Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 30: Difference between revisions

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. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 23:38, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Okapi#Common names for background

This supposed alternative name for the Okapi has been added repeatedly by two IPs: once in 2014 (rev. 598279984 and once in 2017 (rev. 804881518). It was removed in 2014 before the article went through the GA process (rev. 643298559), but by that time it had already disseminated through Wiki mirrors. A redirect was created from the term in 2017, I believe based on those mirrors/sources, despite not being present in the article.

Since then, somebody has tried to source the name, but it’s simply only present in circular references and mirrors. I’ve spent several hours looking for a pre-2014 or pre-2017 source for the name “zebra giraffe” and have been coming up pretty blank – nothing in Internet Archive, nothing in Google results sorted by date, and no real mentions in Google Books or Google Scholar prior to 2017. If this was a common name, I’d expect to find something. The redirect doesn’t get many views – I suspect some are curious people, typing in zebra, and wondering what on earth our auto-suggested “zebra giraffe” could be, weird spike in 2020 could have been an offsite link).

(NB: IP data is stale but I suspect they’re the same person – they both nearly exclusively edited articles on the same set of kids TV shows. I suspect they were a child, no idea about faith or competence ) GreenLipstickLesbian💌🦋 20:21, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• It seems like in the first half of the 1900s, they were occasionally referred to as a “zebra-giraffe” (including the hyphen maybe exclusively?) in news reports about their discovery/bring to Europe/America (from newspapers.com: [1] “is, in fact, a sort of zebra-giraffe”, [2] “Capturing alive the first okapi (zebra-giraffe)”, [3] “Okapi, Sir Harry Johnston’s short-horned zebra-giraffe”, [4] “… the okapi does not Inherit. The British Government is now engaged with experiments with this zebra-giraffe hybrid”). I think it is likely that adding it as a name at the top of our article caused it be used again. There’s a smattering of usages through the newspaper archive similar to the clips above but starting in 2014 after the first addition there’s [5] from Aug 2014 about an event at a zoo where the write-up says “visit with Corky, one of Brookfield Zoo’s okapi, also known as a zebra giraffe”, which sounds like Wikipedia. And then a Mark Trail Sunday strip from Sep 2014 has [6]. Okay so for this redirect, I am leaning toward a weak keep since it’s not totally a Wikipedia invention (if we ignore the hyphen) and maybe a useful search aid at this point as its out in the wild as I don’t think there’s anything else ever referred by this. But open to be convinced otherwise. I think the article itself should not include it bolded in the lead. Skynxnex (talk) 21:58, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep in light of Skynxnex’s findings and the fact that the term is still mentioned prominently mentioned. The discussion at Talk:Okapi#Common names has been inactive for a week. We should always be concerned about citogenesis but there doesn’t seem to be any dispute about whether this term is now used unambiguously to refer to Okapi. If the article is restructured in the future, editors should feel free to refine the target to a section where the history of the name is discussed. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 00:30, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep because the term is still around; I would assume the original redirect came from some version of this, considering the IP’s [history] (look at the edits before okapi) and location. Drew Stanley (talk) 16:05, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

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. ^Complex/_Rational 17:03, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

These redirects are a burden to maintain as the status of the ‘next’ election changes throughout time. At the recent RM Talk:2026 Israeli legislative election#Requested move 27 October 2025, there was consensus to move without leaving a redirect from the former article title, Next Israeli legislative election. Deleting these leftover redirects is consistent with the consensus of that discussion. Israel has a system of regularly scheduled elections every four years and early elections, which occur frequently. When early elections are called, new articles are quickly written on en-wiki. The date of the next Israeli election is often unknown because of the frequency of early, off-cycle elections. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:58, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

wow! did i really create the first one of these items? apparently this edit for Next Israeli parliamentary election says that i did! amazing! —Sm8900 (talk) 00:25, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Drew Stanley (talk) 16:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete per nom. ← Metallurgist (talk) 19:56, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

