This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 8, 2023.
Sang-gamma is a trade name for the compound described at the target, but this obscure version created by PotatoBot isn't doing anyone any good. Create the proper version if desired, but delete this nonsense. Mdewman6 ( talk) 22:45, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
A continuation of Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_June_8#Α-BCH with the same rationale: evidently created in error as initialisms for β-Benzenehexachloride (β-BHC) and γ-Benzenehexachloride (γ-BHC), due to confusion with the intialisms β-HCH and γ-HCH for the more common form of their names, β-Hexachlorocyclohexane and γ-Hexachlorocyclohexane (or Lindane). Unlikely to be useful, given that these begin with a Greek letter and are unlikely to be typed. Delete these incorrect versions to avoid further confusion and possible incorrect use in links. Mdewman6 ( talk) 22:02, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
I'm genuinely unsure what to do with this redirect.
A comment about page history: It appears (I actually dug into nostalgia wikipedia in order to check this!) that this page was created first on 23 February 2001 and said "See Mathematics and Statistics" (which I assume was red at that point). Then on 9 March 2001 a different user redirected this to Mathematics and Statistics and made the latter a bulleted list containing only "Mathematics" and "Statistics" (both linked). In 2002, MathematicsAndStatistics was redirected to Mathematics, with Mathematics and Statistics being redirected later in 2011(!), and they've stayed that way to this day.
Now the reason I want to nominate this is that despite the page history the title and the target don't quite seem to match; I think a reader searching for "MathematicsAndStatistics" is probably looking for the relationship or intersection of mathematics with statistics (such as we discuss in Mathematical statistics). But also the use of uppercase might make these unlikely search terms so deletion is not a far-fetched option too (and the page history, despite its age, is minimal enough that I wouldn't be bothered by it). Duckmather ( talk) 19:18, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
mathematics and statisticsis a fairly common phrase and might even be an irreversible binomial at this point (c.f. the google search results, especially the academic departments called "Department of Mathematics and Statistics" or such). Furthermore, this redirect has gotten 1756 views since 2015, which works out to ~0.6 views/day which is also a borderline case. Thus I don't really have a strong opinion on this one in any direction.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of the discussion at the talk pages of Statistics and Mathematical statistics.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Jay
💬
09:04, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Per Duckmather I propose changing Mathematics and Statistics to a set index article with content "Wikipedia has separate overview articles on Mathematics and Statistics." For someone searching on the term, this would get them to useful articles with minimum fuss and is otherwise harmless. As for the camel-case version, I would do the same since it has amassed over 1400 hits. Again it is harmless and minimizes wasting editor time discussing this ultra trivial issue.-- agr ( talk) 16:05, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
A set index shuoldn't cover two topics. Redirected to the intersection[ sic]. Per this RfC, if someone wants to restore the setindex then it's gotta go to AfD as well. Nevertheless I don't object to setindexifying and then AfD'ing the setindex. (I still think that you should have put everything in your proposed setindex after the second bullet point in a "See also" section. Also, if this discussion gets a second relist, which seems likely, then your setindex-turned-redirect should be bundled here as well.) Duckmather ( talk) 20:14, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Boldly doing an
involved relist as the very nominator to close out the May 20 log page (as well as to test out
XFDcloser). Also because this is a really complicated discussion that hasn't reached a consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Duckmather (
talk)
18:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 16#7 virgins
A combination of two errors, "chloric" instead of "chloro" and "benzine" instead of "benzene" make this highly implausible to be useful. Delete. Mdewman6 ( talk) 17:48, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 15#Sex-based rights
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 27#Democratic planning
These pages were created for the purposes of helping Legobot who links non-ASCII characters such as α or č as ?, which if these redirects were not created, would break many links related to RfCs and such. However, these pages are all no longer linked to from anywhere. They're relatively cheap redirects, but they also are a bit odd and are pretty unlikely to be used unless another RfC is started on any of these pages. Tartar Torte 16:46, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
these pages are all no longer linked to from anywhere, this is demonstrably untrue - every single one of them has inward links. They don't have inward links from mainspace, but I wouldn't expect that of any talk page, redirect or not, unless there was a cleanup banner at the top of the article that contained a discuss link. To the statement
