Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 10

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! 19:19, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• "Helge Ingstad" collision → Helge Ingstad collision  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not a helpful search term as title conventions don't include quotation marks. Delete per WP:UNNATURAL. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:30, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, the ship is often quoted as the name is taken after the Norwegian explorer. The page name on the Norwegian Wikipedia is also in quotation marks («Norwegian quotation marks look like this»). FatalFit | ✉ | ✓  18:37, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 22:49, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per FatalFit. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 23:02, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - unambiguous, harmless, and points to the correct target. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:11, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per FatalFit's explanation. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:06, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. Editors have identified that this is a slang term in use, and no evidence of ambiguity or other harmfulness has been presented. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:00, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Grippy sock jail → Psychiatric hospital  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely search term and not a useful redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:48, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Slang term. ([1]), also creator's edit summary. {{r from colloquial name}} Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 19:55, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep (as creator): a slang term that is in current use (google search results), a plausible search term, & redirects are WP:CHEAP. A smart kitten (talk) 12:13, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is a genuine slang term which is used in the wild, at least online. I note that wikitionary has wikt:grippy sock vacation but not yet wikt:grippy sock jail. It's so recently created that it's impossible to see whether it naturally gets any pageviews (deletion nomination was less than 3 hours after page creation). Probably grippy sock vacation (redlinked as I write this) would be a more defensible redirect because there are a couple of thinkpieces about it as a slang term (the Yahoo one linked by Edward-Woodrow and this both come up on google for me), but I think this is at least a vaguely plausible search term (probably from someone looking up the slang to see what it refers to). On the other hand, the term isn't mentioned in the article, so WP:R#DELETE#8 arguably applies. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 14:59, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:RNEUTRAL. While there's no information at the target, it is a known unambiguous slang term for that target, thus useful as a search term. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:12, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Ivanvector, I'm not sure how RNEUTRAL applies here. — Qwerfjkltalk 20:36, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  We generally don't delete redirects just because they might be offensive. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 13:14, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  @Ivanvector, I don't think anyone suggest it might be offensive, much less deleted because of it. (Though in writing this, I can see why someone might use that as a rationale for deletion.) — Qwerfjkltalk 14:31, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Um ... okay? I don't understand why you keep pinging me to this stale discussion. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 14:40, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep as {{R from slang}} per A smart kitten and Ivanvector. I've personally heard "grippy sock hotel" and "grippy sock vacation" more often than "grippy sock jail", but I wouldn't support creating new redirects for either. As for this one, it's somewhat in use and redirects are WP:CHEAP. 〜 Askarion ✉ 17:42, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. Jay 💬 08:15, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• The plaza casino&resort → Plaza Hotel & Casino  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Very unlikely search term (fails WP:RPURPOSE). Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:08, 10 August 2023 (UTC) Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:08, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There are quite a few of these redirects created by the same user. Like, maybe 50. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:21, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This is one of countless redirects created by the same person, most of which range from rather pointless to outright wrong. This one is somewhere in the "pointless" area. Nobody is ever likely to look for this topic by searching for this search term. In fact in my opinion this could have been speedily deleted under CSD R3 as an implausible typo, in view of its containing "casino&resort", but we may as well let this discussion run its course now that it's here. (The same editor has also created a number of other pointless redirects related to casinoes, which could probably be deleted if anyone is willing to search for them and nominate them.) JBW (talk) 14:26, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm going to R3 some of the really strange ones (like Plaza casino&resort@lvnv) Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:39, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Implausible typo, per JBW. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:53, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as unhelpful. Skynxnex (talk) 17:10, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all effectively per WP:X1. Mass- and likely automated creation of barely-plausible redirects is net negative for Wikipedia, and the creator is blocked for exactly that. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:25, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I R3'd most of the worst ones, and a lot of the rest are just incorrect (like mistaking a hotel for a resort), but there are one or two decent ones (Plaza casino and hotel). Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 13:43, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as implausible, note the lowercase "plaza" and "casino" as well as the lack of spaces around the ampersand. It is not very likely anyone is going to type this version. JIP | Talk 09:29, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 Primary color#Red, yellow, and blue as primary colors with a hatnote to the video game series. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 12:03, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Red, Blue, and Yellow → Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Red, Blue and Yellow → Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Red Blue and Yellow → Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These search terms are more likely to be used by someone searching for primary colours as opposed to Pokémon games. Alternative target could be Primary color#Red, yellow, and blue as primary colors. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:00, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 19:50, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom. – Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:03, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – intuitively a clear primary topic. Red, blue, and yellow etc. can provide for the rare other user. J947 † ^edits 22:23, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Thought that this was a single game. Given that it's multiple, grouped, my opinion is moderately weakened. J947 † ^edits 09:43, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Primary topic is difficult to intuit from pageviews ([2]) Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 22:38, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to the broader concept article per nom; add a hatnote to the nearly-30-year-old video game series. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:27, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom, with hatnote per Ivanvector. 〜 Askarion ✉ 21:08, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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. Jay 💬 08:22, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Raping her → Sexual assault  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not a useful search term. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:36, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: unlikely search term – another strange-tense redirect. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:01, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  This user (now indeffed) has created quite a few odd redirects; I'll have a look through. Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 14:05, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This is one of countless redirects created by the same person, most of which range from rather pointless to outright wrong. This one is somewhere in the "very pointless" area. Nobody is ever likely to look for this topic by searching for this search term. JBW (talk) 14:18, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak retarget to Rape by gender#Rape of females, which discusses what rape is like specifically when the victims are women or girls (and thus can be referred to by "her"). It's not a perfect match, given the conjugation, but it's much better than nothing. Duckmather (talk) 15:59, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete agree it's not a useful search aid and I'd say beyond being largely pointless, it's potentially mildly offensive. Skynxnex (talk) 17:16, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and above. Not a useful or plausible search term. 〜 Askarion ✉ 20:09, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - should have been speedied. I don't know why we are wasting time discusses it. Deb (talk) 15:40, 12 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:11, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 redirect all to WP:Subjective importance#Fame. Jay 💬 12:18, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:15MINUTES → Wikipedia:Notability (Reality Television participants)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Wikipedia:15 minutes of fame → Wikipedia:Subjective importance#Fame  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Wikipedia:15MOF → Wikipedia:Notability#Notability is not temporary  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Wikipedia:FIFTEENMINUTES → Wikipedia:Subjective importance#Fame  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Nominating a batch of shortcut redirects referring to the "15 minutes of fame" idiom which, except for the one I just created for my own convenience, all target different project pages including a failed proposal. They should all point to the same target, but I'm not sure which is the most appropriate. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:57, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect all to Wikipedia:Subjective importance § Fame. It links to Wikipedia:Notability § Notability is not temporary, among other helpful guidelines, whereas Wikipedia:Notability § Notability is not temporary only links to AfD; it's the most helpful of these options. It's also the least surprising since the shortcut box actually list some of them; due to how similar they are, listing some of them would be enough to explain why the rest link to it as well. – Scyrme (talk) 19:14, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm going to throw out here that Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Subjects notable only for one event also covers a guideline that could be summarized as "fifteen minutes of fame". But the subjective importance essay also links there, and also to the idiom itself, so Scyrme is probably right. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:01, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• We can update the shortcut boxes... I had been leaning toward Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Subjects notable only for one event or Wikipedia:Notability (people)# People notable for only one event since that seems closer to my feeling of what people mean when they say 15 minutes of fame. But I think all going to subjective per Scyrme is fine too per Ivanvector's added details. Skynxnex (talk) 21:24, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  We can update shortcut boxes, but it minimises confusion if they don't have to updated; no need to relearn anything.

