From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 24

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 24, 2023.

Great Britain Olympic football team

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 Great Britain football team. Participants agree that there's no need for creating a new DAB page if one already exists. Tagged the redirect accordingly as a {{ R from incomplete disambiguation}}. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 16:16, 31 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Should be a dismabiguation page as per WP:TWODABS. Great Britain men's Olympic football team has only competed a few times and not since 2012 (and no plans to compete again), whereas the women have competed at every Olympics since 2012. Thus, it's equally likely people will be looking for the men's team (for historic articles) or for the women's team (for recent articles). There are 64 mainspace links to this redirect which would need to be fixed. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 13:29, 13 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:56, 24 July 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).

HMS Cruizer (1705)

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 23:43, 31 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete per reason 10 ("The redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject"). This redirect was created as a placeholder on the request of Rgdem999 who appears to be inactive. No other potential Royal Navy ships are redirected rather than being redlinked. Tevildo ( talk) 19:51, 24 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  • That's unfortunate. It's not something I really care enough about to want to invest the time to have it lifted, especially if as you say this is related to a recent issue. If someone wanted to turn this into an article, I could support a retarget to HMS Cruizer as a temporary measure but given this could be created by request I think a redlink is still preferable. A7V2 ( talk) 00:27, 29 July 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).

7 21 23 and 21 7 23

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 23:42, 31 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Barbie also came out on this date, making this a bit ambiguous if it were to only refer to movies. I'm unsure if this should keep its current redirect as Oppenheimer's ad does seem to use 7.21.23 much more than Barbie's did, but also this doesn't necessarily unambiguous refer to movies either. I'm split between keep, retarget to Barbenheimer, retarget to 2023#July (although July 21 is not mentioned specifically) or delete. Tartar Torte 17:00, 24 July 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).

Combat jujitsu

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 2#Combat jujitsu

Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 2#Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit

Radeon R800

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. Keeping as a plausible misnomer, and promoting the CPU to primary topic. wbm1058 ( talk) 22:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Apparent failed crystal balling (per creating edit summary) - not mentioned at target. If this is deleted then the entry at R800 can be removed and R800 (CPU) promoted to the undisambiguated title * Pppery * it has begun... 20:40, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 edits 10:21, 17 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk 14:17, 24 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Keep per my comment above and go ahead with the promote despite the keep. Jay 💬 17:04, 24 July 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).

Heterophylly

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 💬 05:27, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply

After closing the move at Shoot, I went to update the redirects, and stumbled across a couple that didn't make sense to me. I don't think Shoot (botany) is the best target for any of these; not sure about Heteroblasty (botany) either, and they may fall under WP:R#D10 as broad topics that need their own articles (especially Anisophylly, which is not mentioned at either target). At the very least, Heterophylly and Heterophyllous should be synced. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:23, 10 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Yep, that's rather a mess. I think the first thing to do would be to create coverage for Anisophylly, which is entirely different from Heterophylly. I can't find any history that it was ever covered, am I missing something? Anisophylly, "not quite the same leaves", is when there are leaves of two different sizes on the same shoot, little leaves alternating with the big ones, as shown here [ [2]] and we have it in at least one Commons photo here. Sminthopsis84 ( talk) 06:47, 10 July 2023 (UTC) reply
Anisophylly now has a minimal coverage on its own page. Sminthopsis84 ( talk) 08:05, 14 July 2023 (UTC) reply
Struck Anisophylly from the nom as such. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 20:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, SONIC 678 05:17, 17 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk 14:16, 24 July 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).

Wikipedia:Code of conduct

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 Wikipedia:List of policies#Conduct. Jay 💬 05:22, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply

I believe that all these should redirect to the same page. I think it's better for all of them to redirect to Wikipedia:Universal Code of Conduct. Just as a note, I made the last 2 ( Wikipedia:CoC and Wikipedia:Coc) QuickQuokka [⁠ talkcontribs 09:23, 10 July 2023 (UTC) reply

The universal code of conduct applies as a minimum standard for all of the Wikimedia projects, while the English Wikipedia has its own policies on top of it. In addition, Wikipedia:Etiquette only offers one part of the English Wikipedia's code of conduct. Wikipedia:List of policies § Conduct, consistent with WP:CONDUCT, may be a better choice. Randi🦋 Talk Contribs 14:50, 10 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 edits 11:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk 14:16, 24 July 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).