if there's still a bot that doesn't understand UTF-8, surely in 2023 we're decades beyond obsoleting such a bot- this is Legobot ( talk · contribs), which created a broken link as recently as four weeks ago, here. I have been creating these redirects (including all of the above except Talk:Aleksandar Vu?i?) for more than five years, often in response to complaints at User talk:Legobot or User talk:Legoktm, in order to provide a usable workaround for a known bug in Legobot; and nobody has complained until today. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 20:32, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
a bad use of [my] volunteer time? What about those people who have the page on their watchlist and couldn't click through to the RfC? Should we leave them wasting time by having to guess where the RfC was really taking place? I would say that filing an RfD for a bunch of redirs that are causing no harm whatsoever is itself a waste of time. Surely there are other pages more worthy of deletion - attack pages, copyright violations and so on. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 22:49, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
someone should just fix the bot, the bot op is Legoktm ( talk · contribs), who has many more important things to do; for several years, the only amendments that Legoktm has carried out to Legobot have been of the nature of "unbreak now!" problems, and this doesn't go that far. Is somebody offering to take it over from Legoktm? -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 13:24, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Accidentally created this due to a typo. 〜 Festucalex • talk 15:59, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
The Christian God is not the only one to be infinite (see God in Judaism, God in Islam). There is no good retarget. Therefore, I propose deletion. Veverve ( talk) 01:29, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
03:41, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Jay
💬
14:38, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
change target redirect to Pokémon X and Y since video game is more popular. RMXY ( talk) 08:46, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
This is a convoluted article title but I can't delete it via speedy deletion as it is the result of a page move. So, I'm sending it to RFD to see if anyone agrees that it should be deleted. By the way, there are a ton of other redirects to this article as well that link to this page. Liz Read! Talk! 06:41, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
While this is a quote from an internet meme about the film, I doubt it would be a common search query for people looking for the film. I think it should be deleted because, let's be real, nobody is going to type "do not want" in search of Star Wars Episode III (the phrase "do not want" doesn't even appear in the article). "Do not want" is a fairly common set of words in English anyways. Di (they-them) ( talk) 05:00, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
This was evidently created in error as an initialism for α-Benzenehexachloride or α-BHC (which has now been created), due to confusion with its intialism α-HCH for its more common name α-Hexachlorocyclohexane. Unlikely to be useful, given that it begins with a Greek letter and is unlikely to be typed. Delete this incorrect version to avoid further confusion and possible incorrect use in links. Mdewman6 ( talk) 02:14, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
A misspelling ("Phophoryl" instead of "phosphoryl") combined with incorrect spacing and capitalization makes this highly unlikely to be useful. The correct form would be Alpha-Glycerylphosphorylcholine, and we already have the also questionable but at least correctly spelled Alpha-Glyceryl Phosphoryl Choline. Delete this multi-error version. Mdewman6 ( talk) 00:59, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 8, 2023.
Sang-gamma is a trade name for the compound described at the target, but this obscure version created by PotatoBot isn't doing anyone any good. Create the proper version if desired, but delete this nonsense. Mdewman6 ( talk) 22:45, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
A continuation of Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_June_8#Α-BCH with the same rationale: evidently created in error as initialisms for β-Benzenehexachloride (β-BHC) and γ-Benzenehexachloride (γ-BHC), due to confusion with the intialisms β-HCH and γ-HCH for the more common form of their names, β-Hexachlorocyclohexane and γ-Hexachlorocyclohexane (or Lindane). Unlikely to be useful, given that these begin with a Greek letter and are unlikely to be typed. Delete these incorrect versions to avoid further confusion and possible incorrect use in links. Mdewman6 ( talk) 22:02, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
I'm genuinely unsure what to do with this redirect.
A comment about page history: It appears (I actually dug into nostalgia wikipedia in order to check this!) that this page was created first on 23 February 2001 and said "See Mathematics and Statistics" (which I assume was red at that point). Then on 9 March 2001 a different user redirected this to Mathematics and Statistics and made the latter a bulleted list containing only "Mathematics" and "Statistics" (both linked). In 2002, MathematicsAndStatistics was redirected to Mathematics, with Mathematics and Statistics being redirected later in 2011(!), and they've stayed that way to this day.