  I'm not sure I agree about "1 event" being closer. "15 minutes" suggests temporary fame, whereas many people famous for 1 event continue to be famous indefinitely due to the lasting impact of that event. WP:ONEEVENT gives the example of Gavrilo Princip, who remains infamous due to the lasting impact of WW1 (which the assassination of Ferdinand precipitated). Regardless, as Ivanvector mentioned, Wikipedia:Subjective importance § Fame also links to WP:ONEEVENT so it would remain easily accessible if someone did expect to find it through these redirects. – Scyrme (talk) 22:20, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  To me 15 minutes and 1 event, with the caveats at both WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E, fit well. But I agree the Fame target is also useful and minimally changing targets/shortcut boxes also has value. Skynxnex (talk) 16:07, 3 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Seeing 15 minutes in the context of Wikipedia immediately reminded me of Wikipedia:New pages patrol's old... grace period I guess, which was 15 minutes for a long time and was only recently changed to one hour. It's probably worth at least hatnoting to Wikipedia:New pages patrol#Care. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 07:17, 4 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Where ever this are finally placd WP:15M need to target to the same place.--65.93.193.235 (talk) 16:59, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree. As a note, WP:15M currently points to Wikipedia:Subjective importance § Fame. Counting it with the 4 listed here, a majority (3/5) point to that article. Retargetting the rest would minimise disruption. – Scyrme (talk) 18:46, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 04:09, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't necessarily agree that WP:15M inherently needs to target the same place as the others (it could be 15 metres or something) but I also can't think of any other targets for it at present. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:31, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

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 no consensus. Jay 💬 12:01, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• The Equaliser (2020 TV series) → The Equalizer (2021 TV series)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The series did not premire in 2020. Gonnym (talk) 16:15, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also not the correct name. Gonnym (talk) 16:15, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Not released in 2020 and no reasonable reason to believe it was. The Equaliser (2021 TV series) would be plausible enough though. CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} (I will not see your reply if you don't mention me) 07:06, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per spirit of WP:RFD#K4 and as a plausible search term. The article was called The Equalizer (2020 TV series) from May to November 2020, and it seems as though it was initially thought that this would start in 2020 making this plausible (and seemingly unambiguous). The "s" instead of "z" is not an issue given the alternate spellings. A7V2 (talk) 08:21, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Move to The Equaliser (2021 TV series) without leaving a redirect if this page needs to be deleted. 176.33.242.229 (talk) 10:04, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Equaliser (2021 TV series) can be created if desired, but no benefit comes from moving this redirect, and redirects without useful history should not be moved (WP:MOVEREDIRECT). A7V2 (talk) 00:21, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 19:09, 2 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:14, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom and create The Equaliser (2021 TV series). Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 20:26, 10 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per A7V2 - WP:ENGVAR redirects are inherently useful and shouldn't be deleted unless there are more significant problems. This one is unambiguous and harmless. I went ahead and created the 2021 UK English variant. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:40, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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