Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 29

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:47, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Boris Johnson is a Fucking C**t → Kunt and the Gang#Discography  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Wikipedia is not censored, and this appears to be a redirect with a censored title. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 20:06, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep valid bowdlerized {{r from incorrect name}}. Looking at Google search, this censored form does appear to be used at least occasionally, such as in the headline (though not body, curiously) of this NME article. We've got plenty of redirects along the lines of F**k, N****r, etc., and indeed C**t. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 22:01, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep per Tamzin, though I'm not sure how useful it really is -- "use in title but not body" seems like the kind of censorship enforced by copyeditors. Vaticidalprophet 22:04, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - We don't censor, but the encyclopedia does not exist to become a secret repository for every hidden sentiment someone wants keep on file. Nor do we usually keep redirects to every song title that is not eligible as a stand-alone page. We should probably consider that this redirect has been created so someone can use it as a hidden message link on various pages. This serves no encyclopedic purpose. — Maile (talk) 20:54, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  No, we should assume good faith absent evidence to the contrary. I see nowhere that someone has used this redirect the way you suggest, and besides it would be silly to use this link as a political insult given that it redirects to an obscure musical work and not the targeted individual. I don't know why you think we throw out song title redirects with unambiguous targets, but see {{R from song}} and its companion Category:Redirects from songs with its 36,000+ redirects from song titles that aren't eligible as stand-alone pages. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 12:48, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Tamzin. This had 275 pageviews in the 30 days prior to nomination (Boris Johnson is a Fucking Cunt has only 7) , it's clearly useful and the target is unambiguous. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 12:48, 31 May 2021 (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.

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 00:20, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Actinium(II) fluoride → Actinium fluoride  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Target is about Actinium(III) fluoride (+3 oxidation state); no mention of a compound with the +2 oxidation state in the article. Delete to avoid confusion. Mdewman6 (talk) 17:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom, compound does not exist. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:43, 29 May 2021 (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.

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. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 05:46, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Radio 1 music for lady diana → Death of Diana, Princess of Wales  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in the target article. Dominicmgm (talk) 14:50, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. This was originally an unsourced stub listing the music played on Radio 1 after the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. It was quickly marked for merging into the present target but was redirected instead. Thryduulf (talk) 20:27, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - the stub only ever listed four songs, and said they were played on loop throughout the day. That seems absurd, and no sources back this up. The only possible source I have found is someone's Spotify playlist with ten songs, which itself notes that it's not a complete list, and is from memory, so not usable as a source anyway. Readers will not find any information on this on Wikipedia, it should be deleted. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 13:05, 2 June 2021 (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.

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 withdrawn. Avilich (talk) 21:03, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Zosimus Historicus → Zosimus  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

He is never called this in any source. The subject is usually cited in footnotes as "Zos. Hist." (Zosimus, Historia Nova), so the creator of this redirect presumably got the abbreviation wrong. Avilich (talk) 02:09, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• a few seconds of googling seem to disagree; unless all results are referring to a different historian called Zosimus or, e.g., they are all metaartifacts of me creating in wikipedia said redirection page with many of the latter backpropagating in time, e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5...
  Thanatos|talk|contributions 03:03, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• All you did was to show entries where his occupation ('historian') just so happens to be spelled out in Latin, and some of yours even have other languages attached (I found a German "Zosimos, Historiker" there). In all of those cases, 'historicus' is an ad hoc label rather than an epithet, as indicated by comma, parentheses, or other means. The google entries which 'disagree' are there because you invented the nickname 7 years ago, inconveniently placed it on the article lead, and several Wikipedia mirrors throughout the web have copied it. Avilich (talk) 05:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Thanatos. Even if one could show that this is incorrect/atypical, as long as some people use this name, and it can't refer to anything else, it's a valid redirect. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 03:50, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • See above comment. Inventing nicknames doesn't make them plausible redirections. Avilich (talk) 05:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    I'll answer under the assumption that you're right, without actually taking a position on that, since it doesn't change the end result here: It's plausible because it's used. It doesn't matter whether it's incorrect, ahistorical, etc. If a reader could plausibly think that something is a valid alternative name, and there's no ambiguity, then generally we have a redirect from that name. In this case, we definitely know of one person who thought it was a valid name, namely Thanatos666. And, citogenesis or not, someone who buys, for instance, this book on Amazon is going to think it's a valid name for him. There's plenty of cases of this. For instance, someone on Find a Grave made up the middle name Randall for Harry R. Truman, leading us to mistitle our article on him for quite some time, an error that made it into at least one published book. We nonetheless have maintained a redirect from Harry Randall Truman, because now that the name's out there, it's out there. Right or wrong.

    If a consensus emerges that you're right and that this isn't a valid alternative name, someone can tag the redirect as {{r from incorrect name}}. -- Tamzin (she/they) | o toki tawa mi. 05:48, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• We don't have a redirect for the German "Zosimos Historiker" and there's no reason for a Latin one too. An Amazon page description isn't a book as in the Truman example, and a few stray internet entries don't mean much. A reader is unlikely to search for an extended term if it's incorrect, and WIkipedia shouldn't encourage citogenesis. Avilich (talk) 06:05, 29 May 2021 (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.