Template:Notable

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 with support. No further discussion to be had. Username6892 / Edward-Woodrow, or any user may perform the retarget after the transclusions are done. Jay 💬 05:14, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply

"Notable", as the name of a template, implies that it should be added to articles on topics editors have concluded are notable in the way {{ Sources exist}} is used rather than for a topic of questionable notability. I think this should, therefore, be retargeted to Template:Sources exist after the 128 existing mainspace transclusions are converted to {{ Notability}}. ~ UN6892 t c 14:16, 24 July 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).

England's King Charles I

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. Consensus has cleared post-relist, and it has settled on this specific case being a valid form of natural disambiguation. (non-admin closure) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 23:58, 30 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:38, 24 July 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).

'feld

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 💬 17:00, 3 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete - This is an oddly longstanding undiscussed redirect. I can't find any references of this sort of abbreviation for the show, and it has 0 hits from what I can find anyway. estar8806 ( talk) 22:53, 16 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep or delete; the fact of its creation demonstrates that this is potentially a term that is used even though it is basically impossible to search for this phrase. A retarget is unhelpful. J947 edits 01:20, 28 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete - It's been used 372 times since 2015, but did they find the 'feld they were looking for? Absent any evidence of use, it's not an appropriate redirect. signed, Rosguill talk 23:59, 1 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).

Wearables, Home and Accessories

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 Apple Inc.#Other products. signed, Rosguill talk 23:53, 1 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete - Implausible and ambiguous search term. estar8806 ( talk) 22:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:32, 24 July 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).
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

July 24

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 24, 2023.

Great Britain Olympic football team

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 Great Britain football team. Participants agree that there's no need for creating a new DAB page if one already exists. Tagged the redirect accordingly as a {{ R from incomplete disambiguation}}. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris talk! 16:16, 31 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Should be a dismabiguation page as per WP:TWODABS. Great Britain men's Olympic football team has only competed a few times and not since 2012 (and no plans to compete again), whereas the women have competed at every Olympics since 2012. Thus, it's equally likely people will be looking for the men's team (for historic articles) or for the women's team (for recent articles). There are 64 mainspace links to this redirect which would need to be fixed. Joseph 2302 ( talk) 13:29, 13 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:56, 24 July 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).

HMS Cruizer (1705)

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 23:43, 31 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete per reason 10 ("The redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject"). This redirect was created as a placeholder on the request of Rgdem999 who appears to be inactive. No other potential Royal Navy ships are redirected rather than being redlinked. Tevildo ( talk) 19:51, 24 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  • That's unfortunate. It's not something I really care enough about to want to invest the time to have it lifted, especially if as you say this is related to a recent issue. If someone wanted to turn this into an article, I could support a retarget to HMS Cruizer as a temporary measure but given this could be created by request I think a redlink is still preferable. A7V2 ( talk) 00:27, 29 July 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).

7 21 23 and 21 7 23

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 23:42, 31 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Barbie also came out on this date, making this a bit ambiguous if it were to only refer to movies. I'm unsure if this should keep its current redirect as Oppenheimer's ad does seem to use 7.21.23 much more than Barbie's did, but also this doesn't necessarily unambiguous refer to movies either. I'm split between keep, retarget to Barbenheimer, retarget to 2023#July (although July 21 is not mentioned specifically) or delete. Tartar Torte 17:00, 24 July 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).

