This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 6, 2023.
Jill Biden's husband
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 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).
Divide and Conquer (Transformers episodes)
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.
Delete. The redirect is erroneous as the nominator has explained. The proper redirect is at
Divide and Conquer (Transformers episode). Some other user created the original article at the erroneous title first, I moved it later to the correct title. That's why Wikipedia is showing me as the creator of the redirect.
JIP |
Talk20:46, 6 June 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.
Keep. I think a correct use (present participle/noun form) should take precedence over a spelling difference (no space vs. space). If desired, the hatnote at the current target can be expanded to provide a link directly to other most likely use (
Dog fighting) to avoid users needing to go through the dab page.
Mdewman6 (
talk)
22:36, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
"Dogfighting" (no space) seems to appear 18 times in
dogfight and 12 times in
dog fighting, and I would argue most/all of the latter should be changed to "dog fighting" to match the title format. Of course, the problem here is that
dogfight is etymologically derived from
dog fighting, so natural disambiguation here requires hatnotes and careful attention to
WP:SMALLDETAILS.
Mdewman6 (
talk)
22:39, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep this as is per Mdewman6. To quote
Whoop whoop pull up in reverting to the current target the second time, "dogfighting without the space [...] usually refers to aircraft." I'd also support updating the hatnote in the current target to include a link to the proposed target and correcting the instances of "dogfighting" without the space in the word to avoid users having to use the disambiguation page. Regards,
SONIC67823:03, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
dogfighting without the space [...] usually refers to aircraft. This does not seem to be true. A quick Google search shows that most results for "dogfighting" without the space are for the topic involving dogs. —
Mx. Granger (
talk·contribs)
02:27, 7 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep at dogfight. Add R from gerund if that's the proper grammar term (can't remember). Add hatnote to dog fighting or dogs fighting.
AngusW🐶🐶F (
bark •
sniff)
14:56, 7 June 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).
German cake
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.
Keep (probably?) I don't know as well outside the US, but I'd say that the current target is reasonable and perhaps add a hatnote to
German chocolate cake about the redirect and a link to
List of German desserts. I think searching, say, Google with quotation marks is misleading since most sources will refer to it as the full name but just typing "German cake" is a plausible search term for German chocolate cake.
Skynxnex (
talk)
14:43, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak delete for reasons:
"German cake" ≠ "German chocolate cake" exclusively (or at all) for the reasons stated by the nominator. In addition, "
Spiegeleierkuchen", which in English is sometimes translated as "German fried egg cake", has the same first and last words as "German chocolate cake".
The article
List of German desserts does not seem like a proper target for this redirect since:
The article does not have a "cake" section, leaving readers searching at various places in the article for a "cake" subject and:
There's no reason to believe that a reader is looking for a list of desserts when searching this term, given that "cake" is not exclusive to "dessert" either as a subtopic (a cake is a dessert) or at all ("cake" can be a subtopic of subjects not "dessert", and not all "cake" subjects can be classified as "dessert".)
All of the examples you linked use the full name in the title, i.e. the context was already previously given. Searching for pages with "German cake" in the page title, reveal results without a dominant topic. At best, if a disambiguation page is created,
German chocolate cake should be in the "See also" section due to the reasons mentioned above. - CHAMPION(
talk) (
contributions) (
logs) 23:34, 8 June 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Jay: I assume you meant "of" instead of "are" ... but I'm sticking with "delete" per the above comments since the phrase "German cake" is apparently not a phrase which is exclusive to any of these options, so I don't believe a disambiguation page is the way to go.
Steel1943 (
talk)
20:35, 14 June 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Steel1943: No, you said I think all three options are plausible..., and my question to you was Which are the three options? because I did not know which three options you were referring to. I thought "three options" referred to three entries in a disambiguation page that you had in mind. But now you say you are "sticking with" Delete. Do you mean to say you are changing your vote to Delete because your earlier stance was Disambiguate? Jay 💬05:11, 15 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Deletion isn't unreasonable, but because one of those is almost certainly intended and the search engine is so-so on its own, probably not best for navigation.
Redirecting to Kuchen is OKish with the hatnote, but because the list link is not obvious upon arrival, may still result in a navigational delay.
Redirecting to the list is a bit odd but workable; I guess both other possibilities could be hatnoted, but Steel1943's objection is fairly solid.
Keeping is defensible, a lot of people will be looking for German chocolate cake when they type that, nonetheless it can potentially confuse a good deal of searchers as well, probably fixable with hatnoting, but is it really primary?
In sum, no good options so disambiguation seems the least bad way to aid navigation here. It also offers the potential to add entries as more plausible targets are identified. Of course I may have missed something, and I also respect that it doesn't take much to nudge the needle here.
74.73.224.126 (
talk)
06:10, 15 June 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).
UserːEagledj/sandbox/John Warner White
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.
I don't know why that phonetic symbol came up when I typed a colon. I think my computer was on "international Phonetic Alphabet" instead of "Use native Keyboard". My mistake, I hope you can correct this. Regards,
Eagledj (
talk)
12:37, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Hi all, just notifying everyone that I've completed the move that Dsuke requested. I think this should fully resolve the issue, but please feel free to ping me or drop a talk page message if there's anything else that needs to be done.
ModernDayTrilobite (
talk •
contribs)
13:46, 6 June 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).
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 6, 2023.