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. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 23:37, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

named “symmetric beta distribution” for decades, unused redirection Ethaniel (talk) 17:03, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep. The redirect is identical to the name used for the section heading. I suspect this nomination was in error since it has nothing to do with “symmetric beta distribution”. Otherwise it’s unclear why that was mentioned. In any case, this is an obvious keep. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:54, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

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. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 17:04, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Page created so that it could redirect to Indigenous Music Awards. However, the Canadian Aboriginal Music Awards are not the same as the Aboriginal Peoples’ Choice Music Awards, which became the Indigenous Music Awards. Msoul13 (talk) 15:53, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• According to The Canadian Encyclopedia, the Canadian Aboriginal Music Awards is the former name of the Indigenous Music Awards. The rest of the information I’ve found thus far doesn’t clarify things. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 00:17, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Based on the information from The Canadian Encyclopedia and at this link, I have added the former names to the article. So it seems the redirect from “Canadian Aboriginal Music Awards” to “Indigenous Music Awards” is appropriate and should remain. (On a side note, haven’t found anything that mentions the “Aboriginal Peoples’ Choice Music Awards” (emphasis added). Msoul13 (talk) 13:47, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Keep based on these findings. I found this article from the Winnipeg Free Press describing the name change from “Aboriginal Peoples Choice Music Awards” to “Indigenous Music Awards” in 2015. I found other sites of variable reliability using that former name (use of the apostrophe varies—Peoples, Peoples’, People’s). The situation is pretty unclear and probably warrants discussion on the article’s talk page, possibly with outreach to appropriate WikiProjects. That’s beyond the scope of this discussion and I’m satisfied that there is at least enough justification to keep this redirect. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:34, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

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. —BDD (talk) 04:01, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not really sure what circumstance would lead to a reader searching for “Southern and Eastern”, but the current target would almost certainly WP:ASTONISH most users. I have no preference regarding whether this should be retargeted (possibly to a page like “Global North and Global South“?), deleted, made into a disambiguation page, or left as is. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 14:21, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

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 14:19, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is an alternative name for a different compound [9] for which we have no content. Delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 08:29, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

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. —BDD (talk) 03:59, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not mentioned at the target and not synonymous. It can be caused by other infectious diseases such as yaws. It is mentioned in the article for one of the physicians who discovered it, Édouard Jeanselme, but not the other, Adolfo Lutz (except that the ‘See also’ includes a link to this redirect). Redirecting to one seems arbitrary. It is not listed at List of eponymous diseases. It could be added there but should not also redirect there as this would create a circular link. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫‍(talk) 23:37, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

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. No prejudice against recreation closer to the event if the name does pop up. —BDD (talk) 03:57, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No sources use this name for the tournament. Vestrian24Bio 02:33, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

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. Noting there are plenty of redlinks in that navbox. —BDD (talk) 03:54, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Topic unmentioned at target. None of the other California assembly elections redirect here. –Samoht27 (talk) 16:00, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).

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 Military Frontier#18th century. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 17:18, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RLANG – this seems to be Croatian for “regiment”, no particular affinity – Croatia isn’t even mentioned in the target. Rusalkii (talk) 21:00, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is pukovnija “regiment” and Pukovnija “Regiment”, the latter being a territorial division of (among others) the Austrian Military Frontier (“Original or official names of people, places, institutions, publications or products“). I will change the target to the relevant section of the Military Frontier article. Ⰻⱁⰲⰰⱀⱏ (ⰳⰾ) 23:18, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The target has been changed. Ⰻⱁⰲⰰⱀⱏ (ⰳⰾ) 16:10, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You need to wait until the RFD is over, also to clarify this user’s vote is NOT keep but retarget to Military Frontier#18th century Thepharoah17 (talk) 07:18, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Military Frontier#18th century. There is pukovnija “regiment” and Pukovnija “Regiment”, the latter being a territorial division of the Austrian Military Frontier (“Original or official names of people, places, institutions, publications or products“).

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Иованъ (talk • contribs) 01:37, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. 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).