Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

"WP:RFD" redirects here. For other requests for deletion, see Wikipedia:Deletion venues. For requests for discussion, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment. For reference desk, see Wikipedia:Reference desk.

XFD backlog

V	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Total
CfD	0	0	0	3	3
TfD	0	0	0	8	8
MfD	0	0	0	2	2
FfD	0	0	0	9	9
RfD	0	0	0	24	24
AfD	0	0	0	3	3

Redirects for discussion (RfD) is the place where potentially problematic redirects are discussed. Items usually stay listed for a week or so, after which they are deleted, kept, or retargeted.

• If you want to replace an unprotected redirect with an article, do not list it here. Turning redirects into articles is wholly encouraged. Be bold!
• If you want to move a page but a redirect is in the way, do not list it here. For non-controversial cases, place a technical request; if a discussion is required, then start a requested move.
• If you think a redirect points to the wrong target article, this is a good place to discuss the proper target.
• Redirects should not be deleted just because they have no incoming links. Please do not use this as the only reason to delete a redirect. However, redirects that do have incoming links are sometimes deleted, so that is not a sufficient condition for keeping. (See § When should we delete a redirect? for more information.)

Please do not unilaterally rename or change the target of a redirect while it is under discussion. This adds unnecessary complication to the discussion for participants and closers.

Before listing a redirect for discussion

Please be aware of these general policies, which apply here as elsewhere:

• Wikipedia:Redirect – what redirects are, why they exist, and how they are used.
• Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion – which pages can be deleted without discussion; in particular the "General" and "Redirects" sections.
• Wikipedia:Deletion policy – how we delete things by consensus.
• Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – guidelines on discussion format and shorthand.

The guiding principles of RfD

• The purpose of a good redirect is to eliminate the possibility that readers will find themselves staring blankly at "Search results 1–10 out of 378" instead of the article they were looking for. If someone could plausibly enter the redirect's name when searching for the target article, it's a good redirect.
• Redirects are cheap. They take up little storage space and use very little bandwidth. It doesn't really hurt things if there are a few of them scattered around. On the flip side, deleting redirects is also cheap because recording the deletion takes up little storage space and uses very little bandwidth. There is no harm in deleting problematic redirects.
• If a good-faith RfD nomination proposes to delete a redirect and has no discussion after at least 7 days, the default result is delete.
• Redirects nominated in contravention of Wikipedia:Redirect will be speedily kept.
• RfD can also serve as a central discussion forum for debates about which page a redirect should target. In cases where retargeting the redirect could be considered controversial, it is advisable to leave a notice on the talk page of the redirect's current target page or the proposed target page to refer readers to the redirect's nomination to allow input and help form consensus for the redirect's target.
• Requests for deletion of redirects from one page's talk page to another's do not need to be listed here. Anyone can remove the redirect by blanking the page. The G6 criterion for speedy deletion may be appropriate.
• In discussions, always ask yourself whether or not a redirect would be helpful to the reader.

When should we delete a redirect?

Further information: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Common outcomes and Wikipedia:Moving a page § Moving over a redirect

The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:

• a redirect may contain non-trivial edit history;
• if a redirect is reasonably old (or is the result of moving a page that has been there for quite some time), then it is possible that its deletion will break incoming links (such links coming from older revisions of Wikipedia pages, from edit summaries, from other Wikimedia projects or from elsewhere on the internet, do not show up in "What links here").

Therefore consider the deletion only of either harmful redirects or of recent ones.

Reasons for deleting

See also: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § Redirects

You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met (but note also the exceptions listed below this list):

1. The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. For example, if the user searches for "New Articles", and is redirected to a disambiguation page for "Articles", it would take much longer to get to the newly added articles on Wikipedia.
2. The redirect might cause confusion. For example, if "Adam B. Smith" was redirected to "Andrew B. Smith", because Andrew was accidentally called Adam in one source, this could cause confusion with the article on Adam Smith, so the redirect should be deleted.
3. The redirect is offensive or abusive, such as redirecting "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs" (unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is legitimately discussed in the article), or "Joe Bloggs" to "Loser". (Speedy deletion criterion G10 and G3 may apply.) See also § Neutrality of redirects.
4. The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam. (Speedy deletion criterion G11 may apply.)
5. The redirect makes no sense, such as redirecting "Apple" to "Orange". (Speedy deletion criterion G1 may apply.)
6. It is a cross-namespace redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. The major exception to this rule are the pseudo-namespace shortcut redirects, which technically are in the main article space. Some long-standing cross-namespace redirects are also kept because of their long-standing history and potential usefulness. "MOS:" redirects, for example, were an exception to this rule until they became their own namespace in 2024. (Note also the existence of namespace aliases such as WP:. Speedy deletion criterion R2 may apply if the target namespace is something other than Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help:, or Portal:.)
7. If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to an article that does not exist, it can be immediately deleted under speedy deletion criterion G8. You should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first and that it has not become broken through vandalism.
8. If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects in a language other than English to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created. (Implausible typos or misnomers are candidates for speedy deletion criterion R3, if recently created.)
9. If the target article needs to be moved to the redirect title, but the redirect has been edited before and has a history of its own, then the title needs to be freed up to make way for the move. If the move is uncontroversial, tag the redirect for G6 speedy deletion, or alternatively (with the suppressredirect user right; available to page movers and admins), perform a round-robin move. If not, take the article to Requested moves.
10. If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.

Reasons for not deleting

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

1. They have a potentially useful page history, or an edit history that should be kept to comply with the licensing requirements for a merge (see Wikipedia:Merge and delete). On the other hand, if the redirect was created by renaming a page with that name, and the page history just mentions the renaming, and for one of the reasons above you want to delete the page, copy the page history to the Talk page of the article it redirects to. The act of renaming is useful page history, and even more so if there has been discussion on the page name.
2. They would aid accidental linking and make the creation of duplicate articles less likely, whether by redirecting a plural to a singular, by redirecting a frequent misspelling to a correct spelling, by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term, by redirecting to a synonym, etc. In other words, redirects with no incoming links are not candidates for deletion on those grounds because they are of benefit to the browsing user. Some extra vigilance by editors will be required to minimize the occurrence of those frequent misspellings in article text because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links; consider tagging the redirect with the {{R from misspelling}} template to assist editors in monitoring these misspellings.
3. They aid searches on certain terms. For example, users who might see the "Keystone State" mentioned somewhere but do not know what that refers to will be able to find out at the Pennsylvania (target) article.
4. Deleting redirects runs the risk of breaking incoming or internal links. For example, redirects resulting from page moves should not normally be deleted without good reason. Links that have existed for a significant length of time, including CamelCase links (e.g. WolVes) and old subpage links, should be left alone in case there are any existing links on external pages pointing to them. See also Wikipedia:Link rot § Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites.
5. Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways. Evidence of usage can be gauged by using the wikishark or pageviews tool on the redirect to see the number of views it gets.
6. The redirect is to a closely related word form, such as a plural form to a singular form.

Neutrality of redirects

Just as article titles using non-neutral language are permitted in some circumstances, so are such redirects. Because redirects are less visible to readers, more latitude is allowed in their names, therefore perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion. In most cases, non-neutral but verifiable redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term. Non-neutral redirects may be tagged with {{R from non-neutral name}}.

Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:

1. Articles that are created using non-neutral titles are routinely moved to a new neutral title, which leaves behind the old non-neutral title as a working redirect (e.g. Climategate → Climatic Research Unit email controversy).
2. Articles created as POV forks may be deleted and replaced by a redirect pointing towards the article from which the fork originated (e.g. Barack Obama Muslim rumor → deleted and now redirected to Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories).
3. The subject matter of articles may be represented by some sources outside Wikipedia in non-neutral terms. Such terms are generally avoided in Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. For instance the non-neutral expression "Attorneygate" is used to redirect to the neutrally titled Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy. The article in question has never used that title, but the redirect was created to provide an alternative means of reaching it because a number of press reports use the term.

The exceptions to this rule would be redirects that are not established terms and are unlikely to be useful, and therefore may be nominated for deletion, perhaps under deletion reason #3. However, if a redirect represents an established term that is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources, it should be kept even if non-neutral, as it will facilitate searches on such terms. Please keep in mind that RfD is not the place to resolve most editorial disputes.

Closing notes

Details at Administrator instructions for RfD

Nominations should remain open, per policy, about a week before they are closed, unless they meet the general criteria for speedy deletion, the criteria for speedy deletion of a redirect, or are not valid redirect discussion requests (e.g. are actually move requests).

How to list a redirect for discussion

STEP I.	Tag the redirect(s).   Enter {{subst:rfd|content= at the very beginning of the redirect page you are listing for discussion and enter }} at the very end of the page. Please do not mark the edit as minor (m). Please include in the edit summary the phrase: Nominated for RfD: see [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]]. Save the page ("Publish changes"). If you are unable to edit the redirect page because of protection, this step can be omitted, and after step 2 is completed, a request to add the RFD template can be put on the redirect's talk page. If the redirect you are nominating is in template namespace, consider adding |showontransclusion=1 to the RfD tag so that people using the template redirect are aware of the nomination. If you are nominating multiple redirects as a group, repeat all the above steps for each redirect being nominated.
STEP II.	List the entry on RfD.  Click here to edit the section of RfD for today's entries. Enter this text below the date heading: {{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName|target=TargetArticle|text=The action you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for that action.}} ~~~~ For this template: Put the redirect's name in place of RedirectName, put the target article's name in place of TargetArticle, and include a reason after text=. Note that, for this step, the "target article" is the current target of the redirect (if you have a suggestion for a better target, include this in the text that you insert after text=). Please use an edit summary such as: Nominating [[RedirectName]] (replacing RedirectName with the name of the redirect you are nominating). To list multiple related redirects for discussion, use the following syntax. Repeat line 2 for N number of redirects: {{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName1|target=TargetArticle1}} {{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectName2|target=TargetArticle2}} {{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectNameN|target=TargetArticleN|text=The actions you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for those actions.}} ~~~~ If the redirect has had previous RfDs, you can add {{Oldrfdlist|previous RfD without brackets|result of previous RfD}} directly after the rfd2 template. If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
STEP III.	Notify users.   It is generally considered good practice to notify the creator and main contributors of the redirect(s) that you nominate. To find the main contributors, look in the page history of the respective redirect(s). For convenience, the template {{subst:Rfd notice|RedirectName}} ~~~~ may be placed on the creator/main contributors' user talk page to provide notice of the discussion. Please replace RedirectName with the name of the respective creator/main contributors' redirect and use an edit summary such as: Notice of redirect discussion at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]] Notices about the RfD discussion may also be left on relevant talk pages.

• Please consider using What links here to locate other redirects that may be related to the one you are nominating. After going to the redirect target page and selecting "What links here" in the toolbox on the left side of your computer screen, select both "Hide transclusions" and "Hide links" filters to display the redirects to the redirect target page.

Current list

November 27

September 2017 bridge incident

• September 2017 bridge incident → PewDiePie#2017–2018: media controversies, streaming, and formatted shows  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No clue what this is supposed to mean in context to the target. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 06:47, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• This refers to the PUBG Battlegrounds racial slur incident described in the fourth paragraph, which became known in internet lore as "the bridge incident" ([1]). However it's fairly obscure (when we take into account WP:SYSTEMICBIAS) and an even more obscure search term for it. Retarget to 2017 Mumbai stampede, a disaster that occurred in September 2017 on an overcrowded footbridge, with multiple fatalities. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Unlikely search term for the stampede. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:40, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

⚭/equaric unicodes

• ⚣ → Gay men  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• ⚢ → LGBTQ symbols  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

anon IP changed status quo of the Achillean/gay symbol. But the gay men and lesbian pages don't mention the unicodess specifically, only the image. Also that also means sapphism in general. --MikutoH ^talk! 02:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep 1st, Retarget 2nd to Lesbian I see that lesbianism is the primary subject to the second and the first redirects to the primary subject. Kolano123 (talk) 19:59, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

It would also be consistent with ⚤. I also noticed that ⚣ never had the current target before, but the gay men page didn't exist when it was created. They were retargeted two times by Leif Runenritzer and Kwamikagami. Also @Gaismagorm: Any comment? --MikutoH ^talk! 03:36, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Honestly I'd say Keep second and Retarget first to LGBTQ symbols since I feel like nobody is gonna be searching up the unicode symbol and looking for the article on gay men or lesbian, and instead will likely be looking for info on the symbol itself. Gaismagorm (talk) 11:33, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:36, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Cilla Single

• Cilla Single → Benjamin Franklin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Can't find where Ben Frank ever used this as a pseudonym. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:55, 20 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• Unsure at the moment. A Google search for this term doesn't bring up anything showing how it's related Benjamin Franklin (neither does one for both this term and "Benjamin Franklin"), and mostly talks about stuff relating to Cilla Black or Cilla The Musical. I'm not sure of the connection either, but Rich Farmbrough, who created this redirect, might know. Regards, SONIC678 01:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. I can't find a shred of evidence that this name has any association to the target whatsoever. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep I've added a reference to the redirect. Ben Franklin had a lot of pen names, as did Daniel Defoe. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 19:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC).
  

  Which I've reverted, since you removed the RFD tag, and it should be either here or on the talk page of the redirect, or both. I did check it, and there's no mention on the page you gave, but there is a few pages later. It's a single bare listing, with no context or corroboration. Given that no one else has been able to able to verify this, I'm dubious of the reliability of the source, and if nothing else, the usefulness. Furthermore, given how many other entries from this book you've created, it would seem to be a mass creation in violation of your current editing restrictions. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  No, this is not a mass creation contrary to Rich's editing restrictions. @35.139.154.158: your repeated references to Rich's restrictions where they definitely don't apply is bordering on harassment at this point. Knock it off.

  Rich, adding references to redirects is odd, readers typically don't see the content of redirects. Is there a way to add this information to the article instead? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 23:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  Eh, fine. My points about the redirect itself though still stand. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 00:05, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  The reference is not for readers, it's for RfD regulars. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 17:07, 22 November 2024 (UTC).
  

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:34, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Benjamin Franklin (swim coach)

• Benjamin Franklin (swim coach) → Benjamin Franklin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

HUH??? TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 01:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• It's true Ca ^{talk to me!} 04:43, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Add a mention to "Interests and Activities" section and redirect there. There are surprising amount of literature on this. Ca ^{talk to me!} 04:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Even if true, and even if mentioned, having a disambiguator like that is needlessly silly and pointless, since that's not what he's known for, and makes it sound like the disambiguator is there to distinguish someone else of the same name, notable for a different reason. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:21, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  cf. Benjamin Franklin (clergyman) (which is someone else), vs. Benjamin Franklin (statesman) (which is not, so there's no such link) 35.139.154.158 (talk) 04:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  Readers might be looking for content about Franklin as a swim coach. Ca ^{talk to me!} 04:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  If they are, then they'd probably just go to the page and ctrl+f swimming, rather than enter an implausible disambiguator in their search. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Refine to Benjamin Franklin#Interests and activities and add a mention there per Ca's findings and some of my own. People might be interested in finding out his endeavors as a swim coach in addition to his other ones, and there's a lot of literature to back this up. Regards, SONIC678 06:25, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  This is a misuse of a disambguator; see WP:DAB, which explains the purpose is to differentiate articles. If someone wants to know about a particular aspect of BF's life, they'll just look up the article on BF; no one's going to type in a random disambiguator on the off chance it'll save them a ctrl-F or a few spins of the scroll wheel. And again, the existence of this is misleading, as it seems to imply that it's for a different person of the same name, rather than the extremely well known PTOPIC. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 06:42, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per 35.139.154.158. Not what redirects are for. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:28, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:33, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

2024 AP Poll

• 2024 AP Poll → 2024 NCAA Division I FBS football rankings#AP Poll  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Seems ambigous but I'm not totally sure what would be a better target. Could refer to 2024–25 NCAA Division I men's basketball rankings, 2023–24 NCAA Division I men's basketball rankings, 2023–24 NCAA Division I women's basketball rankings, 2024–25 NCAA Division I women's basketball rankings. But college football is the only one that only uses 2024. Esolo5002 (talk) 04:23, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Unmentioned Pikmin 2 caves

• Hole of Heroes → Pikmin 2  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Glutton's Kitchen → Pikmin 2  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Submerged Castle → Pikmin 2  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These caves aren't mentioned in the target article (and weren't at the time the Hole of Heroes one, which was always a redirect, was created). As for the other two, they began as articles on their respective caves (see here and here for what the articles looked like before they were turned into redirects) until Combination redirected them to the main article in November 2006 (when they actually were mentioned before Abryn removed them with this edit in October 2008 to trim down the page) because, in their summary for the Submerged Castle one, there [was] absolutely no reason for this to be kept separate from the Pikmin 2 article. Unlike Dream Den, which is worth keeping because that cave actually is mentioned in the article and has plot relevance, I'm not sure we need to keep these redirects when their respective caves aren't mentioned in the target article. Regards, SONIC678 01:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:20, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

DuPage 3

• DuPage 3 → DuPage County, Illinois  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Du Page 3 → DuPage County, Illinois  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Group of neighborhoods previously WP:BLARd no longer mentioned in target article. Delete unless it is mentioned somewhere else. -1ctinus📝🗨 00:10, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment Maybe Illinois = Ill = III = 3? All the best: Rich Farmbrough 17:10, 22 November 2024 (UTC).

  No, this is from the article before the merger: The Du Page 3 refers to the Chicago suburbs of Burr Ridge, Hinsdale, and Oak Brook. Not mentioned in the article. -1ctinus📝🗨 22:51, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
  

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 01:11, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank Goodness

• Thank Goodness → Wicked (musical)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Isn't that a bit too vague to be specific too a play? TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:23, 20 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• Delete per nom -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 01:28, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to wikt:thank goodness. Web-julio (talk) 02:35, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Weak keep since it's capitalized and actually a title mentioned at the target. I'd be surprised if this weren't the title of anything else, in which case a dab might be appropriate, but I didn't find anything after a quick search. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:11, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keeep per 35. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 17:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC).
  

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra ‹ u — c › 00:34, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Athletic Field (Seattle)

• Athletic Field (Seattle) → Championship Field  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous title which does not have any mention at the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:25, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

November 26

Perry Smith (murder)

• Perry Smith (murder) → Perry Edward Smith  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The word "murder" is not a synonym of "murderer". Perry Smith (murderer) already exists. This page has a significant number of pageviews, most likely because it appears in the search suggestions when typing "Perry Smith"; Perry Smith (murderer) does not (at least on my environment, Firefox 128 on macOS 12). – dudhhr ^talk_contribs^she_her 21:41, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

This is the only redirect to the biography of a murderer of this form. A Quarry search for page titles containing "(murder)" found only this redirect, Black widow (murder), and 187 (murder); the latter two are not redirects to murderers. – dudhhr ^talk_contribs^she_her 21:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom, incorrect disambiguator, and bonus points for doing the quarry query. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - Perry Smith was not murdered, to my knowledge. Fieari (talk) 23:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Chowda

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

it cannot be understated how hard i laughed seeing this, my entire head hurts. created as a phonetic spelling of the boston accent, though results are torn between some english product (or is it a brand?), some unnotable musician, and the character from the tv series, and i still doubt a case like this would be worth keeping. created by a user who was blocked for "ridiculous redirects", so there's that too cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:15, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep as it's a legitimate, though informal, regional term, but maybe change the target article to clam chowder. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 20:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to The Boy Who Knew Too Much (The Simpsons)#Plot, a pretty well known gag from the series, probably what inspired the redirect. Although not explicitly spelled as "chowda" in the article, it is mentioned "with a Boston accent", which is how that would typically be done. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 20:24, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget to The Boy Who Knew Too Much (The Simpsons)#Plot, per the IP above. BarntToust 21:43, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Nazi persecution of Jews

• Nazi persecution of Jews → History of the Jews in Germany#Jews under the Nazis (1933–45)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Persecution of Jews § Nazi Germany might be a better target. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:39, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• The current target has much more information, although the section is wrong (it's currently History of the Jews in Germany#Under the Nazis (1933–45)). Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 20:31, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Sentencing enhancement

• Sentencing enhancement → Hate crime laws in the United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no reason that sentencing enhancements should re-direct to US hate crime laws. Notwithstanding the fact that this is US centric, there are a plethora of other factors which might go into sentencing enhancements that aren't hate crimes, such as the use of a deadly weapon, or crimes against children. This would be a good candidate for a standalone article. Lenny Marks (talk) 18:59, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Alright; should that article be at sentencing enhancement or somewhere else? I know that mandatory sentencing may be a related concept in some cases. Arlo James Barnes 19:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm not sure to be honest; At the moment, there doesn't appear to be an appropriate section in Sentence (law), but I'm not sure if it would be best as its own article or part of a broader one. -- Lenny Marks (talk) 21:48, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I suspect the current target was chosen because hate crime laws are often used as a sentencing enhancement tool... but the topic is notable enough (in that you can find a lot of writing about it out there) that I agree it could be worthy of an article in and of itself. A section under Sentence (law) should be added as a minimum. Maybe both-- a short summary in Sentence (law) and an article on its own with more detail. This gets talked about a lot in reliable sources. Fieari (talk) 23:15, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Música mexicana

• Música mexicana → Music of Mexico  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Musique canadienne → Music of Canada  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete both as clear cases of WP:FORRED; they're sum-of-parts phrases with no link to the target other than it being a language spoken there.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 35.139.154.158 (talk • contribs) 18:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Thanks for signing...I guess I forgot which templates added sigs automatically 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:21, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  twinkle does that. i love me some twinkle cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• keep. redirects from other languages to topics actually associated with said languages are fine and dandy. does this count as a "keep per nom"? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  But what FORRED says to keep are "Original or official names of people, places, institutions, publications or products", but delete "Common words or concepts". This isn't any sort of official name of anything; it's just an abstract concept (music), a common term, that we have an article about restricted to a particular country. Nor should we create foreign-language redirects for "Economy of [country]" in every language spoken in [country], or for "Tourism in [country]", etc etc. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:30, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  "common words or concepts" would refer to música and musique as redirects to music, for example. if an article is about something from a certain place or language (or manifestations of culture with special significance in areas where that language is spoken, as forred refers to it), it should be all good

  but yes, i do agree that there's little reason to create them, it's time better spent indiscriminately nominating other redirects~ or i guess adding stuff to articles cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

2025 Buffalo Bills season

• 2025 Buffalo Bills season → Buffalo Bills  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No relevant information at the target, making it a misleading redirect. WP:TOOSOON. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Affordable Care Act (version 2)

• Affordable Care Act (version 2) → Affordable Care Act  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Useless and confusing. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:34, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

ooh, i was getting on those. if at the pace expected of a procrastinator. speedy delete per g6, as a botched or unfinished move cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 17:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete there doesn't appear to be anything in the history worth keeping. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:21, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Move without redirect to Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act at WP:RMTM to fix incomplete pageswap move. Per #Rule 34 (Internet meme) (version 2). Hyphenation Expert (talk) 23:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Hut-on-the-rock

• Hut-on-the-rock → List of Harry Potter characters#The Dursleys  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This location may be a somewhat important one in the first Harry Potter book (it's where Hagrid gives Harry his letter and tells him he's a wizard); but it isn't mentioned in the target article, the book's article, or even at Places in Harry Potter. The redirect started out as an article about the place in August 2003 (see the last article version here) before it was redirected a little less than two weeks later to the nonexistent Petunia Evans Dursley (which I'm not sure really existed), and then to Dursley (a town in England from which J. K. Rowling got the Dursleys' surname; to be fair, the article did mention the Dursleys below the information about Dursley for a time before that was removed later), and then stayed there for over three years before finally going to Dursley family (where the Hut-on-the-Rock wasn't mentioned even at the time of redirection). From there, the history consists of changing the target (mostly fixing double redirects) and The Transhumanist adding a {{R to section}} template in 2018. Because of this, I think this redirect should be deleted, as the Hut-on-the-Rock isn't mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia (and hasn't been for many years). Thoughts? Regards, SONIC678 16:48, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

2024 Jew arrest warrants

• 2024 Jew arrest warrants → International Criminal Court arrest warrants for Israeli figures  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

1. Deif is not a Jew.
2. Calling this "Jew arrest warrants" is problematic, conflating being a Jew with being an Israeli. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:45, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

delete per nom Mason7512 (talk) 18:26, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Get rid, POV nonsense.Selfstudier (talk) 16:52, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

delete, per nom and as vague. i'm pretty sure there's more than one place with jewish people in the world, and more than one instance of arrest warrants for said people cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:56, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

delete as the editor who made this, based on #2 criteria. But #1? the article itself is titled "Israeli figures", which excludes the fact that Mohammed Deif is Palestinian. That may be a problem as the article currently treats him as a footnote. BarntToust 17:05, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

There's ongoing discussion on the article talk page about the title. AntiDionysius (talk) 17:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

delete: both troubling and not a plausibly necessary redirect AntiDionysius (talk) 17:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per everyone above. This redirect falsely implies that Jews are Israeli, and the Israeli are Jewish (the vast majority are; but over 25% combined are Christian, Muslim, Druze, and other faiths), and plus it seems kind of antisemitic to have this redirect lying around. Jews are far more than those who are Israeli (there are other countries with large Jewish populations as well, like the United States, France, the United Kingdom, and Canada; plus countless other countries with smaller percentages), and arrest warrants are issued every day worldwide to people regardless of faith (or lack of faith), and additionally there are many Jews and Israeli who don't support the Israeli government's actions. I think it's best to do without this redirect for all these reasons. Regards, SONIC678 19:47, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per others; clearly a bad-faith, pointy creation. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 19:53, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Speedy delete as a serious violation of WP:NPOV. Conflating Jews with Israelis is not a good look. Esolo5002 (talk) 19:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Speedy delete per above. Flip^andFlopped ツ 21:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete as per above comments. --Michail (blah) 22:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. I don't know if the speedy deletion criteria apply, but I would support a.... err, rapid deletion per WP:SNOW. Fieari (talk) 01:10, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipaedo

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy deleted per WP:CSD#G10

Hawaiian style

• Hawaiian style → Pizza  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

was about to retarget to hawaiian pizza, but i realized that there are at least two other things that can be considered "hawaiian style". maybe even more! also see the history. it's not important to this discussion, but it is really funny cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 14:16, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep as redirect to pizza, although redirecting to Hawaiian pizza is worth a thought (the only difference is the pineapple, which I don't think is considered Canadian as much as a universal ingredient). It's lucky that at least two fruits, pineapples and tomatoes, go well on pizzas (are any other fruits commonly used as a pizza topping?). As for your alternates, don't try it on a surfboard. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  i was actually thinking of acoustic guitars and shaved ice, two things widely known for being closely related cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 15:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

see also hawaii-style pizza and hawaiian-style pizza, which do redirect to hawaiian pizza, but make sure to specify that it's about pizza cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 15:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete there is such a thing as Hawaiian fashion. Such as Hawaiian shirt, etc -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep as a disambiguation page It is plausible to me that someone could search for "Hawaiian style", and legitimately be searching for either Hawaiian Pizza or Aloha Shirt. I'm not sure what the other things cogsan is referring to as other possible target articles, but the benefit of a disambiguation page is that they could be added if appropriate. Flip^andFlopped ツ 21:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  a lot of things related to its culture, like cuisine (excluding the pizza, as it ironically has nothing to do with hawaii), media, music, funny shirts, and most importantly(?), the coincidentally named canned pineapple brand that a type of pizza is named after. then again, "style" is a little too subjective for my tastes (could refer to fashion, art styles, how they season their meat...), so i'm actually against a dab cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 22:20, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Disambig as multiple topics of prominence: "uh-huhuhehuhuhuhg, yeah, Beavis, we'll take it Hawaiian style, ugh-huhuhughuhug." On another note, after I get done with the page I've G-nom'd, I think I've got a new article idea... BarntToust 21:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• DABify - With, at minimum, a reference to Hawaiian pizza and Aloha shirt, with potential for further options. Amazingly, I can't currently find a direct mention of Hawaiian pizza in the pizza article, nor in the Pizza in the United States article, and I definitely think it should be at least in the latter of those. I just don't have the time to look up references at this moment... Fieari (talk) 01:18, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

  Ooops, my search-fu was weak, in an embarrassingly silly way. Hawaiian pizza exists, and it doesn't appear in the Pizza in the United States article because it originated in Canada, not Hawaii, and does in fact appear in the Pizza in Canada article. It probably still deserves a mention in the pizza article, as I personally feel it has enough notoriety for that, but it's less of a concern now. Fieari (talk) 01:33, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Australia.

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

per other redirects with pointless periods. has incoming links in some user pages, evidently all by accident cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 14:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. per the most recent discussions like Los Angeles. and Canada.. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:24, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:UNNATURAL. – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:22, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Emirates Flight 5001

• Emirates Flight 5001 → Qantas Flight 1  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• EK5001 → Qantas Flight 1  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• EK5101 → Qantas Flight 1  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Emirates Flight 5101 → Qantas Flight 1  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No sources showing this flight number was ever associated with the target page. Tube·of·Light 09:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. QF1 flew via Dubai from 2013 to 2018, during which it had EK5001 as a codeshare number. But this has no relevance to the topic of the article, which is the 1999 accident. This is a problem inherent to Wikipedia's naming conventions for airline accident/incident articles when the flight number is not retired, as readers may (reasonably but incorrectly) assume from the title that it's about the route (which Wikipedia generally deems non-notable) rather than the accident/incident. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:07, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Comment: EK5001, EK5101 and Emirates Flight 5101 should also be added to this discussion. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:08, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Added them. Tube·of·Light 12:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Cnada

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

Typo with random "a" missing. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:07, 12 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: pageviews show that this is a highly used redirect. Alternatively retarget with hatnote to New Animal Drug Application#Types, where a CNADA is discussed, but given that that article receives less than half as many pageviews as this redirect such a retarget is probably unwarranted. J947 ‡ ^edits 23:18, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

  Duplicate !vote struck. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:09, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 23:46, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. Plenty of pageviews, and I expect that the vast majority of people using this are looking for Canada, rather than the drug, as this seems a plausible typo to me. – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:36, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete as an arbitrary typo, no more deserving of a redirect than any other typo; let Mediawiki suggest possible matches rather than trying to make billions of redirects ourselves. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:50, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:37, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - it's a frequent typo and this redirect is helping those who make it, and this can be seen in the stats. If we "let Mediawiki suggest matches" it would mean that the top result would be Cnidaria, which is not helpful. Deleting things just for the sake of it is rarely helpful. BugGhost🦗👻 15:50, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:24, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Could you expand on this? The nom is a sock striked description of the redirect with no verbalised opinion or rationale given, so this "per nom" makes no sense to me BugGhost🦗👻 00:02, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Crouch, Swale It's also identical to your previous reply earlier in this listing. BugGhost🦗👻 08:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

  Duplicate !vote struct but I still agree with the nom even if its been struck per WP:SOCKSTRIKE. Swatching a word in a name is implausable and every word could have this kind of typo like Lnodon or Uinted States. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:09, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep, plausible typo based on page views. (I'm fairly confident I've used this one). Plus WP:CHEAP. Esolo5002 (talk) 19:58, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete – a person can just type the right thing in. BarntToust 22:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

X in in Y, part 2

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Withdrawn by nominator

• Sonic678, you might have created the correct redirects but these "bad" ones still remain. I think they are worth considering for deletion if you want to reopen this discussion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Ac/DC

• Ac/DC → AC/DC  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unnecessary redirect; When would a user have AC lowercased and DC uppercased? Hexware (talk) 16:30, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. HorrorLover555 (talk) 19:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Seems like textbook WP:CHEAP to me with no chance of ambiguity. Steel1943 (talk) 21:35, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

  We do have an entire AC/DC (disambiguation) ;; and the non-music electrical topic; the war of the currents between Tesla and Edison -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:41, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Harmless. And I'm not convinced the band is primary anyway, but assuming it is there's no reason it's not primary for the miscapitalization that's correct for nothing. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:40, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete recently created mix of lower and uppercase. If this was an old redirect, I would have agreed to keep. I see no reason for editors to create new redirects with half-and-half cases. Jay 💬 15:31, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per Jay. Harmless, but recently created. Mdewman6 (talk) 08:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 05:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

keep. while the inconsistent capitalization hurts me as much as people who use "it's" as the possessive form of "it" (do y'all say "hi's"?), it's not really implausible in any way. at this point, it's kind of not recent anymore, so there goes that, i guess cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:41, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

no big opinion on retargeting to the dab, by the way cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:41, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - Textbook WP:CHEAP. I prefer not to target the DAB directly, the hatnote at the current target is enough to catch other use cases... the band does have some claim to WP:PTOPIC here. To flip nom's rational: Deletion of this redirect is unnecessary. Fieari (talk) 06:48, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Segmented Crawbster

• Segmented Crawbster → Pikmin 2  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is the boss of the Cavern of Chaos, who used to have an article (see here for the article) for about eight minutes on December 29, 2009 before it was retargeted to the article for breaching WP:NOTHOWTO. The enemy isn't mentioned in the target article, and it wasn't at the time its article was turned into a redirect, potentially making this also fall afoul of WP:GAMECRUFT. I'm leaning towards deletion, but I'm open to other outcomes. Thoughts? Regards, SONIC678 04:42, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 04:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

delete per nom. should be a clear-cut case of cruft cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:09, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

2026 NASCAR Cup Series

• 2026 NASCAR Cup Series → NASCAR Cup Series  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It seems WP:TOOSOON to know much about this season, since it isn't mentioned in the target article. A Google search does bring up some articles with predictions and details so far about the season, but I'm not 100% sure that really warrants a redirect to the current target or creation of an article. As such a situation, I'm torn between deleting and stubifying this redirect, but I'm open to other courses of action if possible, and I'd like to hear your thoughts about it. Regards, SONIC678 04:47, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

it's easy. just grab a time machine and a gun, kill chronos to death, take his place, and tape the years together!

or delete per nom, i guess. we can wait until at least late 2025 for articles about 2026, since predictions alone aren't worth much in this case cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:59, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

List of Cuphead speedrunning records

• List of Cuphead speedrunning records → Speedrunning#History  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The game Cuphead is not mentioned in that article, let alone a list of records. QuicoleJR (talk) 03:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete I didn't find any mention of speedrunning on Cuphead as well. Ca ^{talk to me!} 03:25, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Comment. This was a BLAR from 2020 (the list was in place for about 8 months prior). Maybe it would be better to restore and PROD it, just to cross our Ts and such? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:14, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Formula One (Psygnosis video game series)

• Formula One (Psygnosis video game series) → Formula One (video game series)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unused redirect. Formula One (Studio Liverpool video game series) is barely notable enough as disambiguation, and the Psygnosis one was not notable enough for any use. MimirIsSmart (talk) 02:02, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep, textbook {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 14:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep redirect is accurate and formulated properly - 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Gros tournois

• Gros tournois → Tornesel  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Reasons for deletion #5 - incorrect / nonsensical. The Gros tournois is a French coin instituted by Louis IX in the 13th century, not part of the Italian coinage tradition, making the redirect not useful (either requiring inclusion of French coinage information under Tornesel which refers specifically to Italian coins or - as is currently the case - omitting completely to mention the gros tournois in the article, making the redirect less useful for people who want to know about the gros tournois. See w:fr:Gros tournois (& other language wikipedias). This page is linked to by few pages, most notably Groat (English coin), French franc and Groschen, where all three state it is a French coin, so this redirect would be WP:ASTONISHING for readers since the redirect target's content appears to contradict the initial context of the link. Shazback (talk) 01:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

The redirect was created in 2008 when there were preciously few relevant articles on such topics, so that was a best-effort approximation. I am not in favour of deletion, but if OP knows about it, why not simply make a short article out of it? That would solve the incongruence and serve our readers. Constantine ✍ 15:07, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Personally I dislike creating articles directly into mainspace - in particular when I am far, far from knowledgeable on the topic. I have added creating this article to the list of things I would like to do, but I think in the meantime it is reasonable to not keep a "wrong" redirection. Shazback (talk) 01:39, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Zirabagtaria

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

Per the previous deletion discussion. (Not G4-able since it's a new target.) voorts (talk/contributions) 00:12, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nomination. This user created article Kimberellomorpha but either way that should be deleted as invalid taxon.(Wikipedia:Fringe_theories/Noticeboard#Precambrian_chitons_and_another_reports_by_Mark_McMenamin) Ta-tea-two-te-to (talk) 00:36, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

November 25

Cicindela redirects

• Cicindela (Calomera) → Cicindela  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Cicindela (Cicindelidia) → Cicindela  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Subgenera, or species for that matter, should not redirect back to the genus unless they are significantly discussed there. Suggest retargetting to the appropriate sections of List of Cicindela species, where they are discussed, or deleting. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 23:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment: Speaking as the creator of these redirects, I have no personal preference here, but I point out that these two redirects of mine were originally redirects to Calomera and Cicindelidia, which were at the time separate articles from Cicindela. Also, these redirects are still linked to by the articles Cicindela littoralis and Cicindela floridana as well as the template Template:Taxonomy/Cicindela (Cicindelidia) Monster Iestyn (talk) 00:11, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Trump Won

• Trump Won → 2024 United States presidential election  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirect seems to be getting a few pageviews, however Trump also won in 2016, so i suggest either deleting it or convert it to disambiguation. Airtransat236 (talk | contribs) 22:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete - I don't really see the point of a "Trump Won" page even as a redirect

Artem...^Talk 22:44, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Ambiguous and unhelpful. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete This could describe a number of things the subject won, including contracts, honors and contests. It's also capitalized so it's non-sensical outside the context of a Twitter insult. Nate • (chatter) 23:53, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Convert to disambiguation page. We can't redirect this to both 2016 United States presidential election and 2024 United States presidential election. Cyber the tiger (talk) 22:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  That would be just a WP:2DABS. Also, a related dab already exists: Presidency of Donald Trump. Web-julio (talk) 17:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete This title is extremely vague and unamenable to disambiguation. Ca ^{talk to me!} 05:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

I support a retarget per Michael Aurel below Ca ^{talk to me!} 00:18, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete disambiguation would require adding all the court cases he's won over the decades -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 06:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete There are a lot of things this could refer to (court cases, elections, debates, etc.). User Page Talk Contributions Sheriff U3 17:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Attempts to overturn the 2020 United States presidential election#"Trump won" and "big lie". This has been the target for most of this redirect's lifetime (it was changed [2] by an IP earlier this month), and, seeing as the section is about the slogan itself, with the phrase being present in the section title, this redirect pointing there is useful and accurate; also note the pageviews, 12 people are using this each month. While in a literal sense, yes, Trump has "won" various things, anyone looking for one of the elections is surely going to search "2016 election" or "2024 election" (or similar), whereas a search for "Trump Won" specifically is very likely looking for this slogan in particular. – Michael Aurel (talk) 18:59, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete, too ambiguous to be useful. Esolo5002 (talk) 20:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Strong retarget per the above reply by @Michael Aurel. I think that this is my first time ever prefixing a !vote with "Strong". I had come across this redirect a few days ago and was visiting to restore its former target when I realized that it has been listed for discussion. –Gluonz ^{talk contribs} 22:02, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Paw, Paw

