Login
Login

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 26#Fire danger

{{rfd log header|2021|September 25|2021|September 27}}

=[[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 September 26|September 26]]=

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on September 26, 2021.

==Afghanistan War (2001-)==

File:White check mark in dark green rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:13, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

The war is no longer current, so this redirect is no longer accurate. Aasim (talk) 23:19, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

  • Keep for now because of the still high number of pageviews it's getting (possibly from old and/or external links). It may not be accurate, but deleting this could inconvenience A LOT of readers (for example, [https://pageviews.toolforge.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=last-year&pages=Afghanistan_War_(2001-) last year's statistics represent about 21 people every two days]), and we'll have to wait for 2022 (possibly beyond) and see if the pageviews are going down by then. Regards, SONIC678 01:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep because the target is the Afghanistan War that began in 2001. -- Tavix (talk) 16:50, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Keep - clearly this is the desired article for anyone searching this. It is too early to delete this. A7V2 (talk) 09:01, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

: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.

==List of countries by past and future population density)==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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 01:20, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Unlikely search term due to extra close paren at end. This has been around for a month and a half, which might be too old for R3, so listing here. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:25, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete. The redirect without the extra close paren already exists too. Winston (talk) 23:39, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete) per nom). There's also not much history to preserve, that's already at the target), it's better just to do without this thing). Regards, SONIC678) 00:56, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. Very unlikely search term compared to List of countries by past and future population density with no parenthesis at the end. Evil Sith Lord (talk) 02:44, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:R#DELETE, it simply does not make sense. A random closing paren? PlanetsForLife 23:10, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete See nothing here that would require preserving. Azuredivay (talk) 08:21, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

: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.

==Femur Breaker==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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 01:20, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 22:02, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

  • Delete it's a torture device associated with SCP-106, one of the antagonists of the game. It's a minor plot point that is isn't even covered by the target article. --Lenticel (talk) 00:54, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. It's not even specifically associated with Containment Breach itself, as it's in the original SCP Foundation entry for [https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-106 SCP-106] (and 106 isn't mentioned on the SCP Foundation article either). DudeTheNinja ( speak to me | spy on me ) 19:46, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

: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.

==Futha Mucka==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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 01:20, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Granted I haven't seen every Samuel L. Jackson movie and I do know he swears many of them, this doesn't seem like a plausible search term if someone comes to Wikipedia, looking for the Samuel L. Jackson article. Liz Read! Talk! 21:53, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

:Delete. Apparently it was a planned animated series for Quibi, see [https://deadline.com/2020/07/ryan-reynolds-samuel-l-jackson-animated-comedy-series-futha-mucka-quibi-1202991570/ here]. Don't think it would be a valid redirect anyways. Winston (talk) 23:34, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

: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.

==Palm leaves==

File:White check mark in dark green rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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 Revert/Keep target as Arecaceae

. Thryduulf (talk) 13:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Target had been Palm tree for about 10 years, where this usage isn't even mentioned in the hatnote there. Palm trees have palm leaves, "leaves" is used throughout the article. MB 18:33, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

  • Revert target to Arecaceae (Latin for trees of the Palm family and the article to which the Palm tree redirect is targeted). There are lots of references to "Palm leaves" (see Search/"Palm leaves), most of which refer to the leaves of Palm trees in a general sense as opposed to their use in manuscripts. For most readers, especially if these article mentions were linked, redirecting to Palm-leaf manuscript would be surprising. Coastside (talk) 19:17, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Arecaceae consistent with Palm tree, and add to the hatnote. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:20, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Retarget to Arecaceae per above. Perhaps even to the Morphology section? Winston (talk) 23:31, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Oppose revert. This old target doesn't make sense to me. We don't have, say, "apple leaves" retargeting to Apple, or "pine leaves" redirecting to Pine. What is it about palm that you need a special entry as "palm leaves"? Perhaps palm leaves are used for many different purposes. If so, a dedicated article on that would be quite appropriate, like banana leaves. If not, palm-leaf manuscripts would be the right target. Palm leaves were a major piece of writing technology, the Asian equivalent of papyrus, and thousands of books have been inscribed on them for over two millennia. -- Kautilya3 (talk) 00:39, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • :I initially had this reaction too, but since the target does discuss leaves a little, and since the redirect has existed for a decade, I felt we might as well keep it. As the lead section of Palm tree indicates, they are indeed distinguished by their unique leaves. I believe most people would associate palm leaves more closely with palm trees than with palm-leaf manuscripts, if they even knew of the latter's existence. Otherwise, I would disambiguate or add a hatnote. I definitely would not redirect to palm-leaf manuscripts. Winston (talk) 02:46, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • ::Emblem of the African Union links to Palm leaves as decoration as does Roman triumphal honours (although it does via a hyphenated "Palm-leaves" redirect which is actually incorrect). Palmier refers to "palm leaves" for their distinctive shape. If the link is deleted or redirected, editors referring to leaves of Palm trees would have to link instead to Palm leaves or more likely they would link to Palm leaves which would inadvertently link to a disambiguation page, as would Palm leaves, so reverting Palm leavesto link to the tree makes it easier to write articles that refer to palm leaves specifically for their decorative aspect or for any other reason. It's ironic that the article on Palm-leaf manuscripts refers to "palm leaves" 10 times without ever linking the term. It would make sense to link the first reference of "Palm leaves" to Arecaceae since both Palmyra palms and talipot palms are of this family. Coastside (talk) 13:45, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

: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.

==Andrew Istler==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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

. Thryduulf (talk) 13:25, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Player has not been with the Nationals since 2019 and is not playing anywhere. redirect should be deleted Spanneraol (talk) 17:30, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

:Agreed. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:34, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

  • Retarget to 2018 Washington Nationals season with {{tl|R from person}}. There are seven relevant mentions to Andrews Istler in Wikipedia (see search/Andrew Istler). Per WP:RFD#DELETE there is no valid justification for deleting. And per WP:RFD#KEEP, there are good reasons to keep. Retargeting is appropriate since the new target mentions him. Coastside (talk) 18:30, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete. The several mentions of him are in different articles, and a redirect to one of them obscures other results. Deletion is consistent with what we generally do for actors without articles who have been in more than one (or perhaps just one) film. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:23, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  • : What reason at WP:RFD#DELETE justifies doing this? Coastside (talk) 19:28, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:RFD#D1, the redirect makes it harder unreasonably difficult to find similar articles via the search engine. Istler's career far exceeds the 2018 Nationals season, so redirecting there is way too narrow. Search results paint a broader and more accurate picture of what one can find on Istler, eg: that he was on the 2015 Duke Blue Devils baseball team, he participated in the 2014 Atlantic Coast Conference Baseball Tournament, etc. The results also prominently include Ryan Madson, the player he was traded for (and the only blurb of note on him from that sprawling season article). -- Tavix (talk) 16:44, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • :Just to be technical, WP:RFD#D1 doesn't say the redirect makes it "harder" to find similar articles, it says it makes it "unreasonably{{em|unreasonably}} [emphasis in original] difficult". Still, since it's relatively easy to find the articles with a simple search in this case, I'm not going to fight hard to defend this particular redirect. Coastside (talk) 18:37, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • ::Fair enough, I've updated my rationale. -- Tavix (talk) 18:53, 27 September 2021 (UTC) [Revised] Coastside (talk) 19:23, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
  • :::Ok, I updated mine, too. ;) Coastside (talk) 19:23, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

: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.

==MIGY==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 4%23MIGY

==Chosen, Japan==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 3%23Chosen, Japan

==Fire danger==

File:Symbol move vote.svg Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 3%23Fire danger

==Red, White and Cruee==

File:White x in red rounded square.svg Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

: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 05:04, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Another Eubot heavy metal umlaut redirect, which doesn't seem to be used much nowadays (it's only gotten [https://pageviews.toolforge.org/?project=en.wikipedia.org&platform=all-access&agent=user&redirects=0&range=all-time&pages=Red,_White_and_Cruee 31 pageviews since July 2015]). As per the precedent with its "Cruee" bandmates, it also needs to get taken off stage. Regards, SONIC678 04:14, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

: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.