September 27

Owww!

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)21:23, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Owww! →Arsenio Hall#Discography (talk·links·history·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I do not believe why this page redirects to that article. It's also not mentioned in that section.Seventyfiveyears (talk)16:54, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• This is the title (or a misspelling) of a track on his albumLarge and In Charge. Searches show it spelled with three or four W's, and I don't know which is correct. -Eureka Lott19:04, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per the information provided by Eureka Lott._signed,Rosguill^talk17:25, 23 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. There's no mention of that track anywhere in enwiki. So, I guess it would be best to delete this.CycloneYoris^talk!06:10, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The track was mentioned as a "minor hit" in the article about the album[1] when it was briefly in existence in 2008, but there's no mention anywhere now, there isn't likely be one soon, and if one were added that wouldn't be enough to justify a redirect: an article about an artist would typically mention dozens of productions, and each will probably share a name with other productions by different artists. Navigation for such minuscule topics is what the search engine is there for. –Uanfala (talk)01:17, 27 September 2020 (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.

Battery tram

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasretarget toTram#Battery. --BDD (talk)21:21, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Battery tramBattery tram →Coventry Very Light Rail (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, is mentioned briefly at other articles. Deletion to allow for search results may be the best option here._signed,Rosguill^talk17:19, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget toTram#Battery which has a short but comprehensive overview of the subject.Thryduulf (talk)21:25, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to the obviousTram#Battery.Shhhnotsoloud (talk)09:03, 29 September 2020 (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.

Wikipedia:NOTBIBLIOGRAPHY

Gesellschaft (disambiguation)

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdabify --JHunterJ (talk)15:07, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Gesellschaft (disambiguation) →Society (disambiguation) (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete perWP:RLOTE. None of the entries at the target appear to have any German affinity (nor are they otherwise known as Gesellschaft).Gesellschaft without a disambiguator points toGemeinschaft and Gesellschaft, which would not be an appropriate target for a (disambiguation) redirect._signed,Rosguill^talk16:36, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I thinkGesellschaft can be converted (back) into a dab page, looking something along the lines of:

Gesellschaft may refer to:

• Gesellschaft, the German word for "society"; used in English for a particular category of social relations (seeGemeinschaft and Gesellschaft)
• Gesellschaft, company inGerman company law
• Die Gesellschaft (literary magazine) [de], a literary magazine published 1885–1902 byMichael Georg Conrad
• Die Gesellschaft (series) [de], a series of monographs published 1906–1912 byMartin Buber
• Die Gesellschaft (political magazine) [de], a political journal (1924–1933), successor ofDie Neue Zeit

The first meaning is certainly the most prominent (so much so that it's got an entry in theOxford English Dictionary), but there's also a fair number of incoming links for the second one (where it's notjust the German word for 'company', it's a term in a particular legal framework that may not be 100% equivalent to the English one). –Uanfala (talk)22:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Dabify per Uanfala. I have put a draft under the page. --Soumya-8974^talk_contribs^subpages14:52, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Disambig per Wuhanfala and consider moving the disambiguation to the base title.Thryduulf (talk)15:10, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed.Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

John Adamsson

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)21:20, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• John Adamsson →Juhani Aataminpoika (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, no matches in a google scholar search. Seems like a novel anglicization to me. Delete unless a justification can be provided._signed,Rosguill^talk16:32, 27 September 2020 (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.

Dipwad

Cooyon

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasdelete. --BDD (talk)21:18, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Not mentioned in target.Soumya-8974^talk_contribs^subpages15:04, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete this andcoo yon per nom.Seventyfiveyears (talk)13:00, 2 October 2020 (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.

Butt shaker

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasno consensus._signed,Rosguill^talk19:59, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Butt shakerButt shaker →Tactile transducer (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in the article. Also, "bass shaker" and "butt shaker" are not the same meaning. Bass shakers are tools that contain low-frequency vibrations on surfaces.Seventyfiveyears (talk)16:17, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update: This page should be retargeted to "Twerking".Seventyfiveyears (talk)20:07, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep orRetarget toSubwoofer#Bass shakers which indicates that tactile transducers are called "butt shakers" and explains why.Shhhnotsoloud (talk)10:06, 21 September 2020 (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.