• Paw, Paw → Martha Stewart#Personal life  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The word "paw" doesn't appear anywhere in the target article. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:434F:7EAA:14AD:DD9B (talk) 13:45, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak retarget to Paw Paw (disambiguation) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 14:36, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. Apparently Paw Paw was one of her dogs, which (surprise surprise) aren't important enough to mention by name in her bio article. There's no reason why it should have had the comma in there in the first place, nor is there any particular reason to keep this around for any of the various other uses, none of which make any sense with a comma inserted. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:11, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete The comma makes this very implausible to target anywhere. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Not sure if there's any good target in the dab page. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Paw Paw (disambiguation). It got 7 hits this year, might as well send those hits to something plausible. I disagree that a comma is implausible for all of the targets at that dab. I mean, sure, a comma is not ACCURATE for any of the targets, but accurate is not the same thing as plausible. People make mistakes, after all. Fieari (talk) 05:36, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  7 hits in a year is background noise. Arguing for a retarget is the same as arguing for a delete, and then for the creation of a new redirect....a creation that no one would ever reasonably make, because it'd be useless. We don't need to bend over backwards to try to find a home for wayward, useless redirects. Nothing of value is lost from deletion. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:37, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  Retargeting is not delete in RfD. But in AfD, a redirect in general is considered a deletion, so this redirect could be seen as deleted already, following your logic. Web-julio (talk) 18:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  At RfD, supporting retargeting by no means implies support of deletion of the original redirect. Someone giving their position as retargeting is not saying anything as to whether they think the original redirect ought to be deleted or kept in a hypothetical world without the choice of an alternative target; all they are saying is that the alternative target is a better target than the original one. – Michael Aurel (talk) 19:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Not true. A choice to retarget is equivalent to deleting, and then making a new redirect with a new target (barring page history concerns, which isn't really an issue here). Just because a target is better doesn't mean it's good enough to go out of our way to create anew. Unlike articles, deletion of redirects is relatively harmless, since they can always be recreated with very little effort if needed. And in this case, as has been demonstrated, this is a particularly useless redirect. No one in their right mind would make this redirect, hence, it should be deleted, even if you did identify a technically "better" target. "Better" ≠ "good enough". 35.139.154.158 (talk) 20:49, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  If "X" is a redirect to "Y", and at RfD I support retargeting "X" to "Z", all this means is that I think "Z" is a better target than "Y". I might still think that, if "Z" weren't a possible target, "X" pointing to "Y" would be a perfectly fine redirect. This is all I said, and nothing about this is "not true". – Michael Aurel (talk) 22:33, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  all this means is that I think "Z" is a better target than "Y". I might still think that, if "Z" weren't a possible target, "X" pointing to "Y" would be a perfectly fine redirect.. It might in other cases, but no one here has suggested that the current target is reasonable. My line of reasoning here is under the assumption that it's between a choice to delete or retarget, which this one pretty clearly is. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Sure, but I was only speaking in general, as indicated by me starting my comment with At RfD. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: (non-admin comment) Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JuniperChill (talk) 21:59, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete as implausible. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 22:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Paw Paw per Fieari. Web-julio (talk) 18:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Paw Paw per Fieari. Given the pronunciation of "Paw Paw", the presence of a comma in the middle phonetically makes sense, so this isn't unnatural as would be, for instance, "Donald, Trump". – Michael Aurel (talk) 19:19, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  I'm sorry, what? No it doesn't. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 20:43, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  You say it with a slight pause in the middle, no? That's how it's said where I'm from, like the first two "row"s in "row, row, row your boat". All I'm saying is that this is different to how you say a name, where there's no sort of gap or pause in between the first name and surname, so it isn't as unnatural. – Michael Aurel (talk) 22:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  "You say it with a slight pause in the middle, no?" Um, no, you don't, and I can't imagine that anyone would do so. Your analogy is also inapt because a) it's a list, where you add commas anyway, and b) it's a song, and there's an equivalent pause between the 3rd "row" and "boat", despite there being no comma there. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:01, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  Ok, well, I don't think so, but if you feel strongly about it, pretend I didn't include the added reason, like the commenter directly above. – Michael Aurel (talk) 01:55, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Easy and cheap

• Easy and cheap → Digital rights management#"Easy and cheap"  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

...really? the target section currently exists, sure, but any mentions of this description are unsourced, in passing, and seemingly unnecessary. honestly, i really can't think of a way this redirect wouldn't be at the very least extremely surprising cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Weak retarget to Trilemma#The project-management trilemma. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Project management triangle (linked from the trilemma article) might be a better target. Tevildo (talk) 21:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

a little late to note, but i'm kinda not following that. "quick" doesn't necessarily mean "easy", and it's still only two thirds of the Funny Triangle™ cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:06, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Indeed. Delete per nom, not sufficiently close to the canonical formulation to be useful. Tevildo (talk) 18:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

WP:INTERNETPROCTOL

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy delete per G7

MeTV Plus

• MeTV Plus → MeTV#MeTV+  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

OWaunTon (talk · contribs) blanked this redirect and then sent it to AfD, which is not the correct way to delete redirects. Their rationale follows:

An alternate redirect was created a while ago MeTV+ and I blanked the page and is now unneeded.
— User:OWaunTon 17:49, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Both subsequent comments pointed out that AfD is not the right venue for deleting redirects, but of particular note is the comment by Lord Bolingbroke (talk · contribs):

Speedy keep. Wrong venue, and this redirect is a perfectly plausible search term – it's even used on MeTV's official website. No way this would be deleted even if taken to RfD.
— User:Lord Bolingbroke 19:42, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Alas, my interpretation of WP:PROCEDURAL is that this has to come to RfD. This is entirely a procedural nomination, and indeed I am if anything a keep for the reasons Lord Bolingbroke gave. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:59, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment, I agree with your interpretation of WP:PROCEDURAL but I also agree that this is clearly a plausible search term and should be a Speedy Keep. Esolo5002 (talk) 20:12, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

But it's not according to the actual logo itself and not able as "MeTV Plus", for example, Ion Plus has the word "plus" in it and not the symbol. OWaunTon (talk) 20:22, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Speedy Keep This has absolutely no chance of being removed; it's the name of the network and we generally append 'Plus' redirects on any channel/service with this name as many searches for these channels/services inside/outside Wikipedia tend to use '(service name) plus' rather than the plus symbol, which is a common search modifier. This isn't going anywhere. Nate • (chatter) 23:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Speedy keep per my comment at the AfD. Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 20:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Swing the hairy ones

• Swing the hairy ones → wikt:svänga sina lurviga  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Wikipedia is not a swedish dictionary. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Does not seem like a useful Wiktionary redirect. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:16, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

...Re

• ...Re → ...Re (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

...Re (film) was moved away from this title after a March 2016 discussion; a followup April 2016 RfD ended without consensus. It was then boldly retargeted to the disambiguation page Re in May 2016, with an explanation on the talk page, but this was reverted in 2018. I personally think it should redirect to Re (or else the film should be moved back to this title), for the reasons laid out at WP:MISPLACED, but the history here is complicated enough that I want to make sure there's consensus for this change. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:31, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Move the film here at it appears to be the only thing called this per WP:SMALLDETAILS. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• (edit conflict) Either Move ...Re (film) back to ...Re (in which case, a hatnote to the dab page will suffice), or move ...Re (film) to Re (film), if you're not happy with the stylization being a part of either the article title or the running text. In either case, the current redirect should point to the film as an apparently typical stylization at the very least, and since nothing on the dab page would be prepended with 3 dots. The current situation is silly. If the current redirect is pointing to the film, then the film should be sitting at the base title. I don't really understand how the move discussion came to the conclusion it did. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 19:57, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

CTTOI

• CTTOI → wikt:Appendix:Internet slang  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• DKDC → wikt:Appendix:Internet slang  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• KTHNX → wikt:Appendix:Internet slang  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• HTH, HAND → wikt:Appendix:Internet slang  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• T,FTFY → wikt:Appendix:Internet slang  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not listed at target. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

delete most, put a pin on kthnx, i'll see if i can find something for it cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 21:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

"HTH" and "HAND" are both listed at the target page. it makes sense to keep the redirect for the combined term. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Andrew Gower (programmer)

• Andrew Gower (programmer) → Jagex  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previous discussions:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021_April_29#Andrew_Gower
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Andrew_Gower_(5th_nomination)

Although possibly justified previously, this redirect is now inappropriate. Despite founding the company Jagex and launching RuneScape being his most well known achievement, Andrew Gower (programmer) is not synonymous with Jagex, having left their board of directors over 14 years ago.

His current game Brighter Shores has no involvement with Jagex at all, but everywhere that Andrew's name is linked on Wikipedia (confusingly, including on the Brighter Shores page), it points back to Jagex. Brighter Shores was released in early access relatively recently, on 6 November 2024, seeing signs of early success.

Brighter Shores' full name is "Andrew Gower's Brighter Shores" (displaying that name on boot), in the same style as "Sid Meier's Civilization". It is likely that a person might search for "Andrew Gower" to find out who the title is referencing, and get redirected to Jagex, a company that has no involvement whatsoever with Brighter Shores.

At a minimum, I would recommend that this redirect no longer target the Jagex page. However, it would also be inappropriate if the redirect were changed to Brighter Shores, or a potential Fen Research article/redirect (currently a red link), since when Andrew Gower (programmer) is referenced in the context of discussing RuneScape on Wikipedia, it would then redirect to his latest project instead of an article about the programmer, which is not very expected.

Per WP:RFD#DELETE, my opinion is that this redirect violates conditions 2 and 10.

• It has potential to cause confusion that Andrew Gower is still affiliated with Jagex, and that Brighter Shores is a Jagex game.
• The current target article Jagex "contains virtually no information on the subject", and as evidenced by the redirect's long edit history, "could plausibly be expanded into an article".

Per WP:RFD#KEEP, the redirect should also not be out-right deleted, since it includes a "potentially useful page history" for an article about a person who has made "unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment."

I'd recommend that an article about the programmer Andrew Gower be created in place of this redirect, similar to other well-known game programmers with multiple projects (such as Sid Meier, John Carmack, etc.).

— Hubcapp (talk) 19:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment This is the wrong venue to (functionally) do a deletion review of the last AFD. I don't think recreating the Andrew Gower article is a viable outcome of this discussion. Axem Titanium (talk) 19:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  Apologies. You'd be more experienced and knowledgeable on the subject of AFDs and proper procedure than me. It was not obvious (or documented on Wikipedia:DRV nor here on Wikipedia:RFD) that I should create a new deletion review for an article that has not technically been deleted, but instead turned into a redirect. How would you recommend I proceed from here? Thanks, — Hubcapp (talk) 20:06, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  For what its worth, the reason I originally removed the redirect and re-created the article was due to this very reason, he's not linked to Jagex anymore, and he's just released his first game post-Jagex, which was received decent media coverage. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 20:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  Yes, "circumstances have changed to due to recent events" and it's now a problematic redirect that needs to be changed (WP:RFD#DELETE 2 & 10). Will wait a day or so for confirmation that it is only appropriate to address this issue through WP:DRV, considering that the article was changed to a redirect through the AFD process in 2021, several years ago under different circumstance. If it's improper to discuss how the redirect is inappropriate here because of its prior AFD history, I will add a bullet point near the top of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Header that redirects created as a result of the AFD process should not be discussed here. — Hubcapp (talk) 21:04, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  It's not clear that opening a new DRV on a 3 year old AFD decision is the correct move. I suggest posting a discussion at WT:VG to get a better sense for how the larger project is feeling about Gower today in terms of notability. As I said before, a consensus is needed to overturn a previous consensus so more eyeballs are better. Axem Titanium (talk) 23:39, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  Sounds correct, thanks for your advice. I have created this discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Video_games#Re-evaluating_Andrew_Gower_(programmer)_as_a_redirect per your recommendation. — Hubcapp (talk) 01:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Trim level

• Trim level → Trim level (automotive)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Trim level → Trim#Transport – The phrase "Trim level" is also used in aviation as a command given in the cockpit to trim the aircraft to a level flight attitude using the Trim wheel to move the Trim tab, so this is an ambiguous term and should redirect to the DAB page of Trim#Transport. Raladic (talk) 19:08, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep (that is, don't change the target). In aviation, we might talk about a trimmed airspeed or angle of attack, but not a trim level. Level has a specific meaning in aviation, and it's not something that's (directly) affected by the trim of the aircraft. Tevildo (talk) 21:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  You most certainly trim for straight and level flight, sometimes shortened to the command to "trim level". Not Flight level, trimming for straight and level flight, this is one of the first basic maneuvers pilots learn during private pilot training.

  The final part of Straight and level flight is to trim the plane to maintain level flight attitude (after adjusting pressure on the yoke and adjusting power, you trim to maintain the level attitude to relieve pressure of the yoke. Task VIII.A: Straight and Level Flight | Mark Berry - CFI Notebook, FAA Airplane Flying Handbook (3C) Chapter 3. Raladic (talk) 23:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget per Raladic. The automotive topic is about an options package, while the aviation topic is acutally about trim -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 06:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget per nom. The target is ambiguous, as I accept the argument above that that trim level can be used in aviation. Fieari (talk) 07:32, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Adimo

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

This name isn't mentioned in the current revision of the target article. Page history shows that it used to mention Adimo when the Adimo article was moved to its current title on February 19, 2014. In order for this redirect to be helpful, Adimo must be mentioned somewhere in the target article again. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 17:45, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Giant ground sloth

• Giant ground sloth → Megatherium  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Megatherium is tied with Eremotherium in size (with Lestodon being not much smaller), so this isn't an unambiguous redirect. In the academic literature, "giant ground sloth" is used for basically any sloth of considerable size, regardless as to whether they are truly elephantine (e.g. [3] [4]). Many of the current redirect uses have nothing to do with Megatherium, making this redirect misleading. I would suggest redirecting to ground sloth Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget to ground sloth per nomination. PrimalMustelid (talk) 21:16, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Tradiční Lovecký salám

• Tradiční Lovecký salám → Salami  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

lovecký salám (hunting salami, apparently) is mentioned in the article, but not necessarily its "traditional" variant. has incoming links, but their classification as traditional seems to be unsourced and not necessarily correct cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

should mention that lovecký salám already exists, so the links could easily be fixed, if any fixing needs to be done cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Lovecký salám was applied for as a EU Traditional Speciality Guaranteed-product (TSG). That means that -in order to use the name- all products in the EU have to be produced according to the specs provided in the application. following opposition, the name Tradiční Lovecký salám was accepted as a TSG (see here). That means that one can use the name Lovecký salám without regards to what the product looks like, but Tradiční Lovecký salám is subject to the characteristics in the description. The name is therefore worth a redirect as people may be interested and this is the closest page we can offer. Having said that, the current characterisation of Lovecký salám as a TSG i incorrect; and I will change that. An alternative is redirecting to List of traditional specialities guaranteed by country, but for me that feels too generic... L.tak (talk) 09:29, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Mortazza

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

results gave me two conflicting definitions: dishes involving mortadella, like pizza mortazza and mortazza sandwiches, or one specific dish that happens to involve mortadella... said dish seemingly boiling down to "random stuff with mortadella, i guess". not mentioned in the target or wiktionary, and seems to be an obscure synonym for something else cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:31, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Openptail g

• Openptail g → G#Typographic variants  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

is it supposed to be a misinput? p is close to - in qwerty keyboards, but that doesn't seem like a plausible mistake cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:44, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete as implausible typo. Nardog (talk) 11:47, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete per Nardog. Considering that Menchi created Open-tail g four minutes after this one, I think that was probably the intended title for the redirect. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:34, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Jewish pogroms in Amsterdam

• Jewish pogroms in Amsterdam → November 2024 Amsterdam attacks  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect doesn't direct to a pogrom -- haminoon (talk) 06:19, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep, pogrom = Riot, given that there were assaults, it could be assumed that there are riots in the area. For the record, there is currently a discussion on the target article's talk page about moving to November 2024 Amsterdam attacks. ToadetteEdit (talk) 06:45, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Struck per WP:ARBPIA's extendedconfirmed restriction. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 22:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
delete, - is inflammatory and ignores context HorrorEnvironment8 (talk) 06:46, 8 November 2024 (UTC) Hi. I see that you have registered today and the only edit you did id on this page. Do you mind to elaborate your point? With regards, Oleg Y. (talk) 14:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC) merge at minimum, as this contains RS-supported relevant information not in the other article. --184.153.21.19 (talk) 07:17, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• merge what little there is, place a redirect if really necessary, but I think due to how general the title is, that due to WP:RECENT within a few months it will be back here to be deleted due to lack of precision. TiggerJay (talk) 08:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep and merge, as many RS call it this way:

1. The Jerusalem Post (1, 2, 3, 4)
2. The Times of Israel (1, 2, 3, 4)
3. Reuters (1 - quote)
4. JSN (1)
5. New York Post] (1 - quote)
6. The New York Sun (1, 2)
7. BBC (1, 2, 3)
8. Israel Hayom (1)
9. Arutz Sheva (1, 2)
10. The Jewish Chronicle (1)
11. The Spectator (1)
12. The Forward (1)
13. Ynet (1)
14. The Jewish Press (1)
15. Newsmax (1, 2)
16. Legal Insurrection (1)
17. Townhall (1)
18. Israel Today (1)
19. And more.

With regards, Oleg Y. (talk) 14:18, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect to The Holocaust in the Netherlands, would be much more proper than a WP:RECENT football hooligan riot. (Same as the singular redirect.)

Smallangryplanet (talk) 16:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• I didn't understand this RFD because the redirect under discussion here, Jewish pogroms in Amsterdam, pointed to a different article, November 2024 Amsterdam attacks so I reverted that edit. But the target article mentioned here, Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam is another redirect, not an article. So, this discussion needs to be withdrawn or reorganized because right now it doesn't make sense. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:07, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Put on hold. As long as the singular title exists as a redirect, there's no possible reason to treat this separately from it; any retargeting there should be performed here too. If the singular gets deleted, this should be deleted too — no good reason to delete singular and keep plural. And if anything else happens to the singular (e.g. converted to disambiguation page), this should remain a redirect there, since it's 100% related and wouldn't be a double redirect. Nyttend (talk) 23:22, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
  • @Liz and Nyttend: The Pogrom redirect had been correctly tagged already, but I've updated the listing above to include both. @Smallangryplanet and Unknown Temptation: You are the only commenters whose !votes seem like they might be different for Pogrom rather than Pogroms, so pinging you in case you'd like to comment further. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 22:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
    • I have reverted the listing of the Pogrom redirect here to avoid confusion. The singular is already being discussed at the November 24 page, and a duplicate listing here could prompt new/existing participants to start voting on that. Smallangryplanet already has the same opinion in both discussions. Participants who wish to discuss the singular can do so at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam. Jay 💬 07:35, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect to The Holocaust in the Netherlands. Let's get real here. I don't know the ins and outs of what happened in Amsterdam the other night. What I do know is that it did not kill three quarters of the Jews of the Netherlands. [5] If Greek or Armenian football fans were to be non-fatally attacked in modern Istanbul, that is obviously not the primary idea of anti-Greek/Armenian pogroms in Istanbul Unknown Temptation (talk) 19:26, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --MikutoH ^talk! 03:54, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

LGBT in Chile

• LGBT in Chile → LGBTQ topics in Chile  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to LGBTQ in Chile for wp:consistency. Regardless of the RM outcome, if moved, a bot automatically retargets it to where LGBTQ in Chile will be retargeted. Also see WP:CONSUB and WP:STATUSQUO. --MikutoH ^talk! 03:20, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Support per nom. Lewisguile (talk) 12:44, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget to LGBTQ in Chile – omitting the "Q" doesn't indicate a different topic. I think this could have been done boldly, by the way. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:32, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

November 24

Next Singaporean presidential election

• Next Singaporean presidential election → 2023 Singaporean presidential election  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The 2023 presidential election has passed, and is hence no longer the next presidential election in Singapore. As there is no substantial information on the current next election to place into an article, I would like to propose instead that this page be deleted. VoicefulBread66 (talk • contribs) 00:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Atlantoöccipital articulations

• Atlantoöccipital articulations → Atlanto-occipital joint  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Anterior atlantoöccipital membrane → Anterior atlantooccipital membrane  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Anterior atlantoöccipital ligament → Anterior atlantooccipital membrane  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Posterior atlantoöccipital membrane → Posterior atlantooccipital membrane  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These pages clearly derive from typos as the character ö does not appear in latin and these terms are not used in literature, see also this discussion on one of their talk pages. I believe that if they were recent pages, they would fulfill WP:R3 from the speedy deletion criteria, but as its multiple old pages, I'm listing them here. Since entering a term with the diaresis diacritic does not seem to matter for Wikipedia search unless there is a specific page with it in its name, these redirects do not bear any value and should be deleted. The respective redirect or article pages without diacritics seem to already exist. Withdrawn nomination, see below. YuniToumei (talk) 11:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page histories of Anterior atlantoöccipital membrane and Posterior atlantoöccipital membrane?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. Sources do sometimes use the diaeresis, so that's really the end of the story as far as RfD is concerned. They're not typos, and the Latin usage matters much less than the English usage, which does sometimes use the diaeresis for this purpose (see User:Tamzin/The diaeresis). And while they're not likely to be terribly useful in searching, that's not a particularly strong argument for deletion when the redirect is precise, found in sources, and free from WP:RFD#DELETE issues. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 08:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks for the helpful comment! I wasn't aware of this usage of these diacritics in english sources. Seems like I should've done some more close reading after seeing the page histories. I'll withdraw my nomination accordingly. Cheers! YuniToumei (talk) 23:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Ap (ghost)

• Ap (ghost) → Krasue  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I'm not sure this use of "Ap" is legitimate. The article refers to "The word អាប (Ahp/Aap)..." Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:03, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. In use, obvious alternative spelling in a language without a single standardised romanization system. --Paul_012 (talk) 09:10, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:47, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep – even if it's not a legitimate spelling, it's a plausible and unambiguous misspelling. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:24, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Big Bank Black

• Big Bank Black → Def Jam Recordings  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. C F A 23:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

The Scream (Greek TV miniseries)

• The Scream (Greek TV miniseries) → el:Ελευθερία Καραδήμου  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Weird cross project redirect to the Greek Wikipedia. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:4786:8BAE:11B2:46A7 (talk) 22:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:REDYES. This might be a plausible article in the future. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete, unless there is an appropriate local target for this page. Sending readers to non-English content is not helpful. Additionally, the plain {{soft redirect}} template is not used in the mainspace (WP:SOFTSP). See here for precedents. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 02:19, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Restore and send to AfD. C F A 15:27, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Under-16 and Under-17 teams

• Hong Kong national under-16 and under-17 basketball team → Hong Kong men's national under-16 basketball team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Kuwait national under-16 and under-17 basketball team → Kuwait men's national under-16 basketball team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Indonesia national under-16 and under-17 basketball team → Indonesia men's national under-16 basketball team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Singapore national under-16 and under-17 basketball team → Singapore men's national under-16 basketball team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• South Africa national under-16 and under-17 basketball team → South Africa men's national under-16 basketball team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Comoros national under-16 and under-17 basketball team → Comoros men's national basketball team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Kazakhstan national under-16 and under-17 basketball team → Kazakhstan men's national under-16 basketball team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Zambia national under-16 and under-17 basketball team → Zambia men's national under-16 basketball team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete all:

• WP:XY – the under-17 team is not discussed at these targets
• What about, say Indonesia women's national under-16 basketball team? Why target the vague "national" to "men's national"?

Credit to Maiō T. who created a useful list of such redirects. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 18:58, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

2026 NFL team redirects

• 2026 Kansas City Chiefs season → Kansas City Chiefs  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 2026 New England Patriots season → New England Patriots  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 2026 Miami Dolphins season → Miami Dolphins  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 2026 Tampa Bay Buccaneers season → Tampa Bay Buccaneers  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 2026 Philadelphia Eagles season → Philadelphia Eagles  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 2026 Buffalo Bills season → Buffalo Bills  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:TOOSOON, no relevant info at targets, making these redirects misleading. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nom. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 20:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom, probably at least one year before any reasonable content could be included--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 22:28, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Noting that another team season redirect for the same season was nominated at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_22#2026_Houston_Texans_season. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Recent

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

There is no evidence that a primary topic has been specified. Kolano123 (talk) 17:33, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak keep All of the incoming links appear to be using "Recent" in its geological definition (i.e., as a synonym for Holocene). I do think there is a point to be made about the geological definition not being the "primary topic," so to speak. But I'm hesitant to delete since the "primary" definition isn't getting wikilinked at the moment. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Appears to be used for convenience in a narrow set of articles. Thsi redirect is unlikely to cause the confusion (as we are unlikely to have an article about the word itself, which would be the primary meaning). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Викидим (talk • contribs) 22:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Lean delete, although I'm not unsympathetic to the cleanup that would require. Maybe someone could use AWB or a bot to automate the process, but I don't know if that's more trouble than it's worth. This seems to be used in a bunch of taxoboxes in a technical sense, but far more often, it's done better, with "Recent" as a piped link to Holocene instead of relying on the redirect (see e.g. Giraffe). I don't think it's appropriate to carve out a redirect for a technical sense of an everyday word to use like this. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:15, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Template:NWHL profile

• Template:NWHL profile → Template:PHF profile  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Same as Template:PHF Profile. rm this redirect page. See Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 November 24. MikeVitale 16:27, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment: once a template is deleted, all redirects to it are also deleted, so no need for RfD to get involved. Gonnym (talk) 18:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

King Edwards

• King Edwards → Sound system (Jamaican)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous title. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 15:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:REDBIO. The group (the brothers George and Vin Edwards) is potentially notable (see [6]), but the current target doesn't contain any information on them apart from the name. Having a redlink is an incentive to create the article. Tevildo (talk) 17:33, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to King Edward, where one value of "King Edward's" is already found, and others can be added -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 06:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

AR-M100390

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Bus Testing and Research Center

• Bus Testing and Research Center → Pennsylvania Transportation Institute  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Quite ambiguous title not discussed at target. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 15:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep There's an entire section on this in the article. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:03, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

  I think the inversion of "testing" and "research" is a small but important difference. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 21:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

  Oops. Good catch. I'm fine with deletion then. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:12, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Template:Puffery inline

• Template:Puffery inline → Template:Peacock inline  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

{{Puffery}} now redirects to {{Promotional}}, so this should go to {{Promotional inline}}, for consistency. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:29, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Illustrative aid

• Illustrative aid → E-learning (theory)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Quite ambiguous title and not discussed at target. Seems to also have a legal meaning, based on search results. Delete as ambigous. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 15:01, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• 50/50 between deleting per nom -- this could refer to hundreds of things, way too vague even for a dab page...or retargeting to Diagram, as possibly the only reasonable match for such a general term. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• strong delete makes the assumption that visual aids did not exist before electronic teaching aids -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:14, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Field hockey at the 2028 Summer Olympics – Women's tournament

• Field hockey at the 2028 Summer Olympics – Women's tournament → Field hockey at the 2028 Summer Olympics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The women's tournament is not discussed at target – misleading to the reader. Delete per WP:REDYES. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Algeria national under-16 and under-17 basketball team

• Algeria national under-16 and under-17 basketball team → Algeria men's national under-16 basketball team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:XY – the under-17 team is not discussed. Also, what about the women's team for the same age bracket? Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:53, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. {{db-g7}} Maiō T. (talk) 18:09, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Adult Swim (Latin American TV channel).

• Adult Swim (Latin American TV channel). → Adult Swim (Latin American TV channel)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible typo to add punctuation to the end (the period key is quite far away from the 0 key). Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete as unlikely misspelling. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

2024–25 Pilipinas Super League season

• 2024–25 Pilipinas Super League season → List of Pilipinas Super League seasons  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The season doesn't seem to have started, and the target gives very little information to the reader. Delete per WP:REDYES. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Marie Stopes Myanmar

• Marie Stopes Myanmar → MSI Reproductive Choices  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Marie Stopes Myanmar is not discussed at the target. Seems like a WP:REDYES situation. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Taxi to Heaven

• Taxi to Heaven → The Aerial Cabman  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not seeing this used as an alternative name or translation. Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Creator seems to be CU blocked. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 07:50, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Ultrajectine Communion

• Ultrajectine Communion → wiktionary:Ultraiectinus  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 17 § Ultrajectine – soft retarget to Wikt:Ultraiectinus

The RfD previous discussion ended up on deciding on a soft redirect with my approval. However, I am having second thoughts on this Ultrajectine Communion redirect that I had bundled with Ultrajectine in this previous RfD.

I do not think a reader searching for "Ultrajectine Communion" will be satisfied with being led to the Wiktionary link to the Latin word for 'of Utrecht'. "Ultrajectine Communion" is not an used expression, and it is not used to refer to the Union of Utrecht.

Thus, I propose this redirect be deleted. Veverve (talk) 14:41, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete I was the one who proposed the soft retarget, but I am comfortable with deleting this specific redirect per the nom's rationale. This doesn't seem to be a phrase used to refer to the Union of Utrecht. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:06, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Mate tea (drink)

• Mate tea (drink) → Mate (drink)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Mate tea is also a drink, so this seems confusing. 1234qwer1234qwer4 11:46, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

retarget to mate cocido per nom. for better or worse, i know the exact demographic of this redirect, and they'd actually want both results. still, mate cocido is slightly more accurate in the context of places that aren't brazil, so as far as this wiki cares, it should redirect to that one cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:35, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget to Mate cocido as {{r avoided double redirect}} and {{r from unnecessary disambiguation}} of Mate tea. jlwoodwa (talk) 17:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

2025 Dutch general election

• 2025 Dutch general election → Elections in the Netherlands  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no election planned in 2025 Dajasj (talk) 18:37, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• Refine to Elections in the Netherlands#2023 general election. According to 2023 Dutch general election, that election was expected to take place in 2025 but was called early on short notice, so this is a very plausible search term. I've added a summary to the target article that explains this. Thryduulf (talk) 13:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  Would then be more sustainable to link to redirect to 2023 Dutch general election, because the section header will be changed after the next election (and we will have forgotten about it). Also avoids duplicating content.

  More generally I disagree with redirecting with a hypothetical situation, but in this specific case it is also ambiguous because 2025 could also refer to a hypothetical snap election after 2023 (if the cabinet fell today, that would be the earliest moment). Dajasj (talk) 13:47, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  The cabinet failing before the next expected election is different to the expected next election unexpectedly not happening. Sources regularly talk about the next expected election, so there will be sources from pre-July 2023 talking about the 2025 elections that people will see and search for information about. Sources since that date don't expect 2025 elections, they talk about 2028 elections in the expected manner. If elections do happen in 2025 then obviously this redirect will be correctly usurped by an article about those elections. That article will mention the circumstances and explain things for those who arrive looking for what became the 2023 election. Thryduulf (talk) 13:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:01, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to 2023 Dutch general election, the article about the Dutch general election that was originally planned for 2025. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:58, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Refine or retarget? Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• I suppose 2023 Dutch general election would be the most logical target, as that election would have been held in 2025 if the cabinet had not fallen (and some sources written before might refer to an election "planned for 2025"). However, I'm not a big supporter of having such alternative history redirects in the first place; it feels a bit like redirecting Presidential inauguration of Kamala Harris to Second inauguration of Donald Trump. - Tristan Surtel (talk) 10:18, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Kikurage

• Kikurage → Auricularia heimuer  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Kikurage mushroom → Auricularia heimuer  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Kikurage mushrooms → Auricularia heimuer  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not sure what the path forward here is with these redirects. I recently changed the target of these redirects from Tremella fuciformis to Auricularia heimuer (while creating Kikurage) after finding that most results in English for the term "Kikurage" refer to Auricularia heimuer (specifically its use in Japanese cuisine), which would claim it to essentially be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term due to its common use in English to refer to the Japanese culinary use. However, after reviewing Tremella fuciformis, the term "Kikurage" is mentioned in the article, which is probably why the redirects Kikurage mushroom and Kikurage mushrooms targeted there. At this point, I'm not sure if "keep", "retarget" or "disambiguate" (possibly by retargeting to Wood ear?) is the best course of action here, so I'm bringing this up for discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 19:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Just from reading the articles it seems that the redirects to Auricularia heimuer are correct. Tremella fuciformis is the shiro kikurage (or white kikurage) in Japanese. I don't think this is just a white form of kikurage, as it is a very different fungi (different taxonomic classes). This seems to me more akin to tiger and Tasmanian tiger where the latter are not closely related to cats. The only question is whether "Kikurage mushrooms" could be used for such different mushrooms that are used quite differently in cooking.  —  Jts1882 | talk  12:49, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:30, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

MOS:JEW

• MOS:JEW → Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism/Manual of Style  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Wikipedia:JEW/MOS → Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism/Manual of Style  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• MOS:JESUS → Wikipedia:WikiProject Judaism/Manual of Style#Jesus  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete: Same as "MOS:ASTRO" last month. Incorrect and confusing redirects that declare this WP:PROJPAGE essay to be a part of the WP:MOS guidelines. (The page's misnaming with "/Manual of Style" instead of "/Style advice" is being addressed separately in an RM.) Deleting these shortcut will be consistent with prior deletions of "MOS:" namespace (formerly pseudo-namespace) shortcuts, and other shortcuts with "MOS" in them, that were going to wikiproject essays and the like. See also the page-creation editnotice: "This is a page in the MOS namespace, which should only be used for shortcuts to the manual of style."

The potential for mischief with such shortcuts is high, because editors who encounter them "cited" in talk-page arguments are highly likely to trust that they are MoS guidelines with the authority of community consensus acceptance, instead of being pre-WP:PROPOSAL essays by a small number of editors with little broader editorial-community input. The advice in the page might even mostly be good, but it is not (yet?) part of MoS and should not masquerade as such. Some of its wording has been a bit ranty and even leaning in an us-vs.-them direction, and ironically riddled with MoS-compliance failures (some of this I cleaned up in a particular section [7], but it needs a lot more work). The page really has not seen much substantive improvement in over a decade.

I've created a new WP:JUDAISMSTYLE shortcut for this page, and a WP:JESUSCHRIST one (in place of "MOS:JESUS" for the "Christ"-related material's anchor point in the page). The latter doesn't really doesn't belong in this page, as it is not a Judaism matter. The advice there is correct, however, and should probably be moved into a guideline page, likely WP:Manual of Style/Biography#Honorifics (as now proposed here), at which point an "MOS:" shortcut for it could be reinstituted. These seem to be the only shortcuts to this page. I'm skeptical that "JEW" in such constructions is a good idea, as it can have conflicting interpretations. But regular editors in what wikiproject might want "WP:JEW/STYLE" to go along with other subpage shortcuts they use.

 — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Notified: WT:WikiProject Judaism, WT:MOS. Reason: Essay is part of that wikiproject. WT:MOS is the central place for concerns about MoS's maintenance. Did not notify Judaism, or Christianity (for MOS:JESUS), or Religion subpages of WP:Deletion_sorting, because internal essay and guideline shortcuts are not pertinent to encyclopedic coverage.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  08:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete. These are not MoS pages. Gonnym (talk) 11:10, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

A Night

• A Night → Rihanna#Discography  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Since the now blocked sockpuppet TeapotsOfDoom nominated this redirect four days earlier and it was speedily kept per WP:BE, I'm reopening the discussion because I'm not really sure if it has a particular connection to Rihanna. The closest I could find via a Google search was part of the lyrics for "Goodnight Gotham" (which contains a sample of "Only If for a Night" by Florence and the Machine), but other than that, I'm not sure if it warrants a redirect to Rihanna's page, since 1) it's also part of the titles and/or lyrics for countless other songs and 2) it's a partial title match for multiple other articles and/or redirects (so I'm not sure where, if anywhere, is appropriate to retarget this). Delete this unless someone can provide a justification or a suitable alternative course of action. Regards, SONIC678 05:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Backstory on why this redirect exists in the first place... this redirect was originally created in February 2015 when a snippet of what was then known as "A Night" was included in a Dior advertisement.

At the time, the song was unreleased (it wouldn't officially be released until January 2016 on Anti (album)), but "A Night" is the official title that the song was registered under in the ASCAP database, so that's how it was referred until the final title was revealed to be "Goodnight Gotham" upon its official release.

If kept, the target should be changed to Anti (album).

