
Talk
04:22, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Incivility per above, and add a hatnote to the current target. The radio show may be what comes first to certain people's minds, but stuff like that isn't always the primary topic. Regards,
SONIC
678
13:34, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
incivility per above. I created the original redirect but in hindsight, a disambiguator like "(podcast)", as Tamzin created, would have been better. –
Broccoli & Coffee (
Oh hai)
00:31, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget to
Incivility per above --
Lenticel (
talk)
03:07, 15 September 2021 (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.
✗
plicit
01:24, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
reply
No evidence this is a pseudonym for the target; article indicates the subject's full name is
Allen Neal Jones. Delete unless a justification can be provided.
Mdewman6 (
talk)
00:04, 13 September 2021 (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.