Mint jelly

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasretarget toMint sauce._signed,Rosguill^talk19:58, 8 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Mint jellyMint jelly →Mentha#Culinary (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Mint JellyMint Jelly →Mint sauce (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Mint jelly andMint Jelly both redirect to different articles, so I am not sure which article the redirect should target to.Erpert^{blah, blah, blah...}09:21, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• (The RfD notice was missing from the second one, so I just added that). The second one actually has a brief mention (and bolded), but it seems to be pretty out-of-place. I'd favor redirecting toMentha#Culinary, as the first one does, since that actually seems a more appropriate place to discuss it (and it does, briefly, along with a picture). –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos)15:05, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • And thanks for doing that. (SN: The hatnote at the top of the article for the second redirect is of questionable notability, so I'm going to keep an extra eye on it.)Erpert^{blah, blah, blah...}18:08, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Both redirects should target the same article. On the whole I preferMint sauce, with a better See also link toMentha#Culinary (which should really be "Culinary uses", but I'd also be happy with the other choice.Shhhnotsoloud (talk)10:13, 21 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget toMint sauce.Rreagan007 (talk)16:05, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• As an American, I associate mint jelly with Southern cuisine, where it has the much thicker consistency of jello or preserves. Is this really the same mint jelly mentioned atMint sauce? Cf. entry for "jelly" atList of words having different meanings in American and British English (A–L). --BDD (talk)21:13, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget tomint sauce. They are largely the same thing (a food dressing made with mint), and some sources regard mint jelly as the American term for mint sauce:[2], though in the UK we have both mint sauce and mint jelly. The jelly is a recent introduction (possibly from America) and is of course sweeter, and less minty and vinegary, but they are both used to accompany food (traditionally lamb).SilkTork (talk)10:24, 7 October 2020 (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.

Garamond (typography)

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion wasretarget toGaramond (disambiguation).(non-admin closure)CycloneYoris^talk!05:30, 4 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Garamond (typography)Garamond (typography) →Point (typography)#Traditional point-size names (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Garamond (typography)" is ambiguous and more likely to confuse people when it comes up on search than be a helpful redirect.

Garamond is a font design, and the name wasalso sometimes used as the name for 10ptmetal type in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (in any style, but most commonly in the Netherlands, I think, where they actually spelled it Garmond). So it wouldn't be obvious to someone seeing this in the search box which of those topics this redirect is going to take them to. We also already haveGaramond (disambiguation). I therefore propose deleting this redirect and replacing it with ones that are something like "Garamond (font size)" and "Garmond (font size)" which would redirect totraditional point-size names.Blythwood (talk)04:11, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The section in the target article was moved toTraditional point-size names, where the Dutch name is still mentioned. Agree that this is too ambiguous and should bedeleted. –Thjarkur(talk)09:06, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget toGaramond (disambiguation) - I'm not sure how "too ambiguous" is a reason to delete when a disambiguation page exists. The disambiguation page of course mentions the font, and also has a section for "typography" which includes the article split from the current target.A7V2 (talk)01:53, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget toGaramond (disambiguation) (which I've cleaned up) and create any new redirects as required.Shhhnotsoloud (talk)09:07, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per above.{{R from incomplete disambiguation}} exists for situations like this.Thryduulf (talk)15:13, 3 October 2020 (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.

Ursicinus (Roman general)

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'stalk page or in adeletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion waskeep. I'm also going to tag those redirect pages withTemplate:R from incorrect name as suggested.(non-admin closure)Seventyfiveyears (talk)19:47, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Ursicinus (Roman general)Ursicinus (Roman general) →Ursicinus (magister equitum) (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

• Ursicinus (Roman General)Ursicinus (Roman General) →Ursicinus (magister equitum) (talk ·links ·history ·stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete both. "General" is an anachronistic rank for the subject, and discouraged perWP:ROMANS. Unlikely to help with disambiguation since a disambiguation page already exists.Avis11 (talk)03:00, 27 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Support Seems in line with guidelines.★Trekker (talk)18:54, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and tag with{{R from incorrect name}} (note that he's a member of two categories for generals). Sources such asBritannica and theOxford Classical Dictionary refer to Ursicinus as a general, and this is a useful qualifier since most of the other notable people named Ursicinus were religious figures. ROMANS may be a fine reason to avoid referring to him as such, in the article text or title, but I can't see how removing these is anything but a disservice to readers. --BDD (talk)21:05, 5 October 2020 (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.