Combat jujitsu

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 2#Combat jujitsu

Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 August 2#Fanta Pineapple and Grapefruit

Radeon R800

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. Keeping as a plausible misnomer, and promoting the CPU to primary topic. wbm1058 ( talk) 22:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Apparent failed crystal balling (per creating edit summary) - not mentioned at target. If this is deleted then the entry at R800 can be removed and R800 (CPU) promoted to the undisambiguated title * Pppery * it has begun... 20:40, 6 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 edits 10:21, 17 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk 14:17, 24 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Keep per my comment above and go ahead with the promote despite the keep. Jay 💬 17:04, 24 July 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).

Heterophylly

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 💬 05:27, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply

After closing the move at Shoot, I went to update the redirects, and stumbled across a couple that didn't make sense to me. I don't think Shoot (botany) is the best target for any of these; not sure about Heteroblasty (botany) either, and they may fall under WP:R#D10 as broad topics that need their own articles (especially Anisophylly, which is not mentioned at either target). At the very least, Heterophylly and Heterophyllous should be synced. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:23, 10 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Yep, that's rather a mess. I think the first thing to do would be to create coverage for Anisophylly, which is entirely different from Heterophylly. I can't find any history that it was ever covered, am I missing something? Anisophylly, "not quite the same leaves", is when there are leaves of two different sizes on the same shoot, little leaves alternating with the big ones, as shown here [ [2]] and we have it in at least one Commons photo here. Sminthopsis84 ( talk) 06:47, 10 July 2023 (UTC) reply
Anisophylly now has a minimal coverage on its own page. Sminthopsis84 ( talk) 08:05, 14 July 2023 (UTC) reply
Struck Anisophylly from the nom as such. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 20:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, SONIC 678 05:17, 17 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk 14:16, 24 July 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).

Wikipedia:Code of conduct

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 Wikipedia:List of policies#Conduct. Jay 💬 05:22, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply

I believe that all these should redirect to the same page. I think it's better for all of them to redirect to Wikipedia:Universal Code of Conduct. Just as a note, I made the last 2 ( Wikipedia:CoC and Wikipedia:Coc) QuickQuokka [⁠ talkcontribs 09:23, 10 July 2023 (UTC) reply

The universal code of conduct applies as a minimum standard for all of the Wikimedia projects, while the English Wikipedia has its own policies on top of it. In addition, Wikipedia:Etiquette only offers one part of the English Wikipedia's code of conduct. Wikipedia:List of policies § Conduct, consistent with WP:CONDUCT, may be a better choice. Randi🦋 Talk Contribs 14:50, 10 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 edits 11:02, 17 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Edward-Woodrow :) [ talk 14:16, 24 July 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).

Template:Notable

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 with support. No further discussion to be had. Username6892 / Edward-Woodrow, or any user may perform the retarget after the transclusions are done. Jay 💬 05:14, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply

"Notable", as the name of a template, implies that it should be added to articles on topics editors have concluded are notable in the way {{ Sources exist}} is used rather than for a topic of questionable notability. I think this should, therefore, be retargeted to Template:Sources exist after the 128 existing mainspace transclusions are converted to {{ Notability}}. ~ UN6892 t c 14:16, 24 July 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).

England's King Charles I

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. Consensus has cleared post-relist, and it has settled on this specific case being a valid form of natural disambiguation. (non-admin closure) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 23:58, 30 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:38, 24 July 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).

'feld

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 💬 17:00, 3 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete - This is an oddly longstanding undiscussed redirect. I can't find any references of this sort of abbreviation for the show, and it has 0 hits from what I can find anyway. estar8806 ( talk) 22:53, 16 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC) reply

  • Keep or delete; the fact of its creation demonstrates that this is potentially a term that is used even though it is basically impossible to search for this phrase. A retarget is unhelpful. J947 edits 01:20, 28 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete - It's been used 372 times since 2015, but did they find the 'feld they were looking for? Absent any evidence of use, it's not an appropriate redirect. signed, Rosguill talk 23:59, 1 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).

Wearables, Home and Accessories

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 Apple Inc.#Other products. signed, Rosguill talk 23:53, 1 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Delete - Implausible and ambiguous search term. estar8806 ( talk) 22:54, 16 July 2023 (UTC) reply

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:32, 24 July 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).

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook