This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on January 21, 2023.
- 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 restore.
MrsSnoozyTurtle, edit warring over whether or not something should be an article is disruptive. Per
WP:BLAR, if someone disagrees with your blanking and redirect, the proper procedure is to nominate the article for deletion at
WP:AFD. --
Tavix (
talk)
20:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
no consensus to redirect, article subject meets GNG. the redirect discussion should occur at AfD. --
Turktimex3 (
talk)
21:51, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Comment pinging
Onel5969 and
MrsSnoozyTurtle to speak their opinions about the BLAR. If necessary, an AFD nomination shall happen since this redirect-and-restore-and-redirect is going to escalate into
WP:EDITWAR.
2600:1700:9BF3:220:28ED:F39F:A2F7:5736 (
talk)
04:53, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Keep redirect. When I initially restored the redirect, the article was not close to passing GNG. After looking at the current sourcing, the academic has a weak h-Index of 14, there is no in-depth sourcing from independent, reliable, secondary sources, so if it is restored, it will just end up at AfD.
Onel5969
TT me
16:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Keep redirect My take is also that the subject doesn't meet WP:GNG and that a redirect is helpful for navigation purposes. Regards,
MrsSnoozyTurtle
21:29, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Leaning towards restore since this is not the venue to discuss the merits of an article, and per
WP:BLAR, if there is disagreement about the notability it should be discussed at AFD, and just repeatedly BLARing is in my opinion disruptive. As to the redirect itself, it seems appropriate enough if there is consensus against the existence of the article.
A7V2 (
talk)
23:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Restore: Whether or not this topic meets
WP:GNG is in my view not a discussion for RfD per the
2021 RfC about BLARs. I think that this would best be discussed at AfD, where if consensus is to redirect, then it will remain in its current state; however, I don't personally view RfD as the place to discuss notability.
Tartar
Torte
00:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Restore per the above. If there is disagreement about whether a page should be an article or a redirect, then the correct course of action is to restore the article and discuss it on the talk page or at AfD.
Thryduulf (
talk)
12:13, 26 January 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. I am willing to restore article versions of any of these into draft or userspace if anyone would like to take the lead on making an article like those described in the discussion. --
BDD (
talk)
01:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
reply
Both of these redirects
Algebra I and
Algebra II are {{
R with history}}s, but neither one of them is mentioned specifically in their target article. Yes, these titles refer to a specific courses that is taken at universities, but without mention in the target article, the current redirection situation is not helpful. Due to the existing histories of
Algebra I and
Algebra II, and to avoid deletion, it may be best to retarget these redirects to
Algebra.
Steel1943 (
talk)
19:11, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Changes made to nomination statement to accommodate the addition of
Algebra 1,
Algebra 2, and
Algebra 3.
Steel1943 (
talk)
19:50, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Weak retarget to
Mathematics education in the United States (probably either to the section "Curricular content", or anchored to relevant sections) where these are explicitly mentioned and discussed, and which is what the original articles in the history of these are about (high school mathematics education in the United States).
A7V2 (
talk)
00:29, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
Retarget both(Re)target both forms of Algebra I and Algebra II to
Mathematics education in the United States where both are discussed per A7V2.
Mdewman6 (
talk)
02:11, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Retarget both to
Mathematics education in the United States since both of these courses are unique to the United States. Sending to a section specifically referencing these courses would be fine. --
seberle (
talk)
13:12, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Comment. It's not just US high schools, everywhere that algebra is being taught over several years or terms there's a tendency to label the individual units like that (examples from Russia
[1] and from US higher education phttps://principedia.princeton.edu/principedia/algebra-i/], where the content is understandably unrelated to that of the high school modules). Noting also that the redirects
Algebra 1,
Algebra 2 and
Algebra 3 also exist. –
Uanfala (
talk)
13:40, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Comment. The "Algebra 1" course at the Moscow University referred to by
User:Uanfala is part of a university-level sequence on abstract algebra. Such courses may also be found in American universities over the span of one or two semesters. However, the term "Algebra 1" in the U.S. almost always refers to a high school course taught around 9th grade, and such courses are generally not found outside of the U.S. The university level course is usually referred to in English as "Abstract Algebra". Most English-speaking people searching for "Algebra I" or "Algebra 1" are probably looking for the high school course, so it should redirect to
Mathematics Education in the United States. --
seberle (
talk)
00:13, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural relist due to adding
Algebra 1,
Algebra 2, and
Algebra 3 to this nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Steel1943 (
talk)
19:46, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- @
A7V2,
Mdewman6,
Seberle, and
Uanfala: Pinging current participants to let them know of the 3 new redirects have been added to the nomination in the event their votes need to be adjusted. (Thanks Uanfala for pointing out the existence of these redirects.)