Now the reason I want to nominate this is that despite the page history the title and the target don't quite seem to match; I think a reader searching for "MathematicsAndStatistics" is probably looking for the relationship or intersection of mathematics with statistics (such as we discuss in Mathematical statistics). But also the use of uppercase might make these unlikely search terms so deletion is not a far-fetched option too (and the page history, despite its age, is minimal enough that I wouldn't be bothered by it). Duckmather ( talk) 19:18, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
mathematics and statisticsis a fairly common phrase and might even be an irreversible binomial at this point (c.f. the google search results, especially the academic departments called "Department of Mathematics and Statistics" or such). Furthermore, this redirect has gotten 1756 views since 2015, which works out to ~0.6 views/day which is also a borderline case. Thus I don't really have a strong opinion on this one in any direction.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of the discussion at the talk pages of Statistics and Mathematical statistics.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Jay
💬
09:04, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
Per Duckmather I propose changing Mathematics and Statistics to a set index article with content "Wikipedia has separate overview articles on Mathematics and Statistics." For someone searching on the term, this would get them to useful articles with minimum fuss and is otherwise harmless. As for the camel-case version, I would do the same since it has amassed over 1400 hits. Again it is harmless and minimizes wasting editor time discussing this ultra trivial issue.-- agr ( talk) 16:05, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
A set index shuoldn't cover two topics. Redirected to the intersection[ sic]. Per this RfC, if someone wants to restore the setindex then it's gotta go to AfD as well. Nevertheless I don't object to setindexifying and then AfD'ing the setindex. (I still think that you should have put everything in your proposed setindex after the second bullet point in a "See also" section. Also, if this discussion gets a second relist, which seems likely, then your setindex-turned-redirect should be bundled here as well.) Duckmather ( talk) 20:14, 31 May 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Boldly doing an
involved relist as the very nominator to close out the May 20 log page (as well as to test out
XFDcloser). Also because this is a really complicated discussion that hasn't reached a consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Duckmather (
talk)
18:30, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 16#7 virgins
A combination of two errors, "chloric" instead of "chloro" and "benzine" instead of "benzene" make this highly implausible to be useful. Delete. Mdewman6 ( talk) 17:48, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 15#Sex-based rights
Relisted, see
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 27#Democratic planning
These pages were created for the purposes of helping Legobot who links non-ASCII characters such as α or č as ?, which if these redirects were not created, would break many links related to RfCs and such. However, these pages are all no longer linked to from anywhere. They're relatively cheap redirects, but they also are a bit odd and are pretty unlikely to be used unless another RfC is started on any of these pages. Tartar Torte 16:46, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
these pages are all no longer linked to from anywhere, this is demonstrably untrue - every single one of them has inward links. They don't have inward links from mainspace, but I wouldn't expect that of any talk page, redirect or not, unless there was a cleanup banner at the top of the article that contained a discuss link. To the statement
if there's still a bot that doesn't understand UTF-8, surely in 2023 we're decades beyond obsoleting such a bot- this is Legobot ( talk · contribs), which created a broken link as recently as four weeks ago, here. I have been creating these redirects (including all of the above except Talk:Aleksandar Vu?i?) for more than five years, often in response to complaints at User talk:Legobot or User talk:Legoktm, in order to provide a usable workaround for a known bug in Legobot; and nobody has complained until today. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 20:32, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
a bad use of [my] volunteer time? What about those people who have the page on their watchlist and couldn't click through to the RfC? Should we leave them wasting time by having to guess where the RfC was really taking place? I would say that filing an RfD for a bunch of redirs that are causing no harm whatsoever is itself a waste of time. Surely there are other pages more worthy of deletion - attack pages, copyright violations and so on. -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 22:49, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
someone should just fix the bot, the bot op is Legoktm ( talk · contribs), who has many more important things to do; for several years, the only amendments that Legoktm has carried out to Legobot have been of the nature of "unbreak now!" problems, and this doesn't go that far. Is somebody offering to take it over from Legoktm? -- Redrose64 🌹 ( talk) 13:24, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
Accidentally created this due to a typo. 〜 Festucalex • talk 15:59, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
The Christian God is not the only one to be infinite (see God in Judaism, God in Islam). There is no good retarget. Therefore, I propose deletion. Veverve ( talk) 01:29, 25 May 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗
plicit
03:41, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Jay
💬
14:38, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
change target redirect to Pokémon X and Y since video game is more popular. RMXY ( talk) 08:46, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
This is a convoluted article title but I can't delete it via speedy deletion as it is the result of a page move. So, I'm sending it to RFD to see if anyone agrees that it should be deleted. By the way, there are a ton of other redirects to this article as well that link to this page. Liz Read! Talk! 06:41, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
While this is a quote from an internet meme about the film, I doubt it would be a common search query for people looking for the film. I think it should be deleted because, let's be real, nobody is going to type "do not want" in search of Star Wars Episode III (the phrase "do not want" doesn't even appear in the article). "Do not want" is a fairly common set of words in English anyways. Di (they-them) ( talk) 05:00, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
This was evidently created in error as an initialism for α-Benzenehexachloride or α-BHC (which has now been created), due to confusion with its intialism α-HCH for its more common name α-Hexachlorocyclohexane. Unlikely to be useful, given that it begins with a Greek letter and is unlikely to be typed. Delete this incorrect version to avoid further confusion and possible incorrect use in links. Mdewman6 ( talk) 02:14, 8 June 2023 (UTC)
A misspelling ("Phophoryl" instead of "phosphoryl") combined with incorrect spacing and capitalization makes this highly unlikely to be useful. The correct form would be Alpha-Glycerylphosphorylcholine, and we already have the also questionable but at least correctly spelled Alpha-Glyceryl Phosphoryl Choline. Delete this multi-error version. Mdewman6 ( talk) 00:59, 8 June 2023 (UTC)