Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 7

July 7

This is a list of redirects that have been proposed for deletion or other action on July 7, 2024.

Botswanan

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

It should redirect to Motswana. Not sure why this got reverted, the authority is wikitionary or however you spell it. Botswanan is not a proper word. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] OK I think I’ve made my point. 48JCL 01:54, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oops wrong place 48JCL 01:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @48JCL: I have reverted your bold retarget and restored the redirect with the RfD tag as nominated to allow for proper consensus to be reached on where to target this. As stated at WP:RFD, please do not unilaterally rename or change the target of a redirect while it is under discussion. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 04:27, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment 48JCL I think you maybe need to give a bit more of an argument for why it should be retargeted. Even if Botswanan isn't a "proper" word I think for most readers the main Botswana article is a good target; it also mentions the Tswana people in the lead paragraph for example. Skynxnex (talk) 15:22, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• "Botswanan" not being 'a proper word' isn't really an issue-- the question is if it's *a plausible word*. Adding an -n, -an, or -ian suffix to the name of a place is a typical English way of signifying "from this place" or "people from this place", see American, Mexican, Canadian, Italian, ect, just like "-ish" (English, Spanish, ect) or "-ese" (Japanese, Chinese, Portuguese, ect). I can easily see someone unfamiliar with the term Batswana to invent terms like Botswanese, Botswanish, or, yes, Botswanan.
  That said, I would Retarget to the Tswana DAB, simply to match the other 'from this place' words above. The searcher is clearly looking for information on *something* from Botswana- let's both inform them of the correct term, AND offer up the multiple meanings for said word. After all, who's to say they're not looking for the language they speak in Botswana? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment @Lunamann, the proper denonym is at Motswana. 48JCL 13:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That... definitely presents an issue, given part of the reason I targeted the Tswana DAB was its link to Tswana language; many demonyms also serve as a name for the language that group uses (see English, Chinese, German, ect); and given Botswanan is a made-up and incorrect demonym, there's really nothing stopping someone from also using it as an incorrect name for the language.

  The only idea I have is, to retarget to the Motswana DAB, and then add a See Also that targets the Tswana DAB? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 14:10, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Lunamann: Yes, that does seem to be a problem; I will ping Lefcentreright and John, who were able to somewhat eradicate the term from the Wikipedia and replace it with proper terms. 48JCL 22:33, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to the dab per Lunamann. The word appears in dictionaries (Cambridge, Oxford) and is used by reliable sources such as the United States Mission to the United Nations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, Cardiff University and Florida State University among others as well as lots of other sites I haven't bothered to assess for reliability. Even if it isn't a "proper word" (which seems doubtful given that evidence) it is very much a plausible search term. Thryduulf (talk) 16:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment What about creating a disambiguation page that points to Botswana, Tswana people and Tswana language? --Error (talk) 09:48, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I think this is the better solution. The sources that Thryduulf has included in their comment show that "Botswanan" refers just as much to the country itself as it does to the people or language. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 18:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I wouldn't be opposed to this. Support. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:39, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I have no objections to this. Thryduulf (talk) 10:36, 21 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Support this, sounds like the most helpful solution. BugGhost🪲👻 09:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I have no objections. If this is closed, the result would probably be like merge 2 articles and retarget to disambiguation. 48JCL 01:48, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is leading to agreement on a disambiguation page but it is unclear if the current redirect will be converted to it, or be targeted to a new disambiguation page that needs to be created.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Petapixel