Steel1943 (
talk)
19:54, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete
Algebra 3 (but keep/retarget others per my amended original comment above). Algebra 3 is not mentioned at target, and has only some passing mentions elsewhere on enwiki, usually in references. Pedagogically, Algebra III is probably equivalent to precalculus in the U.S., but is at best a much less common synonym. Unless a mention can be added, deletion seems best. Moreover,
Algebra III does not exist.
Mdewman6 (
talk)
20:30, 6 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Algebra 3, not mentioned and per Mdewman6.
A7V2 (
talk)
23:40, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Algebra 3, per Mdewman6 and A7V2.
MusiBedrock (
talk)
10:20, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete all, confusing. I took a course in "Algebra 1" at a German university and it was mostly
Galois theory. Failing that, redirect to
algebra, which mentions most of the things that "Algebra 1" can mean. —
Kusma (
talk)
11:43, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- British universities also have "Algebra 1" classes referring to algebraic structures like fields and rings:
Algebra 1 at Warwick. I don't think the University of Warwick should be discussed at
Mathematics education in the United States, but I do think the target of
Algebra 1 should contain information about things covered in Warwick's Algebra 1 course. —
Kusma (
talk)
11:49, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete Algebra 3, but retarget others to
Mathematics education in the United States. There is no course called Algebra 3. Also, these course names are unique to the United States.
Mast303 (
talk)
05:32, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- The
University of Warwick, which offers "
Algebra 1" and "
Algebra II", is not in the United States. —
Kusma (
talk)
14:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete all. These terms are too generic to be useful search results, in addition to the above a quick search found that the University of Tasmania has an Algebra 2 module
[2], Durham University (UK) offers Algebra II
[3] and "algebra 1" seems to be an informal name for several different courses at different levels in the Indian education system.
Thryduulf (
talk)
16:20, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- @Thryduulf: Algebra 1 is used most often in the United States. So we should redirect Algebra 1, 2, etc. to the corresponding sections of the article
Mathematics education in the United States. Algebra 3 should be deleted because it is not a commonly used term. 01:29, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Mast303 (
talk)
01:29, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment:
WP:ENGVAR complications have surfaced.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung,
mello
hi! (
投稿)
20:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete all. If these terms are kept at all, they should redirect to
Mathematics education in the United States since this is by far the most common usage. (They can apparently also refer to the first part of a college abstract algebra course in some places.) Course titles, especially those recognized in only one country, don't seem like encyclopedia content to me. I am fine with deleting these terms. --
seberle (
talk)
12:09, 22 January 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).
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 28#Kremlin Palace
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 28#Academy of Geneva
The Marriage Market (film)
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 28#Untied Plankton Pictures
- 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. This is essentially per
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jew gold even though this redirect has a different target. --
Tavix (
talk)
20:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
Deletion recommended along the same reasoning presented in
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jew gold —
Moops ⋠
T⋡
03:37, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Speedy keep Once again, these redirects are minor spelling variants of the target, which if deleted will have these redirects speedy deleted per
G8. –
LaundryPizza03 (
d
c̄)
04:00, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Speedy keep. Disruptive renomination, same as
#Jew Gold.
Glades12 (
talk)
08:42, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- D/K depending upon if this is found to be
WP:ATD-R at
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jew gold: First off, apologies for what is certainly my longest bold part of a !vote I've done; however my arguments are such.
Two Days Before the Day After Tomorrow isn't up at AfD so unless this is retargeted to
Jew gold, this wouldn't be
WP:G8able if
Jew gold is deleted at the AfD. The AfD for the article
Jew gold has consensus currently roughly leaning towards deleting
Jew gold instead of retargeting to
Two Days Before the Day After Tomorrow. By this same logic, we should also delete this redirect; however, if consensus changes and
Two Days Before the Day After Tomorrow is found to be a suitable
WP:ATD-R (I don't believe it really is both for it's high potential for vandalism and low view counts), then it should be kept, despite my personal thoughts, as that's what consensus dictated was appropriate for a very similar term.
Tartar
Torte
15:14, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Comment
Jew gold was deleted at AfD, but this redirect was not deleted.
Natg 19 (
talk)
01:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
reply
- Delete as a variant of
Jew gold which had no consensus for redirecting at the AfD. There was one vote for redirect, and several against redirecting. I understand the speedy keeps here by
LaundryPizza03 and
Glades12 were a misunderstanding of the target (as this is different from the
Jew Gold RfD), and as explained by Tartar and Natg 19.
Jay
💬
12:02, 28 January 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).
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 31#Oil (road)
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 31#Asphaltum oil wells