Jill Biden's husband
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 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).
Divide and Conquer (Transformers episodes)
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.
Delete. The redirect is erroneous as the nominator has explained. The proper redirect is at
Divide and Conquer (Transformers episode). Some other user created the original article at the erroneous title first, I moved it later to the correct title. That's why Wikipedia is showing me as the creator of the redirect.
JIP |
Talk20:46, 6 June 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.
Keep. I think a correct use (present participle/noun form) should take precedence over a spelling difference (no space vs. space). If desired, the hatnote at the current target can be expanded to provide a link directly to other most likely use (
Dog fighting) to avoid users needing to go through the dab page.
Mdewman6 (
talk)
22:36, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
"Dogfighting" (no space) seems to appear 18 times in
dogfight and 12 times in
dog fighting, and I would argue most/all of the latter should be changed to "dog fighting" to match the title format. Of course, the problem here is that
dogfight is etymologically derived from
dog fighting, so natural disambiguation here requires hatnotes and careful attention to
WP:SMALLDETAILS.
Mdewman6 (
talk)
22:39, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep this as is per Mdewman6. To quote
Whoop whoop pull up in reverting to the current target the second time, "dogfighting without the space [...] usually refers to aircraft." I'd also support updating the hatnote in the current target to include a link to the proposed target and correcting the instances of "dogfighting" without the space in the word to avoid users having to use the disambiguation page. Regards,
SONIC67823:03, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
dogfighting without the space [...] usually refers to aircraft. This does not seem to be true. A quick Google search shows that most results for "dogfighting" without the space are for the topic involving dogs. —
Mx. Granger (
talk·contribs)
02:27, 7 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Keep at dogfight. Add R from gerund if that's the proper grammar term (can't remember). Add hatnote to dog fighting or dogs fighting.
AngusW🐶🐶F (
bark •
sniff)
14:56, 7 June 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).
German cake
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.
Keep (probably?) I don't know as well outside the US, but I'd say that the current target is reasonable and perhaps add a hatnote to
German chocolate cake about the redirect and a link to
List of German desserts. I think searching, say, Google with quotation marks is misleading since most sources will refer to it as the full name but just typing "German cake" is a plausible search term for German chocolate cake.
Skynxnex (
talk)
14:43, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Weak delete for reasons:
"German cake" ≠ "German chocolate cake" exclusively (or at all) for the reasons stated by the nominator. In addition, "
Spiegeleierkuchen", which in English is sometimes translated as "German fried egg cake", has the same first and last words as "German chocolate cake".
The article
List of German desserts does not seem like a proper target for this redirect since:
The article does not have a "cake" section, leaving readers searching at various places in the article for a "cake" subject and:
There's no reason to believe that a reader is looking for a list of desserts when searching this term, given that "cake" is not exclusive to "dessert" either as a subtopic (a cake is a dessert) or at all ("cake" can be a subtopic of subjects not "dessert", and not all "cake" subjects can be classified as "dessert".)
All of the examples you linked use the full name in the title, i.e. the context was already previously given. Searching for pages with "German cake" in the page title, reveal results without a dominant topic. At best, if a disambiguation page is created,
German chocolate cake should be in the "See also" section due to the reasons mentioned above. - CHAMPION(
talk) (
contributions) (
logs) 23:34, 8 June 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Jay: I assume you meant "of" instead of "are" ... but I'm sticking with "delete" per the above comments since the phrase "German cake" is apparently not a phrase which is exclusive to any of these options, so I don't believe a disambiguation page is the way to go.
Steel1943 (
talk)
20:35, 14 June 2023 (UTC)reply
@
Steel1943: No, you said I think all three options are plausible..., and my question to you was Which are the three options? because I did not know which three options you were referring to. I thought "three options" referred to three entries in a disambiguation page that you had in mind. But now you say you are "sticking with" Delete. Do you mean to say you are changing your vote to Delete because your earlier stance was Disambiguate? Jay 💬05:11, 15 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Deletion isn't unreasonable, but because one of those is almost certainly intended and the search engine is so-so on its own, probably not best for navigation.
Redirecting to Kuchen is OKish with the hatnote, but because the list link is not obvious upon arrival, may still result in a navigational delay.
Redirecting to the list is a bit odd but workable; I guess both other possibilities could be hatnoted, but Steel1943's objection is fairly solid.
Keeping is defensible, a lot of people will be looking for German chocolate cake when they type that, nonetheless it can potentially confuse a good deal of searchers as well, probably fixable with hatnoting, but is it really primary?
In sum, no good options so disambiguation seems the least bad way to aid navigation here. It also offers the potential to add entries as more plausible targets are identified. Of course I may have missed something, and I also respect that it doesn't take much to nudge the needle here.
74.73.224.126 (
talk)
06:10, 15 June 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).
UserːEagledj/sandbox/John Warner White
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.
I don't know why that phonetic symbol came up when I typed a colon. I think my computer was on "international Phonetic Alphabet" instead of "Use native Keyboard". My mistake, I hope you can correct this. Regards,
Eagledj (
talk)
12:37, 6 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Hi all, just notifying everyone that I've completed the move that Dsuke requested. I think this should fully resolve the issue, but please feel free to ping me or drop a talk page message if there's anything else that needs to be done.
ModernDayTrilobite (
talk •
contribs)
13:46, 6 June 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).