Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 June 21

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

June 21

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on June 21, 2019.

Incorrect American city/state pairs

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:00, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Similar to the Reno, Arizona redirect which was nominated for deletion, there has never been a Reno, California, although Reno is close to the CA border. Las Vegas and Los Angeles redirects are even less plausible. With essentially no usage, I think these redirects are a solution searching for a problem. signed, Rosguill talk 20:37, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. The only one of these that is even remotely plausible is Las Vegas, Arizona, given this part of Nevada was briefly part of the Arizona Territory (note it was also part of New Mexico territory at one time). But even then, that is stretching logic. Las Vegas was little more than a meadow used for a rest area for travelers at the time. The city did not come into being until long after it was transferred to Nevada. Dave (talk) 20:52, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The Arizona Territory justification would make sense if we had more time travelers from the 19th century using Wikipedia. signed, Rosguill talk 21:03, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, Las Vegas wasn't founded until 1905 so Las Vegas was never a part of Arizona Territory (except as an anachronism). -- Tavix (talk) 21:13, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Since I made my comment Reno, Utah was added to this list. The same logic applies, while the Reno area was once part of the Utah Territory, Reno was not founded as a city until after it was transferred to Nevada. So that also would only exist as an anacronism. Dave (talk) 21:16, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Northeast Scotland

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 North East Scotland. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 02:52, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would encourage people to clickthrough to the target and look at the map of Scotland showcasing the lowland/highland divide. While Northwest Scotland is essentially all Highland, regions of Scotland that could very plausibly be considered "northeast" are on the lowland side of the divide. signed, Rosguill talk 20:34, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Rider people

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:01, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

While there's a clear semantic connection, it's not mentioned in the target, and searching online and on Google Scholar returned no evidence of use. signed, Rosguill talk 18:00, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Jove(tribe)

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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 05:01, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot tell why this was created. It's incorrectly punctuated, and there's no mention on Jaega of Jove being an alternative name. But the redirect has been here since 2007, so wouldn't qualify as R3 now. — Smjg (talk) 17:30, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Jove" is an alternative spelling of the Spanish pronunciation of "Jobe" [ˈxoβe], the name of a village mentioned by various Spanish sources and by Jonathan Dickinson (he spelled it "Hoe-bay"). It is the source of the name for Hobe Sound, Florida. The village was on the Jupiter Inlet, which name may also be connected with "Jove". Jobe apparently was an important village of the Jaega, but is also mentioned in places as a tribe. I've intended to work on the Jaega article to clarify these things, but haven't gotten around to it. I had found some scholarly articles on the Jaegas/Jobes, but seem to have misplaced them. I'll think about how to clarify the redirects involved here. - Donald Albury 16:00, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have edited the Jaega article and added mention of Jobe/Jove to the lead (and in the main body). There is an existing redirect named "Jove (tribe)" (with a space), so "Jove(tribe)" should be deleted. - Donald Albury 01:45, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Smell receptors

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 Olfactory receptor. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 02:52, 29 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused here. Shouldn't this target Olfactory receptor? Steel1943 (talk) 04:03, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Olfactory receptor is a closer match, so unless others object in a timely fashion, you should change it. Aeffenberger (talk) 01:19, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.

Smell (sense), Olfactory sense, and other friends

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. MBisanz talk 20:16, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unclear on whether these should continue to target their current target or be retargeted to Olfactory system. Steel1943 (talk) 04:00, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. There is an important difference between olfaction and the olfactory system, and the pages you've listed here all seem to belong closer to olfaction (the phenomenon) than the page for the organ system. Aeffenberger (talk) 01:19, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_June_21&oldid=904227836"