[8] RachelTensions (talk) 07:01, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep, but retarget per nom., Also create A Night (disambiguation), and use a {{Redirect}} hatnote at the album article. The DAB page should list the song, the concept "a night" (we cannot count on readers to capitalize correctly, especially since English is inconsistent and does capitalize some temporal things like days of the week), and add templated means in "See also" of looking up other works and such that start with "A Night", or have "a Night" in their title or in a subtitle. Various works will be known to some readers by partial titles or by lines/fragments from them, so this will be helpful for readers looking for "A Night ... something something, I dunno". Have One Night (disambiguation) as a see-also. I'm surprised there aren't other major works and other notable things just named "A Night"; contrast A Day (disambiguation). I suspect there are, actually, including other songs by notable artists.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:04, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• "A Night" is now mentioned at Anti (album). RachelTensions (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Anti (album) per above. We probably don't need a separate DAB per WP:DABCOMBINE. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:48, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Male protagonist bingo

• Male protagonist bingo → Gender representation in video games#Portrayal of men  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unhelpful redirect that sounds a lot like the title of some Tumblr meme. Not relavent or mentioned in the article. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 04:33, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

RubRub

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Shen an calhar

• Shen an calhar → World of Warcraft  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

How did this end up redirecting to WoW? Apparently, this somehow got redirected to the wrong franchise. Slight research shows that it's supposed to be from Wheel of Time. That being said, there doesn't seem to be a mention on that on there either. It appears that "The Band of the Red Hand" is a more common name for that in-universe group that the articles do mention. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 21:09, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Redirect to List of The Wheel of Time characters#Mat Cauthon, as that's also what Band of the Red Hand redirects to. Procyon117 (talk) 14:43, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment, upon further inspection, turns out it did originally redirect to the correct franchise, but was changed for an unknown reason. Could probably just be reverted back if you're not opposed to doing so. Procyon117 (talk) 14:45, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Unless someone adds a mention at the proposed target. I don't see how anyone would benefit from this if it isn't mentioned anywhere. CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:09, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 15:21, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per CycloneYoris. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anyone want to add a mention to the correct franchise?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:28, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Flag of North Yemen

• Flag of North Yemen → Flag of Yemen  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ill make it an article just like how Flag of South Yemen is an article Abo Yemen✉ 11:18, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment. Normally, I'd say retarget to North Yemen (which is incorrectly marked as a dab page, more on that in a moment), which has a picture of the flag. It's short enough to accommodate information about the flag there, and if a spinout is warranted, that can happen without discussion here. However, I notice that the nominator has recently converted it from a dab page to an article (without removing the dab template or adding any sources). I don't know a thing about the history of the region and have no idea if this was reasonable or not. I'd encourage others that might to take a closer look. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:47, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

If you make it an article, I'd say delete. CheeseyHead (talk) 02:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Moot. It being an article now, this is no longer an RfD matter but (if the condition doesn't improve) a WP:AFD or WP:SPEEDY or WP:PROD matter.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

ハンマーブロス

• ハンマーブロス → List of Mario franchise characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not helpful for the English encyclopedia. Appears to refer to the Hammer Bros. antagonists in the Mario franchise. TNstingray (talk) 17:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

weak refine to #enemy characters. yeah, that refers to hammer bros. mario is a japanese franchise (really japanese, even, have you seen how many tanuki they can cram into a single game?), so japanese redirects are fine and dandy, though this one isn't mentioned, so meh cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 17:51, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Narrow target per cogsan, and give the Japanese in the article. It's entirely reasonable to expect various native or non-native speakers of English who are big fans of this culture-spanning franchise to run into Japanese references to characters, so we should help them. It's pretty conventional with regard to translated media for us to give original other-language names of characters and things, especially since various academic or other sources may refer to the original-language version or a translation or both at once (and might even be constrasting them, if significant changes were made beyond name-rendering).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

PKS 1402-012

• PKS 1402-012 → Parkes Catalogue of Radio Sources  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This belongs on the target list, but is just one of 8000, and isn't mentioned there. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:41, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment. This was an article which existed for a short time, but was then BLARed by the creator/sole substantive contributor, Galaxybeing. If GB gives the go-ahead, this could probably just be G7ed. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:13, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

  oops, fixed ping for Galaxybeing 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:14, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 22:31, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak keep and tag with {{R with possibilities}}; I added PKS 1402-012 to the bulleted list at Parkes Catalogue of Radio Sources pulling a reference from the redirect page history that I thought was the most general (I didn't parse through those 33 references too thoroughly though). This doesn't quite satisfy WP:SELFRED, but there's enough in the page history to benefit another editor if this object becomes more notable. Should GalaxyBeing request deletion, I trust that decision. ― Synpath 20:21, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Ro (antigen)

• Ro (antigen) → Anti-SSA/Ro autoantibodies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Autoantigen Ro → Calreticulin  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

We need an expert to determine if these are correctly targeted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:57, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep the first link, as the "Ro antigen" is mentioned there and I think this is the main article discussing it. Is there some controversy we're not aware of? For the second link, the Ro antigen is also a Ro autoantigen, that is, this is an autoimmune response. Hence, also Redirect "Autoantigen Ro" to Anti-SSA/Ro autoantibodies. Calreticulin was not a terrible target, but Anti-SSA/Ro autoantibodies is the more relevant target. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 11:44, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget both to Anti-SSA/Ro autoantibodies#Antigens where the Ro antigens are discussed thoroughly. The Calreticulin article states that it is proven to not be a Ro antigen. ― Synpath 14:42, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

In the spirit of consensus, redirect to the Antigens section is also a good outcome. --{{u|Mark viking}} {Talk} 18:18, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• keep per Mark viking--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 11:49, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget both per Synpath. The current 2nd redir is clearly and error, and there's no clear reason to not go to the section specifically about the antigens. I guess I could live with both targeting the bare Anti-SSA/Ro autoantibodies link, but being vague like that doesn't seem helpful to the readership.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Indy HeroClix (heroclix)

• Indy HeroClix (heroclix) → HeroClix  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Inappropriate DAB formatting by listing it both inside and outside the parentheses. Delete as unhelpful redirect. If kept, please redirect to List of HeroClix supplements#Main series. TNstingray (talk) 18:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete. Yes, indeed, bring me to the page about a heroclix! Which one? The one that's a heroclix! This is a very implausible disambiguation attempt, and we don't need it. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 04:30, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Move the non-insignificant edit history to Indy Clix (which seems to be the real name per Google searches) and retartget to List of HeroClix supplements#Main series as suggested. BOZ (talk) 08:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Regards, SONIC678 04:17, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per above after moving page history or move without redirect to Indy Clix. Jay 💬 12:17, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Chingisid

• Chingisid → Borjigin#Genghisids  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Which articles should these redirects point to? The current situation is inconsistent and confusing.

1. Chingisid redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
2. Chingissid redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
3. Chinggisid redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
4. Chinggisids redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
5. Chingissids does not exist yet.
6. Chinggissids does not exist yet.
7. Genghisids redirects to Borjigin#Genghisids (section does not exist anymore)
8. Genghisid redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan
9. Chingizid redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan
10. Family tree of Genghis Khan redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan.
11. Jochid redirects to Jochi, but Jochids redirects to Descent from Genghis Khan. (Jochid Ulus redirects to Golden Horde, that seems fine).

Personally, I am in favour of redirecting them all to Descent from Genghis Khan, as a Chingis(s)id / Ghenghisid is, strictly speaking, a descendant from Genghis Khan, not an earlier Borjigin, while Genghis Khan himself was obviously not a Chingis(s)id / Ghenghisid, but a Borjigin only. Redirecting to a section always risks link rot anyway, as section titles often change or they are rearranged, while Descent from Genghis Khan as a whole will presumably always be dedicated to this very subject. Thoughts? NLeeuw (talk) 12:43, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

PS: Not sure if I formatted this RfD correctly; I rarely do these. Do I need to tag all redirects in question? NLeeuw (talk) 12:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• Section redirects are useful in taking the reader straight to the relevent part of a large article. A link from Genghisids to Borjigin can confuse the reader, since the Borjigin article does mention Genghisids in the lead. Link rot can be reduced by linking to an anchor rather than a section name, e.g. {{anchor|Genghisids}}. An editor is likely to preserve the anchor. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

@Nederlandse Leeuw if you meant to nominate all of them, then no. if you want to nominate multiple redirects at once, you could try this mass xfd tool. then again, it doesn't matter much, since anyone could just do whatever is deemed necessary with them after this is closed (except deleting, that's an admin thing) cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:55, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• See this version of the Chingisid article. The broadest meaning of the term is "to do with Ghengis Khan", and could mean "descended from Ghengis" but could have various other meanings depending on context. Possibly the solution would be to pick the spelling used in the largest number of articles and make it a disambiguation page pointing to Descent from Genghis Khan, Yassa, Khanate and Golden Horde. Point the other spellings to the disambiguation page. Links can then be cleaned up to point to the page that discusses the intended meaning. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:39, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

  A disamb page might indeed be the best solution here. What do others think? NLeeuw (talk) 14:19, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• I've been intending to create a new article on the Chinggisid dynasty for some time. If others are amenable, I can get started in the next couple of days. The first nine redirects can then target that. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:38, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Pages that refer to Chinggisid dynasty should link to it directly. But the disambiguation page would also list Descent from Genghis Khan, the Chingisid principle (Yassa golden lineage), Chingisid states (Khanates), Chingisid people (e.g. Golden Horde) and Chingizid (moth). The various forms of Chingisid should redirect to the disambiguation page. A page that included a link to, e.g., Chingizid would be flagged for clarification. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:10, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
    • Of course, if the dynasty is the dominant meaning of the term (I don't think it is, may be wrong), the forms of Chingisid would redirect to Chinggisid dynasty, which would have a hatnote {{Otheruses|Chinggisid (disambiguation)}}, and Chinggisid (disambiguation) would list the other meanings. We need a list of all pages that use some variant of the word, with or without a link, showing what they mean by it. Aymatth2 (talk) 18:24, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

      I don't think "Chingisid dynasty" as such makes much sense. There are competing definitions of what a "dynasty" even is; a series of hereditary monarchs who each sat on the throne, excluding all their relatives who didn't? The entire family of that series of hereditary monarchs? The "state" or "empire" governed by them? Etc. See the discussions about Rurikid dynasty and category:Rurik dynasty, where we ended up renaming them to just Rurikids and Category:Rurikids. Similarly, see the recent scholarly work of Raffensperger & Ostrowski 2023, The Ruling Families of Rus, where the whole concept of a dynasty is heavily criticised as an outdated and ambigious concept that erases lots of people from history who didn't sit on the throne, despite wielding significant political or otherwise power and influence for sometimes decades. (Note: they also discuss 'house', 'clan' and 'family', and end up choosing 'family', as can be seen in the title.) If there is to be a new article, separate from the existing ones on Borjigin and Descent from Genghis Khan, I strongly recommend that the title be Chingisids, and to omit a word like 'dynasty'. NLeeuw (talk) 20:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

      PS: But really, I think such an article might easily become a WP:REDUNDANTFORK of the existing articles, so let's make sure it would have added value separate from what we've already got, or integrate such contents into our existing articles. My question here is just to make consistent redirects. NLeeuw (talk) 20:54, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

      I strongly disagree. The term "Chinggisids" has strong independent notability as distinct from the Borjigin. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

      I may start an Index of articles related to Ghengis Khan, including redirects. I suspect there is a fair amount of forking. Aymatth2 (talk) 22:27, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

The Crimean Giray dynasty was referred to as the "Genghisids". Genghisid/Chinggisid literally means Borjigin dynasty. Descent from Genghis Khan is irrelevant in this context, and I don't even know why this article exists. Should be merged. "Chingisid dynasty" doesn't exist. Only two words should be redirected Chinggisids and Genghisids. Beshogur (talk) 21:14, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Perhaps, but similarly, lots of people were referred to, or referred to themselves, as "Romans", and yet histiographical convention names a great number of them "Byzantines", for example. We could theoretically always merge everything, but we'll soon end up with articles that are WP:TOOLONG (e.g. List of Roman emperors should imo have been split, because it's way too long to navigate comfortably, and we already had List of Byzantine emperors.) Although I made a plea for not splitting off a new articles named Chingisids above if there was no obvious need, I think we shouldn't underestimate the value of splitting up articles either. NLeeuw (talk) 04:01, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

I agree that Descent from Genghis Khan is a very odd article that should probably be redirected, but Chinggisid is distinct from the wider Borjigin term primarily because it was descent from Genghis, not general membership of the Borjigin, that legitimised rule in the post-Mongol world. See discussion in e.g. May 2017. While the Borjigin altan urugh (golden family) included the descendants of Genghis's brothers and of his children by concubines such as Kolgen, they were not eligible for rulership because they were not Chinggisid. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:24, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Alright, I think I see a solution. I will expand Chinggisids until it is reasonably complete; Borjigin needs also a little bit of expansion and a lot of rewriting to match current scholarship (many of its sources are half a century old and vastly out of date).

Meanwhile, Descent from Genghis Khan should be renamed and refocused onto the matter of genetic descent from Genghis—i.e. the numerous papers that have been released after the "16 million descendants" article from 2003.

All redirects seem fairly self-explanatory then, except for Jochid/Jochids which should probably redirect to Golden Horde, and Family tree of Genghis Khan which would probably work best as a redirect to Chinggisids, if I can figure out how the family tree thing works. Thanks for bringing matter up, NLeeuw. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:03, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good! Yes, I suppose renaming Descent from Genghis Khan to Genetic descent from Genghis Khan or something works better. Chinggisids can then fully focus on the reigning families of the late Middle Ages descended from Genghis or married into that family. NLeeuw (talk) 16:09, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

PS: I would recommend doing a search query in reliable sources to check for the WP:COMMONNAME. We better prevent endless disputes about how to spel "Chingisids" (I don't care which, but we need to pick one). NLeeuw (talk) 16:13, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

The current spelling (Chinggisids) is favoured in most reliable sources that I can see, including all cited so far in the article. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:48, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Ngrams appears to overwhelmingly agree. I'm a bit surprised; I'm not that familiar with the double g spelling. Halperin 1987, which I use a lot for reference, has single g, single s, and some of his sources are single g, double s, but apparently they are in the minority. Ngrams shows the double g, single s spelling quickly gaining ground from the 1990s onwards. Seems like you've chosen the right title, so I guess that settles it. NLeeuw (talk) 22:19, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:21, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Proposal I think we already reached agreement, but let's make it clear.
  • Redirect no. #4 has been turned into stand-alone article Chinggisids, which is good. (Thanks to AirshipJungleman29!).
  • Redirects no. #1, #2, #3, #7, #8 and #9 should all redirect to Chinggisids.
  • If anyone ever created no. #5 or #6, they should redirect to Chinggisids as well.
  • Redirects no. #10 and no. #11 can remain unchanged.
  • A requested move (RM) for Descent from Genghis Khan could be discussed on Talk:Descent from Genghis Khan if the current title is found to be inadequate. AirshipJungleman29 could initiate such an RM if they please.

This seems to be the outcome of the discussion above, but we haven't yet formally agreed that we are going to resolve the question this way, so let's make it official. NLeeuw (talk) 11:31, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Support. As above, Chinggisids is the COMMONNAME for the new destination, and it has sufficient independent notability to exist as a distinct article. That resolves most of the confusion with the transliterations. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:34, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Kentuchy

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

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:07, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment looks like it could be an OCR error or a pronunciation spelling -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 06:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak delete doesn't seem plausable but does get some Google results. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:59, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
• Comment: 48 total page views since creation. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Entirely plausible typo, especially from both OCR and from non-native English speakers for whom "ch" rarely represents the "tsh" sound (which it doesn't even consistently in English, anyway: cf. anarchy, etc.).  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:23, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: Phonetically, I can definitely see how this misspelling could be possible. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:36, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Plausible misspelling, seems unambiguous. Has some degree of some. – Michael Aurel (talk) 04:39, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

凧

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

mentioned, but not directly. the article mentions 祝い凧 (iwai tako, or celebration kite) as a funny thing japan does to celebrate stuff, but not 凧 (tako, or kite). opinions? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:36, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep per WP:RFOR, this subject does have some affinity for Japanese given the history of kites. Furthermore, the kanji does appear in the article-- no, not solo, but 祝い just means celebration, and is a very simple grammatical adjective; it does not make the combination 祝い凧 a unique and different word. Fieari (talk) 23:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

oh right yeah while we're at it, should i create 祝い凧 after this is done? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 23:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:16, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Lu Tianna

• Lu Tianna → Kirsten Gillibrand  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It's unclear why this redirects here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:18, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak delete This site and other, seemingly less reliable, sources indicate that "Lu Tianna" is a Chinese-language name adopted by or used to refer to Gillibrand. There is precedent to keep these sorts of names, as seen in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 31#Foreign language redirects to Kamala Harris. But, unlike Harris's Chinese names, I don't find evidence of widespread use. I am willing to reconsider if evidence that this is indeed commonly used by Chinese speakers to refer to Gillibrand exists. Note that Lu Tian Na, which is used here by the New York Times, exists as well. I am not a Chinese speaker so cannot say if the number of words makes a difference. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:46, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Comment if this is treated like a Chinese name, then the variant spellings available from "Lu Tianna" would be "Lu Tian-na", "Lu Tian-Na", "Lu Tian Na" -- and the flipped forms "Tianna Lu", "Tian-na Lu", "Tian Na Lu" -- NYT uses one of the styles you can do with the syllables. In the PRC, the preferred form would have a single "word" to represent a name, so "Lu Tianna" if Lu is the surname and Tianna is the given name. This isn't the preferred style used in Hong Kong or Taiwan though. That is dependent and independent on romanization method, as some people style their names differently from the romanization method's preferred form. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 15:34, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Her Chinese name is known by the Chinese-language world, used by Chinese-language media. I can search a bunch of news article if I search on Google by her Chinese name "陸天娜" [9][10][11]. The name Lu Tianna (陆天娜; 陸天娜) is used by herself, pretty irrelevant to her English name. Lu Tianna, Lu Tian Na, Lu Tian-Na, Lu Tian-na are essentially the same, just with or without space or hyphen. It is just the difference of transliteration, all of them are used to some degree (and actually "Lu Tianna" is the most conventional transliteration). However, the transliteration is not a conventional way to refer to her, not in Chinese media or English media. This makes me doubt but I am still leaning that it is more useful than harmful. Sun8908 _Talk 14:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete Not mentioned at target. If you have to do this level of OR to justify a redirect, then just don't. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:32, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per Pppery. It seems other Chinese language name will preferred from Kirsten. Unfortunately, there is no absolutely match why did transliterated in other romanization name. ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 01:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

FC Türkiye II

• FC Türkiye II → FC Türkiye Wilhelmsburg  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This could refer to the B-team of the target club, but it isn't mentioned in that page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:04, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - if the other thing this could refer to isn't mentioned on Wikipedia, then the redirect is fine. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:20, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

  Please see WP:RSURPRISE. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 02:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:11, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nomination. ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 01:49, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:10, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Enteractive

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

unmentioned, results gave me some unrelated brand that does Things™. incoming links seem to imply that it's a developer that worked under ljn maybe probably, but that's all the info i got cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:01, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak retarget to Interactive (disambiguation) as a (mis)pronunciation spelling -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:51, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:53, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Interactive (disambiguation) as a plausible misspelling (vowels that reduce to schwa can easily be mistaken for each other). Fieari (talk) 07:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  This isn't a schwa though; it's a stressed short i. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  My local dialect/accent definitely reduces it to a schwa sometimes, nearly dropping it altogether. 'nteractive. 'nternet. I don't think this is uncommon. Fieari (talk) 00:16, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Not totally off the wall as a misspelling, but still pretty unlikely given how common "inter-" is as a prefix. And in this case, having this would be harmful as it would inhibit searching for this actual term, which has quite a few hits in WP already as various company names (none of which are main enough for a redirect themselves). This seems to be what the original target was for, but I'm having trouble finding much about the exact relationship. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:17, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Comment. And to add a little, god forbid I say the P-word, but yes WP:PANDORA applies, lest "enter-" redirects are deemed appropriate to make for all the (what I assume are) thousands of articles that begin with "inter-". This one is only even being intertained entertained because this redirect was up here for a different reason. Arguing for a retarget (and why to the dab page? Why not to the same place that "interactive" itself redirects?) is tantamount to saying: yes, we should delete this, but we should also make a brand new redirect, which no one seems to have bothered doing in the many years that the thousands of "inter-" articles have existed. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:27, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
  • I was curious, and Special:Prefixindex/Inter just goes on and on, so I ran the numbers. "Thousands" is correct. There's currently 10360 mainspace pages with titles starting "Inter", and another 22605 mainspace redirects starting "Inter"; 10407 of those redirects target mainspace pages not starting with "Inter", so would need {{R from avoided double redirect}}s created too if we took this as a mandate.
    For my part, I don't strongly care whether it's kept or deleted, but do not retarget to the disambig unless something with that spelling is mentioned there. (And I doubt it would belong if it were.) Not a plausible misspelling. For context, original target was LJN Toys, which at the time was a separate article that did prominently mention this term. —Cryptic 19:11, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

comment: a little late to remember to mention and probably inconsequential at this point, but the only evidence i found of enteractive working under ljn was circular. that is, old diffs and incoming links cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:09, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. This redirect inhibits Search which reveals 20 legitimate mentions. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:17, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

September 31

• September 31 → List of non-standard dates  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention of September 31 in the target page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:54, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Can someone unify it with #April 31? Web-julio (talk) 07:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• Note a redirect with this title was deleted in 2017, but a deletion review discussion overturned G4 speedy deletion as it had a different target (September). Thryduulf (talk) 14:50, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:07, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

  So now we have two other proposed targets. Any place this can point is guesswork, and a redlink clearly tells the user that there is no September 31. Still support deletion. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:38, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  Well, the current target already tells this day doesn't exist, especially cause if it existed it would have its own mainspace article. Anyways, does December 32 imply it exists? Web-julio (talk) 02:34, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget. October 1 would parallel an April 31 → May 1 RfD. But September 30 might be the likely sought-for page for users who simply forgot September's last date. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 22:34, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to September 30 per @Hyphenation Expert. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:02, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:51, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

It seems the current target page talk wasn't notified. Web-julio (talk) 01:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• September, which says that it has only 30 days in the first (very short) paragraph, makes more sense than either of the two new proposals, and I'd say to retarget there if there were any internal links. But there aren't, and a redlink is a better result here for all other use cases. Delete. —Cryptic 06:54, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  Well, if September 31 ever gets talked about in Wikipedia, it would be in the current target (list). However, it's not yet. Though both mentions the words separatedly. Web-julio (talk) 01:47, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per Pppery. There is no information on why did the editor must added in a leap year for September. IMO, there is only 30 days beneath the month of September but not added in one day. See this: [12] ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 03:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. It's difficult to search for evidence of a legitimate use of September 31 (meaning 31st September, other uses being ambiguous eg September 1931), but I can't find any. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:27, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

List of Chalcolithic cultures of China

• List of Chalcolithic cultures of China → List of Neolithic cultures of China  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No such list of Chalcolithic cultures exists at the target. This does not appear to be a subject that is discussed on Wikipedia at this time. Previously existed as a list with one entry.

This title may be able to be salvaged if the list of Neolithic cultures is expanded to include Chalcolithic cultures. However, searching for an article about a "Copper Age list" and being sent to an article about a "Stone Age list" does not seem generally helpful in a vacuum, and would be confusing to readers if there is no indication or hatnote about why they ended up here (that there may not have been enough content to substantiate an individual page for Chalcolithic). Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:36, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak keep. No, there isn't a list at the target, but several of the cultures at the target were able to work copper in their later years, such as the Erligang culture and the Yueshi culture, so it seems reasonable to keep this until such a time that a proper list is split off. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:51, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:46, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom - no Chalcolithic list exists. The page history needn't be kept. We have the redirect Chalcolithic China pointing to the same target, but probably that should point to Chalcolithic#East Asia. Jay 💬 13:26, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Karhusaari (island)

• Karhusaari (island) → Angelniemi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Misleading redirect. There are several islands named Karhusaari in Finland, the island in Angelniemi is not the only one and probably the most notable either. The redirect had two incoming links, neither of which was actually about the island in Angelniemi: one was for an island in Espoo and the other for an island in Kuopio. I removed the wikilinks from both. This redirect should be deleted until we have an actual article about at least some island named Karhusaari. JIP | Talk 12:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. I created this redirect when reviewing Karhusaari (disambiguation) because of the line in the article Angelniemi: "Other isles of Angelniemi are Angelansaari, Kokkilansaari, Pikkusaari and Karhusaari". If there are other islands then fine: mention them in the appropriate article and disambiguate at Karhusaari (disambiguation) to where this redirect should point. Otherwise, we actually do "have an actual article about at least some island named Karhusaari". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 22:01, 6 November 2024 (UTC) (Not an expert in Finland but once had a lovely trip to Helsinki)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• There are indeed many, see ceb:Karhusaari. Probably the base name should be a DAB and thus this redirect there. Karhusaari is also an island which has an article here. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:12, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
  • @Crouch, Swale: ... but as you know, a disambiguation page is not a list of things in the world, but an index of articles on English Wikipedia (of which we currently have two). By all means improve the existing Karhusaari (disambiguation), because otherwise it can be deleted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Matsubara dialect

• Matsubara dialect → Tokunoshima language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention in target article. Google search pulls little results bar city existence and being a Japanese dialect. Blethering Scot 21:23, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

If they're called dialects (方言), they're actually Ryukyuan dialects, and not part of Japanese (see Japanese dialects). As for the existence of the Matsubara dialect, there are some information about the pitch accent data from a quick search:

https://doi.org/10.15002/00012659

I wonder what else could be the criteria. Chuterix (talk) 21:37, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:23, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:04, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Nueva Hampshire

• Nueva Hampshire → New Hampshire  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Dakota del Norte → North Dakota  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Seems to be a fail of WP:RLANG, but I am not too confident. Weak Delete? -1ctinus📝🗨 23:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep. Half of the current U.S., including Dakotas, at some point were part of Spanish colonization of the Americas before Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. And given that USA doesn't have an official language and Spanish is the second most spoken, both redirects are justified. Web-julio (talk) 09:27, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete NH, keep ND as I don't see any strong ties between NH and Spanish languages. The area now in NH was not part of the Spanish colonization of the Americas so far as I can see, and only around 3% of the people in these states speak Spanish according to NH. However, ND was part of the Spanish colonization, and so has a tie to Spanish language. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:59, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:04, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete both Neither meets WP:RLANG in my opinion. I'm unconviced by the mere fact that many people in the U.S. speak Spanish to justify keeping here. (Many people in the U.S. also speak French, for example, but neither Nouveau Hampshire nor Dakota du Nord exist). In regards to North Dakota's supposed affinity to Spanish, that's spurious at best. There was never a place known as "Dakota del Norte" under Spanish rule, which in this case would have been limited to the brief era of Spanish Louisiana. (Assuming you count claiming Indigenous land as "ruling" it). No sustained European settlement occurred in the region until well after the U.S. acquired the territory. Even then, Dakota Territory was one entity until 1889. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Turkish Turkish

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

nonsense redirect Golikom (talk) 20:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep As per this source, this source, and this source, "Turkish Turkish" is not a nonsense statement, but rather one used for categorical purposes.

We must also keep in mind that "English English", "French French", "German German", and "Spanish Spanish" all exist too. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 20:47, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Can hardly call these sources. Beshogur (talk) 22:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Comment: I assume "Turkish Turkish" means the Anatolian dialects of Turkish (i.e., the Turkish language as spoken in Turkey). In that case the appropriate target might be Turkish dialects#Anatolian dialects. Similar redirects include German German (redirects to German Standard German), Spanish Spanish (redirects to Peninsular Spanish), English English (redirects to English language in England), French French (redirects to French of France), and Portuguese Portuguese (redirects to European Portuguese). —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 20:51, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  I fully agree. Of course, the redirect still shouldn't be deleted. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 21:02, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  Shouldn't be deleted because you created it? Beshogur (talk) 22:26, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  It's "Turkish of Turkey" if you look for the proper term. There is nothing like this nonsense. Beshogur (talk) 22:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  If we assumed users only used "the proper term" for everything we wouldn't need any redirects at all. BugGhost🦗👻 23:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  There is no single evidence that this term exists. Try googling google books. No one uses it. These "sources" aren't even sources. What's next? Making inventions, because it's ok? It doesn't exist and no one uses it. Beshogur (talk) 18:24, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  Beshogur I think you're falling into wp:bludgeoning territory - you have posted 12 comments on this RfD - I assure you everyone who comes across this listing will read your view on it, repeating yourself doesn't make yourself more persuasive. Regarding the actual terms, it's worth noting that "Turkish Turkish" is a more popular term on Google than "Turkish of Turkey" - see this trends result. BugGhost🦗👻 18:55, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  First, Turkish of Turkey is the translation of Türkiye Türkçesi, a common Turkish term used by the Turkish Language Association, second, that's not even a redirect, only mentioned in the article as a translation, because it's the second alternative name to Turkish. Googling "Turkish Turkish" can be misleading, because it doesn't look at commas, etc. I am saying that you can't find anyone using this in a linguistic book, whatsoever. How come no one discovered this until this particular user redirected in late 2024? Plus this user's one source is cooking book, another one Sydney government, another one some shady language learning website. It's not even clear that they're meaning that. What's next? Turkish Turks -> Turkish people. And this is my last comment. Beshogur (talk) 19:26, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete there is no such thing. There is "Turkish of Turkey" (Türkiye Türkçesi). Beshogur (talk) 22:24, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

I assume "Turkish Turkish" means the Anatolian dialects of Turkish so non Anatolian Turks aren't Turkish? What kind of statement is this? Beshogur (talk) 22:29, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

That is a non sequitur. By that logic, French French would insult Quebec French speakers and other non-Metropolitan French speakers by calling them not French (which they aren't and neither is Turkish Turkish, that's why there is a second Turkish/French in the terms).

And to answer your previous question, whether I created them or not has no importance on whether or not Turkish Turkish should be kept/deleted. My sources are self-explanatory.

Here's two more sources I found with "Turkish Turkish" used in them. [13][14] 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 14:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Stop giving example of other things. There is nothing like Turkish Turkish, and these are the "sources" you have hardly found. Beshogur (talk) 09:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete I can't find evidence this phrase is used to refer to the language or any of its dialects. The sources provided by the creator read to me as simply codes for the specific courses. (See, for example, the similar listings for Chinese and French at UC Berkeley). - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:57, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  Indeed, however the following 3 sources still use "Turkish Turkish", with the latter 2 sources most definitely not using them as codes. [15][16][17] 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 14:59, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  These "sources" are beyond ridiculous. Beshogur (talk) 16:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  How so? 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 17:05, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep the government of Sydney, New South Wales uses it per the given [18] -- thus it is a reasonable construct. Turkish is spoken outside of Turkiye with non-Turkiye based dialects, so this is definitely usable. Refine target per Granger. And add {{R from avoided double redirect|Anatolian Turkish}} Turkish of Turkiye could also be created as a redirect with the same target and same Rcat -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 18:16, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  The government of Sydney is very reliable source for sure! Anyways, it uses "Southern Turkish" as a branch, then Turkish. Simply stop writing false information. This isn't even a source by the way. Beshogur (talk) 19:06, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

So you contend that the governments of Tokyo, NYC, London, Paris, Moscow, etc, are *not* reliable? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:58, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Maybe you should read what reliable are. Beshogur (talk) 00:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

This is about the existence of a term, not about an event. I would assume sources needed would be more lenient than those needed for an event's occurrence? 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 10:13, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

There is no such term. Beshogur (talk) 15:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep. As a redirect, it makes sense. And since it's in use, it doesn't really matter if it makes sense or not, either conceptually or grammatically (but if it was grammatically incorrect (aka redundant or pleonasm), so all other redirects mentioned above, such as German German, would be pleonastic/redundancies). Web-julio (talk) 02:56, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

or retarget per anon/Granger. Web-julio (talk) 02:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Makes sense what? So no one discovered this until late 2024? Beshogur (talk) 15:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Putting wedge

• Putting wedge → Golf club  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 21 § Putting wedge – no consensus

Over two years later, let's try this again: delete per WP:RSURPRISE as unmentioned and per WP:REDLINK per my comments in the previous discussion's nomination statement. Steel1943 (talk) 17:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment shouldn't it just be refined to #chipper, per the last RfD? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:27, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Weak delete. "Putting wedge" is definitely a term associated with golf clubs but since we don't really know where to mention it or what it really refers to, we might as well put it in the bin until the term has an actual definition. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:25, 17 November 2024 (UTC) (blocked sock)

• Refine to #chipper, as an unofficial, possibly erroneous, but commonly/colloquially used synonym. I can find published attestations for the term's use (in novels and such), but it isn't enough for inclusion in the article itself. But that's fine and plenty enough for a redirect, no inclusion is really needed. The redirect itself will inform someone searching for it: "A putting wedge is more correctly called a chipper." Fieari (talk) 01:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Tata (Persian King)

• Tata (Persian King) → Tata (king of Awan)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There were no Persians at the time of Tata Викидим (talk) 21:48, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nom. The Persians haven't been created as separate ethnicity at that time. Ahri Boy (talk) 00:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

• This redirect was actually created by Maziargh in 2010 as a redirect to Awan dynasty, then subsequently made into an article by AnnGWik and since moved to the target of the current redirect (none of that is necessarily a reason to keep, though I will also notify those users of this discussion on their talk pages). There is no Tata on List of monarchs of Persia but I don't know enough about the plausibility of someone (incorrectly) believing this Tata to be Persian to say whether this should be deleted or not. A7V2 (talk) 00:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

  Tata is a semi-mythical figure, but the Awan dynasty dates to approximately 2000 B.C.. As far as I know (I am no expert), Persians came to Persis and became "Persians" a millennium later. If I am correct, Awan kings could not have ruled Persian people. Викидим (talk) 06:31, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

  I was more getting at how likely would it be that someone would search for this person in this way, ie that people would think to search for a Persian king. But given the relative obscurity of this person, that question is probably impossible to answer so ultimately I don't think it makes much difference one way or the other if this is deleted. That said I think adding him to Tata (dab page) would be helpful and I will shortly do so, but perhaps you or someone else would like to revise my wording. A7V2 (talk) 22:33, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete as misleading per the abovementioned findings --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

  Note that almost certainly the only way someone would find this redirect is by using it or following a link (which would likely be piped given the use of a disambiguator) so rather than being misleading, it can be helpful to help someone who is mistaken to find what they are looking for (but see my reply above as to whether that is likely to actually happen). A7V2 (talk) 22:33, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep The existence of a redirect is not a "factual offering". The argument for deletion is like saying redirects from typos should be deleted because they imply the typo is correct. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 18:53, 18 October 2024 (UTC).