• Petapixel → Gigapixel image  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Aside from the "Petapixel redirects here", not mentioned in page. I can't find any discussion of the concept of a petapixel image to see if it should be mentioned in the page, search results are completely shadowed by PetaPixel. Possibly this should redirect there? Rusalkii (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment peta- is an SI prefix. JoshuaAuble (talk) 19:15, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Fieari JoshuaAuble (talk) 02:21, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - The target doesn't discuss petapixel images by name because, to my knowledge, such a thing does not yet exist... yet if it did/when it does, it's basically the same thing as a gigapixel image except... moreso. As Joshua said above, peta is just an SI prefix after all. So I feel like the current target is a pretty good choice, and probably a better target than PetaPixel, which is a pretty low notability organization (not saying it needs to be AfD'd, just that it wouldn't make good WP:PTOPIC fare). Fieari (talk) 07:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Not even mentioned, much less explained or expounded upon, in the target article. Until such time as that occurs, this needs to be deleted as misleading and confusing. Softlavender (talk) 23:52, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Totally implausible search term and pointless redirect. As Rusalkii and Softlavender said, it's nonexistent and confusing. Fieari agrees with that as an equally elaborate rationale for deletion as the nominator's rationale, but with the inexplicably wrong conclusion. It's just another of this user's bunk redirects in a campaign to attempt to coin some pet jargon, so stop making them. — Smuckola(talk) 01:42, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This is not me making up new words, as petapixel image has redirected to gigapixel image since 2011. JoshuaAuble (talk) 19:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  My conclusion is the opposite of your simply because my criteria for conclusion has only two components: firstly, is it a plausible search? Peta is an SI prefix, two steps up from giga, and while nothing currently goes that far I can see someone using it a speculative fashion, so that checks plausible off for me. Secondly, is the target accurate? The target describes images with a very large number of pixels, which would cover what a petapixel image is. No other criteria for a redirect is really meaningful, and since this one meets both those criteria there's no harm in keeping it. Fieari (talk) 02:43, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The harm in keeping it is that is worse keeping it than deleting it, because it is not mentioned, much less explained, in the target article. If you want to add the term to the target article and cite it as relating to Gigapixel image, then this discussion would be moot. As it is, encyclopedic integrity demands that it be deleted. Softlavender (talk) 04:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or retarget to PetaPixel. Yes, you can probably figure out what this hypothetical term means if you land on the target. But it's not mentioned, and being a redlink or pointing to a different topic would convey it doesn't exist. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:54, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trial by jury

• Trial by jury → Jury trial  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Trial by Jury and Trial by jury go to completely different articles (the Gilbert and Sullivan opera and the legal system respectively). It's absolutely insane to have disambiguation by capitalization; clearly, the links from here to Jury trial should be replaced with a piped link. I don't think there's any other redirect where capitalisation makes a difference to which article you go to.

Trial by Jury has 581 uses, Trial by jury about 100. It would be far less disruptive to simply redirect to Trial by Jury. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 8.8% of all FPs.} 11:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:DIFFCAPS. You may feel that the policy is insane, but it's actually standard practice. Jury trial and Trial by Jury both have appropriate hatnotes, so there's little chance of confusion. - Eureka Lott 13:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: per Eureka Lott rationale. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 16:41, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voi.id

• Voi.id → Voice of Indonesia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Wrong target, and there isn't a right one: Voi.id is an entirely different entity from Voice of Indonesia (which uses voinews.id). Herostratus (talk) 06:39, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete/Retarget. Voice of Indonesia is a public new channels under Radio Republik Indonesia, while Voi.id is a private news channels. Despite their similar names, they are unrelated entities. Ckfasdf (talk) 15:33, 30 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 16:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 FIVB Men's Volleyball Nations League

• 2025 FIVB Men's Volleyball Nations League → FIVB Men's Volleyball Nations League  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mentioned at the target page and per WP:FUTURE. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 04:56, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Better be recreated as an future article if reliable sources exist. Ahri Boy (talk) 05:50, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League

• 2025 FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League → FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mentioned at the target page and per WP:FUTURE. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 04:52, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nabbit

• Nabbit → New Super Mario Bros. U#Gameplay  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The most recent RfD was closed as retarget based on Nabbit not being mentioned in List of Mario franchise characters. However, a section List of Mario franchise characters#Nabbit was added in September 2023. Should this redirect be changed to List of Mario franchise characters or should it remain at the current target which only mentions Nabbit twice in passing? Mia Mahey (talk) 02:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't think it's controversial to redirect to List of Mario franchise characters#Nabbit. In the (likely) event that the section is removed again, it would make sense to restore the New Super Mario Bros. U#Gameplay target, where the character is mentioned. czar 03:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There is consensus against removing the section. Mia Mahey (talk) 03:26, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Patterson

• Harry Patterson → Jack Higgins  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I propose to move the new disambiguation page, Harry Patterson (disambiguation), over this title. The current redirect subject, Jack Higgins, may well be a popular author, but his real name was "Henry Patterson" (not Harry), and he apparently only ever made limited use of the name "Harry Patterson", finally switching to "Jack Higgins" before he became famous; I therefore do not think there is a primary topic for the actual name, "Harry Patterson". BD2412 T 01:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Harry Patterson (disambiguation) 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 05:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]