• Delete, the target is simply not a Persian king. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
• I echo A7V2's thoughts. As a redirect to Awan dynasty, the redirect was getting views from 2010, which stopped in early 2022. The subsequent views were when the article was being written, and this RfD. Ideally we can argue to delete this since we have a factually titled article now. But Tata (king of Awan) doesn't have any redirects to it. What would be a proper redirect title to indicate a king who ruled some thousand years before his kingdom became part of the "Persian region"? What is a more colloquial name better than Persia to refer to the historial Iran region? Jay 💬 19:41, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  The place is known as Elam or Susiana. Even (Sumerian king) disambiguation would be less factually incorrect. Викидим (talk) 14:36, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 23:41, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

• Strong Keep and tag appropriately as a redirect from a (very plausible) error. A redirect is not an endorsement of accuracy, it is a navigation aide to help those who are looking for something find that thing. If someone doesn't know that a thousand years before Persia that land was known as Awan, this redirect will help them. Fieari (talk) 05:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 14:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Harapanahalli railway station

• Harapanahalli railway station → South Western Railway zone  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no mention of "harapanahalli" at the target article, or any other indication about a "Harapanahalli railway station" at the South Western Railway zone article. The only mention of "harapanahalli railway station" anywhere on Wikipedia is at the overarching article for Harapanahalli, but this article has a good number of problems and only contains two references, so it begs the question whether the railway station needs to be mentioned there either. In any case, it seems that there may need to be a change to either the target, or to the content, or to delete entirely if its not necessary to be included anywhere. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 08:42, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

• Add mention. Railway stations that verifiably exist (and this one does) are always plausible search terms and are always DUE for a mention on the article about the line and in articles about the settlement they serve. Note also this was a BLAR and should not be deleted without an AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 14:31, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello I'm the person who created this page the Harapanahalli Railway Station which is functioning currently six trains are operating through this station please help me to publish this article

Thank you :) Darshan Kavadi (talk) 15:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• comment Each of the three division articles has a list of the stations within the division. These lists appear to be incomplete do I cannot give an appropriate target, but whichever applies would be a good target. Mangoe (talk) 10:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
• I cleaned up the language at Harapanahalli#Railway Transportation. There are still no sources, so added a {{cn}}. Jay 💬 10:38, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:28, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no mention at the target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Linjian

• Linjian → Lin Jian  (talk · links · history)

The name, which is that of a town in the Chinese province of Shandong, is being redirected to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China spokesperson with same name. Either it should be deleted or be redirected to the target page I have given.Toadboy123 (talk) 03:47, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

• NOTE this is a malformed nomination. There is no RfD header on the redirect. The current target of the redirect is Lin Jian, and not that contained in the opening of this section. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:08, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
• Comment Lin Jian is definitely the wrong target. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:08, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
• Disambiguate with a see also to Lin Jian (林剑) and Linjiang (disambiguation); there is Linjian (临涧镇) in Pingyi County, Shandong, China; there is Linjian (林尘镇) in Zijin, Guangdong, China, listed at List of township-level divisions of Guangdong; Chen Linjian listed at 2020–21 and 2018–19 Chinese Basketball Association seasons; -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:26, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 14:31, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. The first option to think was disambiguate per 65. However, note that the town in Zijin, Guangdong, China, is spelt Linjiang, and another town in Huazhou, Maoming, Guangdong, China (zh:林尘镇) was mistakenly written as Linjian in the list of township-level divisions of Guangdong, but it is actually pronounced Linchen (see also: Huazhou, Guangdong#Towns), which I have corrected, so it is not an entry. Therefore, there are only two valid entries (Linjian as the town in Shandong, and Chen Linjian the basketball player) with zero entries having the actual article, which makes delete the best choice, unless at least one of the article is created. Sun8908 _Talk 16:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
• @Toadboy123: You had edited Linjian to remove the redirect, but you did not provide a new target, which is why your edit was reverted. Who is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China spokesperson you mention in the nomination? Jay 💬 10:12, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  That person is Lin Jian. Toadboy123 (talk) 13:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  Sorry, I misunderstood. In the nomination you mentioned .. the target page I have given. Which is that target page? Jay 💬 23:01, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per User:Sun8908. As far as I can tell, the primary topic is the town in Shandong, which we don't have an article for. I don't think this is a plausible enough search term for Linjiang, Linchen, Lin Jian, or Chen Linjian to be worth a disambiguation page. Best to let the search function do its job until an article about the town in Shandong is created. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 14:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

サイゴン

• サイゴン → Ho Chi Minh City  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Japan and Vietnam have quite an interesting relationship to say the least, but it's probably not enough to warrant a redirect to one of its cities. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:12, 15 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:24, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment Japanese: サイゴン, romanized: Saigon is the old name for Japanese: ホーチミン市, romanized: Hōchimin-ichi, lit. 'Ho Chi Minh City'. So, did the Japanese Occupation Forces during WW2 call it "Saigon", or did they call it something else? It is actually written as Vietnamese: 柴棍, romanized: Sài Gòn, so one would expect that the Japanese would have also written it that way in WW2. Japanese: 柴棍; or did the Japanese rename the city, or pronounce it differently with various Japanese sounds used for these characters? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:53, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Mongola

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

possible implausible misspelling TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:40, 7 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:10, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete - Ambigous, could be aiming for Mongols (A and S are next to each other on qwerty keyboard). BugGhost🦗👻 20:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per BugGhost, ambiguous typo with both "Mongols" (typo by adjacent key substitution) and "Mongolia" (typo by omission) both of which are likely forms of typo to occur -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 06:44, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
  • On second thought, this could also just redirect to Mongolia (disambiguation), where appropriate entries could be found for Mongols (subsidiary dab link) and Mongolia -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:52, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:40, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Mongolia (disambiguation) per IP. Pageviews are decent and typo is plausible, so I don't see a reason for deletion, and the dab page has relevant links for both of the likely intended targets. Also (and maybe this is just for me?), in the search results for "Mongola" both Mongolia and Mongols are absent from the first page. – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:47, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:52, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete as an arbitrary typo, no more deserving a redirect than any other (and not even clear what it's a typo of, as pointed out above). Let Mediawiki search do its job and suggest possible matches. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:38, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  The search results in this instance aren't helpful, as they don't contain either Mongolia or Mongols, which are surely what the the majority of people who type this are looking for. – Michael Aurel (talk) 22:05, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  Indeed, fair enough. But it does find a couple similar targets, and it does match several actual things/people named "Mongola". Probably better to defer to a search here rather than try to guess what the user intended anyway. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:51, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  All I'm really seeing is Metanarsia mongola and Omweso; other results are surely far too minor to be possible intended targets. Some results are just the word "Mongolia" in other European languages. If we retarget we're assuming it's more likely the intended target was Mongolia or Mongols, and if we delete we're assuming it's more likely there was a different intended target (because we're not giving them any options pointing towards Mongolia or Mongols). I take the former view. – Michael Aurel (talk) 05:26, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• WT has an entry on it but it seems to only be for Italian and Spanish so might not be appropriate in English. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:54, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

History of the United States (2008–2024)

• History of the United States (2008–2024) → History of the United States (2008–present)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect is the result of a bad page move but I don't think any CSD criteria applies to it. It is the result of an editor writing a new article that states that 2024 ushered a new era into American history. The article has now been moved to Draft space. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete for the reasons Liz gave. Nobody's going to look for an article by that name. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 21:15, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep, given the scope of the redirect is present in the target article, and then some starting 2025. Steel1943 (talk) 01:50, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - whether this redirect would be useful is just based on WP:CRYSTALBALL BugGhost🦗👻 08:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  WP:CRYSTALBALL doesn't apply here since the date range in the redirect is included in the scope of the target. Steel1943 (talk) 20:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  It's true that the date range is contained in the target - my point (which I admittedly didn't phrase well) is that whether this range (2008-2024) is a relevant set of bookends is currently impossible to determine. BugGhost🦗👻 00:48, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  What I'm trying to say is that's not relevant. I've seen several articles with incoming redirects that include date ranges which the target article includes, but is not entirely exclusive to. For example, see the list of incoming redirects to "List of Netflix original films". Steel1943 (talk) 01:06, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. Someone using this search term will find the content they are looking for at the target. We gain nothing by making things harder for them. Thryduulf (talk) 20:33, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Who would be using this as a search term? Is it generally considered that American history ended in 2024? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:39, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep No one is suggesting that American history ended in 2024, but 2008-2024 is covered in the target article. Ultimately, this is harmless. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:11, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - It is a small issue in that, as noted, it isn't causing any harm, however I agree that nobody is likely to type in that specific string of characters in our search - what will most likely happen in such a case is that somebody will start typing in "History of the United States (2..." and then autocomplete options will present. If you do this now, you'll see both the (2004-present) and the (2004-2024), which in my eyes is confusing, especially if I'm a regular reader who doesn't understand Wikipedia's policy on redirects. What's more, this does fall into crystal ball territory, and is a title that makes implications which readers might take as reinforcement that Wikipedia agrees with a particular viewpoint, something which I think would be more helpful to avoid. Any implications about the period demarcations of American history are best left to our sources. ASUKITE 01:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom, and as an implausible search term, very soon to be obsolete, all of which is reinforced by the fact that this only came about because of a bad move. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Vendamonia

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Californian city redirects

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jamie Boo Birse

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Google Currents (2011–present)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Kingite

• Kingite → Māori King movement  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous and not explained at target. (Soft) retarget to wikt:kingite? Cremastra ‹ u — c › 14:09, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:SOFTSP. Information about the mineral is certainly encyclopedic. Whether or not it's notable enough for its own article, I can't really say, but it's probably better to just delete this one. As always, a search will automatically include a link to the Wiktionary entry at the top anyway. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:41, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  On second thought, it might be better to dabify this one with entries for the current target, and maybe Phosphate mineral for the other, which has at least a brief mention. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

No opposition to a dab. The term Kingite is regularly used in discussing the original forces that supported the movement during the war but the term hasn't been used int he article. I don't think it needs to be explained as 'Kingite' is obvious when given with the context. Traumnovelle (talk) 19:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• The current problem is the incoming links from other articles – they (five of them) are all for the mineral. Turning it into a dab page seems the most practical solution for now (without prejudging whether it might one day become the title for an article about the mineral). For the NZ topic, perhaps best to make the link from the dab page to Invasion of the Waikato, which uses the term many times, rather than Māori King movement. Nurg (talk) 22:57, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• DAB seems sensible, but I disagree with linking the dab page to Invasion of the Waikato. Kingite here is definitionally connected to the Kingitanga. — HTGS (talk) 05:42, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anyone want to create the DAB?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:48, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Fay Spaniel

• Fay Spaniel → List of Star Fox characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This character has no confirmed last name, and this isn't even the right dog breed. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:56, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Per nom. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep - Google shows me that this name is in widespread use amongst fans, even amongst fans who say that they aren't sure whether she's a Cocker Spaniel or a Poodle. It's not just one corner of fandom, it crosses multiple different social media sites, fan sites, art sites, forums, and so on, and also it crosses over into the furry-sphere which is related but distinct from Star Fox fandom. It's certainly not an official name as far as I can tell, but the extreme widespread nature of this name being assigned to this character, rightly or wrongly, makes it a pretty plausible search. As a navigational aid, this will get a searcher to the right place where we have information on the character being referred to. Fieari (talk) 00:11, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:06, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history in case of support for deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Not mentioned anywhere. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:37, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Weak Keep. To those commenting "Not mentioned at target", the character is at List of Star Fox characters#Other members, although not with the surname in the redirect. Tevildo (talk) 22:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Lanyard class

• Lanyard class → Professional–managerial class  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I have been unable to find sources that describe the Professional–managerial class as the "lanyard class", which could also refer to other class groups. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

The phrases are used as synonyms in the Niskanen Center piece I linked in the edit summary:

Graeber suggests that the electoral collapse of social-democratic and worker’s parties in Europe is a result of a “revolt of the caring classes” against the “proceduralism” of the “professional-managerial class” for whom “rules and regulations, flow charts, quality reviews, audits and PowerPoints that form the main substance of their working life inevitably color their view of politics or even morality.” [...] Warren’s “I have a plan for that!” slogan appeals mainly to the PowerPoint masters of the lanyard class, not the people who have to navigate the byzantine maze of their oversight.

and also in the Telegraph:

...managerial class getting tax perks to feel good in their shiny new electric vehicles, while the manual classes... It’s the lanyard-wearing boss class who are enjoying the perks of subsidised electric vehicles...

PK-WIKI (talk) 21:40, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 04:48, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete. This seems to me like WP:SYN from essentially a single source (since the second source given above does not even use the term directly!), and not a term in common use. Many non-managerial workers wear lanyard badges. You might as well create a link for the "suited class", "PPE-wearing class", "tabard class" or "steel-toed boot class". — The Anome (talk) 11:50, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

"Laptop class" is also redirect to PMC due to similar usage.

"Lanyard class" has similar connotations and is in fairly frequent use, unlike the other phrases you mention: https://x.com/search?q=%22lanyard+class%22

Blog post that defines it and also mentions an (unlinked) mention in "academic literature". Used here in an interview on Jacobin. Somewhat difficult to find reliable sources using the exact term, but it's definitely in use and I added two other reliable source citations above. Lots of "lanyards", "lanyard wonks", "lanyard-wearing", etc. in articles. "Lanyard" is a signifier of a class.

Definition also listed on Wiktionary: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Citations:lanyard

PK-WIKI (talk) 05:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:45, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete, not mentioned anywhere. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Great Depression in the Middle East

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Asmodel

• Asmodel → List of DC Comics characters: A#Asmodel  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This was blanked by Quindraco. When I investigated, I saw why. "Asmodel" was removed from List of DC Comics characters: A, therefore breaking the redirect. It was if Asmodel, who is apparently a ten foot angel/devil, simply blinked out of existence. I would imagine this would be difficult for any ten feet being to do. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 04:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 04:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Anybody out there?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:44, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

GGKEY

• GGKEY → Google Books  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

no mention TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:01, 17 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment apparently it's Google's internal ID number for a book [19]; as not every book has an ISBN or EAN or UPC, there would be such needed at BGC -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:32, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Google Books Key. It's a thing, and should be mentioned in the article. BD2412 T 18:40, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

  But it's not mentioned, so this redirect shouldn't exist. Moreover, just because "it's a thing" doesn't mean the article on Google Books needs to say anything about it. Our article should be a broad overview of the site -- what it does, its history, etc etc. A random technical detail of how it keeps track of ISBN-less books internally would be inappropriate to add. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:27, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

FWIW, all books have a GGKEY at BGC, not just ones without ISBNs, from what I gather. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:34, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete, not mentioned at the target, and probably shouldn't be (see above). 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:27, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per IP. An (incredibly brief) Google search of GGKEY doesn't bring up anything other than guides on how to find a book by ISBN or similar identifiers, so it doesn't really seem to have the notability to warrant a mention at the article. Tessaract2^Hi! 20:55, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep per User:BD2412. Notable that this and other disruptive delete request were made by a blocked sock, and then argued and supported by one IP editor, who has done very little for the past 6 months but vote delete in RfDs. -- GreenC 16:10, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep Best target. The idea that we should delete and recreate redirects every time some redirectable word or phrase is removed or added to an article is contrary to many good things including common sense. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 11:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC).

Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

• Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam → November 2024 Amsterdam attack  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The Holocaust in the Netherlands, where actual pogroms happened, is a better target than a WP:RECENT football hooligan clash. मल्ल (talk) 16:08, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands or delete. The Hooligan clash which was instigated by the Israeli supporters who where chanting let the IDF win to fuck the Arabs has nothing to do with pogroms. M.Bitton (talk) 16:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect to The Holocaust in the Netherlands indeed, similar to the plural version of this redirect. Generally speaking a pogrom has to be initiated or at least condoned by local authorities, which even the most cynical amongst us couldn't say happened here. Smallangryplanet (talk) 16:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete "Pogrom" is not an established or a widely used term, looking at the coverage of this incident WP:RNEUTRAL. Retarget to the suggested article is also fine. — hako9 (talk) 20:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect as suggested, but I suggest adding a {{for}} hatnote (not a {{redirect}} hatnote, for language reasons) to that target. It is supposedly being used in prominent sources (and probably social media but I'm not on Twitter) to refer to the recent ethnic hooliganism, but I agree that it's inappropriate and insensitive to refer to this as a pogrom when actual state-sanctioned pogroms actually happened here. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:04, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep - Redirects are navigation aids. With the target article saying that the President of Israel characterized the attack as a pogrom, that's sufficient to make it a reasonable search term. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 00:06, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  The purpose of the redirects is covered in WP:RPURPOSE. The President of Turkey characterized the president of Israel as a "genocidal murderer". Is that sufficient to make it a reasonable search term, and therefore, a redirect? M.Bitton (talk) 01:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  Your analogy doesn't apply. Per WP:BLP, it would be inappropriate to put into the biographical article on the President of Israel the personal attacks that some other world leader made (although it would be appropriate to say that he has been criticized). Likewise, we do not put into biographical articles all the insulting "nicknames" that Trump has given all his political opponents.

  In the case of this redirect in question, the target article specifically has the term "pogrom" in the article, and there are no WP:BLP concerns.

  It's somewhat bewildering that this is not obvious, and I need to explain it. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 06:37, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  It's somewhat bewildering that you missed the obvious point: the president of Israel is not a reliable source for such a statement. His irrelevant opinion can be attributed to him, but that's about it. M.Bitton (talk) 14:31, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  WP:RS does not apply to redirects. The question about redirects is whether it's a plausible search term. The fact that the President of Israel called it a Pogrom, and it's in the article, makes it a plausible search term. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 20:35, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• Preferably delete, the usage of pogrom seems to be isolated to biased sources and should be avoided for obvious WP:NPOV concerns. I think a retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands would only work if it is retarged to something specific on that page. Esolo5002 (talk) 08:42, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Strong keep. What happened yesterday in Amsterdam was characterized by reliable sources as a pogrom. This is stated in the lede of the target. What happened in the Netherlands during the Holocaust was mass-murder of Jews, but not a pogrom or a sequence of pogroms. In fact, that article does not mention pogroms and never uses the word.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:19, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  Have any of the WP:RSP described this as a pogrom in their own voice? — hako9 (talk) 11:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands or delete.

When I was a fresh-faced disambiguator, I came across an ambiguous link to a place in modern Belarus. I identified it.

The very next problem was identical. I solved that too.

The third one was the same, and I solved it as well.

At that point, I took a break, because for some reason I was unable to focus properly and was swearing uncontrollably. One of those three places, obliterated in the early 1940s, is commemorated by an engraved stone in the ground. The other two are not.

Calling the recent incident in Amsterdam a "pogrom" is an insult to all those who were victims of actual pogroms. FWIW, I have no Jewish heritage. Narky Blert (talk) 15:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Speedy and Strong Keep - What happened in Amsterdam was horrific and it needs to be reflected as such. It has been described as a pogram and that's because it was one. MaskedSinger (talk) 19:15, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

  I'm going to try to say this as charitably as possible, but as someone whose relatives have had to flee actual pogroms during WW2, I feel I do need to say it:

  I find this comparison, made by heads of state or politicians and now defended by you, incredibly insensitive, deeply upsetting, and bordering, itself, on antisemitism, given how profoundly, by association, it minimizes the horrors of anti-Jewish pogroms and relativizes the atrocities of those that carried out pogroms. Especially now that it's become increasingly apparent the Israeli fans engaged in behavior that could itself, at best, be described as monstrous bigotry and cheers for ethnic cleansing.

  Either way, while I wanted to share how offensive I think this comparison actually is, I'm aware my feelings on the subject matter little. The only question that should be considered here is: per RNEUTRAL, is this term one that's been established by reliable sources to have due weight and therefore meets the criteria for NPOV redirects? I don't have an answer to that myself as I haven't looked at the proportion of sources that use the term, but I think that's what should be focused on here. LaughingManiac (talk) 14:17, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

  @LaughingManiac How is calling it a pogrom bordering on antisemitism? MaskedSinger (talk) 14:56, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

  I said what I said and have laid out my reasons for saying it already. Take it or leave it at that. LaughingManiac (talk) 15:07, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep A very quick Google search demonstrates that the term “Amsterdam pogrom” and “pogrom in Amsterdam” are being widely used to describe the article topic. This strikes me a reasonable search term; I personally used the redirect to initially find the article. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 20:44, 9 November 2024 (UTC) EDIT: under wikipedia:RNEUTRAL we are permitted to use non-neutral redirect titles and are in fact given extra leeway because redirects are less visible to readers. Given that the the term has been frequently used in reliable sources and given that it is a reasonable search term for readers to utilize, I really do not see a justification to delete. Spirit of Eagle (talk) 23:07, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget or just delete - the reliable sources used in the article which I spot-checked do not describe this event as a pogrom; at most they quote Israeli officials doing so. Hatman31 (he/him · talk · contribs) 02:41, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete The sources are not describing this as a pogrom. Netanyahu is not a reliable source for what this article should be called. Parabolist (talk) 11:00, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete An unfortunate event with poor behavior all around does not meet the definition of a progrom. If someone has called it that that can be reflected in the article text but we shouldn't be saying it was one. Just Step Sideways ^{from this world ..... today} 02:33, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• Strong delete or redirect as suggested. Not a pogrom, though there was violence against Jews. Natg 19 (talk) 21:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 04:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands. This feels like another case of WP:RECENTISM. 67.209.128.164 (talk) 08:37, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget WP:RECENTISM in full swing. Lavalizard101 (talk) 18:22, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose retarget to The Holocaust in the Netherlands per Ymblanter. The segregation and deportation of Jews in the Netherlands was a gradual and meticulous process. The holocaust article also has no redirects or incoming links from articles having "pogrom' in the title. If a president naming a recent incident as a pogrom, is irrelevant opinion, a group of Wikipedia editors characterizing the Holocaust in the Netherlands as comprising of a pogrom, is not any less. But if we have other redirects titled "pogrom" targeting holocaust articles where "pogrom" is not mentioned, or pogroms didn't happen, then I would like to look at those, and possibly reconsider. Jay 💬 08:26, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:43, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• What is the connection from this discussion and the one at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 25 on the same redirect? Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:42, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

  It is not the same redirect. The one at the November 25 page - the plural Jewish pogroms in Amsterdam, was nominated when its target the singular Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam, was an article. The singular was BLARd around 5 hours after the first nomination, and it was nominated (current redirect under discussion) another 5 hours later, and it was too late to bundle them together. Jay 💬 08:07, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Ted, Ned and Ed

• Ted, Ned and Ed → Codename: Kids Next Door#Characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These minor Codename: Kids Next Door characters (security guards of the Mustache Office Building who appeared in "Operation: S.H.A.V.E.") are not mentioned in the target article, and they weren't mentioned in the now deleted List of allies in Codename: Kids Next Door or List of Codename: Kids Next Door characters (whose extensive edit history is located at List of families in Codename: Kids Next Door) at the times the redirect was pointed at either page. Plus, a Google search for this exact term brings up mostly unrelated results (including one for the category where the redirect is located), and the redirect is also kind of ambiguous (it could refer to any three characters with these names), so I'm not sure if this is really worth keeping. Regards, SONIC678 01:30, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete WP:XY seems unlikely to refer to this one, and more likely to refer to "Ed" diminutive which has been used to cover possibilities that reduce to Ted and Ned as well; and there are already Ed (disambiguation), NED (disambiguation), Ted (disambiguation) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:27, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Joseph Stalin's death conspiracy Theories

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cite AV media

• Cite AV media → Template:Cite AV media  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

One of the many mainspace redirects that link to citation templates created by the same user. He has created many of them and I'm not in the mood for bundling so I might as well nominate one and see how that plays out. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:30, 17 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete WP:XNR to the pipeworking, not even close to readership content -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)
• Weak keep Is no different than Cite web which was kept several times. I don't think either should exist, but there's no reason for one but not the other. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:02, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

That was discussed in 2012, time to revisit it and get it deleted -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:15, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

NOTE #Cite web was nominated later today -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete while many results are for wikis many aren't so its not a Wikipedia specific term. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:20, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
• Strong Keep The major CS1|2 templates should be frictionless reaching the documentation, anything we can to help editors figure out how to find and use these tempalates overrides any minor guideline technicality. Nobody has presented a practical reason why this redirect would be a hindrance, but there are strong arguments why it's useful to keep. Also I'm concerned by the sheer volume of RfDs by an infinity banned sock, which are then followed up by a single IP editor voting/arguing in support of the nom. -- GreenC 16:19, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 03:39, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. This is an unnecessary WP:Cross-namespace redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:57, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. There really is no reason to have a redirect from mainspace to a template. Gonnym (talk) 11:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep, per GreenC. The Cite web RfD was once again closed as "no consensus". I think it's practical to have these as they could improve sourcing without much downside. It's also a hassle to type in "Template:" each time, and I can never remember if the shortcut is "tm:", "tp:" or "tl:". (But I think "tl:" might be Tuvalan Tagalog Wikipedia, as I've made that mistake several times before). BucketOfSquirrels (talk) 14:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Five Finger Discount (That's So Raven episode)

• Five Finger Discount (That's So Raven episode) → List of That's So Raven episodes#Season 3 (2004–06)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No content about the topic in Wikipedia, just a directory of TV series episodes. fgnievinski (talk) 02:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to That's So Raven season 3 where the episode is summarized. Mdewman6 (talk) 09:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to That's So Raven season 3#ep48 – an episode title is a reasonable name for a redirect, as there is a clear target and it is something a reader could easily search for. RunningTiger123 (talk) 02:42, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Redirect per RunningTiger. Gonnym (talk) 11:14, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Raleway

• Raleway → Ubuntu (typeface)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect doesn't seem to make sense. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:19, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Pinging @Stefán Örvar Sigmundsson: as they made the redirect. This redirect also makes no sense to me, as the only link I can find between the two articles comes from Reddit, and even then it only appears to be used in a game. /etc/owuh $ (💬 | she/her) 02:50, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. There's a raleway font, but as far as I can tell, it has nothing to do with Ubuntu. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 02:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to List of sans serif typefaces. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:59, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

  Hmm, while it is listed there, should it be? This seems like a case where the list should be limited to things that have articles. I don't know much about notability for typefaces and if Raleway is, but the current list entry is just unsourced with no page to link to and just a sample image. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:17, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

So hell

• So hell → Dependency hell  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unneeded redirect. The term "So hell" is not mentioned in the target article. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 15:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

So hell is a dependency hell about .so files, which .so is an executable format used on Linux. NagisaEf (talk) 17:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment it should be a {{R from avoided double redirect to|.so hell}} as the extension is ".so", so .so hell. the equivalent of .dll hell ; .so shared object is a dynamically linked library of software functionality; the target already mentions library dependencies. Perhaps a note should be added to show common library extensions (ie. .dll, .so, .lib, etc) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 18:04, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  .dll is used on Windows only; .so is used on Linux, Unix, etc. In Linux, .so format does not provide stable ABI. NagisaEf (talk) 18:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 00:56, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Arthur J. May

• Arthur J. May → Arthur Johan May  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Also Arthur James May. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:54, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Arthur May as the primary topic for this redirect. (I'm not sure Arthur James May is really the primary topic for the title "Arthur May", but that can be addressed elsewhere; conveniently enough, if Arthur May becomes a disambiguation page, it'll still be the right target for this redirect.) jlwoodwa (talk) 08:12, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Arthur May. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:03, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

November 23

UTF-2000

• UTF-2000 → Han unification  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Non-notable subject that is not mentioned anymore in the redirect target article. See old AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UTF-2000. Nidaana (talk) 15:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Rules to consider/Confer in e-mail debate

• Rules to consider/Confer in e-mail debate → Wikipedia:No personal attacks  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unnecessary WP:XNR of questionable usability. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:20C5:2840:D036:C9B3 (talk) 15:15, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete this unnecessary WP:Cross-namespace redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• This is ridiculous. I deleted this as housekeeping 45 minutes after I moved the original page into the project namespace back in 2008. I am effectively the only real contributor after 16 years, with most of the history being nominations for deletion and template/category shuffling, and for 4 of those years this page remained deleted as I left it. There is zero reason for this to exist in the article namespace, i.e. the actual encyclopaedia. As for this being history: I certainly didn't consider my own redirect from article to project namespace to be important edit history to keep. I deleted it. Discussions of link rot seem to be entirely hypothetical and based upon no actual data, and the original edit history, from the actual early days of the encyclopaedia, that I carefully moved into the project namespace in order to preserve, and that is now to be found at Project:Rules to consider/Confer in e-mail debate even began as a redirect itself making the idea that this is some sort of vital URL to preserve seem highly unlikely undeed. Uncle G (talk) 15:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

The B

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

Delete. B (disambiguation) contains no topics referred to as "The B." GilaMonster536 (talk) 04:23, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep seems like a bunch of them could be so referred to -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete Per Gilamonser; no evidence there is anything notable referred to as "The B." OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:13, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Don't you take the B or ride on the B, missed the B... there's a load of transport articles listed -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 18:08, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

None of them are specifically referred to as "The B," at least on the DAB page. GilaMonster536 (talk) 00:41, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep. To me, I would expect adding the "the" would take me to a disambiguation page or a more specific page rather than a generic article about the letter b. Ca ^{talk to me!} 13:34, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:42, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak refine to the Transportation section per 65. That seems to contain everything that could plausibly take the definite article. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:07, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• My first thought is that there are a fair number of topics titled The Bee, any of which could be abbreviated to the letter. BD2412 T 16:18, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Snoutlet

• Snoutlet → Heterocrossa eriphylla  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No longer mentioned at the target (see history there for why I removed it). Was originally created somewhere else, which also has no mention. There is one on WP, but it's to a mere listing of an apparently minor character (unsourced) voice credit in an as yet unreleased movie, and doesn't need a redirect. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:07, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget back to Mario & Luigi: Brothership. That's literally a major character in the game's plot and the game just released so there wouldn't be a plot summary just yet. He will definitely get a mention once the editors do a write-up on the plot. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:35, 8 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Update: The page has a plot summary now with Snoutlet getting mentioned. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 19:08, 10 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 04:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:39, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Bleach (games)

• Bleach (games) → List of Bleach video games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Bleach video games → List of Bleach video games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Bleach games → List of Bleach video games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ancient redirects that are neither notable synonyms for that article nor is it used in any articles for the last 18 years. Should be deleted. For the first redirect, edit history is not notable either with only two edits and both being moves. The other two were created as redirects and never actually used. MimirIsSmart (talk) 11:30, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete "Bleach (games)" as unusable -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:27, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Delete "Bleach games" as horribly ambiguous -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:28, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep Bleach video games. As long as it doesn't cause confusion somehow, and as long as there's nothing better to do with it (e.g. overwriting with an article), "X" is pretty much always a good redirect to "List of X". This won't cause confusion (what other meaning would "Bleach video games" have?), so this should remain a redirect. No opinion on the others. Nyttend (talk) 23:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 04:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Bleach video games due to its lack of other possible uses, delete others as unnecessary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:39, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It seems like we have rough consensus to keep "Bleach video games" and delete the other two, but one more relist can make it airtight.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:38, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep "Bleach video games" and "Bleach games", and delete "Bleach (games)". The first is clearly unambiguous, and is useful, and the second is, judging by a Wikipedia and a Google search, also unambiguous, and so useful. The third seems unnatural. – Michael Aurel (talk) 04:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

"Bleach games" is wrong. There are several non-videogame games, such as Bleach Trading Card Game -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 07:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

That's fair enough, so it isn't entirely unambiguous; it's not "wrong", though. Judging by search results for "Bleach games", this is the best target. I can't find a page on the card game in the first three pages of Google search results, with every other page being about the video games. In Wikipedia's search results, only the one page on the card game comes up in the first page, with the other results (except for a handful on film/TV adaptions or the original), all being related to video games. We also (see Template:Bleach) only have one article on the card game, whereas there are eight on the video games (the list article, and seven individual games), or twelve if we're counting the "related" video games. Also, look at the pageviews difference; [20] plus, the plural "games" indicates that the searcher is looking for multiple games, ie., a list. – Michael Aurel (talk) 10:13, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Whitewashing

• Wikipedia:Whitewash → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Wikipedia:Whitewashing → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unconvinced that the current target is definitely the right way for these redirects. Couldn't find "whitewash(ing)" or similar precisely. Possible alternative targets are WP:Conflict of interest, WP:Civil POV pushing, WP:Neutral point of view... Maybe I'm missing others. Again, still couldn't find the word. If neither the alternative targets nor dab-ifying nor leave as-is is a viable solution, then I guess... delete if no one objects? George Ho (talk) 07:46, 16 November 2024 (UTC); extended, 10:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Attitude flying

• Attitude flying → Visual flight rules  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Attitude flying" is not mentioned at the target, and definitions of attitude flying (eg [21][22]) do not correlate with VFR. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:26, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Makes me think of IFR flying with a hood on... where attitude control correlates to monitoring attitude instruments, instead of feeling it with your eyes on VFR pilotage -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 06:02, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Attitude (engineering)

• Attitude (engineering) → Axes conventions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Given the other (and similar) uses of "attitude" at disambiguation page Attitude, I'm not sure this is correctly targeted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:14, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. No clear target, especially with the disambiguator. It was leftover from a move about an hour after page creation. Retargeting to the dab page wouldn't be an awful alternative , but probably wouldn't be all that helpful either. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:32, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:11, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Fado (character)

• Fado (character) → The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 03:01, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment Fado is indirectly mentioned in the passage Tetra remains in the castle while Link and the King journey to the two sages who provided the Master Sword's power. They discover Ganon's forces murdered them both (which includes Fado). Maybe a mention could be added but I am doubtful. Ca ^{talk to me!} 08:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

November 22

Lectka enantioselective beta-lactam synthesis

• Lectka enantioselective beta-lactam synthesis → Β-Lactam  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Lectka Reaction → Β-Lactam  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Lectka Enantioselective Beta-Lactam Synthesis → Β-Lactam  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Lectka Asymmetric Beta-Lactam Synthesis → Β-Lactam  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The top redirect was previously an article that was redirected per Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lectka_enantioselective_beta-lactam_synthesis, apparently to preserve the option for a partial merge. But no merge has occurred, nor has any interest in doing so been expressed, nor do I think there is any content worth merging. There is no evidence this is a named reaction that is common enough to merit mention in the article. Delete all. Mdewman6 (talk) 07:37, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 00:03, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Coramandal FC

• Coramandal FC → Andhra Pradesh Football Association  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

should be deleted until there is a list of associated football clubs in the target page. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:20, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak retarget to Coromandel International which is the target of Coromandel FC. Jay 💬 10:01, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:09, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 00:02, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to List of football clubs in India. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to List of football clubs in India#Andhra Pradesh. This could have been done without a discussion. Daask (talk) 09:20, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Racial violence

• Racial violence → Ethnic conflict  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Racially motivated violence → Ethnic conflict  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Only four articles currently make use of this redirect. In all four cases, "hate crime" would be a more appropriate target than "ethnic conflict". So I suggest retargeting the redirect to "hate crime". Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 15:57, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment Racial violence redirects here too, should the two be considered together? Thryduulf (talk) 20:41, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  Da. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 22:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled together with Racial violence and relisting for further input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:47, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• tendency to Oppose. I looked at four of the roughly 30 articles that have the redirect racial violence. The legal formulation of hate crime seems to be fairly modern, from the 1980s - although per our article it's used retrospectively to interpret older events, and the article seems mostly to cover the legal aspects of the topic. Ethnic conflict seems to be a broader article including those hate crimes patterns that evolve into major (often intra-state) armed conflicts. The intended usage of racial violence seems to be somewhere in between and overlapping hate crime and ethnic conflict, in terms of the current state of the articles. I think that the different focus of the two articles is in some sense in singular - hate crime - versus ethnic conflict = plural hate crimes (pattern of many events on scales going up to 100s or millions of victims). Scale is a natural way to divide topics - when a set of hate crimes constitutes a crime against humanity or a genocide is not purely a case of scale, but scale clearly contributes. My feeling is that the relevance of racial violence as a link is to the broader pattern of multiple hate crimes, not so much individual ones. Caveat: I arbitrarily selected only four out of about 30 links - so this may misrepresent the more common usage. There is a see also link from ethnic conflict to hate crime, so a reader looking thoroughly may find that anyway. Boud (talk) 03:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

I think adding "Racial violence" to this discussion has confused the issue a little. My initial proposal was for "Racially motivated violence" to be retargeted to "Hate crime" because the usage seems more consistent with that definition. The case for "Racial violence" is much less clear. Certainly, scale plays a part. I recently created the redirect "Racially motivated attack". A racially motivated attack is a hate crime and an example of racially motivated violence, but doesn't necessarily imply ethnic conflict in the sense described by our article on that subject. An example is the murder of Stephen Lawrence: in that article, the phrase "racially motivated attack" is piped to "Hate crime". Jean-de-Nivelle (talk) 11:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 23:54, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget racially motivated violence as suggested, do not change Racial violence for reasons stated above. Kind of vibes based but I would be the least surprised this way. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:46, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget Racially motivated violence and no change to Racial violence per Jean-de-Nivelle's further comments. Daask (talk) 09:07, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Capitol protest

• Capitol protest → January 6 United States Capitol attack  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Capitol protests → January 6 United States Capitol attack  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Impossibly vague redirect. Could easily also refer to the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, or the hundreds of other protests that happen around the world at various capitols. Delete.-1ctinus📝🗨 23:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete RECENTISM at work here. There are many capitol protests at many capitols -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:24, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Could this be dabified? Do we have other articles on things called Capitol protests? PARAKANYAA (talk) 15:03, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

"capitol" is a generic word in this format, it is "capitol protest(s)" and not "protest(s) at the Capitol", so that would include such as the occupation of the building in Abkhazia right now; the Gunpowder Plot; Stop Line 3 protests; April 30 storming of the Michigan State Capitol; 2021 United States capitol protests; George Floyd protests in Utah; 2024 storming of the Kenyan Parliament; 2023–2024 Georgian protests; etc, etc. I don't think it would make a good disambig page. You could make a list article instead. List of protests near, at, surrounding, around, and, in, capitol, legislature, and, parliamentary, buildings -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:24, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

I is a useful search term. Should be DAB or List target.Blethering Scot 23:20, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

I think I would prefer to dabify it. Seems a reasonable search term. Unsure if it passes NLIST but that could also be ok. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:41, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

My problem is that there are wayyyy too many things that can be described as a "Capitol protest" that it becomes borderline WP:INDISCRIMINATE. 190+ countries, 50+ US states plus Brazil, Canada, and Germany as federal governments, plus centuries of history including countries that no longer exist. It would be hard to maintain, and I doubt it would pass WP:NLIST. -1ctinus📝🗨 02:14, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 23:45, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per 1ctinus. As a dab, we would either be using a dab as a runaround for a list that would fail WP:NLIST and involve WP:OR, or we would be trying to determine which protests held at capitols have been referred to as "Capitol protest", which would be painstakingly difficult and feel oddly like an incomplete version of the first option. Daask (talk) 09:01, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Rising And Setting Of The Sun

• Rising And Setting Of The Sun → Sunset  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Could refer to a sunrise also. Classic WP:XY. Delete. -1ctinus📝🗨 23:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment - I think this might actually be a reference to Psalm 113 (verse 3). Not sure if it's a close enough match to redirect, but this is definitely where my mind first went. Fieari (talk) 23:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  "Setting" in the context of a sunset is not mentioned on that article. -1ctinus📝🗨 00:03, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Sun path, where the rising and setting of the Sun is discussed -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 05:34, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is a retarget to sun path acceptable?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 23:42, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Sun path, the target of Sunrise and Sunset. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:23, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

4 (album) by matisse

• 4 (album) by matisse → 4 (Matisse EP)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Sock posted this for RFD but was speedily kept since well.. sockpuppets are not allowed. But the point still stands. This is an improper disambiguation. Delete. -1ctinus📝🗨 22:56, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Incorrectly formatted, and inaccurate (the target is an EP, not an album). Tevildo (talk) 10:53, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 00:14, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete as inaccurate --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:17, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

2026 Houston Texans season

• 2026 Houston Texans season → Houston Texans  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:TOOSOON, no relevant information at the target, making it a misleading redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Strong delete per nom. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 22:54, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Noting that similar nominations, for other team seasons of the same year, were made at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_24#2026_Buffalo_Bills_season. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Macchar

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

no particular affinity for urdu cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

This one matches a lot of pretty legitimate uses in Indian websites for mosquito control, as does the spelling variant "machhar". Hard to tell which is the preferred spelling. Dyanega (talk) 22:04, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

if wiktionary is to be trusted here, it'd be "macchar". then again, it's tucked away in the translations, so... cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:48, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. WP:RFOREIGN is the relevant essay. A casual search revealed the use of this term (or its spelling variant "machhar") for mosquito in English-language content.[23][24][25][26][27] Thus I think this is an example of "Apparently foreign words which are used as the English variant word in some forms of English". Daask (talk) 09:37, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Mozze

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

no particular affinity with this language... whatever language it actually is. google gave me nothing, wiktionary gave me nothing related to mosquitos cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:50, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

It's got no usage, and appears to be a misspelling of the nickname "mozzie". I'd support a speedy delete. Dyanega (talk) 20:56, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Agree, mozzie is the Aussie word. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete. While this is possibly a plausible phonetic misspelling of "mozzie", which is Australian slang for mosquito, this seems ambiguous with Canne mozze and even Mezzo. – Michael Aurel (talk) 23:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Brandblusser

• Brandblusser → Fire extinguisher  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

no particular affinity for dutch cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:45, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Extuingisher

• Extuingisher → Fire extinguisher  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

not on the plausible side of misspellings. it's 6 letters effectively scrambled cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:42, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete as being an implausible misspelling, and per the pretty much non-existent pageviews. – Michael Aurel (talk) 23:10, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:20, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Agent Galahad

• Agent Galahad → Kingsman (comic series)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in the redirect target. It used to have an article, but it was deleted, then redirected, then deleted again, then redirected again, then deleted again, then redirected to another article. Either it stays deleted or redirected, or have to recreate the article. Toby2023 (talk) 19:42, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect to Kingsman (franchise), where there's a mention. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:07, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Done I've changed the redirect to the franchise article. Nightscream (talk) 06:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

University of Michigan School Of Law

• University of Michigan School Of Law → University of Michigan Law School  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Currently unused, and redundant with the similarly spelled University of Michigan School of Law redirect. The "Of" spelling is only used for this redirect of the many "University of Michigan School of" redirects, which causes more clutter when a user searches for 'University of Michigan School' with no additional value-add. Engineerchange (talk) 18:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep, very cheap for what it is. It's incorrect capitalization, yes, but so is a lot of stuff in Category:Redirects from other capitalisations. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 18:39, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: Nothing problematic about this redirect and it could possibly be useful. Redirects are cheap, and it's not misleading in any way. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep per those above. BD2412 T 21:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Unambiguous, non-problematic. – Michael Aurel (talk) 22:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep per everyone above and WP:CHEAP. This redirect is unambiguous, not harming anything, and will take readers exactly where it promises whenever they're searching this term. No need to delete it. Regards, SONIC678 01:42, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:53, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Headwaters Country Jam

• Headwaters Country Jam → Montana  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target article or rest of Wikipedia. Delete. Retarget per below -1ctinus📝🗨 23:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs more consensus
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 16:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Cardwell, Montana, where I've added a mention. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete: Looks like it's a music festival held in Three Forks, Montana, so a mention there could be added. However, there is some sourcing on the festival, so WP:REDYES could apply. मल्ल (talk) 16:29, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

WP:NOTWIKIA and WP:NOTFANDOM

• Wikipedia:NOTWIKIA → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a blog, web hosting service, social networking service, or memorial site  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Wikipedia:NOTFANDOM → Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not#Wikipedia is not a blog, web hosting service, social networking service, or memorial site  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 31 § Wikipedia:NOTFANDOM – keep

Suggested decision: Retarget to Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not Fandom. WP:WPINFD and WP:WPINWA already target that page, which explains the differences between Wikipedia and Fandom, but this redirect is still targeting the policy on that Wikipedia is not a social network, just like treating anyone who slaps unnotable fancruft with indiscriminate collections of information just like on Fandom^[hyperbole] as someone who is using Wikipedia as a social network. 67.209.128.85 (talk) 15:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

 Comment: Unfortunately, I cannot notify the ones who created such redirects because both of them are either retired and/or inactive. 67.209.128.85 (talk) 16:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Why would you retarget it to an essay instead of a policy? The Banner talk 17:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia now has an essay explaining that it is not Fandom. The current target of these redirects is outdated, so i was obligated to ask for consensus before doing any deliberate redirect target changes. 67.209.128.85 (talk) 17:35, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep You are proposing to downgrade the level of importance as an essay is just a long comment while a policy can be enforced. The Banner talk 12:56, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep both. Both have incoming links, and have existed for years. Also, "policy" > "essay" any day of the week. Hatnote the current target if necessary. Steel1943 (talk) 03:40, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

  I agree that the current target should have a hatnote if we were to keep this redirect.

  I propose it should look something like this:

  {{Redirect2|WP:NOTFANDOM|WP:NOTWIKIA|the essay explaining that Wikipedia is not Fandom|Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not Fandom}}

  Which would appear as:

  "WP:NOTFANDOM" and "WP:NOTWIKIA" redirect here. For the essay explaining that Wikipedia is not Fandom, see Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not Fandom.

  67.209.128.85 (talk) 12:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep widely used already, and this concerns POLICY, which is of much higher import than any other rules. An ESSAY is not even a rule, and thus will be widely misleading as it makes any arguments using the shortcut expecting policy result in an argument that means nothing, as essays are ultimately not WIDE CONSENSUS created polices. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 05:12, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep Policy should be a higher priority than essays --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:36, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Jim Baker (lobbyist)

• Jim Baker (lobbyist) → National Rifle Association#Lobbying and political activity  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect was created in 2013 as a "placeholder" ([28]), but the creator never actually built out an article and a web search indicates it is dubious that the subject meets WP:GNG.

The redirect target article does not mention Jim Baker anywhere in the article text. Anyone searching for the subject will be redirected to "National Rifle Association" which will provide them with... no information whatsoever. Whilst dangling redirects rarely do any harm, the target article should generally mention the subject of the redirect in some way. Hemmers (talk) 14:42, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom; doesn't seem to match anyone else at James Baker (disambiguation). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

myelate

• Myelate → Honey  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Myelates → Honey  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

results lightly imply that this is an obscure synonym for honeydew honey, a verb probably related to honey, or some guy on deviantart. not present in the target or wiktionary cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 14:23, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• retarget to some guy on deviantart. Delete, I've also found this as a typo for "myelinate", and maybe something to do with oak trees, but it's spotty and extremely obscure, and even the venerable OED says nothing about it. And we have no mention of this anyway, sourcing for which doesn't seem to be reliable. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:39, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

some regional honeys

• Philippines Honey → Honey  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Philippines honey → Honey  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Finland Honey → Honey  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Finland honey → Honey  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Himalayan honey → Honey  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

locations and their relations with unmentioned in the target. note that the sentence case redirects were all unsourced stubs, with two of them having been created by the same (now blocked) user cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 14:18, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Benzema 15

• Benzema 15 → Zahia Dehar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Surely Benzema 15 is an intrusive and obscure name for an article relating to the football/soccer player Karim Benzema, which relates to sensitive content which shouldn't be openly glorified with the naming of this redirect, as it cannot be compared to other redirects such as CR7 for Cristiano Ronaldo. Cltjames (talk) 12:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Barotrauma and Wind turbines

• Barotrauma and Wind turbines → Bat#Conservation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"barotrauma" refers to damage caused by air pressure differences. while pretty unique to bats since their lungs are held together with thoughts and prayers, it's not exclusive to them. granted, getting sent to the shadow realm due to barotrauma from the low-pressure areas just behind the blades of wind turbines is a little more closely associated with bats, but it's not what the redirect's wording necessarily implies cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:31, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - the intersection of the two topics is unique to bats - other animals that it's thought are impacted by wind farms are harmed by impact damage flying into them, not pressure damage from being near them. This is covered in detail at the target. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:42, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Nustrale

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

results gave me seemingly assorted pig species. the creation, by a user blocked for constant low-quality additions, refers to a yahoo article, referring to a species of bat known as "myptis nustrale", but you wouldn't find that out from the redirect. hell, as that article states, "nustrale" apparently means "ours" in an obscure french dialect, so in theory, it has nothing to do with bats. the bat shown there is cute though cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:19, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. This redirect inhibits Search which reveals several mention (mostly pig/pork related). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:59, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Final kefka

• Final kefka → Kefka Palazzo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

unused fan name. people just call him kefka. or cefca if they're based cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:42, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. If it was Final Fantasy Kefka then I might have reconsidered. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:51, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirect assimilation

• Wikipedia:Redirect assimilation → Wikipedia:Redirect#Do_not_"fix"_links_to_redirects_that_are_not_broken  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Wikipedia:ASSIMILATION → Wikipedia:Redirect#Do_not_"fix"_links_to_redirects_that_are_not_broken  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete No obvious connection with "assimilation"; no nontrivial incoming links. --Trovatore (talk) 03:15, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete I actually saw this request at WP:AfC/R and saw that it was either pointless or the requester was confused. Oh well, it was accepted already. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 06:05, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 07:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete how is "ASSIMILATION" in any way related to this at all? Highly misleading WP:ASTONISHing and WP:PANDORA. 89.33.113.249 (talk · contribs) never showed [29] where this terminology came from -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 05:20, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per 65.92.246.77 (talk). Search didn't reveal this term having been used on Wikipedia discussion pages. Daask (talk) 08:48, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Confusing Pokémon Redirects

• Pokémon attack → Gameplay of Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Pokemon attack → Gameplay of Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Evolution Of Pokemon → Gameplay of Pokémon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

All three redirects can potentially be confused, and thus serve as unhelpful search terms. "Pokémon attack" can refer to both the attacking moves of the Pokémon and the in-game stat (While both are covered at the same article, a redirect this broad does not help with finding one or the other), while "Evolution of Pokémon" could be misinterpreted as being the real-world evolution of the franchise when it is instead covering the in-game terminology. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:46, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Couldn't pokemon attack also refer to getting attacked by a pokemon in-universe. Anyways, delete all per nom. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:45, 15 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep the 'attack' redirects. Both things it refers to would have the same target. I'm neutral on the 'evolution' redirect, as you'd only think about the "real-world" evolution if you (over)think about it too much. Web-julio (talk) 01:37, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. "attack" could refer to moves, stat, or any other form of attack related to the franchise or the species. evolution could refer to the franchise or the species. so on and so forth. was admittedly a little iffy on nominating those before, but they're here now, so... cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:52, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:46, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Contrary to nom, "Pokémon attack" could plausibly refer to other aspects of the franchise besides the game, eg. the activities of characters on Pokémon (TV series). Daask (talk) 08:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

National Italian American Foundation

• National Italian American Foundation → it:National Italian American Foundation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

(NPP action) An article at this title was deleted at AfD in 2020. Per WP:SOFTSP, interwiki redirects should not be made to other-language Wikipedias. jlwoodwa (talk) 01:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

delete per nom cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:28, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nom. This is the English language wikipedia, not the Italian. The Banner talk 17:05, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment. I can't actually find the claim that interwiki redirects should not be made to other-language Wikipedias at WP:SOFTSP. Why shouldn't they? Wouldn't a soft redirect be a good solution here? --Trovatore (talk) 02:13, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

@Trovatore: I think it's implied by The plain {{soft redirect}} template should not be used in the mainspace. Instead, use one of the specialized templates (see below), and the fact that there is no {{Wikipedia redirect}} template. As for "why not": readers of the English Wikipedia are looking for English-language content. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:25, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

The first is a little speculative — maybe the specialization is listed somewhere else, or maybe just no one's made it yet. That doesn't necessarily imply an active opposition to interlang redirects.

As to the second, probably you didn't mean it this way, but that can be taken as almost insulting, the stereotype of the monolingual American/Brit/Aussie. The purpose of soft redirects is to help users find relevant content in sister projects, and I don't see why we wouldn't want to help them find it in other languages (whether those are technically "sister projects" is beside the point). --Trovatore (talk) 06:26, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

yeah, but said relevant content is locked behind a different wiki with (possibly) different quality standards and a different language. it's statistically not very likely that everyone who looks for something like this would coincidentally know english and italian. contrast to soft redirects to wiktionary as an example, which lead to the english wiktionary

also, that second point didn't really make much sense. what's so insulting or stereotypical about wp-en readers wanting content in english? isn't that the entire reason they're not on wp-it? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:26, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Wiktionary also has different inclusions standards from English Wikipedia — very different, seeing that it has a different purpose. Italian Wikipedia is at least closer than that. They're entitled to their own standards, but they're in the same general milieu; it's not like a random web link.

Of course not everyone who looks this up is likely to know Italian, but given the topic, it seems likely that a fair number will, or will at least be able to puzzle it out.

What's insulting is not assuming that they're looking for content in English, but that they're looking for content only in English. The fact that someone is looking in English Wikipedia provides no warrant to assume they're not interested in content in other languages as well. --Trovatore (talk) 19:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

unfortunately, betting on the chance of someone knowing that other language in the first place is, in the nicest way i can put it, lazy. for cases like this, there are some solutions i've seen

• returning to red
• including a red link, but also a link to an article in an appropriate language (mineirinho ultra adventures [pt]). haven't seen this outside of the touhou project infobox though, which means i haven't seen it in mainspace, so i'm not sure this would be a good idea
• creating an article lmao

i am still inclined towards the first, since someone could create an article later on cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:10, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

It isn't "betting" on the user knowing Italian. Look, not everything in Wikipedia has to be useful to every user. For example, many technical articles are entirely useless to any reader who doesn't have a very strong technical background, and that's just fine, because Wikipedia is WP:MANYTHINGS. The fact that there's a well-written (though admittedly poorly sourced) Italian article on this topic should not be ignored; we should find some way to surface that to the reader who searches for this term. --Trovatore (talk) 17:54, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

method 2 is sounding really good right about now... cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Italian Americans which has information about the organisation. Do not delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:06, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep or modify somehow, not sure how, but the user searching this term should get some sort of indication that there is an it.wiki article. --Trovatore (talk) 21:42, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

November 21

Hent

• Hent → Crasna (Tisza)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Henț → Crasna (Tisza)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Reopening Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_19#Henț/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_19#Hent as the sockpuppet's involvement was largely procedural - I was the first to point it out at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_5#Henț_River that these redirects suffer the same problem as those. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak Delete. Google knows "Hent" only as the Middle English word, an abbreviation for hentai, and a track from the Yann Tiersen album EUSA - our article on Tiersen mentions the album, but not the track. There's very little evidence that the word refers to the river - "Hent River" gives us Henty River (in Australia). Tevildo (talk) 12:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Just one more thing

• Just one more thing → Columbo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

mentioned in both columbo and columbo's articles as his catchphrase, and in columbo and peter falk's articles as the name of a memoir (and of an autobiography). opinions? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:25, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget to Columbo (character), per redirects like Don't have a cow, man to Bart Simpson. As for the memoir, the capitalized version, Just One More Thing, should redirect to Peter Falk. -insert valid name here- (talk) 21:40, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Now that Just One More Thing is a disambiguation page, I vote to retarget to that. -insert valid name here- (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Columbo (character) per precedent, listed above. Fieari (talk) 07:15, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
• Comment a hatnote should be added for One More Thing and Just One Thing and Just One More -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 16:11, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
  • A disambiguation page has been prepared to use in the hatnote for wherever this ends up pointing to -- Just One More Thing (disambiguation) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:14, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:AINTBROKE. The same origin story is given for the catchphrase in both articles, with basically the same amount of detail. Neither is preferable to the other, and in absence of a reason to retarget, we shouldn't. Agree that the capitalized title of the memoir should go to the actor's bio, per WP:SMALLDETAILS. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:19, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

a do or two has been did, resulting in just one more thing (capitalized) being a dab. assuming said do is not undid, i'll vote to retarget to that dab cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 13:00, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:33, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• @Cogsan: your comment above seems to have gotten mangled. Do you want to try restating? Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 23:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  i say what i mean and i mean what i say, and i say retarget to the dab~ cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Clock/calendar

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

xy? while a lot of clocks are also calendars these days, they're not inherently the same thing, and their relation or lack thereof isn't discussed in the target cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 18:07, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete per WP:XY. Calendars aren't clocks. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:16, 14 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:46, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:XY --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:12, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Time#Measurement per WP:XY: it may be possible, however, for such redirects to point to a location in which both topics are discussed. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:51, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

  yeah, but their specific relation also isn't really discussed there cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 23:40, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  What‽ It's absolutely discussed there! One example: In day-to-day life, the clock is consulted for periods less than a day, whereas the calendar is consulted for periods longer than a day. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  if that's in-depth enough in your opinion, then fair enough i guess cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:16, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  In-depth has nothing to do with it. The rationale is WP:XY, which is resolved by redirecting to a place both topics are discussed. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:24, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Deleteish. I think XY is more important here. My gut tells me that this was intended to refer to clocks that have calendars built in, and that the off chance that someone looks for this (especially unlikely given the slash), they're probably looking for that. There's also a deleted Clock calendar page (as OR, via a prod), which might back that up. There's also Calendar Clock Face, but that's kind of a stretch. And there's stuff like Prague astronomical clock, an actual clock that even has a section devoted to a calendar mechanism that it contains. In all, I just don't think there's a good target here, especially given the odd formatting with the slash. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:25, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  What do you mean by I think XY is more important here? WP:XY supports retargeting, not deletion. Also, that Clock calendar was deleted doesn't back anything up. Someone had posted File:Clock calendar.jpg along with their personal explanation of what it means. That abolutely should have been deleted, but it has no bearing on the redirect at hand. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:45, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  Yeah, I was a little unclear...by "more important", I mean that I think it's a case of XY without a good retargeting option. That's a fair point about the old deleted article given that image upload. But that gut feeling I was talking about is also backed up by a simple web search, which comes up with endless clocks that have calendar functions built in (which is probably most digital ones at this point). Even if both are technically mentioned where you propose, it's a bit of a stretch that it's actually going to be a helpful target. It's hard to imagine that anyone doesn't know what these everyday items are, and even if they don't, it's also unlikely that they're going to search for them together...with a slash in the middle...unless they're looking for something more specific, like some combination device, which isn't mentioned there. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:57, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  What I'm getting at is: if you're reading the redirect to mean "something that has the functionality of both a clock and a calendar", that's one thing...but your rationale for deletion then is not WP:XY. WP:XY is explicitly for the intersection of two topics. When there is a target that discusses both topics, which we have in this case, WP:XY says to retarget there. While I disagree with them, arguments such as with "Delete per the formatting" or "Delete because BigTechCo makes a notable gadget with this name", etc. don't have that problem -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:02, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:XY. Clocks are devices which measure and read out time; calendars are systems of subdividing and numerating an entire year. Some clocks also read out the date but that does not make them calendars. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:36, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  ...and all of that is explained at Time#Measurement. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:HEAVY

• Wikipedia:HEAVY → Wikipedia:Why Heavy Bombers Are Not Useful Anymore  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources#Heavy.com – see WP:HEAVY.COM. Current target is a little-used essay, redirect has no incoming links. The perennial sources index would be a much more useful target. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 21:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 21:28, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget per nom; the RSP entry seems a lot more useful, and not only is the shortcut unused, but there don't even seem to be any incoming links to the essay itself in the wild (other than just lists of essays and stuff). If someone really wants a shortcut to the essay badly enough, BOMBER still works I guess. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget per nom. Much more useful target to editors --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:45, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete or retarget. Considering it had all of 10 hits last year and is slightly ambiguous, it could be safely deleted, but otherwise, yeah, retargeting is a tiny improvement. Station1 (talk) 01:16, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Black Mesa Golem Ape

• Black Mesa Golem Ape → Half-Life VR but the AI Is Self-Aware  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

unmentioned cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:39, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

The Crumbles (illness)

• The Crumbles (illness) → Half-Life VR but the AI Is Self-Aware  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

unmentioned. some could say ᴛʜᴇʀᴇ'ꜱ ɴᴏᴛʜɪɴɢ ᴛʜᴇʀᴇ cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:37, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete It was a one off joke made by Holly and seems about as useful to keep as Gordon's death in All Dogs Go To Heaven 2

LaffyTaffer (talk) 21:20, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Wario 4

• Wario 4 → Wario Land 4  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

wouldn't it be competing with warioware: touched! for that title? admittedly a weak nom because wl4 is the only one with a 4 plastered on its name cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Apparently I created this redirect but I have no memory of it. I think Wario Land 4 sounds more plausible as an expected page than Warioware, but I don't have a strong opinion. Popcornfud (talk) 20:12, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

i guess if you want to be pedantic at the cost of common sense, virtual boy wario land would be the 4rd wario game, and wario land 3 would be the 4st wario land game cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Chimneybot hat

• Chimneybot hat → Top hat  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

not entirely sure it's a plausible misspelling of "chimney pot hat" cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete as unlikely misspelling --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:46, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Zubon

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

from ズボン (zubon), japanese for... trousers. no particular affinity with japanese. it's a chain of like 4 borrowed words, wow cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Richard Doty

• Richard Doty → Mirage Men  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Target page is a documentary film in which Doty is interviewed extensively, but the article says nothing substantive about Doty other than this fact, so the connection seems tenuous. Possible new target is Paul Bennewitz, as Doty is mostly known for his involvement in an alleged clandestine disinformation campaign targeted at Bennewitz. Honestly, I'm on the fence about this redirect; I think that Doty is wikinotable, albeit in association with a WP:FRINGE topic, but creating an article about him is not on my priority list, and I'm not sure whether Mirage Men is an appropriate redirect target in the interim. Carguychris (talk) 19:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Redirect to Richard L. Doty and remove links from the three first pages here. I agree that the fringe topic Doty may be notable, but there is currently no obvious target article for a redirect from his name. 80.221.186.222 (talk) 11:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Doty is certainly wikinotable and I've been tempted to write the article on him but so far as I know, he's still living and I'm not sure a standalone bio on him could pass BLP. because we'd had to add caveats to everything he says about himself. The two obvious candidates for redirect are Mirage Men and Paul Bennewitz. I prefer redirecting to the documentary because Doty consented to participating in it. Strongly opppose redirect to Richard L. Doty, which would just add to confusion. Feoffer (talk) 00:49, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Furry Shadaya

• Furry Shadaya → Farai Chideya  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Nonsensical redirect, why would anyone search for this? 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:B493:3381:6FAD:82D8 (talk) 16:29, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Seems like an attempt at a phonetic spelling but can't find evidence this is in use even as a misspelling. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:03, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Furry Happy Monsters

• Furry Happy Monsters → Shiny Happy People  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target article. Seems to be a WP:BLAR from 2006. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:B493:3381:6FAD:82D8 (talk) 16:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Forkknife

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

Likely originated as a joke redirect, but unclear target as is (fork or knife?). Recommending deletion, as it does not benefit Wikipedia. TNstingray (talk) 15:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep The creator, Sandstein, explained the reasoning on the redirect page: The use of the name "fork knife" has been reported [30]. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  It is also a plausible mondegreen. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  Per Masem, Redirect to Fortnite Battle Royale, where it is mentioned. I struggle to see how redirecting a to a linguistics article with the term as a passing example is helpful. We don't have redirects like breakhead(literal translation of Spanish word rompecabeza) targetting puzzle. Per WP:SMALLDETAILS, Forkknife (without a space) unambigously refers to the fortnite meme. Ca ^{talk to me!} 09:02, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Dvandva, where it's a literal translation of an example term. The reference to fortnite is unmentioned, and I expect anyone who wants information about that will be left at a loss, since the article has none, making the redirect inappropriate. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:29, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Fork Knife

• Fork Knife → Fortnite  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Likely originated as a joke redirect, but unclear target as is (fork or knife?). Recommending deletion, as it does not benefit Wikipedia. TNstingray (talk) 15:35, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep "Fork Knife" is a Fortnite meme from around 2018 [31] and while not in use anymore, still was recognized in game and makes it a viable search term, redirected to Fortnite. Masem (t) 15:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Dvandva, where it's a literal translation of an example term. The reference to fortnite is unmentioned, and I expect anyone who wants information about that will be left at a loss, since the article has none, making the redirect inappropriate. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:29, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
  • The better target would be Fortnite Battle Royale where the term is mentioned, however, the redirect to Knife and Fork also is completely fair. — Masem (t) 17:00, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Knife and Fork (disambiguation), where the Greek term mentioned by 35.139.154.158 can be added -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:28, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Henry the Hermit

• Henry the Hermit → Quest for Glory#Characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 'Enry the 'Ermit → Quest for Glory  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 15:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Alex Shrub

• Alex Shrub → Grand Theft Auto: Vice City#Characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

unmentioned suikoden characters (episode 1: a-h)

• Alen (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Apple (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Barbarossa Rugner → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Camille (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Clive (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gadget (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Gaspar (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Georg Prime → Suikoden V  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Grenseal → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Hix (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Humphrey Mintz → Suikoden Tierkreis  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

re-nominating those after this discussion closed as "if only we knew the suffering that would befall us next", but only by a small chunk at a time. same rationale applies cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 13:44, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

should note that between then and now, mentions for some characters have been added. from an extremely cursory glance, georg is now mentioned in his target, and... that's it for this list, really. still not entirely sure that would warrant a redirect cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 13:48, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Humphrey Mintz too has mention. Jay 💬 16:56, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

nice-a cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:57, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:27, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Moseley tea service

• Moseley tea service → Earl Grey tea#Alcoholic preparations  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

unmentioned. the section it targets to mentioned it as a type of cocktail named after moseley, but it's currently gone, so... cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 13:31, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: We could change the target to just Earl Grey tea. I'm finding a smattering of recipes and travel guide references to this drink that confirm that it exists and uses Earl Grey as a primary ingredient. It's a plausible search term that doesn't warrant an article. It could conceivably receive a mention in the Earl Grey tea article. ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:51, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  nice, got anything reliable for a quick mention? google was being a bit of a meanie so it only gave me reddit cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 14:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Cogsan: Not the most ideal source, but page 56 of this trade magazine looks suitable. ~ Pbritti (talk) 19:39, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Kattie

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

misspelling of "kettie". while plausible enough on its own, results gave me a bunch of other stuff, like sandals and a potentially sort of kind of notable musician cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:11, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Disambiguate. When I created the redirect, the target attested the spelling as "kattie" instead of "kettie". It's still attested that way at Madam & Eve. Other entries would include Kattie B. Screws, Katharine Susannah Prichard, a character in The Bookshop (film), and a ship used by Albert Gallatin. See also entries include Katty (disambiguation) and Catty (disambiguation). -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:48, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Musha-gaeshi

• Musha-gaeshi → Castle#Construction  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

curved walls, built to be "a little hard to climb". unmentioned in the target and wiktionary, though it does have some mentions in articles related to japanese castles cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Foot taboo

• Foot taboo → Foot#In culture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

not properly discussed in the target. also a little vague, but that's not much of an issue here cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete If a proper discussion of taboos involving feet was added to the culture section, this can be recreated. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:44, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

It's also ambiguous. It could refer to aversion to foot odor or foot fetishism too. --MikutoH ^talk! 03:38, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Ellen feiss

• Ellen feiss → Switch (ad campaign)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Irrelevant alternate capitalization not used in any other articles. MimirIsSmart (talk) 09:56, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Paul Feiss

• Paul Feiss → Paul M. Fleiss  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Irrelevant typo redirect that does not deserve its own article. Paul Fleiss already exists for this purpose. MimirIsSmart (talk) 09:46, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete as misleading. Unlikely misspelling, and the reader might be looking for someone actually named "Paul Feiss". Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:45, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. There are real people called Paul Feiss and this is misleading. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:57, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Adult contemporary progressive death metal

• Adult contemporary progressive death metal → Colors (Between the Buried and Me album)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I don't think this term is unambiguously affiliated with this album. For instance, the first result on Google (for me) was for a band different than that of this album's. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:41, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

I got that, too (I'm assuming from last.fm), but, Between the Buried and Me literally coined the term. Therefore, it makes better sense to redirect to their album. If, and only if, more bands start to identify with this term, and major outlets such as Rolling Stone pick up on it and define it, could we then start an article for this term. Moline1 (talk) 19:53, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:16, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

FC8671

• FC8671 → DJI Mavic#Neo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirect is for an alternative name for the DJI Neo. The section on the Neo was removed from the DJI Mavic article as the two drones are almost entirely unrelated. Since no article on the Neo currently exists, this redirect should be deleted or retargeted. - ZLEA _T\^C 07:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Retarget to DJI. --Tim Wu (talk) 07:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. This is confusing without a mention, and it isn't mentioned anywhere. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:59, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

2.4-dihydroxybenzoic acid

• 2.4-dihydroxybenzoic acid → 2,4-Dihydroxybenzoic acid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Misspelling of the correct 2,4-dihydroxybenzoic acid (period instead of a comma). This is confusing as it suggests the numbers relate to some sort of amount, rather than being locants. Delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 05:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• I agree that it would be confusing if it were in the article, but because it is a redirect it clarifies more than confuses: anyone who thought it was a period would be corrected and brought to the right article with a comma. In this case, deletion wouldn't be beneficial, so keep BugGhost🦗👻 09:04, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Sontochin

• Sontochin → 2,4-Dihydroxybenzoic acid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is the common name of a completely different compound (a methylated derivative of chloroquine) that is not described at the target and for which enwiki does not appear to have any content. Delete to avoid confusion and encourage article creation. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:14, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Chloroquine which explains. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:03, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

I would be fine with this, but it should be refined to Chloroquine#History. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:06, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

SN-7619

• SN-7619 → 2,4-Dihydroxybenzoic acid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target or anywhere else on English Wikipedia, Google search turns up nothing related to the the target. Delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:08, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Not mentioned anywhere. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:05, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Template:Use Myanmar English

• Template:Use Myanmar English → Myanmar English  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Cross-namespace redirect, apparently created in error. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:26, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment since Myanmar English exists, we could just make a template similar to other {{Use X English}} templates that exist such as {{Use Singaporean English}} or {{Use Australian English}} -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:30, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Criticism of Donald Trump

• Criticism of Donald Trump → Public image of Donald Trump  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to Cat:Criticism of Donald Trump as {{R to category namespace}}. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 16:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:24, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - we already have a mainspace article on the topic, we shouldn't retarget to a category - users won't expect this. As an aside, looking at other {{R to category namespace}} usages it seems to be full questionable redirects, like Political book BugGhost🦗👻 09:17, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete I agree with BugGhost that an XNR isn't useful here. But the target article doesn't really discuss criticism of Trump expect in passing. This seems like something we could plausibly create a broad concept article for, so I think a red link is preferable here. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:21, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  • keep or retarget to Category:Criticism of Donald Trump or to Donald Trump. The word criticism is mentioned multiple times there, though a specific section doesn't exist for it. The redirect should exist, in some way.

  --MikutoH ^talk! 03:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Baby gaetz

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Zhuhui Stadium

• Zhuhui Stadium → Zhuhai Stadium  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Misspelled Zhuhai. No usage exept for mirror sites, IP detect sites, and map data sites that probably grabbed data from Wikipedia. WhatLinksHere cleaned.

Zhuhui is another place in China. The first version said it's in Zhuhui, Hengyang, Hunan, China, while coordinates pointed to Zhuhai. It said it opened in 1998 which matches Zhuhai stadium ("建成于1998年10月", built in October 1998). I searched for Zhuhui stadium (google:朱晖体育馆) with no results.

   — 魔琴 (Zauber Violino) [ talk contribs ] 22:54, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Article was at this title for 13+ years. Thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:22, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Since no Zhuhui Stadium or a stadium in Zhuhui exist, then weak keep. I can see how someone could confuse the word in Latin alphabet, whether unfamiliar with Chinese or with this alphabet. --MikutoH ^talk! 03:49, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak keep, given the name has been used as the title for over 13 years, I guess it is not too harmful to include a redirect with {{R from misspelling}}. Sun8908 _Talk 08:00, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

November 20

4 (album) by matisse

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy keep

L̃

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedily deleted

• @Justlettersandnumbers: couldn't you reopen this? I think this redirect should exist (not necessarily under this target). Web-julio (talk) 16:35, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Web-julio, Justlettersandnumbers didn't close this discussion, they just deleted the redirect. Reopening the discussion doesn't make sense now that the redirect no longer exists. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I see. I answered answered them in my user page talk. I wanted to tag the closer, not them, it was a mistake. Web-julio (talk) 08:04, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Akari Date

• Akari Date → Heaven Burns Red#31D  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note this is a "side character" in Heaven Burns Red. [32] If we had a List of Characters section, it would be an unambiguous Keep. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 18:38, 22 November 2024 (UTC).

  We don't currently have a section like that in this article. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:30, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  Let me express myself more explicitly. If anyone reading this has sufficient motivation and time to create such a section, the redirect could link there and it would then be an unambiguous Keep. Readers of my comment may or may not think this is a good thing, I have not attempted to influence that, for fear that someone puts effort into it and then someone else deletes their hard work it as fancruft, as Wikipedia editors often like to. It is unlikely but not impossible that I may create myself: if it was likely I would not have left the message.

  The phrase "If we had" rather than "If we have" shows that I know "We don't currently have a section like that in this article."

  All the best: Rich Farmbrough 10:21, 23 November 2024 (UTC).
  

• Delete, unmentioned. There was a lengthy, crufty, list of characters at the target which did include the redirect under consideration, but it's been removed per VG guidelines for a while now. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:56, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

xxps

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

Delete target is a TV station, and does not mention "xxps". The redirect was requested with out a proper rationale [33] and accepted [34] ; it was requested with a bunch of plural-form redirect requests, so the acceptor might have missed that. Thus this redirect is useless as the target does not use the term "Xxps" and it is unrelated to the target article -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 18:29, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment: If Draft:XXP (disambiguation) was accepted, then redirect to it. 88.235.212.12 (talk) 18:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Nothing on that disambiguation takes a plural -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:04, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom, not a valid plural redirect (ditto for anything on the proposed dab page), and it doesn't seem to refer to anything on its own. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:58, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. The term isn't mentioned anywhere on Enwiki. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:17, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Criticism of object-oriented programming

• Criticism of object-oriented programming → Object-oriented programming#Criticism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target section Object-oriented programming#Criticism does not exist in that form anymore, see this change. There are currently no incoming internal links. There is no relevant edit history at Criticism of object-oriented programming that would need to be preserved. Tea2min (talk) 09:55, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

It could link to Object-oriented programming#Popularity and reception, or just be deleted. My vote is delete. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 14:29, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

@Mathnerd314159: I already fixed the broken section anchor. Why is it better to delete it? Jarble (talk) 15:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

I just don't find it useful. It is not in use on-wiki and I don't think it is useful off-wiki either. I have plans to further restructure the OOP article and I don't think the effort to keep the anchor updated is worth it. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 20:46, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

Surely I've read a lot of published criticisms of OOP programming in my comp-sci classes back in the day. Shouldn't we have a section on it? Fieari (talk) 07:06, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

That's really a topic for the article talk. But my original change (linked above) was removing the criticism section and integrating the criticisms into the article. It has been 9 months and nobody minded the section's absence. Mathnerd314159 (talk) 22:19, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

• Refine to the Popularity and reception section per Mathnerd. Jay 💬 09:14, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To decide between deletion or retargeting to Object-oriented programming#Popularity_and_reception
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 17:55, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Helstinki

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

Unlikely search term or typo. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:53, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Unlikely...and yet, read it and weep. Still though, unless there's any information about this gaffe specifically, the redirect shouldn't exist. I thought it was just a silly pejorative nickname at first, but if I were going to search for this, I'd expect information about the gaffe, not the city. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  And on a second glance, I don't see anything else about it, which kind of makes me question the accuracy of this. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 18:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep, I have read it and I have wept, it was my understanding that it's a somewhat common mistake, and curious individuals might go searching for whatever a "Hestinki" is, so I figured it was better off existing that not. Caucasianhamburger (talk) 18:28, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  I also believe that it is one of the more common pejorative names in English for Helsinki, though admittedly most English speakers don't have a bone to pick with Helsinki, so it doesn't see much common use.Caucasianhamburger (talk) 18:42, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

one letter short of being a recreation of helstinky. so close!!

delete. it's really not gonna help people unless they specifically only know about other parts of the world from donald trump (or someone else who might have made this mistake), and at this point, it's easier to just call it a skill issue, as the incident isn't mentioned in either article (or anywhere for that matter) cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Cricoarytenoid

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

There is also Cricoarytenoid joint and Cricoarytenoid ligament. This could be a set index like Arytenoid. 1234qwer1234qwer4 09:57, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:22, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we find consensus to disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 17:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Disambiguate -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Support: Using just the descriptive word as shorthand is common practice in anatomical terminology.YuniToumei (talk) 08:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep and use a hatnote (or add the other articles to See also). See wikt:cricoarytenoid#Noun. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:25, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

James J. Finn

• James J. Finn → Lindbergh kidnapping  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in the target article. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 15:57, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

Add a mention and keep (I will try to do this). Searching his name in books he seems to have been a figure involved in this case. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

I added a mention to Hauptmann's page. He appears to be notable on his own, given it was the crime of the century and he played a large role (a lot more could be added), but this is OK for now. PARAKANYAA (talk) 03:06, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mention needs to be added for the keep vote to have weight.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 17:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment Finn was the FBI agent who arrested Richard Hauptmann, so that article might be a better target for any information on Finn. Tevildo (talk) 22:42, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Criticism of George Bush

• Criticism of George Bush → Public image of George W. Bush  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This could refer to both presidents. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 16:50, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - we don't have a separate article on public image for the senior Bush; Public image of George H. W. Bush is a subsection redirect to his bio. We could add a hatnote to the target. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 21:28, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete easily could refer to "Read my lips, no new taxes" promise being broken by H.W., or him being Mr. Invisible. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 05:56, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 17:31, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Too ambiguous. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:47, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Public image of George Bush (disambiguation), which links to relevant content for both presidents. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:05, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Fisking

• Fisking → Robert Fisk  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no evidence that this redirect is plausible. Kolano123 (talk) 15:31, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep The term is explained in the lead, and this is an {{R with history}}. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  Retarget to Glossary of blogging#Fisking per anon. This looks like a better place where the term is explained, although I still think the mention in the article is worth keeping. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. The current mention is one line of unsourced material with no context, stuck into the lead simply because the redirect existed. That should probably be removed as-is, rendering the redirect worthy of deletion (at least at AFD if someone is nervous about the history). I can find the occasional source devoting a sentence or two to the origin of the term, but nothing that goes beyond a dictionary-level treatment. If someone can do better and work this into an actual section of Fisk's article, then a redirect can always be recreated, but there doesn't seem to be much in the history of use here; it wades very heavily into WP:OR territory, and any mention in the biography is probably undue. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:27, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Fisk, which links to Wiktionary defining it as a verb and mentioning this word specifically. Web-julio (talk) 17:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  There are no matches on the dab page, so a redirect there would be inappropriate. And Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a dictionary. (edit: but we do have some glossaries, which I just found). 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:23, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Glossary of blogging#Fisking (to which I've just added an anchor), as a pretty reasonable spot that it can live. I still support the removal at Fisk's bio unless it can be done so properly though. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:35, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  I've added a reference to the mention in his article. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Glossary of blogging#Fisking, as the best target for a direct search, but I note that target also wikilinks fisking, so that should be piped to Robert Fisk to avoid a self targeting link. Fieari (talk) 23:50, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Black Myth: Waking

• Black Myth: Waking → Black Myth: Wukong  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Does not appear to be a likely misspelling. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Highly implausible. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:17, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep Plausible mondegreen and autocorrect error: see store page, YouTube description, Official tweet by The Game Awards Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:52, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Not a likely or common misspelling. --Cold Season (talk) 02:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

  A lot of unofficial merch makers are typing the game's name incorrectly. Ahri Boy (talk) 03:30, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Plannet terror

• Plannet terror → Grindhouse (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is a misspelling of "planet," but for some reason, when it was created in 2007, it was redirected to the current target rather than Planet Terror (to be fair, Planet Terror is one of the two films shown in Grindhouse, but it still doesn't fully make sense to redirect it to the page about the latter film as opposed to that about the former). The misspelling is also questionably plausible—a Google search for that exact misspelling shows stuff related to Grindhouse and Terror Planet, but the posters and stuff still show the correctly spelled Planet Terror. As such a situation, I'm proposing we either delete this redirect or retarget it to Planet Terror, and I'd like to hear your thoughts about this. Regards, SONIC678 20:28, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Planet Terror didn't get its own article until 2009, so that explains why the redirect was made to Grindhouse (film) instead. However, I see no good reason to keep this. Delete. 162 etc. (talk) 02:01, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

:Delete per 162 TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 21:16, 19 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

Retarget I think it is a possible mistake. Not the most likely, but I've seen the typo before. CheeseyHead (talk) 02:00, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:19, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete - I feel that doubling a consonant in this way is a plausible error, but if it was then the pageviews should show use. They don't: 9 total hits in the year before the nomination date. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:36, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep target to Planet Terror perfectly plausible redirect. It's not a hugely popular target, so the hits seem reasonable. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 18:32, 22 November 2024 (UTC).
  
• Delete I don't think 9 hits in the last year indicates that it's worth keeping.★Trekker (talk) 10:47, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Web interfaces

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Cute number

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Work is an honor

• Work is an honor → Gulag  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Work is a honor → Gulag  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Work is an honour → Gulag  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Work is a honour → Gulag  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Seemingly unmentioned at the target. Also could not pull anything obvious up with a general search. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 05:22, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Comments Appears to be a common refrain posted on gulags. The first thing a prisoner would have seen on their arrival at Vorkuta was a sign that said: “Work in the USSR Is a Matter of Honor and Glory.”[35], The emphasis is on the victims of the Gulag; the authors of the exhibition give a clear answer to the sacrosanct question, "To what deity were these sacrifices made?": No deity was involved. In some cases, a large ceremonial portrait of Stalin—the system's main demiurge— appears above the photographs of construction sites and camps. One characteristic example is the Museum of Military and Labor Glory (Taiga, Kemerovo). The exhibition "Rehabilitation" occupies a separate hall: in the "red corner" (traditionally used for icons) hangs a ceremonial portrait of Stalin decorated with barbed wire next to the slogan "For us, work is an HONOR, a deed of valor and heroism." [36]

A mention could potientially added, although I will leave it for others to find out if it is WP:DUE. Ca ^{talk to me!} 12:34, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment I have bundled Work is a honor, Work is an honour, and Work is a honour as clearly needing the same outcome of this discussion. Skynxnex (talk) 22:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, “Work in the USSR Is a Matter of Honor and Glory” is a common slogan of Soviet GULAGs.

https://tadexprof.com/vorkuta-gulag/ NagisaEf (talk) 05:34, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

:Weak Delete. Somewhat implausible, doesn't really show up on general search, and is not mentioned at target. Also, there probably is a similar phase in the Bible. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 18:41, 11 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, Some interesting bits of discussion but we need some more opinions about outcomes as I think we might have an unbolded Keep in here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:58, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep and add mention, as cited above. Fieari (talk) 23:12, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:RSURPRISE as unmentioned. Steel1943 (talk) 04:46, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, should a mention be added or is deletion preferred?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Northern countries

• Northern countries → Global North and Global South  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Southern countries → Global North and Global South  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Recently created and very vague. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 05:26, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Without further context, these terms appear to be mainly used as synonyms in regard to their development. [37][38][39][40].
  I suggest a {{redirect}} hatnote to nordic countries since they share the similar meanings, and I found one source that refers to the nordics as northern: [41] Ca ^{talk to me!} 12:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

  After reading the below IP editor's comment, disambiguation may be the best answer. It is a vague, yet still oft-used term. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:32, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment Northern country and Southern country, these terms also refer to Northern Hemisphere countries and Southern Hemisphere countries geographically (ie. Central America, Caribbean, North Africa, South Asia, are in the Northern hemisphere), but we don't seem to have good targets for those subjects. That is distinctly different from the Global North and Global South. And there's the related term for Northern country being Western country/Western countries in geopolitics, which is distinct from Western Hemisphere countries geographically (ie. Europe is missing, Global South of South America is included). -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:29, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 22:30, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Too vague. Disambiguation pages are useful when a term is ambiguous between a set of specific meanings. These phrases are different – they are so general that their meaning simply depends on the context; they typically refer to whatever group of countries are northern or southern relative to the region being discussed. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 21:43, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we decide between disambiguation and deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per Mx Granger. It's hard to anticipate that the target is more intended than "northern/southern hemisphere", or something else equally vague. And it's still way too vague even for a dab page. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• keep or retarget to Hemispheres of Earth#Geographical hemispheres or to Northern_Hemisphere#List_of_continents,_countries_or_territories,_and_oceans_in_the_Northern_Hemisphere and Southern_Hemisphere#Mainland_countries_or_territories, respectively. Global South doesn't include every country in the Southern hemisphere. Web-julio (talk) 16:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per Mx. Granger. No clear meaning without context. Do not retarget to the hemispheres. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:50, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Christmas in the United States, for children of the baby boom era

• Christmas in the United States, for children of the baby boom era → Christmas  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Christmas in the United States, post-War → Christmas  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Christmas in the post-War United States → Christmas  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Christmas in the post-war United States → Christmas  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Christmas in the United States (1946-1964) → Christmas  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Christmas in the United States (1946–1964) → Christmas  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is a cluster of redirects, mostly resulting from successive moves, that all once linked to the article Christmas in the United States (1946–1964). That article was wiped and replaced with a redirect to the generic Christmas article in 2023- but the Christmas article doesn't have text specifically about mid-20th-century American celebrations of Christmas, and, as these terms are all much more specific than just "Christmas," they're exceedingly implausible as search terms for "Christmas" in the broadest sense. They should either be deleted or redirected to Observance of Christmas by country#United States, which is, I think, the closest match, though it also doesn't (currently) have anything specifically about "baby boom"-era Christmas customs. Only the last of these (with the en-dash) has substantive history. Yspaddadenpenkawr (talk) 12:31, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete No suitable target here as we don't have any information on Christmas specifically in this period. It also seems like an unlikely search term. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:58, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

delete the "post-war" ones as vague and unnecessary (which war, there's like 20 going on right now), and the rest as just unnecessary. and per nom, it should be noted the very last one actually has history... as a gar that failed so bad it got blar'd. really, it wasn't even so much about christmas itself, so much as it was a random collection of things and stuff cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 21:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: As a former article with extensive history, Christmas in the United States (1946–1964) should not be deleted at RfD. --Paul_012 (talk) 02:27, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

  while this hasn't been a redirect for as long as it would take to complete an engineering course around here (which is 5 years, give or take a few months), the circumstances in which it was blar'd lead me to disagree cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 12:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Here's how Bernie can still win

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Neurospicy

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

@Andrewa: retarget to wikt:neurospicy. Or keep if eventually it gets mentioned, it would be here or related (besides Ronya footnotes). Web-julio (talk) 07:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to the wikitionary term since the term isn't actually used in the neurodiversity article and the wikit gives a defintion. IntentionallyDense ^(Contribs) 13:53, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete. We don't need Wikt redirects for every possible word that we don't have an article about. Such soft redirects inhibit searching within Wikipedia, while such a search will already display a prominent link to the Wiktionary entry at the top. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:54, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Section retarget to Neurodiversity#Neurodivergent, which is the target of neurodivergent. They are synonyms. Wiktionary is not useful here: the page just defines the word as a synonym of neurodivergent and then links to that definition. Wikipedia readers are looking for information on a topic, not dictionary definitions. If readers want a dictionary definition they can go to Wiktionary and look one up. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:05, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Section retarget to Neurodiversity#neurospicy anchor. Added details to the section now with a new sub-section Neurodiversity#Alternative terms used for neurodiversity with sourcing to address the original nominators point, so now it's moot per WP:HEY standard and can just be section targeted in the article. Raladic (talk) 19:12, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  Support this retarget to anchor. The article now has relevant referenced material on the topic. Andrewa (talk) 19:53, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Neurospicy → Neurodiversity It is a common synonym in the community. It is attested well enough in sources. There are people who prefer to identify in this way with the social term rather than the medicalized term, and if we wanted to do so, we could hyperlink "neurospicy" in biographies to redirect to the article by its medical name. There is no need to direct to anchors or wiktionary because it is common enough and the same concept. Bluerasberry (talk) 21:30, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep Neurospicy → Neurodiversity It's very much a common synonym, especially now that there's targeted anchor.^SMason_Garrison 22:58, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Refine to Neurodiversity#Neurodivergent per above, it has a mention here. Fieari (talk) 04:37, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Jackask

• Jackask → Jacksfilms  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• JackAsk → Jacksfilms  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention of "Jackask" at the target, nor any mention anywhere on Wikipedia outside of one, on John Milhiser, where it is listed as a "television title" that he acted in. For a Youtube series that is intended to be pronounced similarly to Jackass, such a misspelling seems to be the likely ask for searchers of this term. Especially since this Youtube series is not discussed at the target article for Jacksfilms. The singular mention at John Milhiser can very well be a piped link to Jack's general article, forgoing the need to have a potentially misleading redirect as a result. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 07:27, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep and tag as {{r without mention}}. People searching for this term are unlikely to be looking for a different topic. It is mentioned on Digital Trends, which is considered a reliable source. ✗plicit 14:39, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
• I could not find a way to insert this Q&A show into the target article. But I'm hoping someone else can, so Keep, or tag as {{R without mention}} per XPLICIT. Jay 💬 10:23, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete both I'd prefer not to rely on wishful hope. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:28, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

:Keep. May not get a mention, but simply searching jackask on google would pull up with Jacksfilms TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:34, 15 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:09, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

September 2017 bridge incident

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#September 2017 bridge incident

Unietd States

• Unietd States → United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Very implausible typo. That's like two errors. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:19, 12 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• 'Comment that is a likely typo and only one error. It is a transposition error, where two adjacent characters are swapped. This particular redirect was created in 2012. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:36, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

  Do typos suddenly become plausible when it's dealing with western superpowers? Not like I really care much since I do live in America myself. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 05:51, 13 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

  Typos certainly do become more plausible where they are typos of an article title that receives 45,000 pageviews a day. J947 ‡ ^edits 07:25, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

  it's only actually one error. those are pretty plausible if small enough and located early enough into a title. something like unietd statse would be a little more problematic though, as it's two errors cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 14:01, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:59, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep - Not an implausible typo; this past year it got 18 hits, demonstrating plausibility. It is, as has been noted, a single error. Per WP:CHEAP, there's no reason to delete this. Fieari (talk) 07:18, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nomination. There is also a lot of typographic error while it typing redirect to United States. I suggest that other typographic errors will delete per WP:COSTLY or speedily delete under CSD: G6. ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 04:28, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. Someone can mistype in their keyboard. Not this typo would actually mean anything else. Web-julio (talk) 07:35, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Unambiguous, not entirely implausible, and has some degree of use. – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:17, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete as an arbitrary typo, no more deserving of a redirect than any other typo; let Mediawiki suggest possible matches rather than trying to make billions of redirects ourselves. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Canadaa

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

Typo with extra "a" added. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:08, 12 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• Keep: this redirect is more used than many articles. J947 ‡ ^edits 23:21, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Canadas (disambiguation) which contains both "Canadas" and "Canada", and is the error form for both of these (the [S] key is next to the [A] key on QWERTY keyboard) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:37, 13 November 2024 (UTC)

  If we are talking about plausible typos, then Canada would still be valid since accidentally mashing the "a" button twice is a fairly common mistake on some devices. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 05:54, 13 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:00, 13 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. Has some use. Doesn't seem ambiguous with Canadas (disambiguation) to me; "a" and "s" are pressed by adjacent fingers on the same hand, so it seems unlikely to me that if your aim was to press one then the other that you would end up with two "a"s, unless both fingers are somehow placed over the "a" key. – Michael Aurel (talk) 06:23, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:39, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - possibly phonetic for "Canada, eh?" The page saw 47 total views in the full year prior to the nomination, so it's not particularly well-used, but it's also harmless. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 15:21, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete as an arbitrary typo, no more deserving of a redirect than any other typo; let Mediawiki suggest possible matches rather than trying to make billions of redirects ourselves. And as pointed out, this one is ambiguous with Canadas. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:37, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  Keep maybe they were trying to spell Canadá, Canadà or another variation. Web-julio (talk) 22:00, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Then wouldn't it target Canada (disambiguation) ? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

美利坚合众国

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Crown grant

• Crown grant → Crown Estate  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Whilst grant is mentioned at the topic, Crown grant is not and it is not the type of grant referenced here. I'm not aware of a more appropriate target (although one may exist) and in light of that I suggest the redirect be deleted in accordance with WP:REDLINK. I am open to changing my vote if a suitable target (that mentions and explains what a Crown grant is), please ping me if one is mentioned. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:48, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Crown land, as in grants from Crown land. It differs by state/area but linking to the general concept should give readers enough background. czar 14:20, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:37, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Comprehensive strategic partnership

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

⚭/equaric unicodes

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#⚭/equaric unicodes

Perplexing Pool

• Perplexing Pool → Pikmin 2  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Ernest McGillicuddy

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

BO⅂ICE

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted

Le4and6

• Le4and6 → LeBron James  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Possible Wikipedia:NEO. Doesn't appear to be a common nickname either. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 01:49, 20 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

delete per nom. all the results i got point to this discussion... or a stray hashtag on facebook, i guess cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 21:20, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Shak.

• Shak. → William Shakespeare  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Yeah, Shakespeare is well known, but just four letters of his last name is still very ambiguous. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 01:42, 20 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• Delete I have no idea why anyone could possibly think this redirect is a good idea. QuicoleJR (talk) 02:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep per wikt:Shak and dictionary.com. Alternatively retarget to Shak. J947 ‡ ^edits 06:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete: The Dictionary.com entry shows example sentences, none of which are actually relevant or assist with the assertion that "Shak." is an abbreviation for Shakespeare. I'm not convinced by the Wiktionary entry either. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:53, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep Common abbr. see page iii, Book titled Prefaces to Shak, Collins Dictionary, Oxford Dictionary of Abbreviations. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:40, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

WP:SMALLDETAILS apply as well. While "shak" is very ambiguous, adding a period shows it is a abbreviation. There is no other subjects with shak as an abbreviation in the disambiguation page. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:43, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak keep per Ca. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep - From memory in Universtiy, this appears in the footnote/endnote citations of many older books and textbooks without explanation, just expecting you to know what they mean. This could easily lead a confused reader to want to look up what it means. The period is important in this redirect, as it always appears in these abbreviated citations. Fieari (talk) 23:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Bill Shakespeare

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

A Night

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy keep

A Child's Garden of Poetry

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Genoicide

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

Not really plausible typo. There is an extra "i" that could be argued that it's misplaced, but there is also another "i" that is in the right place. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 01:09, 20 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• Comment it is a plausible fat-fingered typo, [i] is next to [o] on a QWERTY keyboard, and if you mistype, you can hit two keys at once -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 01:25, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete as an arbitrary typo, no more deserving of a redirect than any other typo; let Mediawiki suggest possible matches rather than trying to make billions of redirects ourselves. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:22, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete It's quite clear this is a simple misspelling and does not justify a separate page. 04:23, 26 November 2024 (UTC)LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk)

Benjamin Franklin (swim coach)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#Benjamin Franklin (swim coach)

Unmentioned Pikmin 2 caves

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#Unmentioned Pikmin 2 caves

A little temporary security

• A little temporary security → United States Department of Homeland Security  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This came from a portion of a Benjamin Franklin quote that's out of context and frankly, having this redirect to Benjamin Franklin would probably be even stupider. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 01:01, 20 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• Delete, unmentioned. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Cilla Single

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#Cilla Single

A Sam

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy keep

Fabian'’s lizard

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Dr A

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Wonderful; A song from Wicked

• Wonderful; A song from Wicked → Wicked (musical)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Looks a bit unnatural. Maybe the creator don't know about parentheses. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:31, 20 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• Comment: Is an R with history, though the article existed less than a single day. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete, as an RDAB, and the page history is inconsequential; one paragraph of unsourced material that wouldn't survive at AFD anyway. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank Goodness

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#Thank Goodness

Eytp

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Eypt

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

Is it really that common to miss the "g"? TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:17, 20 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• Delete Implausible misspelling. Ca ^{talk to me!} 04:32, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Weakish keep per pageviews. It seems to be getting a decent number of pageviews, like 177 last year, though I'm not sure why.
• Weak delete. (changed to retarget) I am normally in favour of keeping these sorts of typos, and this one does have some use, but a google search suggests that people searching this could also be looking for Eyepoint Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: EYPT). – Michael Aurel (talk) 08:30, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete as an arbitrary typo, no more deserving of a redirect than any other typo; let Mediawiki suggest possible matches rather than trying to make billions of redirects ourselves. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:07, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• There's a few options. We could retarget to pSivida per Michael Aurel, which is the article for Eyepoint Pharmaceuticals under a previous name. The article could use some work, and I do also think that "eypt" is a somewhat plausible typo for Egypt, so it's not the greatest idea. We could disambiguate between the two, but I also don't think a disambig page for a typo, a stock ticker, and nothing else is advisable. Are there redirect-specific headers? Maybe we keep the current target but add a header that mentions Eyepoint? This is a big reach but I'm full of ideas I want to mention. Deleting is a clean solution if nothing else but it feels like we could be more helpful than that. I'm leaning delete just because the other answers I have are pretty borderline, but they might be worth exploring.

Tessaract2^Hi! 03:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete Google returns Eyepoint Pharmaceuticals Inc which we don't appear to cover but shows its ambiguous and probably not plausable. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:40, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  Retarget to EyePoint Pharmaceuticals since pSivida has traded as this name and we do actually cover it. Crouch, Swale (talk) 09:06, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

• Redirect to pSivida and hatnote with {{Redirect-distinguish}}. If we have a valid article that is the legal successor of Eyepoint Pharmaceuticals, we should redirect it there and if the views are this high, a hatnote might be warranted. Since no other potential targets are found, this works without the need for a DAB page. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 03:46, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

  I've now moved the pSivida page to its new name. @Michael Aurel and Crouch, Swale: It would be helpful if you commented on if a redirect there would be appropriate. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 08:20, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to EyePoint Pharmaceuticals, given the page move; I also hadn't noticed this article when I left my initial comment. Other than being a possible typo for "Egypt", which, per above, I don't think is a very plausible one, I'm not seeing anything else this could refer to; every result I can see in a Google search is for the company. Pageviews indicate that this is being used, and I think it's fair to assume most searchers are looking for the company, given the typo's implausibility. I've also updated the ticker symbol in the infobox, so "EYPT" is now mentioned at the target. – Michael Aurel (talk) 09:06, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Egpyt

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

A .R . EGYPT

• A .R . EGYPT → Egypt  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• A .R . Egypt → Egypt  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Wildly inconsistent punctuation spacing TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC) — TeapotsOfDoom (talk · contribs) is a confirmed sock puppet of Okmrman (talk · contribs).

• Delete both, per nom. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:41, 21 November 2024 (UTC)
• Note User:WhisperToMe has not been notified. The same seems true of other Teapots nominations. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 17:12, 22 November 2024 (UTC).
  

DuPage 3

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#DuPage 3

November 17

List of Neverwinter Nights characters

• List of Neverwinter Nights characters → Neverwinter Nights  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previous AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/List of Neverwinter Nights characters

There is no such "list of characters" at the target article. The only character that is EVER mentioned at the target, is the unnamed "player character", and one mention of a "King of Shadows" in passing. Was created as a result of the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Neverwinter Nights characters AfD. Nevertheless, this is not a helpful redirect in its current form. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:52, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep and restore the content underneath (deleted edits from prior to 2016) so that a proper character list can be created at the target article. 2016 is the bad old days when non-notable stuff was deleted before redirection, even though ATD policy was still the same, we didn't always do it right. Also, naming convention is pretty standard--if you're cleaning up problematic/confusing redirects, this ain't one of them. Jclemens (talk) 07:16, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep Agreeing with Clemens somewhat. While the list itself is very unlikely to ever be revived, it serves as a record and and helps link to the AfD discussion that took place, which also has a list of potential sources.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 07:23, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
• I'll reproduce here what I wrote on my talk page: The consensus at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Neverwinter Nights characters was to delete and redirect, not only to redirect. Undeleting the deleted content would be contrary to the AfD outcome. It would need overturning the AfD closure, which would need to be done at DRV, not here. What's more, I can't even find deleted content to undelete. The deletion log indicates some sort of technical issue in 2016. Sandstein 07:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep I think this should be kept: a) For historical reasons. b) It's just the next best thing we have. There are hits, an people are redirected there, showing what little we have and that we don't have a separate article. c) That's where new content would be added. And there is such content! I can't say if there's enough to establish notability and could change the outcome in a deletion review, but there's more than during the time of the deletion discussion. Examples would be his Kotaku article or this book, p. 20-21. I'd like to add such commentary, but I have too much on my plate already. Daranios (talk) 08:14, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep and restore the content under the redirect, as per Jclemens; the contents of the old list are now at User:Jclemens/List of Neverwinter Nights characters so they can be moved back to article space. A short list can be merged into the main article until it can be spun back out again. BOZ (talk) 12:48, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  It's not clear to me how this got to my userspace. 2016 was after I'd was no longer an admin. Did I request restoration in the past and then forgot about it, or did someone just do this? Jclemens (talk) 00:01, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

  You may have asked me to do that as I was still an admin at that time. BOZ (talk) 23:21, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep as an old redirect with history, and I honestly believe said history should be restored if possible, even if only to the history of this redirect. Fieari (talk) 05:35, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This redirect is not old (2016 from a recent-ish AfD), and does not contain any valuable history. This RfD turnout is quite surprising all within a few minutes tbh. There is still NO characters at the target article, so the redirect is still misleading and this has not been remedied. All the history is in userspace which can be reinstated when it is ready. Does not need a misleading "list" redirect in the meantime. Sources can be copied to the Neverwinter Nights talk page, or grabbed from the AfD directly. We don't do redirects for the "next best thing we have", when we actually have nothing. The only thing that needed to be true for this redirect was to have "characters listed", and Neverwinter Nights does not even manage this in its current state. Articles don't need to exist as a redirect just to indicate where content "should" be added. In fact the opposite is true per WP:REDYES. There is no such content on Wikipedia for this topic at this moment. The only possibility would be to delete List of Neverwinter Nights characters (the replacement created by Sandstein), and move in the material from User:Jclemens/List of Neverwinter Nights characters to the same title, if consensus indicates material should be held here. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 09:55, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

  8 years is not old? I understand it's not from the 200x's, but 8 years is still a pretty long time... Fieari (talk) 23:11, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete - per nom., there is no list. The redirect is somewhat misleading and not helpful. Neverwinter Nights is the obvious search term, and if someone did, for some reason, search on this full name they would be better served with this list of results [42] rather than being jumped to a page that has no list. A case of a redirect actually making things worse. Old content is userfied and can be developed, so that consideration is moot. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 10:27, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

delete, if without prejudice to recreating if usable sources are found. list not present. i think misleading readers would do more harm than losing track of an afd thread in a mainspace page's edit history. even then, deletion would most likely link people attempting to recreate it to this discussion, which in turn links to that discussion, so... cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 13:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Since when do redirects need sources? Jclemens (talk) 23:58, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I presume it refers to sources at the target article, to substantiate a mention of multiple characters and allow readers to receive sourced content, when it is specified in the search bar (via this redirect) that the reader SPECIFICALLY wants a "list of characters", one that we don't have anywhere in mainspace, nor any sources for. Redirects do need to be "reliably sourceable", because all material in mainspace must be verifiable, and redirects are material, and redirects are in mainspace. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:29, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

We should indeed have a list of characters at the target, but the content is already available even if not in that page currently. No, redirects don't need to be reliably sourced, per WP:RPURPOSE. Jclemens (talk) 07:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

WP:RPURPOSE is a guideline; WP:V is policy. Redirects too must be verifiable. Alternate spellings can be verified by WP:COMMONSENSE. What reason-for-maintaining bullet point does this redirect (a redirect indicating a "list of characters") meet on WP:RPURPOSE? Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 07:24, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Well, since COMMONSENSE can satisfy V, then, V's not really an issue, is it? Jclemens (talk) 00:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

i said i'd have no prejudice against recreation if sources could be found cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 10:49, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Yes, but that doesn't explain why deleting a redirect to a notable work of fiction would be influenced in any way by sourcing--presumably, non-primary sourcing--for a set of elements that meet WP:CSC clause 2. Jclemens (talk) 20:38, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

There are secondary sources out there which would allow to include some commentary on characters as a group and individually into the target, but which have not yet been employed. Like [43] or [44]. Or, from a very different angle, an analytical comment on player characters on Dungeons, Dragons, and Digital Denizens, p. 20-21. Daranios (talk) 11:15, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I have now included a rudimentary listing of characters in the Reception section, with potential for expansion based on said secondary sources, which I hope solves the gravest misgivings of Utopes and cogsan. Based on this I'd argue for the inclusion of the old, userfied page into the history of the redirect, as it could be used as a basis to search for more secondary sources, if someone should desire to do so. Daranios (talk) 16:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 20:12, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

i don't think some examples in the reception section would count as enough to warrant a list redirect, so i guess my vote stays for the moment, with equally little prejudice against recreation cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 23:11, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

@Cogsan: So what in your view is still lacking for such a redirect to be justified? Number of characters? Description/commentary? Presentation in bulletpoint form or some such? Daranios (talk) 14:17, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

what i think is missing is a list. "list of knives" probably shouldn't link to an article that only mentions santoku and bread knives, as an example. also as an example, characters of deltarune and that other game doesn't mention every character (where's lemon bread?), but it does have a good handful

so yeah, "number of characters" is the closest to my answer among the options provided, and if reliable sources only seem to cover three of them in any level of detail, i'd say press the big ol' return to red button cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 17:54, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

@Cogsan: Thanks. WP:RETURNTORED starts with "If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article". It might, but though it pains me to say, the last AfD dedided that it did not have the potential to be expandied into its own article then. So do you still not like the redirect even though to my knowledge there is no other article which would cover even the four/five characters we have at the target now? Or to look at it from the other direction, what would be the number for characters you would see as the minimum for an embedded list to not want to delete our redirect? Daranios (talk) 09:17, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

What exactly is the problem here? Red link or redirect, if you can disprove the old AfD by finding sources that allow a new list article to be written, then you can just do that! Retaining this redirect doesn't help. The redirect does not have the old article history, so that argument for keeping it is moot. The old article history is available and userfied, so you have that. You are arguing like this is AfD but the only consideration is whether this is a useful redirect. On that score, it clearly isn't. There are at least nine articles that show up in search if you look for Neverwinter Nights [45]. Now if someone is looking for a list of Neverwinter nights characters, the redirect chooses to send them to one of these pages and ignore the others. The reader is taken to a page that does not list the characters, and does not meet their information requirement. If anyone were actually interested in all of the characters, they are better off seeing all nine articles listed, which will give them a fuller picture, rather than being taken to a page that does not answer their information requirement but pretends to. I just do not see what the benefit is of retaining a redirect that has no history and no utility. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

wouldn't the fact that it was deemed that there weren't enough sources for an article then, and that that's still the case now, be more reason to delete?

i have some level of hope that it might be possible to create that list someday, i just know that that's not today cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 19:28, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I am not sure if I could disprove the AfD in the form of establishing this as a notable topic, and I don't currently have the time (or rather priority based on many other open to-do ideas) to make sure one way or another. And that is not the issue. (I'd be for restoring the userfied history as I said. But the history I was originally referring to was the link to the deletion discussion in the talk page.) I am pretty sure that I could create an embedded list, and for that it would be useful to know opinions how (big) such a list should look to make sense. Just as one project utilizing secondary sources on this topic which have not been (fully) used yet. On the other hand, the AfD did establish this redirect, so redirect, if you can disprove the old AfD does not make sense to me. Rather, deleting the redirect would mean overturning the AfD result. But I guess that's within the prerogative of RfD. Looking at the other hits again I am no longer completely sure if it is best to guide the reader to Neverwinter Nights at this point. We do have five characters there currently, and overall commentary, and it fits better to the redirect title. But other hits do have several characters embedded, too. So withdrawing my keep !vote for the time being, but I am still interested in cogsan's answer to my question above. Daranios (talk) 19:34, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

this is on a case-by-case basis, so the best way to put it is

• general franchises: at least most of the major cast being notable, with some wiggle room for a handful of more important/popular yet not very notable ones
• general franchises that are really long: if they're not known for more than one character, just go for articles for the few notable ones. otherwise, same criteria seem to apply
• novels and other such character-heavy franchises (which nn seems to be): there's usually no plan b for if not enough of them are notable for a list, so to quote a wise scorpion, "lol. lmao."
• pokémon: the best way to describe the situation with pokémon and its (human) characters, and how rules related to notability are treated in its context, is doing multiple backflips in a row to distract people from the question while professor elm keeps his entry

it's a complicated case, but it seems neverwinter nights just plain doesn't have enough notable characters in the first place, "major" or not

and granted, this is for if such a list exists in the first place, and since the answer to that in this case is "not anymore lol", it's really just a matter of deleting and hoping the case changes sometime before the sun goes boom cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 20:24, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Also, pinging Mark viking, who had suggested the redirect back at the AfD. Daranios (talk) 19:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete RfD does not have any authority over article content. We had an AfD, which does have that authority, and declared this should be banished. Now it's time for it to meet its fate. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:00, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

It was the AfD which made this a redirect in the first place. Daranios (talk) 10:54, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Solidarity, Ecology, Left Alternative

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Greater Luxembourg

• Greater Luxembourg → Greater Region of SaarLorLux  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Greater Luxembourg (modern region) → Greater Region of SaarLorLux  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Greater Region of Luxembourg → Greater Region of SaarLorLux  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete all three.Retarget to Luxembourg annexation plans after the Second World War. This Euroregion is never referred to as "Greater Luxembourg". РоманЖ (talk) 14:16, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: Journal of Contemporary European Studies and Organic policies in Luxembourg do talk about a Greater Luxembourg area. The second link also has a map which largely matches the map in Greater Region of SaarLorLux. A mention of the first term needs to be added to the target. The other two are acceptable variants. Retargeting to Luxembourg annexation plans after the Second World War (per the nom's updated recommendation) also seems like a good-enough option. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 14:25, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep, possibly redirect to Luxembourg. The thing very definitely exists, see, for example [46] (there are dozens of solid peer-reviewed works using the term). According to this source, the Greater Luxembourg includes "partly derelict French periphery benefiting from the economic spillover of Luxembourg". Having once made an (accidental) stop there, I can vouch for the description. Whether this description matches the Greater Region of SaarLorLux, I do not know (the SaarLorLux seems much larger than what the works describing the Greater Luxembourg imply). Викидим (talk) 15:21, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

See also Luxembourg annexation plans after the Second World War for some historical background of the term. Викидим (talk) 15:39, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

• MPGuy2824, Викидим, I updated my proposal. I think now that it is better to retarget to Luxembourg annexation plans after the Second World War. РоманЖ (talk) 21:31, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

  This is a modern concept as well. It draws a lot of interest among researchers as, I think, the largest (in terms of interaction) trans-border conglomeration in the EU. While not formal, like Greater London or Grand Paris, it seems notable on its own, perhaps, in the future it will have its own article. For now, I think that a section either in SaarLorLux or Luxembourg would do IMHO. Викидим (talk) 23:51, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

  Closest equivalent is IMHO Paris metropolitan area. Викидим (talk) 00:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep, per MPGuy. This is a solution in search of a problem. Whether or not strictly accurate, the term "Greater Region of Luxembourg" is widely used in reliable published academic source (1, 2). As for "Greater Luxembourg", this is also a commonly used term. Ernst & Young offer accountancy services for for "Greater Luxembourg" (3). So too does the UN (4) and the Lux government (5, "Given the important role of Luxembourg in the ‘greater Luxembourg’ labour market, the department could usefully explore funding opportunities in neighbouring regions..."). This is a very small selection. Where exactly is the problem with the current situation? —Brigade Piron (talk) 22:05, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Brigade Piron although I agree with you regarding the 'Greater Region of Luxembourg', I still think that when a reader searches for 'Greater Luxembourg', they are more likely looking for information on Luxembourg annexation plans after the Second World War. РоманЖ (talk) 15:14, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: While it seems like a consensus to Keep, some participants are also saying they'd be okay with Retargeting so I'm going to relist this discussion to come to a firmer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:54, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:05, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Disambiguate at least the first one. Two redirect targets are discussed above. I am not convinced it's a common term for SaarLorLux, most examples given here do not actually use the full term (they just call it the "Greater region"). The annexation target has some plausibility. However, not mentioned above, the natural target that comes to my mind is the historical Duchy of Luxembourg, which through the Partitions of Luxembourg created the current smaller borders. The term might even refer to Luxembourg (Belgium), which is greater (bigger). The latter two may more specifically refer to SaarLorLux, but that is because they are more specific than the more general term. CMD (talk) 08:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  Support disambiguate proposal. @Brigade Piron@MPGuy2824@Викидим: what do you think? I created Draft:Greater Luxembourg. РоманЖ (talk) 16:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  Support both the disambiguation proposal (for all three variants) and the draft itself. We should not encourage editors to use link to Greater Luxembourg without a clarification: multiple context-dependent meanings are quite clear by now, and he DAB is a standard way to resolve the issue. Викидим (talk) 02:01, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm afraid I'm still opposed. After having boldy but wrongly asserted that the region is "never" referred to as Greater Luxembourg, they have still to provide any evidence that it is used to refer to any of the other three other items now proposed for disambiguation. Several of these seem very suspect. Can we have some evidence that this is not simply WP:OR, please? —Brigade Piron (talk) 21:17, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

All I am trying is to avoid splitting hairs here. The very fact of this discussion confirms IMHO that a reasonable man on the Clapham omnibus would be quite likely confused if a result of clicking on a blue link Greater Luxembourg would bring him to a particular page (regardless of context) so it should point to a DAB to force editors to disambiguate such links according to the context. I am less opinionated about the other two redirects (since a typical editor among the ones that I have seen usually proceeds with caution before adding a wikilink with disambiguation, thus misdirection problems are less likely). If reaching a consensus requires me to abandon my stance of pointing the "modern region" redirect to the DAB as well, feel free to disregard my request WRT to the second and third redirects. Викидим (talk) 22:24, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

@Brigade Piron which of these items (Duchy of Luxembourg, Luxembourg (Belgium), and Luxembourg annexation plans after the Second World War) cannot be found in sources referring to "Greater Luxembourg"? When I google, I see "Greater Luxembourg" associated with the Duchy of Luxembourg and Luxembourg in Belgium. I have not found any references linking "Greater Luxembourg" to the annexation plans after the Second World War. Despite this, based on the discussion above, I have tentatively included it in the draft of the disambiguation page. РоманЖ (talk) 11:42, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Handwriting expert

• Handwriting expert → Graphology  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I would think that the modern primary meaning of "handwriting expert" would be the person who scientifically examines handwriting to determine authorship, not the pseudoscientific person who analysis handwriting to divine personality characteristics. I am on the fence about whether this should be retargeted to Graphanalysis, or disambiguated. BD2412 T 16:13, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

• Hmm. I think I'd lean toward retargeting to Forensic handwriting examination, which is already a dab page with a couple potential entries, but I don't feel super strongly about it. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:01, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
  • An expert is not an examination, though, and Graphology (which should be mentioned on a disambiguation page for the nominated term) is not forensic. BD2412 T 18:46, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Questioned document examination as avoiding double redirect from Graphanalysis, which has a hatnote to Graphology. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:04, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
• Well, it definitely shouldn't go to Graphology, that's for sure. I think Forensic handwriting examination is probably the best retarget, since that will also aim readers at palaeography and diplomatics, two other kinds of handwriting expertise. Disclosure: I have no idea if this counts as a COI, lol. -- asilvering (talk) 15:29, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Questioned document examination per the above comments. 5Q5|^✉ 10:57, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
• When I looked at Questioned document examination, I saw it as a poor but better target than the current. Then when I looked at Forensic handwriting examination, not only did it have Questioned document examination as an entry, but two other terms that could explore the reader's horizons. It is an oddly crafted disambig page, but in the absence of an article about the "Handwriting expert", let's give the reader the maximum. I understand "examination" here does not have the meaning of "test", but of "examining" which is what an expert would do. Jay 💬 12:54, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  With nom's new dab below, the Forensic handwriting examination dab gets duplicated. The Palaeography or Diplomatics articles do not appear to be related to forensics. Forensic handwriting examination can be made a redirect to Questioned document examination instead. Jay 💬 15:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: I have created a disambiguation page at Handwriting expertise, which captures some additional senses. However, I am coming around to the idea that Questioned document examination is likely the primary topic of the term. BD2412 T 15:56, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:01, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Dana Fuller

• Dana Fuller → Dana Fuller Ross  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete: "Dana Fuller Ross" was a pseudonym not shortened to "Dana Fuller". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:56, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

• Dana Fuller Ross does not mention notability, has no references. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 16:06, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
  • Update' someone converted the target Dana Fuller Ross (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) to a disambiguation page -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 02:17, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
• Nom converted the target dab to a stub just before making this nomination. IP wanted it to go back to dab, and there was an edit war. Both were reverted and we now have the status quo, before the nom's conversion. Keep as {{R from incomplete dab}} unless we see more action. Jay 💬 12:14, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 23:01, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. No evidence that "Dana Fuller" on its own is commonly used to refer to either person listed on the DAB page. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 01:20, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Heathe N. Craig Joint Theater Hospital

• Heathe N. Craig Joint Theater Hospital → Bagram Airfield  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Craig Joint Theater Hospital → Bagram Airfield  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no mention of "Craig" or "Theater" at the target article. This redirect is tagged as having possibilities, but such possibilities are closer to impossible if this redirect is a blue link and pointing at a title where the hospital is not discussed. Is mentioned on 3 pages: List of hospitals in Afghanistan, 455th Air Expeditionary Wing, and Advanced cardiac life support. Unsure if any of these are truly ideal, however, or if WP:REDYES would apply. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 21:15, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: For what it's worth, for most of its life (since 2010), the redirect actually pointed to a section discussing the hospital in the Bagram Airfield article, until the section was removed in Special:Diff/1032112406 in 2021. I'm frankly not sure whether the section should have been removed under the reasoning that was given. – Recoil16 (talk) 23:39, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
• If relisted, should be bundled with Heathe N. Craig Joint Theater Hospital. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:46, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled with the other similar redirect as suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:30, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

• I've added back the section mentioned by Recoil16, but retained only the sourced content. I have retained the present tense phrasing although the status of the hospital is unclear after the takeover by Taliban in 2021. But we'll be consistent with the lede which mentions in the present tense: There is also a hospital with 50 beds, three operating theatres and a modern dental clinic. That line cites a July 2021 source whereas the Taliban took over the following month, hence it is the target article that is in need of repair Jay 💬 13:22, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 22:56, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep it is now in the article. The only two key words are "Craig" and "Hospital", looking for Theatre wouldn't necessarily turn up the facility, since it means "area"/"region"/"theater of military command". Joint is the same, just meaning multiple branches of the U.S. military share use of it. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 14:44, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Ra'ad 1

• Ra'ad 1 → RAAD (anti-tank guided missile)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The more I research this redirect, the more confused I get. For starters, this redirect formerly targeted the article that is currently at Fajr-3 (artillery rocket), and did for the past six years. However, before that, this redirect targeted the article which it currently targets. However, to throw some more confusion into the mix, another similarly-titled article, Raad-1, exists. I may have figured out a better plan for what to do with this redirect by now if it were not for its incoming links; I am not clear what subject these links are meant to refer to. I'm thinking disambiguate is the way to go here, but I'm incredibly unclear what the base title should be for such a disambiguation page. Steel1943 (talk) 00:41, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment both RAAD (anti-tank guided missile) and Raad-1 say they mean Thunder and Thunder-1. ; while Fajr-3 (artillery rocket) seems to mean Aurora-3 or Dawn-3 ? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:09, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at Raad-1.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:36, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:39, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 22:56, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Since this discussion isn't really getting any comments, I might as well throw my two cents in and say weak delete. Raad already exists as a disambiguation and there really isn't any suitable target for the exact title. Alternatively, retarget to Raad since that's the actual disambiguation. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:16, 19 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:32, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Raad-1 as {{R from modification}}, which now has a hatnote. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:47, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

Username policy

• Username policy → Wikipedia:Username policy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• User name policy → User (computing)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Recently-created cross-namespace redirect. C F A 💬 20:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

• My question with XNRs to projectspace is always, "Is it plausible that someone would be looking for this internal page while new enough to not know what namespaces are?" Given that for many people creating a username is the first step in contributing to Wikipedia, I find the answer in this case an emphatic yes. Keep. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 22:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
• I support deleting this redirect. Pages in mainspace are primarily for the benefit of the general readership. "Username policy" is not a term familiar to the general public as being related to English Wikipedia. isaacl (talk) 23:10, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to User (computing)#Username format. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:18, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

  That section provides a bit of info on operation system restrictions for usernames. A username policy is generally about rules enacted by an organization about usernames (thus is at the discretion of the organization and not solely due to technical limitations). isaacl (talk) 17:22, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete this unnecessary and confusing Wikipedia:Cross-namespace redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:05, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete not a Wikipedia specific term as other websites have username policies and there could be other uses that don't involve computers etc where usernames have policies. Also User (computing)#Username format doesn't appear to discuss policies so it probably not a good target. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:03, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete WP:XNR too much navel gazing. There is so much material that could be built about controversial username policies for social media and accounts allowed by corporations. There's the unreasonable name length bans for users of various services that appear in the news now and then, about people with long names or short names, not allowed names, etc -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 03:19, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
• Redirect per Pppery. That page already has a hatnote pointing to Wikipedia:Username policy. --Ahecht (TALK
  PAGE) 19:23, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to User (computing)#Username format. Seems right to me. Steel1943 (talk) 05:50, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep I agree with Tamzin on this one, the username policy trips up so many new users that I think having an XNR is more helpful than harmful. Legoktm (talk) 04:29, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
• Note that User name policy that was created in 2006, has targeted User (computing) since 2007. Any outcome would need to be consistent. Jay 💬 18:10, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 07:44, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 10:36, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment: I have added User name policy to this discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 15:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to User (computing)#Username format and move the article hatnote to the section, with a better explanation of why WP:USERNAME is linked, so that those users who are as of yet unfamiliar with namespaces can find what they are looking for. The current hatnote is insufficiently explanatory, and if I was confused and looking for the wikipedia username policy I doubt I'd understand the current wording. Fieari (talk) 05:32, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 22:55, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. WP's username policy is already displayed prominently when creating a new account, so saying that new users need this so badly as to justify an XNR is nonsense. And the retarget proposal immediately above is equally bad, since it doesn't talk about any sort of policies, just a couple specific examples for Windows only, not the general concept, which is wayyyy more general than even any operating system. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:59, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Gamma Squeeze

• Gamma Squeeze → Short squeeze#Gamma squeeze  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Gamma squeeze → Short squeeze#Gamma squeeze  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Either delete the redir or fix the content of the redir target article. The Short squeeze article currently has no mention of "gamma" or "gamma squeeze" whatsoever. N2e (talk) 10:39, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: Fixed nomination which was malformed. @N2e: You need to place the nomination template below the html line for it to work properly. I've fixed this now. CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:52, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:45, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment the redirection is a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gamma Squeeze so this isn't a BLAR situation. Thryduulf (talk) 07:46, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
• Also bundle Gamma Squeeze into this. Jay 💬 17:44, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled with "Gamma Squeeze" as suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:16, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

The removal diff at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Short_squeeze&diff=prev&oldid=1075503817 looks difficult to distinguish from vandalism. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:29, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 22:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Cannot say, but I would not put the removed content back as it was unsourced and hard (for me) to understand. The stock market is complex, but that first paragraph was incredibly hard. The sourced content about Gamma squeeze also didn't seem to be related to the source, so ultimately it is the maintainers of the target article who have to decide. As the redirect has history and an AfD that favoured merge, restore and tag for merge. Jay 💬 07:47, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

RfD doesn't have the authority to do that - it would be overturning an AfD outcome out of process. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

How so? RfD overturns a lot of AfD redirect outcomes. And this particular case is not about overturning, it is helping the AfD outcome by going through the process of merge-and-redirect. When an article is tagged with "merge-to", its status becomes temporary until the merge is complete. Jay 💬 08:14, 26 November 2024 (UTC)

RfD overturns a lot of AfD redirect outcomes -> huh? If an AfD closes as redirect then AfD is declaring that the content shouldn't be an article. AfD doesn't have the authority to declare something should exist as a redirect, so it's not overturning that outcome for RfD to say it shouldn't, and therefore delete. It is overturning to, even temporarily, return that content to an article. And the {{merge}} and even {{Afd-merge to}} backlogs are months long so "temporary" is wishful.

Our options here are either to revert that edit, do the merge ourselves (which is a bold action that doesn't derive any authority from this discussion), or delete as not mentioned. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:26, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Stars War

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Radio-Canada

• Radio-Canada → Canadian Broadcasting Corporation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 30 § Radio-Canada – keep

Make disambiguation page instead. While the CBC is known in French as "Radio-Canada", the term in English most commonly refers to Ici Radio-Canada Télé or Ici Radio-Canada Première, its two main broadcast services. A look at the incoming links to Radio-Canada shows that almost all are actually intended for one of these two articles. 162 etc. (talk) 20:37, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• For the same arguments at the previous RfD, the current target was deemed the primary topic. [Disclosure: previous RfD closer] Jay 💬 07:23, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

  Wikipedia is not a French-English dictionary. No English-language reliable sources refer to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation as "Radio-Canada". However, they do use "Radio-Canada" to refer to the TV or radio networks.[47][48] 162 etc. (talk) 19:57, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep per prior RfD, this is the best target to cover the options, including the international radio broadcaster. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 02:56, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
• Disambiguate per my previous arguments. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 01:47, 14 November 2024 (UTC)
• Lean disambiguate. I previously !voted to keep the redirect, but 162 is right to bring this up again as the state of how editors are using the redirect wasn't discussed in the previous RfD. I went through a small sample of article links and there is clearly a misalignment between what editors think Radio-Canada points to and what it actually does. I wouldn't say that 'almost all' editors intend to link to French-language media services rather than the company entity, though, it's clearly a common intention. I still believe that landing at Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is unsurprising for Radio-Canada, but a DAB page may useful in constructing better and consistent inter-article links. Disambiguating Radio-Canada would be a net positive if creating hundreds of article links to a DAB page is in itself OK, I know it is discouraged. Also note that Radio-Canada shows up as a link in References sections, and I am unsure if that is automatically generated. This would need to be addressed as well. ― Synpath 21:59, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 22:17, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Cite web

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Göbenä

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Bighead octopus,

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

True positive

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Ap (ghost)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Ap (ghost)

Atlantoöccipital articulations

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Atlantoöccipital articulations

Hebed

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted

Tucker Turner

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

Ted, Ned and Ed

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Ted, Ned and Ed

Ultrajectine

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: soft retarget

Joseph Stalin's death conspiracy Theories

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Joseph Stalin's death conspiracy Theories

Cite AV media

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Cite AV media

Goolge book

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Googlw

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

GGKEY

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#GGKEY

November 15

Winkepedia

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Rising And Setting Of The Sun

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Rising And Setting Of The Sun

Miencraft

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Capitol protest

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Capitol protest

"SD"

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Headwaters Country Jam

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Headwaters Country Jam

2007 offseason

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Nueva Hampshire

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Nueva Hampshire

Turkish Turkish

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Turkish Turkish

Putting wedge

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Putting wedge

Tata (Persian King)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Tata (Persian King)

Khaidi No. 150 (soudtrack)

• Khaidi No. 150 (soudtrack) → Khaidi No. 150  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I'm nominating this one separately because of its history—it apparently used to be an article about the movie's soundtrack until a deletion discussion in April 2017 (the participants of which that resulted in it being redirected to the current target. Aside from spikes in 2021 and 2022, it hasn't been getting very many pageviews since then, so I'm not 100% sure we need this lying around, plus I've also created the correctly spelled Khaidi No. 150 (soundtrack) (which should help readers find the intended target), so I'd like to hear all your thoughts about this. Also, the participants of the deletion discussion (TheLongTone, Jennica, Bovineboy2008, Serial Number 54129, and Jo-Jo Eumerus) might want to weigh in on the matter, so I'm pinging them in case they have anything they might want to add. Regards, SONIC678 05:56, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

• Restore the four revisions that were deleted at AFD (as I do not see a policy-baaed reason that justified their deletion in accordance with the WP:ATD !votes at the debate), merge the page history up to Onel5969's revision into Khaidi No. 150 (soundtrack), move the talk page to Talk:Khaidi No. 150 (soundtrack), then delete the remaining 2024 revision. ✗plicit 12:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:39, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

• I'm not 100% sure I understand Explicit's proposal above, but whether the history of the former article is being maintained at Khaidi No. 150 (soundtrack) or Khaidi No. 150 (soudtrack), the target (for both or just the one not deleted) should be refined to Khaidi No. 150#Soundtrack, and I will shortly change this for Khaidi No. 150 (soundtrack). A7V2 (talk) 01:46, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 22:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 14:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Make this title red on the merits as an implausible typo (missing "n"). I don't think RfD has the authority to undelete the history deleted at AfD as Explicit suggests (only DRV could do that), and am fine with history merging the 2020 edits to another title. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:49, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Nail You Down

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Justin Bieber dead

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedily deleted by Rsjaffe per WP:G3

W i k i p e d i a

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Zelda: The Wand of Gannon

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Harapanahalli railway station

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Harapanahalli railway station

2001 attacks

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Linjian

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Linjian

ベトナム系オーストラリア人

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

サイゴン

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#サイゴン

Rihanna Death

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedily deleted by Asilvering per WP:G3

人身売買

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

アメリカ合衆国国務省

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Teletubbies characters)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Nueva York (desambiguación)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Radiac detector

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: procedural keep

Fishers Island, New York (old edit history)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

The Licensing Letter

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Racial violence

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Racial violence

Blind tasting

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Pauletta Brupbakher

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Stephoscope

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Mongola

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Mongola

History of the United States (2008–2024)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#History of the United States (2008–2024)

Talk:Lost (2004 TV series)/Archive 1

• Talk:Lost (2004 TV series)/Archive 1 → Talk:Lost (2004 TV series)/Archive 1  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• All redirects at Special:PrefixIndex/Talk:Lost_(2004_TV_series) except Talk: Lost (2004 TV series)

Several redirects were created when I tried to move Lost (2004 TV series) to Lost (TV series) after closing an RM discussion, but did not notice that the talk page was move protected, causing me to attempt a manual round robin and probably botching something in the process. I am hoping this, along with all the redirects listed at Special:PrefixIndex/Talk:Lost_(2004_TV_series) can be deleted, as opposed to filling somebody's noticeboard with several dozen CSDs.

If they're kept for some reason, I will go about retargeting them, but from the look of it none of them are actually linked to outside of the other redirects. They should either qualify for WP:G6 or one of the redirect criteria. ASUKITE 01:32, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

It looks like there are incoming links to some. Get them straightened out and I don't see why this can't then be speedied. (Or wait a day and a bot should clean up the 2xredirs...) - UtherSRG (talk) 02:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I can take a look later tonight when I'm back home if the bot hasn't already gotten to them. ASUKITE 16:07, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep all on the merits - these are perfectly reasonable {{R from move}}s and while I wouldn't have complained if they had been suprressredirected originally now that we're here there's no actual reason to delete. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:46, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

November 9

Walt Disney Productions

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Yosi (Nintendo character)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: No consensus

England Lionhearts

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: soft delete

Featured topic criteria

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Featured and good topic candidates

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Rúben Amorim

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

98 degrees\

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Waking the Dragons

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Ultrajectine

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 17#Ultrajectine

Tony DiGerolamo

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Restore

Mohammed Jafar

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

3.1415926535…

• 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751058209749445923078164062862089986280348253421170679821480865132823066470938446095505822317253594081284811174502841027019385211055596446229489549303819644288109756659334461284756482337867831652712019091456 → Pi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. This has been created a few months ago. It is just the maximum number of digits that Wikipedia happens to allow for a page title. This is not a reasonable search term, and I would argue it fails rule #8 of WP:RFD#DELETE: being a novel or obscure synonym that's unlikely to be useful. The edit summary for its creation, which is "255 (the max) number of characters. Lol.", also makes me wonder if this was a joke edit (this user has had something of an "obsession" with the 255 character limit, compare this example). Renerpho (talk) 04:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: I did not notify the creator of this redirect, because they were banned indefinitely a week after creating it, for sock puppetry. I notified 2003 LN6 as the only other user who has edited it. I have also mentioned it on Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia records#New longest redirect title, which is where I originally became aware of it. I believe that should cover everyone who may have an interest in this redirect. Renerpho (talk) 04:52, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

  An overview of previous discussions of this question (up to 2018) can be found at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 October 10#Redirects to pi. Since then, there has also been Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 22#3.141592653589.... Relevant arguments may also be found there. Renerpho (talk) 01:08, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Harmless, goes exactly where it should point. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 06:08, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete not a reasonable search term, created by a sock. Not useful. Polyamorph (talk) 08:44, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. I argued at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 8 § The Boy Bands Have Won, and All the Copyists and the Tribute Bands and the TV Talent Show Producers Have Won that in a case where the full title would exceed 255 characters, "I think it's reasonable to say that any plausible truncation of the full title is a valid search term". This is a bit different because the full length of the string in question is, well, infinite, and I wouldn't support keeping redirects for each of the 251 possible truncations past 3.14. But it seems reasonable to allow a redirect for the longest possible truncation supported by MediaWiki. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe) 08:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

  "Plausible" is the crucial word here, and you have not explained why a number of 255 digits in particular is reasonable to keep. That it happens to be the maximum allowed by MediaWiki doesn't make it a plausible search term. Renerpho (talk) 17:16, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete, not a plausible search term. Graham87 (talk) 14:09, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete, do y'all really think it'd be plausible for someone to type this entire string in to search for Pi when they literally only need to plug in "Pi" or "3.14"? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:07, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

  Amending vote: I'd like to note that the idea brought up later to salt is a good one. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:54, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep Some readers may stumble on a very long series of digits and not realize it is pi, so they would search it up, truncating as necessary. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:35, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

And where does "truncating as necessary" at exactly 255 digits come in? Truncating at 256 will result in an error, and truncating at 254 leads to a redirect that doesn't exist. Renerpho (talk) 17:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete - not a useful redirect title. Jay 💬 15:48, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

  And no argument on here has convinced me that this is useful as a redirect. This RfD is useful because we need to have discussions on extreme fun redirect titles such as this which test mediawiki title lengths, and have nothing to do with regards to usefulness as a redirect title. Jay 💬 06:57, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

• Weak keep unambiguous and cheap. Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 19:55, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep per Tamzin. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:57, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete as a sequence of digits no one will type into any kind of search engine. --Викидим (talk) 22:00, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

It's not for typing, it's for copy-and-pasing. If you paste 255+ digits of pi into Wikipedia, it would truncate to this redirect. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:40, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

AFAIK this is not how the search engines work. If one types more that this exact number of digits, search engines will not truncate the token to our 256 characters and will not point to our article (try Google). If the search is done inside Wikipedia, the long prompt will actually work and elicit a Pi suggestion without this redirect (the redirect will actually be confusing as it will distract attention for the actual article). Викидим (talk) 06:50, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep per Tamzin. Longest technically possible version of a number that is infinite. This is especially relavent because it is a non-repeating number that it is not uncommon to memorize many digits out in popular math culture. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 22:31, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete for too long to look at the digits. What is the point of adding these huge numbers of digits, expecting the audience to search the number of Pi in an alternative way by those digits they memorize? If they would like to search for this mathematical constant, can't they just type "Pi" instead? Dedhert.Jr (talk) 00:16, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep per Tamzin, Pppery, Tavix, et al. and my arguments at a similar discussion that took place in March 2021. It's unambiguous, harmless, and potentially helpful to people searching for pi regardless of how many digits they type in. Like Tamzin argues above me, this is a plausible truncation of the full number pi (which has thousands, millions, possibly even billions of digits), just like all the other pi-digit redirects I cited in that discussion. Regards, SONIC678 01:20, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

  The only way to use this redirect AFAIK is to memorize hundreds of digits of pi and actually type (or paste) an exact number of these digits into the search engine. All modern engines would try to autocomplete the prompt (the one in Wikipedia after 3.141592 is typed will identify just the Pi and this strange redirect, so it would be great to hear a description of the scenario, where a genius who memorized all these digits (1) does not know that they belong to pi and (2) is oblivious to the suggestion of the search engine. Викидим (talk) 06:41, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. Harmless, accurate. Steel1943 (talk) 02:14, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep technically correct redirect. --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:08, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Question from nominator: To those arguing for keep, are you saying we should have a redirect from all the other possible lengths? Do you recognize that this goes against most previous discussions involving redirects to truncated versions of pi? We have some, like all up to 3.14159265358979323846264338, but most others -- including some like 3.14159265358979323846264338327950, which is actually mentioned in another article and could be a useful search term, but has been deleted per R3: Recently-created, implausible redirect -- are missing. See also this old deletion discussion, and this one. I'm sure there are others; both of these have resulted in the deletion of multiple similar redirects for the same reason, and are given as examples.

If that argument doesn't hold then we should have 255 different redirects, one from each possible truncation, plus a note on the policy page that such redirects are considered useful per community discussion. Renerpho (talk) 13:55, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Correction: It's actually all up to 3.1415926535897932384626433832795.

(It was also nominated for deletion, but it was kept due to the 32-digit version being useful for the floating point reason that you mentioned. I guess the extra 0 was too much.

Not sure if there's a similar use case for 255 digits.) ApexParagon (talk) 16:18, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

No, 3.14159265358979323846264338327 doesn't exist since 2011, and 3.1415926535897932384626433832 was deleted in 2015. Renerpho (talk) 16:37, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

The latter is of course different from the others, because it was an article, not a redirect. It was deleted under A7 (Article about a website, blog, web forum, webcomic, podcast, browser game, or similar web content, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject), which is a reason I wouldn't have thought about. One could argue whether it should have been turned into a redirect at the time. I would say no, for the same reasons to delete the other one(s), but you could. Renerpho (talk) 16:49, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't follow that because we don't delete a redirect of a certain character, we should therefore create others of the same character, or even encourage, or even not discourage such creations. With articles these three lines are so close that for most people and most purposes they merge into one. Redirects are different because they can be harmless, they don't advertise their presence like articles, and they are very cheap in all resources, especially editor resources (unless they get nommed for deletion). All the best: Rich Farmbrough 20:51, 18 October 2024 (UTC).

• Keep per Tamzin. Not all truncations are plausible search terms, but this one is because it will catch every one using both it and any longer titles. It will also help search engines (internal and external) direct people using slightly shorter tuncations to the article they want to read. Thryduulf (talk) 14:38, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete and salt as implausible and per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 22#3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716939937510582097494459230781640628620899862803482534211706. It's clear that nobody would reasonably type this in for anything other than novelty (I am not convinced by the "copy paste" argument, more on that below) and these types of titles cause more trouble and discussion than its worth, all for reaching a two-character article. We wouldn't permit e (number) or square root of 3 to have these types of titles, and all of these digits are not discussed at Pi either, making the full length of this title an undiscussed subject at the target page. We don't have any material on Wikipedia about 3.141592653589793238462643383279502884197169399375105820974944592307816406286208998628034825342117067982148086513282306647093844-(arbitrary space)-6095505822317253594081284811174502841027019385211055596446229489549303819644288109756659334461284756482337867831652712019091456. This number doesn't appear anywhere on Wikipedia. Conversely, we have an article on the mathematical constant, and that constant has this value at two hundred and fifty-five significant figures. By extension, this redirect is misleading because all of these digits included in the search term are not listed at the target, so people who want to read about all of the digits they typed in, wouldn't be able to. Tests to copy-pasting into the search bar do not work for me, as the search bar does not accept anything longer than 255, gives a MediaWiki error and/or "no results matching the query". But Google takes more than 255 characters and actually HAS all of the digits listed on various pi sites. so if "someone sees it without context", Google seems the way to go. A Wikipedia redirect for not 254, not 256, but exactly 255 digits of unmentioned material, does not seem useful or helpful, nor realistic for reading the Wikipedia article about Pi. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 15:00, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per Utopes. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:23, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep - it's obviously the right target and it's a plausible redirect (someone who sees pi written down this way and copies as much as wikipedia allows in the search box). Stop and consider "realistically, if a user typed this into a search box and pressed enter, where should they go?" Do the delete voters seriously think that a "0 search results" page is a better target for this than Pi? BugGhost🦗👻 23:45, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

That's a straw-man argument, because a "0 search results" is not what's in question. Have you actually tried it? If a user copy/pastes 254 digits, the redirect won't help them, but the autocomplete gives them Pi even if we delete the redirect (they always get autocompleted to 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751, which is not in question). And if they copy/paste 256 or more (which they absolutely can do), they'll also get an autocomplete for Pi -- unless they actually press search, in which case they get an error message. In neither of those cases, the redirect is of any help. Renerpho (talk) 00:48, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

A correction (I admit I wasn't careful enough when I tested this myself): If you search for between 256 and 300 digits, you'll just not find anything (neither the current redirect, nor Pi). It is only when you enter 301 or more digits that you get the error message. Compare H:S vs. WP:TITLELENGTH. Renerpho (talk) 11:05, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - This redirect is not just this redirect, it's this AND EVERYTHING LONGER. It's plausible, as they could paste in any larger number of digits and still get this redirect. Unambiguously accurate target. Harmless. WP:CHEAP. For the record, I would not mind if literally every amount of digits between this and 3.14 was also a redirect, but that is another discussion. Fieari (talk) 01:18, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

  "They could paste in any larger number of digits and still get this redirect" -- that is not true. Pasting in anything longer and clicking "search" results in an error, with or without this redirect. Renerpho (talk) 01:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

  And for completeness, using a smaller number of digits (say, 254) isn't helped by this redirect either. Clicking "search" doesn't find the article, but Wikipedia's auto-completion will suggest 3.1415926535897932384626433832795028841971693993751, which leads them to the correct target. The redirect in question is only useful if users paste in that exact number of digits. Renerpho (talk) 01:28, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

  Renerpho, this redirect is a handful of bytes in size, and it is obviously going to the right place. The fact it is "only useful" if the user types in something non-standard is completely fine, that is the very point of a redirect. By my count, you've made 10 comments over 23 edits on this RFD - it may be beneficial to take a step back, the outcome of this is not really a big deal in the wider scheme of things. BugGhost🦗👻 07:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

  The comment Renerpho was responding to states this redirect works for 255 characters and "EVERYTHING LONGER [sic]"; capitalization not mine. The strength from the !vote seems to be derived from (>255) functionality. Renerpho then says that it's not actually the case, and that the redirect only functions at 255 digits exactly, or (=255). (Indeed, I've come to the same conclusion from my tests). You then say that's "completely fine", seeming to agree with the (=255) status, a wholly different state of mind from what Fieari stated in their !keep. Where is the goalpole? Is this being !kept for encapsulating everything beyond >255, or exactly =255? Because I was led to believe the former, as the only reason it could be seen as exceptional and not meet a fiery fate alongside the rest of the overly long "exact digit matches", such as this (deleted) (=28) and this (deleted) (=35) and this (example of reasonable length) (=12) and this (speedy deleted) (=208) and this (speedy deleted) (=29) and this (deleted) (=98). We deleted these because digits of pi aren't listed on the page. This indicated "consensus to limit" these, but no rule beyond the existing outlier of 3.1415926535897932384626433832795. It's cannot be "obviously going to the right place" if obnoxiously long pi redirects have been discussed ad nauseum and historically deleted at 100% certainty @RfD every single year since 2011.{{cn}} Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 18:37, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Utopes: Consensus can shift, of course, and there's nothing wrong with that. Right now, a small majority of votes is in favour of keep, and claiming consensus to delete it looks illusory at this point. I feel like this really opens Pandora's box though. If we keep this one then we should think carefully about how we limit redirects like this in the future. There are some serious votes here, staying unchallenged by most other keep voters, for creating redirects to literally every possible truncation. That would be a huge shift in policy. But even if we only allow the redirect with 255 digits as a special exception (because it's considered useful for some reason, even if based on a misconception of how the search function works), why only for Pi? What about any other notable real number? Renerpho (talk) 08:09, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Renerpho: I'm not sure what you mean if you're responding to me, I'm !voting delete. I totally agree with where you're coming from. Creating a redirect for every single amount of digits for specifically only pi is not reasonable or practical imo. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 08:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Utopes: I did intend to respond to you. The argument that this was historically deleted at 100% certainty isn't really relevant if the consensus has changed since. I am trying to understand the consequences of what we're doing here, and if Bugghost is right that I was/am overreacting. I stepped away for three days, and what's happening looks as wrong now as it did when I left. I don't plan to make many further comments in this discussion. BugGhost is right that this isn't worth a big hoo-haa either way. Still, I'm trying to understand where we're coming from with the serious arguments for keep (that's not a question to you, Utopes, just something I'm asking myself). Renerpho (talk) 08:41, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

  I agree consensus can change. It was just interesting because it seems like people who are !keeping have not actually tried typing more than 255 digits (it doesn't work). So the only way this works is exactly 255 digits. But we deleted exactly 98 digits and many others, historically. So if the assumption is that we are keeping this because "exactly 255 digits is plausible", my question for !keepers is "what makes exactly 255 digits more plausible than exactly 98 digits", which was deleted. Because the fact that MediaWiki prevents things more than 255, is purely coincidence and not something that a casual reader could possibly consider when beginning their quest of typing 255 numbers and then stopping immediately. And then do we do this for every number with repeating decimals? 0.999? 1.00000 and 255 zeroes? Because 1.0 redirects to 1, and that's a whole number. For the last 14 years it seems that any amount of decimals beyond 30 is viewed as utterly implausible. But consensus can change! So I'm curious exactly what became different, where two years ago =98 digits (no more no less) was unfathomable but =255 digits (no more no less) is a-okay. Oh well. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 09:02, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

  Please let me know the search engine that you tried with a larger number of digits. I tried quite a few, and did not get the results described by you. Викидим (talk) 01:25, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per Utopes and others. Come on people, this is exactly the sort of useless stuff that WP:PANDORA is suited for. And for all you keepers, why Pi? Why not Chronology of computation of π or Approximations of π instead? Wouldn't someone pasting in so many digits be more likely interested in the computational aspects of generating those digits and not a general article on the number itself? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 05:21, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

  Those targets would WP:ASTONISH. If a user searches a decimal version of pi (no matter the quantity of digits) then Pi should be target; we shouldn't guess that they would prefer a more niche article. BugGhost🦗👻 07:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

  No, nothing should be the target, because no one is going to search for exactly 255 digits, as others have already pointed out. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 07:55, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

  I have to agree with @Utopes and say delete and salt on the basis that this redirect is excessively and unreasonably large. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:07, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep for previous reasons. It would be more costly in terms of bandwidth to delete the redirect, as there is a very small chance someone might actually use it. Not problematic, as an opposition to WP:COSTLY. 2003 LN6 17:06, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Delete. While 255 characters may be the limit, I find it implausible that someone is going to type all 255 characters (or even copy and paste 255 characters; where would they even get 255 characters from? I would argue for keep if the search bar limit was 255 characters, but that's not the case). Procyon117 (talk) 10:20, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

What is the search bar limit, anyway? (It's 300, not 255; 255 I think is the limit for the length of article titles.) Renerpho (talk) 10:33, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep absolutely no policy reason to delete. It is by no means novel or obscure. It's a very cheap way of getting people to the right place, compared with the cost of having a discussion about it. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 20:44, 18 October 2024 (UTC).

• Delete that's too implausible redirect and numbers are too long for the 255 digits so far per Utopes and other supporters. So, these would be applied as WP:COSTLY, WP:PANDORA and WP:RFD#D8. ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 02:20, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 19:41, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Delete. Redirects are cheap but this is straight up implausible. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 20:48, 20 October 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:02, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete and salt too long implausible and which may confusing an infinite number of 255 digits so far per Utopes mentioned earlier? IMO, this would be applied for deletion as WP:COSTLY, WP:PANDORA and WP:RFD#D8. ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 21:42, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

  In addition to the double vote thing I'd also like to point out that WP:PANDORA should not be used, as per WP:GETBACKINTHERE. This redirect has plenty of plausibility issues without Pandora, trust me. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:56, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

  I've gone ahead and struck this as a double vote. However, please don't tell people not to invoke PANDORA. I, and many others, find it a quite cogent and valuable essay. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean you should be telling other people not to use it. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:14, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

  There's a marked difference between simply telling people that WP:IDONTLIKEIT, and giving someone (what I believe to be) a well-written, detailed description of what PANDORA does wrong and why it should be avoided in RfD discussions. I do recommend reading WP:GETBACKINTHERE for said detailed explanation, I've put quite a bit of work into it ^^ 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:38, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

  I have read it, and it's frankly quite terrible. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:50, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

  ...Well, I can't improve it if you won't tell me what you don't like about it, lol. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 00:10, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Lunamann: Wouldn't it be better to have a centralized discussion about this (on the essay's talk page, or at Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion), rather than bringing it up on every RfD that mentions WP:PANDORA?[49] Renerpho (talk) 00:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  I mean. If you're referring to talking about WP:GETBACKINTHERE and ways to improve it, I'm perfectly fine with someone going to Wikipedia_talk:Please,_put_Pandora_back_in_the_box and striking up a conversation. I think the last time someone did so was an extensive convo I had there back in March, and that was enough to get me to strike an entire section 'cause I couldn't figure out how else to please the people in that discussion lol

  If you're saying that I should stop mentioning WP:GETBACKINTHERE when people mention WP:PANDORA... I mean, the entire reason I wrote WP:GETBACKINTHERE was to compile and condense down the arguments against Pandora, because... well, before I wrote the article, people would go on paragraphs-long arguments about it and it got tiring and repetitive.

  If you're saying that we should talk about perhaps making some changes to WP:PANDORA in order to have the arguments in WP:GETBACKINTHERE no longer apply? Yes! Please! I'd LOVE to have that conversation! I'd like to point out that a section on Pandora already exists on Wikipedia talk:Redirects are costly#Pandora's box, but the last time anyone replied to that section was... last March, when I posted to it, before writing WP:GETBACKINTHERE. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 01:39, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  "Should stop mentioning" sounds a lot like "shut up". That's not what I mean. You argue that WP:PANDORA contradicts some core principles. Maybe that's true. Has there ever been a poll about whether either of the two essays is compatible with established policy? I feel like that discussion could be more fruitful than to keep shouting into the void. Renerpho (talk) 02:28, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  I mean. I don't think there has been? I wouldn't know where to hold one, though.

  Unless you count Wikipedia talk:Redirects are costly#Pandora's box, which... over the FIVE YEARS that that discussion has been allowed to stand without proper closure, has amassed four keeps to six delete !votes. Would that be considered enough to take action...? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 02:56, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  I would count that, yes! But I see no consensus in that discussion, even though it has been ongoing since 2019 (if anything, there's a consensus to rewrite WP:PANDORA, but no agreement how exactly). That's the kind of discussion that goes on and on and on, but nothing ever happens.

  I already suggested Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikipedia policies and guidelines, for that very reason. Maybe this is a case where a formal RfC is necessary? Your essay may well serve as a baseline for what has to be addressed. (Make sure you read the examples for good questions/bad questions at WP:RFCBRIEF.) Renerpho (talk) 03:55, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Icarus58 you have already !voted. Please make one of your !votes a comment, or strike it. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 22:02, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Icarus58: Just to be clear, could you clarify if you !vote salt or not? Renerpho (talk) 23:15, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

  I will note that Icarus wasn't the one who struck that vote-- it was the IP editor, 35.139.154.158 (I've gone ahead and struck this as a double vote.) Given Icarus's two votes were "Delete" and "Delete and salt", I'd assume that unless Icarus comes forth and says otherwise, he'd want his vote counted as "Delete and salt".

  Unless Icarus and the IP are one and the same. I'd hope not... 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 00:45, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  Looks like they may have forgotten to log in? Renerpho (talk) 00:54, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  I think the IP just made a bold action. Cremastra (u — c) 12:35, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Lunamann, you have no evidence for the suspicious IP user 35.139.154.158 as related for my account. It seems, you'll violated as WP:AGF and WP:BITE. I just stayed for login, but after all spend throughout my days — my account was logging out immediately before it immediate reload automatically. Sorry for my patience. ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 11:38, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

  I'm deeply sorry, to both you AND the IP user. My "evidence" amounted pretty much only to that one incident where said IP user struck one of your votes; Cremastra was right in that it almost certainly was just that the IP user was trying to be bold. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:16, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

  I'd like to apologize as well, for jumping to the same conclusion. Renerpho (talk) 04:27, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete and salt Who the fuck is going to type 255 digits of pi? I don't see how the hell is the redirect plausible at all. To discourage people from testing the limits of character limit the extra salt may also be needed. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 05:17, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
• As nominator, I'd like to amend my initial delete !vote, and say that salt is probably a good idea. Renerpho (talk) 05:47, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

  Comment– I want to reiterate my support for deletion and for salting. My !vote is above. Hurricane Clyde 🌀^{my talk page!} 16:11, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete - Not a plausible search term and already ruled out by previous discussions. Nosferattus (talk) 16:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep, harmless and accurate ‹hamster717🐉› ^{(discuss anything!🐹✈️ • my contribs🌌🌠)} 15:45, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

@Hamster717, most editors are requested to delete for long digit number in terms of approximation equals to pi. But can you clarify your proof? It seems that WP:CHEAP is not advisable as harmless. ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 11:32, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete - I swayed back and forth on this one but ultimately it’s just not plausible that someone’s going to search exactly this many digits of pi. And yes, this is a pretty straight-forward example of WP:Pandora. FOARP (talk) 07:22, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep: harmless and unambiguous. Deleting for the sake of deleting. C F A 💬 00:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete and salt: Aside from the inanity of it, unnecessary redirects are not entirely harmless (and we should stop using harmlessness as a rationale):
  1. I periodically have to search for all uses of redirects to an article to do some associated cleanup maintenance, and having a multitude of such redirects makes this painfully tedious work.
  2. When redirects for misspellings or other deprecated versions of a term exist, this hides inadvertent spelling errors by editors that they (or others) would ordinarily be alerted to by a redlink.
  3. WP search suggestion already works suggesting article through similarity of spelling, so we do not even need the search benefit of minor variants being redirects. —Quondum 14:32, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
• Comment from nominator If more input is needed, I'm sure this would get more participation if it was relisted again. I'm leaving that decision to someone else. Renerpho (talk) 03:56, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:03, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. Though WP:CHEAP, there's really no need for this, no one would search this up on Wikipedia at exactly 255 characters. Myrealnamm (💬pros · 📜cons) 20:54, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep pi is among a very small set of such numbers someone could plausibly see/know/have conception of this many digits; the only harm in keeping is making the search dropdown look a tiny bit goofy because of this but see first item in my list, but I think because of it's history and consistent coverage makes it a net positive, actually. In terms of it being misleading because we don't have coverage since the exact string isn't included is not true, I don't think. It's obvious from the article on pi which includes a shorter prefix and talks about the nature of pi and its digits. Just like common synonyms do not need to be literally in the text, getting to the article makes it clear what it is. (I'd also support a retarget to Piphilology but that seems unlikely to gain consensus.) Skynxnex (talk) 01:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per Myrealnamm. If I go to [50] (this redirect plus one digit) and get MediaWiki:Title-invalid-too-long, I learn that this URL is too long because the maximum is 255 bytes, but the message doesn't tell me how long my current URL is. How am I supposed to know how many characters to remove? I seriously doubt that many people will know pi to exactly 253 decimal places (255 minus "3."), so basically nobody will enter 3.14159...712019091456, whether by typing the digit sequence, or by copy/pasting it into the URL, or by copy/pasting it into the search box. This is different from the cited The Boy Bands Have Won, or When the Pawn... (same situation), because both of them are official titles with a limited number of characters; at worst you just type or paste the whole title and delete letters until you get to the maximum number of characters, but since pi is an irrational number, there's literally no "full title" in this sense, and someone who searches a dizzying quantity of digits is highly unlikely to search a quantity that's small enough to be reduceable to the MediaWiki maximum before the searcher gets tired and gives up. Nyttend (talk) 23:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

  Your example is actually that redirect plus two digits. Which I guess proves your point. Although my first reaction to seeing that comment was to try to customize MediaWiki:Title-invalid-too-long to include the number of bytes the string actually is. My quickhack there didn't work, but I think that's a reasonable feature request. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:43, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

  Filed as T379859. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:46, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

• Keep as redirects are cheap anyway and this isn't harmless considering that pi has an undefined number of digits. 256 charcters is the max it can go. JuniperChill (talk) 16:38, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  @JuniperChill no. The length of pi numbers in undefined elipsis would be invalid and harmful usage of redirects. According to Myrealnamm and Quondum, we should stop using harmlessness as a rationale if do you think it is not really helpful in cheaper redirects. ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 01:02, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

@Renerpho I'm unblocked now, and came across the redirect only by chance while skimming a user's contribs.

Keep per above. Given phab:T379859 has been filed, there's use in having the max number of digits (plus the search prediction thing 🇺🇲JayCubby✡ please edit my user page! Talk 18:53, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Welcome back, JayCubby.

Comment from nominator To the point: If that phab case results in a change to the search function, I'd be less opposed to this redirect than I had been. It doesn't address all the problems I have with it, but it solves some. In particular, my point that many of the keep !votes are based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the search function would no longer be true. On the other hand, I want to be clear, I'd nominate this for deletion again the second I learn that this change is impossible to implement. Renerpho (talk) 20:34, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

It's clearly possible to implement. Writing a patch for that is on my queue to do eventually. Whether it will get code-reviewed is always the biggest challenge. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:57, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

Featured article candidates

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Late 00s recession

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Haskell Harr

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Claire Miller

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Retarget

President of Spain

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Asmodel

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 16#Asmodel

Template:Please stop move

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

ChinaFile

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

November 8

Fpoon

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

This is terminology that was created primarily from a Key & Peele sketch. Searching for "fpoon" brings up exclusively K&P related videos and the urban dictionary citing them. While this might be a portmanteau of "fork" and "spoon", this is not a widely accepted or cited synonym, and is not mentioned at the target. The common and non-confusing name for this subject is "spork"; a lack of pageviews indicate that "fpoon" may be a novel and obscure synonym for the subject, and is likely to confuse readers. Especially so as "fpoon" is not a real word, or particularly grammatical. People who use this term may very well be looking for the Continental Breakfast K&P sketch, lol. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 08:18, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep I do know Key & Peele are hardly the first to come up with this portmanteau. My Elementary School came up with this term (to roarous laughter) sometime in the mid 2000's, significantly predating Key & Peele's coining, and I would have to guess we got it from somewhere just as they did. Conceptually, the jump to a inverted portmanteau is pretty simple, and while it may not be a word I draw serious issues with litigating the legitimacy of a word in a Wikipedia RfD log. Considering there is no central authority for accepted language in English, the fact that Googling the term provides several results (no mater how focused on one subject they may be) is, I think, enough of a reason to say it is a word. Beyond all of that, fpoon is no more grammatical then spork, we're just used to spork. (yes, the fp is not a frequently found constant grouping in English, but novel use of a constant group is hardly cause to call something not a word, if it was than vroom, vlog, dreamt, and bulb are all in trouble (vr, vl, mt, and lb respectively)). Foxtrot620 (talk) 14:39, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete "It's funny" and "people have come up with it before" are not valid arguments to retain the redirect. There has to be some evidence of common usage to refer to sporks in that way, which there isn't. See also WP:NOTNEO for more details. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:34, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Meh, it's a somewhat plausible {{R from incorrect name}}, and its existence potentially prevents this title from being recreated. (That, and I doubt that the invention of a fork with a spoon-like end, like a handle, four-prong with three holes, then curved end, which is what I picture a "fpoon" being, makes any sense to invent.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:25, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

  Delete. Just realized I'm actually thinking of the more likely search term "foon", which is a redirect to a different target that has a hatnote referring readers to Spork. This nominated redirect is nonsense due to the inclusion of the "p". Steel1943 (talk) 16:45, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• Weak Keep - I'm shocked foon doesn't redirect to spork, as I've definitely heard that one a lot. Fpoon doesn't seem far off from that, and I don't really think the target is ambiguous... surely Key and Peele aren't the only ones to have ever used the term. Fieari (talk) 04:16, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  @Fieari: I was thinking the same thing about Foon ... and I'm thinking per WP:DIFFCAPS, I agree with your shockedness and am considering retargeting or starting an RFD. Steel1943 (talk) 05:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 00:06, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. If this were plausible for any utensil, it would be a spoon with long s, i.e. ſpoon. Even then I don't think it useful; we shouldn't go around creating "f" redirects for every word with an initial or medial "s" merely because someone might confuse an old long-s spelling with an f-spelling. fpork wouldn't make sense for the current target even with a long-s, especially since the long s fell out of favour before the spork was invented in 1874. Nyttend (talk) 23:31, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep or soft redirect to wikt:fpoon. Enix150 (talk) 03:14, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to wiktionary for now - if the entry there fails verification then we'll have our answer and it will be G8-ed. Otherwise we'll have our answer than it's a rare but present nickname and it will point somewhere than actually mentions the term. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Byron Cemetery

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: restore article

Manual of Style:

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Bibi the butcher

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:Retarget

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Good articles on Wikipedia

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

OFM Sykes

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 16#OFM Sykes

Marzipan joyjoys

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 16#Marzipan joyjoys

Great Depression in the Middle East

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 16#Great Depression in the Middle East

Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 17#Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

Murgh

• Murgh → Chicken as food  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

created as "urdu for 'chicken'", but apparently only sees use in the context of indian curries, and doesn't seem to be mentioned outside of the page history, the previous discussion, and butter chicken. see also murg i guess cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:34, 2 October 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to Butter chicken (incidentally commonly known as "butter chikkin"). All the best: Rich Farmbrough 22:47, 2 October 2024 (UTC).
  
• Delete per nom and WP:FORRED. Retargeting as suggested above would be inappropriate too, since there's no particular reason to target this dish as opposed to any other chicken dish. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:20, 3 October 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget to Chicken, has passed into English usage, see Wiktionary. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 01:00, 4 October 2024 (UTC).
  

  "Murgh" has not passed into English, and even the Wikt entry lists it only in a sense associated with Indian cuisine. So WP:FORRED still applies. Redirecting to "chicken" would be WP:HARMFUL, as it obscures information from the user. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:52, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

  Actually, the Wiktionary entry does list it as an English word. That it is only used in one context doesn't negate that - plenty of unambiguously English terms are used only in one context. Thryduulf (talk) 16:09, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:10, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep; the English loanword is specifically used in Indian cookery to refer to chicken prepared for consumption, and not the actual animal-- which is the same use that the far-more-widespread from-French loanwords beef, pork, and mutton have. Those words link to their own pages that talk about the meats' usage in food, rather than the pages for cow, pig, and sheep respectively. Given this, the equivalent chicken as food page is the correct target. A hatnote, though, may be appropriate-- "Murgh" redirects here. For the specific dish known as "Murgh makhani", see butter chicken. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 18:21, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

  But it's not English, unlike the others, so this argument falls apart. And such a hatnote would be highly inappropriate for the same reason I gave above -- there are many many dishes whose name on Indian menus would include "murgh"; pointing to just one would make no sense. And before you bring it up, disambiguating would also be wrong as entries would be nothing but WP:PTMs. A reader who doesn't know what "murgh" is will be able to figure out what it is much more easily if the redirect didn't exist, both by the nature of the search results, and the prominent link to Wiktionary. Most people would be confused as to why searching for "murgh" took them to "Chicken as food", which would give them no information that this is a word used in Indian cuisine. A simple definition is much more likely to be useful than a whole-ass article on chicken as food. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 19:38, 10 October 2024 (UTC)

  You do realize how much of English is comprised of loanwords (that is, words pulled from other languages), right? How old does a loanword have to be, in your eyes, before it's an English word? Narrowing in on words related to food, Beef, Pork, and Mutton are all from French, as is Café. Spaghetti and Lasagna from Italian. What about Teriyaki, or Hibachi, both from Japanese? Jalapeño and Tortilla from Spanish? Ooh, Murgh is specifically from Indian, what about Chai?

  My point is that people regularly use all of these words in English speech, and if you were to remove ALL the loanwords from English, it'd sound VASTLY different.

  I'll grant you the idea that pointing to only butter chicken in the hatnote might be a bad call-- but only if you can bring up other 'murgh' dishes that have pages on Wikipedia. Otherwise, I do have to point out that the argument runs afoul of WP:CRYSTAL- we can't throw our hands in the air because someone MIGHT make a page on a second or third 'murgh' dish in the future. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 04:45, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

• Soft Retarget to Wiktionary - The discussion above has convinced me that the search is plausible, but also that we don't have any information on what the user would be looking for... namely, what does murgh mean? For that, the wiktionary entry is, in fact, the best source of useful information to the user. Fieari (talk) 00:09, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

  In case it wasn't clear above, I still specifically oppose a wiktionary redirect, again, because it hides in-site search results from the user....search results which contain a Wiktionary link right at the top already anyway! Let the search feature do its job. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 02:29, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

  Note that search results are not guaranteed to include a Wiktionary link and can be several clicks/taps away depending on multiple factors (including how you navigated here, what device you are using and whether you have the ability to create a new article). Thryduulf (talk) 02:48, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

  Search results DO include a Wiktionary link, and it's dishonest to claim otherwise. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

  If you read what I actually wrote you will see there is nothing dishonest about it. Thryduulf (talk) 11:35, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

  I note your objection, but doing the search myself, it comes up with a number of WP:PTMs that don't really provide information on the word murgh by itself, which makes me still believe that wiktionary is better suited. If they really want the search results, soft retargets provide that option. (Example soft redirect for reference what it looks like: Kiss-in) Fieari (talk) 05:05, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep per Lunamann. The evidence shows that, contrary to the IP's assertions, this is an English word, but even if it weren't the extensive use in English language environments would make this a useful search term. Thryduulf (talk) 02:48, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

  What evidence!? The existence of this redirect is downright misleading and WP:ASTONISHing. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:01, 11 October 2024 (UTC)

  Okay, we... we get it, you don't think this word has actually passed into English yet, and you're getting increasingly angry that everyone else says it has. Please don't bludgeon us over it 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:23, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete. No mention of this term at the target, so we investigate FORRED considerations. If the word means "Chicken" in Urdu, then any target BESIDES chicken (equaling murgh) would be surprising. However, it apparently has a different definition in English, where it specifically relates to culinary purposes... but such purposes are nowhere to be found on the English Wikipedia, so there is no onwiki verification. There is no mention of "Murgh" or "Urdu" at either Chicken, or Chicken as food. Typically I would accept a soft redirect to wiktionary, but we have to remember Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This means that not only do we forbid articles from being simple dictionary definitions here, but ALSO it means that we don't create redirects for every single dictionary word on Wikipedia to send over to Wiktionary. If someone types in "Murgh" onto WikiPEDIA, it seems they'd be looking for an ENCYCLOPEDIC entry rather than a dictionary one. We have plenty of articles about murgh on Wikipedia, such as Murgh makhani and Murgh cholay. If someone wanted to look up the definition of "murgh", they'd use a dictionary, not rely on a redirect that can occasionally lie. Especially so without any verification at the target page, or any logical reason for going to a page where its not mentioned. I took a gander at the wiktionary, and the info we have at Wikt:murgh is quite subpar (i.e. a singular word). As it stands, it does not provide benefit to readers, who would receive the same benefit and more from a Wikipedia search result. A search result, which reveals what encyclopedic topics related to "murgh" that we DO have here. The partial-title matches are probably better than assuming people want to "use an encyclopedia to read a dictionary". Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 08:45, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Alternatively, retarget to Afghan cuisine#Chicken where it is discussed as an Afghan term. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 09:18, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

I will note that anyone searching for the Indian cuisine would be WP:SURPRISEd by the Afghan cuisine target, so that might also be a bad target. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 00:18, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

You can't just say "someone looking for a topic we don't cover on Wikipedia, would be WP:surprised if they ended up at a topic we cover on Wikipedia". That's not at all covered in the essay that you linked to, which states "The average reader should not be shocked, surprised, or confused by what they read." Nobody would be shocked when they search the word "murgh", and see the only place where the topic of "murgh" is directly defined and discussed on Wikipedia (i.e. in Afghan cuisine). It would be different if there was no Afghan mention either, but there is.

We go by what we have, not what we want to, but don't have. If the Indian cuisine target is so important, someone would have added something related to that topic, to Wikipedia, at any point in time for the last two decades, or during the course of the discussion. Or in the future! When something is added for this Indian cuisine content, the term can be disambiguated and new redirects can be created. (Unless there IS currently-existing content related to Indian Murgh, but nobody seems to be stating that to be true. I have not found any that discuss the Indian terminology, on Wikipedia.) Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 21:23, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

Except you yourself have already linked to articles that discuss individual indian murgh dishes, Butter chicken and chana masala (which is the target of murgh cholay). Add to that, Murgh musallam, and Tandoori chicken, which-- while there isn't currently a 'murgh' redirect to it, its own article and the article for Indian cuisine#Punjab describe it as such. Clearly, the individual dishes themselves are worthy of having their own articles that could be linked to in a disambuigation, so I am honestly personally shocked that Indian murgh itself HASN'T been discussed somewhere. Perhaps we simply haven't found it yet? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:40, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

I agree that there are Indian topics such as Murgh musallam and Murgh cholay which exist. However, those can be navigated to by typing in the full name of their respective foods. It would not make sense to send Murgh to either or any of those, as a partial title match. Hence deletion is also on the menu, pun intended. :v On that note though, neither "murgh" nor "cholay" is mentioned at Chana masala, so perhaps that should be nominated too.

I feel less strongly towards deletion now that I know about the Afghan term, which is the only location where the term is discussed on Wikipedia, and thereby should draw the target by default. It is acceptable to have the word "murgh" as it is used in murgh musallam, be of a different origin than the target of "murgh" as it is used in Afghan cuisine#Chicken, which even that lists it as "murgh-e", but still better than nothing at all.

Based on the evidence present to readers in Wikipedia mainspace, only Afghan cuisine could be the primary topic of "murgh", on the basis that it is the ONLY topic covered (individually) on Wikipedia (as is the case while I'm writing this). I'm also opposed to a hatnote, especially if this redirect points to Afghan cuisine. What would a hatnote even say? "Murgh redirects here. For the term used as Indian cuisine, please see chicken as food which contains none of the information you're looking for about 'Murgh as Indian cuisine'"? Maybe at this point, we could just disambiguate something? But it would be quite hard to justify disambiguating a list of food WP:PTMs, which such PTMs are not supposed to be listed on dabs, but I digress... Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:23, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Also re: the last sentence, this has been nominated since October 2nd. All the !keepers wanted to keep, regardless of it not being mentioned at Chicken as food, or the other suggestions where "murgh" was equally unmentioned. No evidence of usage for the Indian term of "murgh" has been aired beyond wiktionary. Now we're looking for Indian usages of "murgh" onwiki, only when the Afghan term has been brought to light? I've done a pretty hefty search myself and turned up nothing, but the best part is that if a mention is found for the Indian term later down the line, the redirect can be retargeted and/or recreated upon the revelation of such evidence, which does not even have to occur this week or this month. But in the meantime, we know what we know, and what I know is that it is mentioned on Afghan cuisine. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:37, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra — talk — c 20:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget to List of chicken dishes. They are annotated link entries, but I guess no harm in embellishing the entries with local names, like how I did for butter chicken. Oppose retarget to Afghan cuisine, which is on the fringes of South Asian cuisine where this is popular. Jay 💬 19:43, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:42, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try please. Delete, keep or retarget? Since there is no update the agreement.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 13:19, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Snoutlet

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 16#Snoutlet

Bleach (games)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 16#Bleach (games)

Wikipedia:STAYONTOPIC

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Thailan

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Fortnit

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Sputnik (serach engine)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

Mothra Leo

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Banorant

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jewish pogroms in Amsterdam

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 25#Jewish pogroms in Amsterdam

NJHS

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: NJHS (disambiguation) moved back to NJHS

2029 in spaceflight

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Hat Simulator

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

PKS 0451-28

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus/restore

Tesonet

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

The Human Aquarium

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

DQw4w9WgXcQ

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy keep

IRAS 13349+1428

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Putting wedge

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#Putting wedge

Ape Escape Racer

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Stone Jesus

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jimboboii

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Lanyard class

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 16#Lanyard class

November 7

Wikipedia:OPENLETTER

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

History of the United States (2008–2024)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#History of the United States (2008–2024)

Mongola

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#Mongola

Waliugi

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Counrty

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Kentuchy

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 14#Kentuchy

Reccomend

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Gardern

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Stephoscope

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#Stephoscope

Monterrey La Raza (current)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:Relable sources

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:AUTOCONFIMRED

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Pauletta Brupbakher

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#Pauletta Brupbakher

Racially motivated violence

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#Racially motivated violence

Blind tasting

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#Blind tasting

FC Türkiye II

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 14#FC Türkiye II

Show Business (TV series)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: resolved

Love Me (TV series)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

Wikipedia:Picture turorial

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

It's time to d-d-d-d-duel

• It's time to d-d-d-d-duel → Yu-Gi-Oh!  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no mention of "d-d" at the target article. Per the RCATs, this is apparently a related meme quotation, yet does not appear anywhere as written within the article. People looking for Yu-Gi-Oh! can reach the subject by typing Yugioh. Hyphenating between all the d's, just to reach an undiscussed meme subject, does not seem particularly useful or helpful here. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:59, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep - Demonstrably helpful, give the steady daily usage count on the stats page, just in the past month. Unambiguous target. WP:CHEAP. Don't break people's workflow just for the sake of tidyness. Fieari (talk) 02:15, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Helpful to whom exactly? Personally, I search for a meme expecting information about a meme. 90% of people familiar with the meme know it's from Yu-Gi-Oh (or seems to be that way from [51], where it is discussed on KnowYourMeme). At the very least, readers expect to read about the thing they searched about. So readers get here thinking "oh so the meme is discussed on this page, great!" One then spends the next 50 thousand bytes searching and searching and nope, zero context, zero benefit. We don't need a redirect for "it's time to d-d-d-d-duel" if all it's going to imply is "this term is synonymous with the entire concept of the Yu-Gi-Oh! general topic article, with no specific section or anchor implied."

Memes are novel. I'm not surprised that people WANT to learn about it here, yet still not useful as a 1-to-1 redirect as it currently leaves people lost on a page without any information for their meme search term, and no mention of "meme" at Yu-Gi-Oh. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Retarget to Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Monsters. This isn't simply a meme-- it's a direct quotation from the original opening sequence for the English dub of this specific anime, with most meme-ification of this quote simply extending the "d-d-d-d-d-d" stuttery part, or otherwise playing around with it and the Yu-Gi-Oh anime's characters in general. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 06:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

So, it's a meme then. I'm well aware of the Yu-Gi-Oh sequence in question, and the associated meme and its derivations. It's clearly not a "direct quotation", else this text (hyphens and all) would appear in the episode transcript here: [52]. Regardless, thank you for suggesting a more-related option. But it's still an unmentioned meme. How does this have any bearing on the likelihood of typing a d, followed by a hyphen, followed by a d, followed by a hyphen, followed by a d, followed by a hyphen, followed by a d, followed by a hyphen, followed by a d, followed by "uel"? And all to end up at an article for the series where the meme being sought isn't mentioned, nor any of the meme-spellings? Even in the anime and the video you linked, they stutter like 9 times, so even that aspect isn't accurate within this redirect, and none of It's time to duel, It's time to d-duel, It's time to d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-d-duel (is nommed), It's time to d-d-d-d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-d-d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-d-d-d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-duel, It's time to d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-d-duel exist, or It's time to dduel, It's time to ddduel, It's time to dddduel, or It's time to ddddduel for that matter. Past precedent has indicated that random hyphens inserted into words is not useful, obfuscates the terms that are actually spoken, and makes searches impractical. And at least for these precedent discussions, they were for quotes which appeared at the target, iirc (in an unmodified/natural state that is, I think). The quote is officially "it's time to duel". Anything beyond that, makes it a meme/meme version. Someone committing to the 5 ds/4 hyphens combination is deliberately typing in a meme into the search engine, so if maintained, the content should reflect that. Neither the real version nor any of the meme variations are covered at the new suggested target either, and Wikipedia is not a collection of memes. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 16:34, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: There's It’s time to du-du-du-du-du-du-du-du-duel!, btw. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 19:17, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks for finding this hyphens, Hyphenation Expert; imo you have definitely earned the title of "expert in hyphenation" for this one 😌 lol.

  For that redirect, the title stutters 8 times, which that number happens to have a bit more basis in reality, compared to this one which stutters 4. (Side note, the edit summary for that redirect is... certainly interesting...). I'm hesitant to bundle these though, as the redirect you found here at least sounds a bit closer to what occurs in the Yu-Gi-Oh sequence, with the ~correct amount of 8 or 9 ds, so slightly more plausible. There may be a case for deletion there (no other du-du-dus exist), but I think the smaller scope and just one redirect here is fine for now. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 19:46, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 14:28, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:19, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:50, 14 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nom. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: As mentioned by Fieari, pageviews in the last (recorded) decade are close to ~2000. This year itself, the pageviews are close to ~500. I used the backlink checker to see if we have a permanent link somewhere, but found only edwardbetts.com/find_link/Wikipedia_community which lists the current RfD. There was a 4-year old reddit discussion asking for the number of Ds, and there was no conclusion, participants counted 7, and 8 and 9, but I agree 4 is easier to type, but so would 3 or 2, but people have been using 4 too. That discussion was in December 2020, although our pageview spike happened in November 2020. Searching for the term with 4 Ds on Google brings up several videos and articles. Ultimately, we don't have a redirect or mention of the non-stuttered phrase It's time to duel. We also don't know if the possible hundreds of readers reaching the redirect, are using the English phrase to reach the article on the series/franchise. Jay 💬 17:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

Conerve

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Cowboy Luttrell

• Cowboy Luttrell → National Wrestling Alliance  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention of "Cowboy" or "Luttrell" at the target article. Not a helpful redirect if we have no content on this supposed individual wrestler at the target article for the NWA. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 21:12, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

• Also known as Cowboy Luttrall. Retarget to Championship Wrestling from Florida where discussed in most detail. Probably notable, anyhow. J947 ‡ ^edits 23:35, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:16, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• In Coastal Championship Wrestling, the correct spelling Cowboy Luttrall is used to pipe to the wrong spelling Cowboy Luttrell. We can have a redirect at Cowboy Luttrall. Retarget per J947 and tag as {{R from incorrect name}}. Jay 💬 11:37, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete The fact that nobody bothered to create the correctly-spelled redirect until now is clear evidence that we don't need an incorrect spelling of it. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

April 31

• April 31 → List of non-standard dates  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The only reasoning for this appears to be "Java (specifically the java.util.Calendar class) allows dates such as February 0 (= January 31) and April 31 (= March 1)." The problem is that that particular class in Java seems to accept any integer for the date. I tested "April 366" which showed up as March 31 of the next year. The internet does say that there is a reference to "April 31" in the The Long Walk by Stephen King, but it is purposely supposed to be a fictional date, even within that universe. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:47, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

• The statement was added unsourced (and shouldn't it be "May 1"?). Even if factual, "April 31" is totally arbitrary: it could apply to anything, #September 31, March 32, your "April 366", etc. (fyi Bfinn) Hyphenation Expert (talk) 02:21, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

  The same can be said about December 32, January 0, February 30, and many others. The redirect isn't to imply it's factual or not, it's to fulfill the gaps for the day 31 every month has in Wikipedia, such as June 31 and February 31. Web-julio (talk) 07:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

  Each of those has unique encyclopedic information. Unlike September 31.

  And note, "filling in the gaps" is just WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 10:15, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

  Except OTHERSTUFFEXISTS exists on Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions essay (note: not policy), and this is a discussion page (the D in AfD stands for deletion while the D from RfD means discussion).

  Filling the gaps is exactly why many redirects exist, and other stuff existing is the main reason why many redirects should be kept. And for example, different from AfD, WP:CHEAP, WP:USEFUL (see also WP:RFD#KEEP), and HARMLESS are valid arguments to use in RfD, and they are used frequently, including this current page. Web-julio (talk) 03:36, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  RfDs are deletion discussions, because this is where the deletion of redirects is discussed. That "deletion" is not in the title of the venue is irrelevant. Thryduulf (talk) 12:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  is the existence of outcomes other than "keep" and "delete" (retarget, disambiguate, etc.) enough to disagree with that? rfd is a discussion venue, and deletion is one of the possible results cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 11:30, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

  But there's Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid on discussion pages, which distinguishes AfD and RfD. This is a discussion that proposes a deletion, so technically is a deletion discussion, but not every RfD is a deletion discussion. Well, neither some AfDs, but why would someone AfD proposing to merge or rename if there are specific tools for that? The alternative is redirect in an AfD, but even there some see this as a form of deletion.

  Nonetheless, that essay still says that what doesn't apply in an AfD may or may not apply to other forms of discussions. Also Wikipedia:When to use or avoid "other stuff exists" arguments. Web-julio (talk) 17:13, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

  Honestly, I'm not sure why it matters that WP:ATA is "Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions". The aim of the essay is to list off ways of "contributing" to a given discussion that may instead just hinder the discussion, such as WP:JUSTAVOTE, WP:ATA#CRYSTAL, or, indeed, WP:OTHERSTUFF. As the opener to the essay itself states, While this page is tailored to deletion discussion, be that of articles, templates, images, categories, stub types, or redirects, these arguments to avoid may also apply to other discussions, such as about deleting article content, moving pages, etc. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:59, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:11, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

It seems the current target page talk wasn't notified. Web-julio (talk) 01:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment - the target mentions Excel, but doesn't get into the use of these nonstandard dates in formulas (it only mentions the weird 1900 problem). In Excel and programs like it, if you add one day to the last day of a month, it returns the first day of the following month. It doesn't recognize April 31 as a valid date if you write it in a cell directly, but April 30 + 1 = May 1. I'm not sure if that could fit into content in the article, or if it's more prominent than other uses that have been suggested here. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 17:26, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
• Retarget. May 1 was the 2014 discussion outcome. But April 30 might be the likely sought-for page for users who simply forgot April's last date. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 22:20, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per my comment at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_November_14#September_31 * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:49, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Ambiguous "planet 3" redirects

• Planet Three → Earth  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• 3rd planet → Earth  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Third planet → Earth  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• 3rd Planet → Earth  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• 1st planet → Mercury (planet)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• 2nd planet → Venus  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• 4th planet → Mars  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Earth is, unsurprisingly, not the only "planet three". This is a highly ambiguous and fairly implausible search term. Ditto for the rest. Delete. Cremastra (u — c) 01:45, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

• Comment these are probably trying to complement the names used for outer planets and theorized planets. (Planet Nine / Planet Ten / Planet X / Planet V ... ) but the phrase "3rd planet from the Sun" and "Sol III" are commonly used in certain circles to refer to the Earth... -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:13, 21 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete My initial thought was to keep as a primary topic. But Google searches show that, in fact, Earth is not the primary topic for any of these phrases. I receive mainly hits for various non-notable businesses. As such, I agree with the nominator that this is highly ambiguous. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

  Note to closer: this !vote applies to the redirects bundled by Cremastra after I made the original comment as well. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:26, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete the first one, keep the three others, there is no ambiguity, except in the first one.

21 Andromedae (talk) 18:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

@21.Andromedae Why is only first one ambiguous? Thanks, Cremastra (u — c) 19:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Planet three isn't the same as 3rd planet, and nobody calls Earth as planet three. 21 Andromedae (talk) 20:06, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

 Comment: I have bundled "1st planet", "2nd planet", and "4th planet" in this discussion. Cremastra (u — c) 19:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep: Other planetary systems do exist, but none is so ingrained into popular knowledge as ours so that random people would be able to name all of its planets, and in order to boot. Right now and for a very long time in the future, "first", "second", "third" and "fourth" planet, said in isolation, will always mean implicitly "...of the Solar System". Cambalachero (talk) 19:52, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep the ordinal ones per Cambalachero. I'm unsure about Planet Three. Looking around there's definitely other uses for this term. There is a publisher (for example redlinked on Mad About Boys), an internet(?) company mentioned on .cx, and probably most notably Arthur C. Clarke's "Report on Planet Three And Other Speculations". In that case it clearly is referring to the Earth. Given it is only a partial title match and given there's no actual articles about any of these things I very weakly lean keep but don't have a strong objection to deletion or targeting somewhere else. A7V2 (talk) 00:58, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:30, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• Delete all. It is not inherently obvious that a reader is intending to determine the order from the Sun. Maybe they are looking for an estimated time when each planet was actually created, or some other chronological construct. And even then, why this solar system? Steel1943 (talk) 18:29, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
• Delete all, mercury was not the first planet to exist. Earth was the first planet to be inhabited by humans. The gauge for determining a scale of "what planet is first" is WP:OR and these descriptions do not seem to be mentioned as "first planet" at the target articles of Mercury (planet) and etc, without the necessary context of "first planet away from the sun". Without the context, this is ambiguous. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 09:29, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:05, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Last time I checked we're in this solar system so many of those planets are likely to be primary for us even if other planets exist in other solar systems but these as noted may be too ambiguous even in our solar system. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:31, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

  Retarget to list of planets (or Solar System if we are going by heliocentric PoVs). Web-julio (talk) 01:51, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Her Royal Hotness

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Site-specific Comedy Opera

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete consensus is the current target is inappropriate, and no better target has been identified

2025 Dutch general election

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#2025 Dutch general election

三州府

• 三州府 → Straits Settlements  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There's two possible targets for 三州府: Straits Settlements and Suong. 三州府 is an old alternative Chinese-language name Straits Settlements, and 三州府市 (三州府 + city) is the name historically and currently used by Chinese-speakers and Chinese Cambodians people for Suong. The Chinese Wikipedia has chosen to solve this with a disambiguation page zh:三州府, so this term seemingly cannot be tied very strongly to one article. I'm not seeing how we could create a local policy-compliant dab page. Given the very high bar needed to have a non-English redirect page, we should probably delete this. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 20:22, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep Cambodia is not a Chinese language subject. But the Straits Settlements are due to the high Chinese population of the region. Thus regardless of what Chinese Wikipedia does, on English Wikipedia, the only subject with affinity for Chinese is the Straits Settlements, and not Suong, Cambodia. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 12:11, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
  • Update I stand corrected on the status of Chinese in Suong, being that there is a large population of such in Suong; therefore I recommend that this page be disambiguated per WP:CJKV {{Chinese title disambiguation}} and create a WP:2DAB like that on Chinese Wikipedia because both locations have large Chinese populations and both locations have carried this Chinese name. ;; So either Keep as is and hatnote Suong, or disambiguate -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:08, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep per the ip editor. A hatnote can be added if really desired, but I don't think it is required. Thryduulf (talk) 13:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
• Comment, per the Chinese Wikipedia article for Suong, Cambodia, 80 per cent of the population in the city are of Chinese ethnicity, so the above rationale might not be valid. However, it doesn't appear to be cited properly (the current source does not provide such information). If there is some related reliable source found, then perhaps a dab, otherwise keep. Sun8908 _Talk 15:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  Anecdotal evidence- I mean if we compare the length and detail of the zhWiki article to the Khmer article, I wouldn't be surprised if the statement that 80% of the population are Sino-Khmer turns out to be true. Baidu Baike(keeping in mind WP:BAIDU and all) also repeats the statistic, citing it to what looks to be an offline database. (@Sun8908, does it look obviously unreliable in this case?)

  But back to the matter at hand- Wiktionary lists the Cambodian city first, emphasizing that the usage of 三州府 is "historical". Again, uncited, but I googled and the Promote Mandarin Council (in Singapore) seemingly confirms this, writing that the name was used most in the early days. The Cantonese Wikipedia lists their (unsourced) article for the Straits Settlement under the name 三洲府, but zhWiki only mentions once that it's an unofficial name. Our own article doesn't mention the name at all. It's clearly not a clear-cut matter.

  When I google "三洲府", my own results are pretty evenly split between the city and the settlement, which I think is why the editors on zhWiki chose to make a dab page in the end. They seemed to have the opposite problem as us, actually, with their initial redirect pointing, for four years, to the article about Suong. I'm not suggesting we should follow them, I'm just pointing out that there is unlikely to be a dominant topic. I suppose if somebody wants to make a dab page, they could, I suppose? Three States is a direct translation, and already a dab page, but I don't think we really make dab pages for direct translations where the direct translation is not used in English. A dab for the direct transliteration might be better, if anybody wants to make one? I'm not convinced it would aid people trying to navigate the English Wikipedia, but I suppose it wouldn't be harmful. A hatnote could be a solution, but I'm not sure how useful non-English/Latin hatnotes for unofficial names are.

  On a personal note, this is why WP:RLOTE based on unofficial nicknames can be problematic- the predominant argument to keep is that Suong, Cambodia has no affinity with the Chinese language. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 21:27, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

  Just want you to note that we indeed have dab pages with Chinese characters as title. We could do that if it turns out there isn't a main article between the two entries. That being said, a main article should be decided with the likeliness that English speaker would more likely want to search. I think there are Chinese-language newspapers in Cambodia using that name to refer to the Cambodian city, so it might worth a dab. Sun8908 _Talk 05:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

  Sorry I missed reading the reliability of the source on Baidu Baike. I am not familiar with the site but I cannot see a link for that citation. I cannot search any useful information about the database / centre by simply searching on Baidu or Google. (Note: there seems to be a lot of database with a similar name, I don't know which to look for) However, that citation seems to be used by a lot of articles on Baidu Baike. Unfortunately, only verified users can see the edit history, so I cannot get any further information from there. I don't feel like it is particularly useful as I cannot find information about the database / centre. Sun8908 _Talk 11:25, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:01, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

• Convert to a disambi , I have no further comment. Jothefiredragon🐲talk🐉edits 08:41, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

The Licensing Letter

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#The Licensing Letter

Żwaniec

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Keep

Solidarity, Ecology, Left Alternative

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 17#Solidarity, Ecology, Left Alternative

Manush Shah

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

November 5

Barangay 79

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Daesh Tunisia

• Daesh Tunisia → Ansar al-Sharia (Tunisia)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I was highly confused by this redirect, and my external searching of "Daesh Tunisia" led me to uncover that apparently it is the "name of an invasive crustacean", per [53]. This blue crab might be invading Tunisia, but what it is ALSO invading is this article which has nothing to do with the subject. No mention of "daesh", "crab", "crustacean", or even "blue" at the target article. People looking for information on this blue crab would be very confused by the topic of Ansar al-Sharia, and if these two DO have a correlation, such a correlation is unclear with zero mention. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:27, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Comment Daesh is ISIS. This redirect is calling them Tunisian ISIS. They were closer to Al-Qaeda.

This name actually does get used in RS [54], but for Jund Al Khilafa-Tunisia or JAK-T, which we do not have a page on. We do have a page on the Algerian one though PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:02, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm quite surprised we do not have a page on JAK-T PARAKANYAA (talk) 22:04, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

I'll try to have an article created. Mooonswimmer 04:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, charlotte ^👸♥ 22:08, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep Daesh is what the Arab world calls ISIS. The Office of Foreign Assets Control, UN Security Council, US Department of State, and European Union all mention "Daesh Tunisia" as an alias of JAK-T. Mooonswimmer 04:42, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete since we don't have an article about JAK-T or the crab. Ansar al-Sharia is not JAK-T. Jay 💬 10:41, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per Jay. And more generally this is not mentioned at target, hence it's time for it to meet the standard fate for such redirects. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:12, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Electrotechnology

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Fox (channel)

• Fox (channel) → Fox (international)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Fox Channel → Fox Broadcasting Company  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Looking at the page histories of both titles, the contents using the redirect title here at RFD later evolved to its current target. I'm listing this here for a fresh discussion of its either possible deletion or re-targeting/redirection. Intrisit (talk) 21:53, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment Fox Channel should redirect to the same place (it currently doesn't) so I've added it to this nomination. Fox (British and Irish TV channel) isn't currently mentioned at Fox (disambiguation) although it presumably should be. Wherever it targets there should be a hatnote to Foxe Channel. Thryduulf (talk) 00:38, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
• Set index. There are, I've discovered, lots of channels called Fox and more previously called Fox, including (and this is incomplete): Fox (British and Irish TV channel), Fox (Asian TV channel), Fox (German TV channel), Fox (African TV channel), Fox (Norwegian TV channel), Fox (Italian TV channel) and Fox (Hungarian TV channel). Fox8. Then there are various ones named Fox Life, Fox Sports, Fox Filipino, etc. We don't seem to have a single list of them that I can find. Thryduulf (talk) 00:51, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
• Setindexify per Thryduulf. All these channels should be assembled in a list, since these terms can refer to any of them. Regards, SONIC678 18:05, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
• Setindexify per Thryduulf. Good find. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:22, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
• Setindexify "Fox Channel" in most contexts refers to one of the international Fox general-entertainment pay channels. The sheer number of them demands this outcome. And a lot of U.S. channels over the years that Fox started could qualify (from Fox News to Fox Sports 1). Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 07:51, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
• SIA. It's more reasonable to have a SIA here than to have an ordinary dab page or to point this to any particular entity. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:52, 12 November 2024 (UTC)
• Anyone feel like drafting a set index? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:11, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Grooving

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Starlow

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: procedural keep

Purge the page

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:Rediretc

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:Redirct

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:Requested Articles/Business and economics/Companies

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted

Wikipedia:REVERET

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:RSreliable sources

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Chocottone

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Keep

Olivolja

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ghost pepper (version 2)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: resolved. This was an artifact left over from when Anthony Appleyard moved Bhut jolokia to Ghost pepper back in 2020. I've moved the edit history back under Bhut jolokia, which essentially completes the WP:ROBIN. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:39, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

John Reilly (actor)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Granatawerfer

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Ray Lavender

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

23th Senate of Puerto Rico

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

MOS:HESD

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:MOSSECTIONHEADINGS

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Uncomfiness

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

Not a word Hexware (talk) 16:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Soft redirect to wikt:Uncomfiness per my !vote on the "Uncomfort" discussion below. That is also a word, just not used as often. Regards, SONIC678 16:55, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Uncomfort

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Touota

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:What WP is not

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Pablo Pivasso

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Unfinished basement

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Ac/DC

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 26#Ac/DC

Charlotte Web

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Template:R from opposites

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Keep

Plaisir d'amour ne dure qu'un moment. Chagrin d'amour dure toute la vie.

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Vor der Kaserne vor dem großen Tor stand eine Laterne und steht sie noch davor

• Vor der Kaserne vor dem großen Tor stand eine Laterne und steht sie noch davor → Lili Marleen  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Vor der" not mentioned at the target article. Unlikely search term because pages about songs tend to be located at an article that matches their title, not this. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 08:05, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep per other discussions above and below. These are the first lyrics to this song, which someone might remember without retaining the title, so it's potentially helpful for people searching for the song in question. Regards, SONIC678 16:35, 27 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 16:20, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Jay 💬 12:28, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:04, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

Police and thieves in the street, oh yeah, scaring the nation with their guns and ammunition

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete'

Enteractive

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 14#Enteractive

Xenusia

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Nuh uh

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Refine

Henț River

• Henț River → Crasna (Tisza)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Hent River → Crasna (Tisza)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Hent" is not mentioned at the target article. It is mentioned as a part of Săcuieu (river), as well, and should be pointed at a location where such a river is discussed. However, the target appears as if it may be ambiguous, and the redirect has history. Unsure what to do here. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:49, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:29, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

• Comment: There's also Hent River, which I'm bundling here. Regards, SONIC678 16:52, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

  Also Henț and Hent. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:03, 19 November 2024 (UTC)

  Nominated separately at WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 19#Henț and WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 19#Hent. Jay 💬 07:18, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

  Now at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 21#Hent since that was sockstruck and my attempt to reopen was (counterproductively IMO) reverted. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:49, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  On the other hand, reopening a discussion with the statement that the rationale appears to be valid to me is counterproductive because it does nothing more than endorse the actions of someone who is not welcome to edit. What do you want to happen with these redirects? Your renomination doesn't really answer that... -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

  I strongly want the ones without "river" to suffer the same fate as those with "river" rather than slipping through the cracks on a technicality, which is why I cared enough to reopen and renominate. Unless somebody else suggests something better, I weakly think that fate should be deletion as not discussed anywhere with sufficient substance to warrant a redirect. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:11, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

• The pre-redirect history says it is a tributary of the target, however, this is not mentioned in the 17 tributaries at Crasna (Tisza)#Tributaries. Săcuieu (river) says Henț is an alternate name in its lower course, so Retarget there for now as {{R from alternate name}}. I did not understand the nomination statement .. the target appears as if it may be ambiguous, .... Jay 💬 11:43, 22 November 2024 (UTC)

Sergey Yurasov

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep S. Yurasov, delete Sergey Yurasov.

Hallucishaniids

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

MagneLine

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Mileu Cyrus

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Tsylor Swift

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Taylor Sqift

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:BASTARD

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Picric acid (homeopathic remedy)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Rage game

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete