Jump to content

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
XFD backlog
V Sep Oct Nov Dec Total
CfD 0 0 1 9 10
TfD 0 0 0 0 0
MfD 0 0 5 0 5
FfD 0 0 14 5 19
RfD 0 0 49 6 55
AfD 0 0 0 0 0

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

[edit]

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

The guiding principles of RfD

[edit]
  • 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?

[edit]


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

[edit]

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

[edit]

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

[edit]

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. ClimategateClimatic 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

[edit]
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

[edit]
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

[edit]

R&B

[edit]
  • Retarget to Contemporary R&B.

As said on talk page, absolutely barely any articles say "Contemporary R&B" when referring to "Contemporary R&B" they just say "R&B". Having this re-direct stops lots of frustration of people redirecting to the Rhythm and Blues genre when it is a Contemporary R&B song. Please see here on how Contemporary R&B is mentioned, it's the modern day now and Contemporary R&B has gained far more notability and is now the WP:COMMONNAME and look at most Contemporary R&B article you'll notice most publications simply wrote "R&B" when citing Contemporary R&B.Eg HotNewHipHop,Billboard,The Guardian.This0k (talk) 21:55, 10 December 2024 (UTC)}[reply]

Criticism of Donald Trump

[edit]

Retarget to Cat:Criticism of Donald Trump as {{R to category namespace}}. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 16:48, 13 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, this is a new meaning, not mere synonym too when compared to "public image". Iljhgtn (talk) 00:36, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent

[edit]

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

  • 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)[reply]
  • 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 (talkcontribs) 22:00, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • soft redirect to wikt:recent, where the holocene period is ironically not directly mentioned. would it be per nom?
and yeah, maybe use the good ol' pipe links. there's surprisingly not that many incoming links in mainspace, so it'd be easy to deal with cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:17, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:55, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep Wikipedia is an Encyclopedia, not a dictionary. Readers do not want to get sent to a dictionary entry about the vague concept of newness. If a reader is searching the term "recent", they are looking for an encyclopedic entry on geology. Ca talk to me! 03:24, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    "If a reader is searching the term "recent", they are looking for an encyclopedic entry on geology." That seems like a stretch to me. The only way that would make sense was if the person that went to this redirect got there from a forum post about geology. Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 05:09, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What other encyclopedic topic could the term "recent" refer to? Ca talk to me! 10:33, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    none that wouldn't stop being recent at some point, and that's the problem cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:19, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In the event that the reader is looking for the use of "recent" in other fields, I would also support an unorthodox hatnote to the wiktionary entry. Ca talk to me! 14:23, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    What other encyclopedic topic could the term "recent" refer to?. Maybe recency effect, recency bias, or recentism. We shouldn't be guessing, and even a dab page for something this vague is iffy. But the status quo isn't there for readers; it's a technical redirect used poorly in some taxoboxes, and it shouldn't remain like that. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:53, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ and IP. This common word shouldn't have primary usage in Geology. Jay 💬 08:31, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:27, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amateur home page

[edit]

The actions you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for those actions.

Target contains no information about "Amateur" home pages specifically. Ca talk to me! 01:25, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This redirect just reads like someone complaining about either our home page (which is like that for simplicity's sake) or someone else's home page (which we have no control over). Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 05:16, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fail to see relevance of redirect. VolatileAnomaly (talk) 01:44, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled with Amateur home page, and tagged the third redirect (Amatuer home page), which wasn't tagged by the nom.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mian Page

[edit]

Vanishingly few page views per month(21) for a page that gets millions of views every week. There are a lot of people named "Mian Page", and Mediawiki already corrects for simple typos like this. Ca talk to me! 01:18, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Implausible. KOLANO12 3 20:23, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No reason why this should even exist in the first place. ThatIPEditor They / Them 21:25, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(comment: "and Mediawiki already corrects for simple typos like this" I tested this now, it doesn't.)
Weak delete Unlike what some others are saying, I can relatively plausibly see someone accidentally transposing the I and A keys together. However, this is literally the first page you see when you open up Wikipedia we're talking about here, so people manually going to the Main Page is irrelevant here. Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 05:15, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a person can just type the right words in themselves. BarntToust 14:55, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haifan Baháʼí Faith

[edit]

again, obscure, and where used, it is perjorative. Smkolins (talk) 21:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haifan Baháʼí Faith

[edit]

again, obscure, and where used, it is perjorative. Smkolins (talk) 21:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Haifan Baháʼís

[edit]

obscure and where used, a pejorative use Smkolins (talk) 21:46, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DEVS VVLT

[edit]

I think this a rather implossable misspelling of this term. Kingsmasher678 (talk) 20:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ayurveda/Non-confirmed editor comments

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy delete

Goth (Silverwing)

[edit]

This no longer has a mention and the redirect is confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:27, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nueva Hampshire

[edit]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the target and creator pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:13, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Musha-gaeshi

[edit]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 23:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the proposed target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:17, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Save battery

[edit]

i know what this means... but the article doesn't mention it in detail (only in passing as an image's caption), or anything to clarify that it doesn't mean methods of saving battery energy. not directly mentioned at volatile memory either cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:08, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete not about NVRAM backup battery, or CMOS clock backup battery, or battery saver apps, etc -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:52, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - It has a mention here (even if only in an image caption) and it has the potential to be discussed here in much more detail. I don't think CMOS clock backup batteries have ever been called "save" batteries, that should be pretty restricted to the domain of "saving your game" if I'm not mistaken. Theoretically, this could be searched for with the intent of finding methods of preserving battery life, but I think written this way (as opposed to the next RfD entry, below) it is much more clear that it refers to using a battery to enable saving your game in a ROM cartridge. Fieari (talk) 06:45, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:31, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. What it's ultimately getting at is more general than game cartridges. Any device with battery-backed volatile RAM would be covered by this, not just game carts. And even then, "save battery" is kind of vague and could refer to other things anyway. And as per nom, there's no significant discussion at the target anyway. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

polypifer

[edit]

refers to organisms formed from polyps, including but not limited to coral. suggest retargeting there. no opinion on the plausibility of the second redirect cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:22, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:31, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ra'ad 1

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try, since there's only really been one relist's worth of discussion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 14:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

regional screwdrivers

[edit]

two different yet similar cases. "birmingham screwdriver" is an apparently obscure uk slang for hammer, as a reference to people from birmingham being muscleheads, while "irish screwdriver" seems to be... some brand of vodka? both terms are unmentioned in the target, and results mostly gave me miscellaneous companies and actual screwdrivers cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:56, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

should note that the second one is mentioned and elaborated on in law of the instrument cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:01, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ecuador scuba diving

[edit]

no particular affinity with ecuador, from what i can gather. originally created as an ad cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UTF-2000

[edit]
Previous AfDs for this article:

Delete. Non-notable subject that is not mentioned anymore in the redirect target article. See old AfD. Nidaana (talk) 15:23, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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, CycloneYoris talk! 09:31, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. pre-blar history had no reliable sources. if someone wants to recreate it, they can, but as is, i'm not feeling it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:23, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I can confirm this project exists, or at least existed, but there seem to be no non-primary sources about it (at least in English) meaning it is not eligible for an article. The target destination provides no information about the subject, and is unable to do so without a secondary source. However, it would be interesting and useful information to put in the target article, as to be perfectly honest, I'd love to see a section about oppositional efforts to Han unification in the project. But... without secondary commentary, we can't really add it. The page history, stub as it was, does has useful content if a secondary source could be found, and I'm loathe to delete it as an eternal optimist. All in all though, deletion is pretty permanent-- I'd rather leave it as a BLAR, simply hoping that a secondary source could be found somewhere, perhaps on the Japanese side of the web (my Japanese is only intermediate, I don't think I'm good enough to find it). The problem with leaving it as a redirect though, is that... again, we have no information on the subject. I wish there was some way to preserve the history without maintaining the redirect. A frustrating situation. Fieari (talk) 06:07, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    how about userifying? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:43, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Userify old content per @Cogsan, and redirect target to the userified page Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 06:01, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i disagree with the xnr part cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sarcenet

[edit]

an alternate spelling of "sarsenet", a type of silk ribbon. unmentioned in the target, though there are mentions of both spellings in other articles (but only two incoming links), and it gets steady views, so maybe there's a more fitting target i'm missing? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:LTS

[edit]

Suggesting retargeting to Wikipedia:Disambiguation#LTS, where Wikipedia:Long-term significance already targets. This is because WP:Recentism is only an essay page that mention "long-term significance" only once whereas WP:DAB is a guideline page and LTS is used very often in RM discussions. In fact, of the 6 incoming links from discussions, 5 use it in the context of WP:DAB, and only 1 use it in the context of Recentism, the current target. A hatnote at Wikipedia:Disambiguation#LTS to WP:Recentism may be added. CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {CX}) 12:06, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dionian(ism)

[edit]

Dionian is a translation of wikt:Dioning (heterosexual). It used to be mentioned in Uranian (sexuality), along with several terms coined by Karl. Apollonian and Dionysian could mention dionism, or Dionysus. If this means male homosexuality, then gay men? Or something similar to Achillean. See Terminology of homosexuality. --MikutoH talk! 02:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:27, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More "solider" redirects

[edit]

These redirects all have the same misspelling of "soldier," which was discussed in a previous RfD from last week. As its rationale says, "solider" is also the comparative form of "solid" and can also be a misspelling of at least several other words. Delete these unless someone can provide a justification or suitable alternative course of action. Regards, SONIC678 05:27, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete all that don't have "solider" as the first or second word, as it's too much stuff to type before making a minro spleling mistkae
  • delete super solider, foot solider (rich homie quan song), solider with the green whiskers, and confederate solider as skill issues
  • retarget the tin solider to... the tin soldier
  • and i guess extremely weak keep the rest (which is... only stereo solider and child solider)
what a doozy... cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of saints (disambiguation)

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

Pekka Soini

[edit]

This is a redirect to species:Pekka Soini, but the target page does not exist. Wikispecies does mention them (in species:Amerotyphlops minuisquamus and species:Helicops yacu), but only as someone who collected a specimen, not a taxon authority – so if I'm understanding species:Help:Author Names correctly, species:Pekka Soini should not be created. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:35, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cowboy Luttrell

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv converseedits 00:34, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jill Martin (herpetologist)

[edit]

This is a redirect to species:Jill Martin (herpetologist), but the target page does not exist. Neither does species:Jill Martin. In fact, Wikispecies doesn't have any mention of Jill Martin (or "Martin, Jill"). jlwoodwa (talk) 00:13, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - I added several of these based on redlinks on an article. All were direct links to Wikispecies articles, but this was just a "local" redlink that I didn't notice wasn't a Wikispecies link. -
UtherSRG (talk) 00:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spicier

[edit]

possible confusion with pungency, to which spicy redirects to? created by neelix, by the by cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:46, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Implausible search term. Why would readers search for the comparative term instead of the non-inflected one? Ca talk to me! 10:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I haven't considered wikilinks. In that case, I agree with 65. Ca talk to me! 01:06, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 00:09, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wang Qingyun

[edit]

No point in this redirect, her name is mentioned only twice here in a table. but she is also mentioned as a competitor/medalist in few other articles but none have enough content to anchor a redirect. Sports2021 (talk) 00:02, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Denetric Malope

[edit]

unmentioned in the target. seemingly part of a running gag of redirects of south african models created by people with oddly similar editing patterns, including adding links to them to their user pages. really starting to think an spi is due cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:06, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree with the nom. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 03:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turbo

[edit]

Unclear if this is a good target for this title. For the last two years, it had redirected to turbocharger until a recent edit. Turbo does seem like it could be a common word for something "fast". Natg 19 (talk) 20:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with the malplaced issue. But want to determine if it should be targeted to turbocharger as a primary redirect first. Natg 19 (talk) 21:59, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well I say speedy because at the moment, there are a lot of incoming links that are going to the dab page, presumably intended for turbocharger. Return to the status quo and then the primary topic can be revisited, either via RM (if there is no primary topic or something "Turbo (bar)" at the dab is primary) or RfD if something else at the dab warrants a primary redirect. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:11, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Appears that all of these were fixed. (Special:WhatLinksHere/Turbo_(disambiguation)). Natg 19 (talk) 07:38, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
keep, essentially per nom. it's a word !! cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lisina

[edit]

This target was unilaterally changed today by Duckmather. It previously targeted the article that Duckmather has renamed Lisina (Raška). While I would agree that this village stub isn't a good WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, I don't think the person is either. In my opinion the disambiguation page (which needs to be fixed up regardless after this is decided) should live at the base name. -- Fyrael (talk) 19:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fyrael: I had thought about moving the dab too, but then I looked at the pageview data and saw that Yekaterina Lisina came up on top. Duckmather (talk) 19:51, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it does have significantly more views than the other entries, but that's not the only consideration for primary topic. I'm probably reading this wrong as I'm not used to the tool, but I think this indicates that almost no traffic to the page for Yekaterina Lisina is coming from the disambiguation page, so readers are not expecting to find her at just "Lisina". -- Fyrael (talk) 20:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Frank Mrvan

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy keep

Hatnote

[edit]

Delete, crossnamespace redirect from (article) to project page. It appears that the word "hatnote" was invented specifically for Wikipedia, there are no other stuff with that word and the internet underlined that word as a misspelling. Cyber the tiger (talk) 14:41, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A reader will never encounter the word hatnote normally, they will just see hatnotes, without knowing what Wikipedia calls the internally. Just as any part of the internals of Wikipedia are not usually known by the readership, nor need to be known by the readership. If they wantt to find out, then they will probably be part of the contributor editorship, which is not what redirects in articlespace are for. WP:HATNOTE already exists for us, the editorship. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 16:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. However, I do feel pageviews should be taken into account here, given that it's averaging around 2 per day. Whether it's bored experienced editors, the readers/newbies being curious, or from the multiple pages it's linked to is beyond me, but the redirect is clearly seeing some use (would also like to note that this is linked in Hat (disambiguation), which has had 206 views in the past 30 days). I must also note that this XNR has been around since 2008. mwwv converseedits 22:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dating style

[edit]

seems pretty confusing, what with both words referring to a lot of other things cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Camera (conventional)

[edit]

no info on what makes a camera conventional or unconvential in the target, results for this and similar terms only gave me cameras you can feasibly hold with one hand cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:51, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

see also the previous discussion, which resulted in refining to the target section, which no longer exist. results seem to have been different back then too. would use the oldrfdlist template, but the visual editor doesn't like it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment a "conventional camera" used to mean a 'photographic film visible light still camera', a 'traditional camera' ; something like a 35mm SLR, 24mm APS RF, 16mm RF, or a Kodak Brownie, etc. If we take that meaning, then it is a still camera used in analog photography; so perhaps retarget to analog photography? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 15:30, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – It's not used, and is only there because a user once moved Camera to Camera (conventional) and I moved it back. I don't think "conventional" has any interpretable meaning there any more. Does it mean a camera that takes glass plates? A camera that takes film? A photographic still camera? A cell phone camera with only one lens? Conventions have changed a lot. According to Google's AI summary, "A conventional camera is a camera that captures blurred versions of a scene away from the plane of focus. When choosing a conventional camera, you can consider things like: Sensor type: CCD, DMOS, ICCD, SIT, or ISIT ... Frame rate and resolution: 24, 25, 30, 60, or 90", so it's not film, not still, not analog, but has a focusable lens. Book hits suggest that "conventional" is used to distinguish cameras that don't have whatever novel feature is being discussed. Dicklyon (talk) 15:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - My initial thought was also to retarget to analog photography, as that's what "conventional camera" means in my head, but the arguments from Dicklyon above have convinced me that this is an ambiguous term unworthy of a DAB page for being, basically, arbitrary in scope. Fieari (talk) 06:50, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Camera make

[edit]

what cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiedia

[edit]

admittedly on the weak side of noms, but could someone also be looking for wikimedia? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(Keep) It's possible, but much more likely Wikipedia. Even if they aren't, they should see their error, so I don't think a hat note is necessary. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 13:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC).[reply]
13:13, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Main Pag

[edit]

I personally think this is an implausible typo, as no one would perfectly type out the entire page name only to then forget the last "e" (I only found this in the first place because I was bored)

Even though there was history since 2011, it was always a redirect Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 12:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am aware that there was an RfD mentioning this redirect from 2019: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_May_23#Targeting_the_Main_Page
However, consensus can change Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 12:42, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mackenziidae

[edit]

Not monotypic: Paramackenzia exists. IC1101-Capinatator (talk) 11:38, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@IC1101-Capinatator: The standard is to simply change Mackenziidae to a family article from a redirect, discussion not needed.--Kevmin § 15:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I came here to say that. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 08:14, 10 December 2024 (UTC).[reply]

Wikiemdia

[edit]

Implausible typo Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 11:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cite AV media

[edit]

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)[reply]

That was discussed in 2012, time to revisit it and get it deleted -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 20:15, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE #Cite web was nominated later today -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:45, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE It was closed as "no consensus to delete", which is elaborated on below. BucketOfSquirrels (talk) 04:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • Delete. This is an unnecessary WP:Cross-namespace redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:57, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. There really is no reason to have a redirect from mainspace to a template. Gonnym (talk) 11:13, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, per GreenC. The Cite web RfD was once again closed as "no consensus" "no consensus to delete". 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)[reply]
    • This is still not something any reader would want. Thus it should not exist in article-space. Article-space is WP:NOT a how-to guide to write articles on Wikipedia. The template page is most definitely a how-to guide to using the template, as it contains documentation . -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 18:26, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Some readers are current or future editors, and even if they're not, seeing a search suggestion for "Cite (anything)" is not likely to discombobulate them. And even if they accidentally click on it there's always the back button. AV media is itself just a redirect to Audiovisual, and "Cite AV media" is not even a search suggestion in that case. You can even type "cite " (with a space) without any CNRs showing up. (Just to emphasise GreenC's point that it doesn't appear to be a hindrance.) BucketOfSquirrels (talk) 04:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • The other RfD closure seems inappropriate, without any relists, as "no consensus". Without relists, that seems very odd -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 18:28, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • I asked CFA about that, and they wrote I closed it as "no consensus to delete", which is not the same as a general "no consensus" close. I was originally going to close as keep, but I felt that this was a better representation of the arguments presented, pointing to the fact that deletion — what the nominator was looking for — was very unlikely to happen (see WP:SNOW). Common practice is generally to delete non-Wikipedia-specific cross-namespace redirects from mainspace, so I weighted the IAR keep votes saying that they find it personally useful slightly less than I might've normally. Relisting may well have balanced out the numbers, but a consensus to delete was clearly not going to emerge so there was no point in keeping it open. I wasn't saying there was no consensus at all in the discussion, just that consensus for deletion was unlikely to happen. Quoted User:CFA - BucketOfSquirrels (talk) 04:44, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:50, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aydoh8[contribs] 11:06, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete. not a necessary (or even widely-used) xnr, templates generally aren't something readers will want to see. if they want to get into editing and templates, they can learn about namespaces when they get there cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Longest Wikipedia Article

[edit]

Retarget to Wikipedia:Wikipedia records#Articles so this stops being an invalid soft redirect to a special page and stops sticking out as technically R2-eligible. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:39, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget both per nom. Yes it is a cross-namespace redirect, but it got over 6000 page views in last months. The proposed target leads readers to what they want. Ca talk to me! 10:38, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aydoh8[contribs] 11:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget both to Wikipedia:Wikipedia records#Articles per nom. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 18:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trump nominations for independent agencies

[edit]

These have significant pre-merge edit history for Political appointments of the first Trump administration, but this title does not differentiate between first or second term. Not sure whether to redirect it to 1st term article or to the disambiguation page. Should we move it to a title mentioning "first presidency" without leaving a redirect? CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {CX}) 21:41, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aydoh8[contribs] 11:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Puffery inline

[edit]

{{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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:57, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:26, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Moseley tea service

[edit]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:20, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Term has not yet received mention at the target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:10, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Syrian Republic (1946–1963) (disambiguation)

[edit]

Delete, the piling up of parentheses. Cuvaj (talk) 08:08, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There's vomit on his sweater already

[edit]

Unlike "snap back to reality", this is a much less common line in this song that people are most likely not going to be searching for. Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:26, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's still a pretty well known lyric, especially since it's before "mom's spaghetti". CheeseyHead (talk) 07:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Yeah, I did not know that. (Can you tell I'm not an Eminem fan? :P) Withdrawn Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete as not the big notable part of the meme. there's spaghetti on his spaghetti alretti cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:26, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Knees weak arms spaghetti CheeseyHead (talk) 16:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not ableist, I have autistic friends

[edit]

Unmentioned synonym. As prior consensus shows for this kinda stuff, delete. Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:06, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i'm not a deletionist, i've made plenty of keep votes. it just... happens that i happen to want this specific redirect deleted. per nom, that is, not for any personal reason cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:56, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Original creator's rationale: "same but with autism, probably won't get approved just trying to see if related sentences should have redirects, maybe to help with searching". If there is prior consensus opposing this per nom, no reason to keep. VolatileAnomaly (talk) 06:28, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trump the sequel

[edit]

The only sites that mention a sequel to Trump are non-notable extremely right-leaning websites Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

as cool as it is that people can have sequels, donald trump 2: orange you glad he's back? isn't mentioned yet, so delete per nom cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:34, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
> as cool as it is that people can have sequels, donald trump 2: orange you glad he's back? isn't mentioned yet
a quote for the books Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 12:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Primal Carnage: Evolution

[edit]

Evolution is not an alternative subtitle of Extinction, as this redirect implies, but rather an entirely different game in this series. I'm choosing to vote Delete unless we have better info on Evolution Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:02, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

YV (rapper)

[edit]

We only have a passing mention of him in the target, and this redirect misleads potential YV fans into thinking we have more about him than we actually do Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 06:58, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"james s Welch jr"

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted as r3

National parks and monuments

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy deleted by Pppery

Scenic and Wild

[edit]

Without additional qualification, these terms seem a bit too broad and U.S.-centric to make good redirects to this specific topic. The ones lacking "river" in particular could refer to many different things. "National Scenic Waterways" is not a term described at target. Delete all. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:27, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Carthaginian general Hasdrubal d. 207 B.C.

[edit]

Delete. We don't have redirects for each person with their year of death. Lucjim (talk) 01:23, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not a plausible search term. Has a grand total of 100 views in ten years. Procyon117 (talk) 16:28, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of federal lands in Alaska

[edit]

The target only includes federal lands that are part of the national park system, omitting large national forests and lands managed by the Bureau of Land Management, among others. Delete to encourage article creation. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:14, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But like the redirect target, the stub is missing national forests, BLM lands, military lands, etc.. Not opposed to creating list articles at these titles of course, but until someone wants to undertake making a comprehensive list, these should be red. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. The newly created list basically duplicates List of the United States National Park System official units#Alaska and related pages, is wildly incomplete since there's far more than NPS areas, and incorrectly includes sites that are affiliated but not actually federal land; this should draftified or also deleted. I don't think these should be hastily made just for the sake of it. Some states instead have a related list of protected areas that includes state lands. Reywas92Talk 04:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Ballon d'Or

[edit]

Event is two years away. No relevant content in target article. Blethering Scot 20:15, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 23:44, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Lanka T10

[edit]

No mention of 2025 event in article. Event not for another year, and not yet notable. Blethering Scot 20:11, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 23:45, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Global Super League

[edit]

No mention of 2025 event in article. Event not for another year, and not yet notable. Blethering Scot 20:10, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 23:45, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Romanian / moldovan language

[edit]

Delete. Poorly formatted and confusing redirect. Also no incoming links. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucjim (talkcontribs) 18:17, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conspiracism

[edit]

Target section vanished.

67.209.128.24 (talk) 17:05, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: There is no consensus on this nomination for too long. Suggesting relisting. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 17:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's only been 24 hours. Discussions typically stand for 7 days before being relisted. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove section target, or possibly re-refine - I can't find the edit where the specific section marker "Conspiracism" was removed, but from scanning the article, I would bet that it was reworded to the "conspiracy ideation" phrasing that appears throughout the article, and thus the information is still all here. We could refine to the Conspiracy theory#Psychology or Conspiracy theory#Sociology sections, but the entire article does kinda talk about this, so my first choice would actually be to just remove the section target altogether and leave it just targeted at the article as a whole. Fieari (talk) 23:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CTTOI

[edit]

Not listed at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:18, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]
"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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The T,FTFY redirect page was not tagged for RfD. Done now, and this nomination has to be listed for at least 7 days.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:38, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Maria, Hilfe der Christen

[edit]

Redirect from the title in German, but the target doesn't seem to have anything to do with the country or language. Delete per WP:RLANG. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:29, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:16, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Amongst whomst?

[edit]

Delete as unused, implausible typo. We might tolerate something like this with regard to mainspace (though I note that whomst is a redlink, and whom's target of Who (pronoun) has no mention of a "whomst"). A template redirect, however, exists for the sole purpose of use in transclusion. The target of this is a cleanup template, and an in-article call to that template should read sensibly to any editor encountering it. "Whomst" isn't a word in Modern English, but an obsolete form that was uncommonly used in the Early Modern period. No corresponding Template:Amongst whomst exists, and tacking on "?" doesn't magically make this useful (otherwise we might as well have Template:Amongst whomst?? and Template:Amongst whomst???). wikt:whomst suggests (without any sources) that "whomst" is sometimes still employed for humorous effect, but WP is not a comedy site and more importantly our maintenance templates and their names don't serve a humor purpose (or an Elizabethan roleplay purpose). PS: Template:Amongst whom is fine, since amongst is still in frequent usage in the language.  — SMcCandlish ¢ 😼  12:14, 8 December 2024 (UTC); revised 01:26, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

MOS:APO

[edit]

"MOS" shortcuts should only lead to actual Manual of Style guideline pages and not other project pages and essays. Incoming links should be replaced with WP:APOS. Gonnym (talk) 11:04, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not commonly used enough to warrant a WP:XNR Ca talk to me! 13:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Breathing (noise reduction)

[edit]

Not mentioned at target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:26, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I searched around a little bit and I believe these redirects are referring to literally making pumps and breathing less loud. However, the current target is about a computer science concept, and I could not find a mention in related articles. Ca talk to me! 13:54, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fucket

[edit]

Unlikely search terms. While it may not be uncommon for ignorant unknowing English speakers to mispronounce the name (it's POO-get, FYI), they would most likely be well aware of the correct spelling, as that's how they're mispronouncing it in the first place. Putting it into writing seems more like an attempt at juvenile humour. Google search also shows that "fucket" is more likely to be a play on "bucket", though I doubt there's an appropriate target for that. Suggest deletion. Paul_012 (talk) 07:57, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the last one was apparently created by a blocked LTA sock. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as suggested per nom. No one refers to Phuket as F*cket. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 04:37, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pale Garden

[edit]

The current redirect is the only remotely plausible one in the page history, else I would've probably deleted or draftified. But since it's not mentioned at the target, I'm not sure this works either. Thoughts? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 07:55, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as clean-up after a blocked disruptive editor. No prejudice against good-faith creation if someone actually thinks such a redirect would be beneficial (as opposed to a red link). --Paul_012 (talk) 08:19, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to List_of_Minecraft_characters#Creaking, where it is mentioned. Oppose deletion per WP:NOTBURO. Ca talk to me! 13:58, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • That is an incredibly poor target, as it's only a passing mention that explains nothing about the term all. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:21, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The Pale Garden is a place added in the newest update of Minecraft, notable for featuring the newest monster creaking. I think the target provides information about whats the most notable about the place, which is the monster. Ca talk to me! 14:57, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • And I would have thought that the WP:NOTBURO argument would be in support of quickly deleting junk redirects resulting from pages created in bad faith instead of going through huge bureaucratic discussions to find accommodation for them. --Paul_012 (talk) 14:24, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Normally my argument would be same as your's, but since I believe the redirect should be kept, enforcing BURO would require pointlessly deletion and restoring/retargetting. Ca talk to me! 14:56, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Fair enough. I did say that there should be a redirect if someone thinks one would be beneficial, and since you do, I'm striking my above !vote. (Though I'm still not quite convinced that's an optimal target.) --Paul_012 (talk) 14:51, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as wikitrashing. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 04:40, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What is a "wikitrashing"? Ca talk to me! 09:39, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The practice of inserting irrelevant and unnatural nonsense junk into wikis. It is also known as "wikilittering". 67.209.128.31 (talk) 17:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have never heard that term before, but I'm assuming that it's a synonym for WP:CRUFT User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:22, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List_of_Minecraft_characters#Creaking. I do not agree that this target contains no information about the subject of this redirect. It tells you, 1) It is a biome location in Minecraft. 2) The biome is in greyscale. 3) The biome contains the monster known as "Creaking". There is no further information that is really needed, this says everything we're going to say about the subject, and since we have the information, we should provide it to the user when searched. Fieari (talk) 07:12, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

UCBR8-60-B28hp2BmDPdntcQ

[edit]

This is a YT channel id, but the reasons for deletion would be the same as Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 October 13#DQw4w9WgXcQ. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:10, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment DQw4w9WgXcQ was recently recreated and consensus has changed to "retarget to Rickrolling where it's mentioned" Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 13:32, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per consensus here and here. Every video/channel, notable or not, has an ID. Putting them all as redirects to the YouTube article would be nonsensical and set bad precedent. Definitely am open to exceptions though, such as DQw as previously mentioned. VolatileAnomaly (talk) 02:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - This YouTube ID does not have the same notoriety, as an ID, that dQw4w9WgXcQ has. As I said in that discussion, most YouTube IDs are not notable, noteworthy, or plausible to be searched for, with VERY rare exceptions. This one does not qualify. I think a good rule of thumb would be whether or not it is WP:DUE to put the ID in the article body as part of a sentence talking about it. Fieari (talk) 23:50, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Alan Kimche

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy keep

Joe (drink)

[edit]

This appears to be a reference to Cup of joe, but searching this on Google only displayed teas and alcoholic beverages. Ca talk to me! 04:02, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of saints starting with A

[edit]

Unusual redirect, a long list of saints that was nominated for deletion per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of saints as WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Absolutiva (talk) 03:18, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There are no lists of saints anywhere on the target (let alone those that start with A), and it's too vague to redirect to any of the specific ones Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 13:34, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to List of Catholic saints#A as WP:PTOPIC, or else Delete as ambiguous - The Lists of Saints page doesn't have any saints that begin with "A" because it's a list of lists, and we have lots of articles of the saints of different denominations and even different religions... but I think in the English speaking world, when you say you want a list of saints, I'm pretty sure people default to the Roman Catholic ones. If other editors disagree with this, then the only other option is to delete as ambiguous. Fieari (talk) 07:18, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2014 in Illinois

[edit]

Deletion. Same reasons as in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 3#1996 in California. Year articles should remain redlinks so we can easily see which ones still need to be created. Target article 2014 in the United States has very little information about Illinois, so not a helpful redirect. HertzDonuts (talk) 01:41, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. When a person is looking at a timeline (which imo is just a glorified list), a redlink telling "hey, we don't have information on this topic yet" is infinitely better than a redirect to the timeline they're already on Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:00, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 ACC Championship Game

[edit]

No mention in target article. Contest a year away and not yet notable. Blethering Scot 22:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above and per WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 04:45, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Mountain West Conference Football Championship Game

[edit]

No notable mention in target article and contest is a year away. Blethering Scot 22:43, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 04:47, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Abu Dhabi T10

[edit]

Future event not discussed at target. Blethering Scot 22:33, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

April 31

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

It seems the current target page talk wasn't notified. Web-julio (talk) 01:43, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 22:22, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nightb***h (film)

[edit]

Wikipedia is not censored. Name of film is simply nightbitch, and therefore redirect is an unlikely search term. Blethering Scot 22:03, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep we usually don't house "censored" redirects, and especially not those that aren't commonly used and have one ghit but since the one hit was from The Daily Mail which is very widely-read we should keep this Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 02:51, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom's statement. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 04:51, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete as implausible censoring. just say "b*tch" if you're that worried about the fuck words. of course, this means i'd consider "nightb*tch (film)" to be a plausible redirect cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete can't realistically assume anyone, even the most naïve person, not knowing what the missing word is and searching to find out more of this item they had to self-censor. Andrzejbanas (talk) 19:20, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nightb***h

[edit]

Book title is not censored and full name is Nightbitch. Wikipedia is also not censored. Blethering Scot 22:02, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom's statement. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 04:52, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
delete as implausible censoring. just say "b*tch" if you're that worried about the fuck words. of course, this means i'd consider "nightb*tch" to be a plausible redirect. don't you hate it when your stay at home wife sometimes transforms into a dog? that happened to my buddy eric once, and his week was ruined cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:22, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't consider "b***h" to be implausible though Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 11:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
it certainly is on the more niche side of censorings. maybe down there with "fu*k" and "a*s" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:58, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
fu*k has a redirect, so it's not really obscure Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 12:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
ow my consonants cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:24, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Plausible censoring. Wikipedia is not censored, but a redirect is not content, it's a navigation aid. The fact that wikipedia is not censored doesn't mean our users necessarily know that, or that they won't self-censor themselves, or copy a search term from someone else who does. WP:CHEAP applies. Fieari (talk) 23:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Female youtuber

[edit]

Gender an unlikely additional search term for a YouTuber. Blethering Scot 22:00, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete listing female youtubers and categorizing them is WikiTubia's job nevermind, wikitubia apparantly doesn't categorize youtuber's by gender? i just tried it with Jaiden, couldn't find a link to something like Category:Female youtubers Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:06, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GENDER and WP:NPOV. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 04:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
create an article about viva reverie, retarget to her as she is the only female youtuber to have ever existed ever (besides all the others), and then delete per nom and someone. steps 1 and 2 are optional cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BlueSky

[edit]

Arguing that BlueSky should be a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT to Bluesky (BlueSky → Blue Sky) given a lot of people think the S is capitalized. The Wikinav data at the current DAB page target shows that clearly the majority of users expect to navigate to the social media platform. Raladic (talk) 20:01, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of canonizations

[edit]

Per discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of saints. Absolutiva (talk) 19:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep After reviewing the AfD, I don't see any reason to delete the redirect. It's just been retargeted to the new list of lists. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:52, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Hi. I created a page with this name 19 years ago, which apparently is reason to leave me a boilerplate message notifying me of this discussion. I'll level with you here. I cannot remember why precisely I created this page under the name list of canonizations rather than list of saints. I think it might have been to keep the scope down, originally? Ultimately though my original intent doesn't matter. But there is a perfectly good edit history spanning over a decade for this page, whereas, Lists of saints? That was created in November. Like, last month. Since List of canonizations has been apparently a good enough article name to have spanned until 2020, when it was redirected to List of saints, I think there might be some cause to believe that we should not remove the redirect from this URL, which has remained valid for 14 years, along with its entire edit history. Morwen (talk) 02:42, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Presidentman. NLeeuw (talk) 20:15, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - An article being deleted is not rationale to delete a redirect. AfD and RfD are completely different processes with entirely different criteria. This is a valid redirect. Fieari (talk) 23:21, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of canonized saints

[edit]

Per discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of saints. Absolutiva (talk) 19:26, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Barotrauma and Wind turbines

[edit]

"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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:34, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the current and proposed targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:51, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per Synpath · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 09:33, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fado (character)

[edit]

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

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)[reply]
I don't think that's good enough for the redirect to target there, since he isn't mentioned by name. QuicoleJR (talk) 23:57, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:08, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mention has not been added to the target. Also, thoughts on the pre-BLAR page history in case of preference to delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:05, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

State of Palestine'

[edit]

self-explanatory Ca talk to me! 15:01, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A "stray" apostrophe is fine for the possessive case of plural nouns that end with "s", none of which describe Palestine Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 02:56, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Exterminate over QE:NONCOMMON.[hyperbole]
Actual text
Delete per WP:UNNATURAL.
67.209.128.31 (talk) 05:04, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Israel"

[edit]

Unnatural redirect. There is no reason to put the country's name in quotes unless in a pejorative sense. Ca talk to me! 15:00, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Delete" Prior consensus (which for the life of me I can't find) dictates that unless the thing in question is officially stylized in quotes that a redirect surrounded in quotes should be deleted Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:09, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as alt-right POV pushing. 67.209.128.31 (talk) 05:06, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Per WP:UNNATURAL RealStranger43286 (talk) 05:36, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

三州府

[edit]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
    • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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. Sun8908Talk 15:40, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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. Sun8908Talk 05:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    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. Sun8908Talk 11:25, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ca talk to me! 12:50, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Legends Drum and Bugle Corps

[edit]

Does not appear at target article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 09:31, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment: I removed it from the target page since it no longer fits the criteria of the list (i.e., a multiple-time finalist in the World Class division). However, I would not be opposed to keeping it purely to preserve the page history. Why? I Ask (talk) 09:38, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Buxamina

[edit]

These appear to at best be very obscure trade names for the target drug. Gamalate and Diastal appear to refer to different drugs. Buxamina may be the Spanish version of Buxamine, but there is no special affinity for Spanish related to the target. Delete all. Mdewman6 (talk) 04:17, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Entomb

[edit]

Burial does not have any content about entombment per se; the most is a brief mention of immurement. The article's scope, per its lede sentence, is "a method of final disposition whereby a dead body is placed into the ground", whereas Wiktionary defines entomb as "To deposit in a tomb". Which, hey, we have an article on! So I suggest a retarget to tomb. Failing that, I would say we should move Entombment (disambiguation) to the base title. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe|🤷) 02:29, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Greg peg

[edit]

Not mentioned in target; originally created via suspected promotional content added to target Jalen Barks (Woof) 02:12, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Oh boy this one is a doozy.
So, this was created in 2020 as a redirect to Patiala peg but as early as 2021 different(?) IPs keep on editing this to a unsourced stub about a specific Patiala peg type/brand(?) in Punjab. A war between Renamed user 7z42t3k8qj (who was continually editing the redirect to turn back into a redir, the only reason I'm not pinging them is because they've been inactive since 2021) and IPs were going on until this revision when it was stopped and it seemed like 7z4 won.
Until 200 weeks and 2 days (!) later, when the IP suddenly remembered they have a unsourced stub to maintain. Then, since 7z4 was inactive and has been for over 200 weeks at that point @Frost (who I am pinging because they're obviously still active) took 7z4's place. This IP rev decided to add their current menu (in INR, may I add?) to their ideal version of the Greg peg article until nom stepped in and did their role.
IP, noticing their pet article was under RfD decided to remove the tag without discussion, which was noticed and reverted by nom. That is, until IP strikes back with this rev which is mostly similar to the earlier one except the menu is in code this time. Finally, nom reverted this article to it's current state.
TLDR; some dude in Punjab wanted to advertise their beer(?) on Wikipedia and is still editing the article to this day.
why did i put more effort into writing this than i do with my school essays Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uncomfiness

[edit]

Not a word Hexware (talk) 16:34, 5 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:31, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep "uncomfiness" is a word I do use from time to time. + the OED may not have an entry for "uncomf i ness" specifically but they do have entries for uncomfYness which is a one-letter difference Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:43, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hallelujah night

[edit]

Not mentioned at target, but is a term used in a least one book (Guadalcanal: The Definitive Account). However, Google results are all associated with a Christian alternative to Halloween, and the only use of the term on enwiki is in a reference at Halloween. Not sure what's best here, but the status quo is likely astonishing to at least some searchers. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:27, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wading bird(s)

[edit]

Seems to me that these should point to the same target, possibly a disambiguation page. Cremastra ‹ uc › 16:40, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Target both to Wader? Or to Wader (American)?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:26, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]


some regional honeys

[edit]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page histories?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:35, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 23:43, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... this is pretty complicated.
Delete Philippines Honey and Finland Honey for being redirects since 2005.
No comment on the rest, as they do appear to have history that isn't just a redirect Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:32, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2026 ARCA Menards Series West

[edit]

No mention at the target, making this a misleading redirect. Delete as WP:TOOSOON. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:01, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2026 ARCA Menards Series East

[edit]

No mention at the target, making this a misleading redirect. Delete as WP:TOOSOON. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:01, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bengals

[edit]

Bengals, plural, usually refers to sports teams (which make up all the uses listed for "Bengals" on Bengal (disambiguation)). Among them, the Cincinnati Bengals are the clear primary topic, so I think it should be retargeted to Cincinnati Bengals. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 20:44, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ROOT!

[edit]

SEEMS TO REFER TO THE AUSTRALIAN BAND, BUT THE LACK OF A LOGO- ow my throat. the lack of a logo in the article might make it a little implausible, and there might be another use i'm missing. could just be retargeted (back?) to the band with no issue, but i'm 99% sure i'm missing at least every detail cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Root! (Australian band) as below. Why anyone looking for plant roots would search for "Root!", let alone "ROOT!" in all caps, is just beyond me. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 20:48, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did some research, A) the band do have a logo B) the logo is indeed an all-uppercase "ROOT!" as the redirect implies so retarget to Root! (Australian band) Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:37, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Root!

[edit]

seems to refer to the australian band, to which it seems to be the primary topic. admittedly kind of iffy on doing anything here for reasons that boil down to a gut feeling that i'm missing something, so... leave as is, or consider proposing a move? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:09, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the Australian band article was originally located at Root!, then suddenly (and less than a year ago) it was moved to Root! (Australian band) and Root! was retargeted to Root at the same time. This is an obvious retarget. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 20:56, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Revert I have never heard of this "Root!" myself, despite being Australian myself, but they don't seem to be particularly popular amongst WA'ers anyway Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:28, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pterotype

[edit]

gonna make the frankly kind of dumb suggestion of returning to red. the pterotype, built by a guy named john twice, is known for being part of the reason christopher latham sholes created this obscure doodad known as the "qwerty keyboard". thus, i think there's a non-zero chance that it might be kinda notable. if not that, i guess retargeting to #inventing the typewriter on chris's article would also work cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:10, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ella, maldita alma (Tv Series)

[edit]

Recently created article which I've moved. This redirect isn't a likely search result because of its strange mixed capitalization. Gonnym (talk) 11:46, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The problem with purely capitalization-based disambig errors is that Wikipedia and Google search are case-insensitive with no way to do a case-sensitive search so I physically can't search for JUST those that use "Tv Series" Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 10:30, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no reason for you to search "Tv Series", just as there is no reason for you to search for "Tv SeRies". Gonnym (talk) 11:07, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was trying to search for other redirects that have that exact capitalization, because I would be more inclined to !keep if it was common than if it was uncommon Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 13:39, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Orduspor 1967

[edit]

Should be deleted as Orduspor 1967 is a legally unaffiliated phoenix club of Orduspor. Should be a red link. – anlztrk (talk | contribs) 11:28, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great appendage

[edit]

Megacheirans aren’t the only things with great appendages, so why does this even redirect here. IC1101-Capinatator (talk) 09:31, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A whole load of other things have "great appendages", the most obvious one being male humans (not even kidding - some people have jokingly referred to their "thing" as an appendage) Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 09:35, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Don't delete I merged content from this article into Megacheira (which the contents of the article were specifically about), so it's necessary to keep the history some capacity to retain attribution. Looking at the term "great appendage" on scholar [12], the term is basically exclusively used for fossil arthropods, and particularly for megacheirans. I wouldn't oppose changing the target to arthropod, but I would oppose deleting outright. Hemiauchenia (talk) 14:38, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Hemiauchenia. This is a (reasonably) well-known paleontology term, and the current target is where our material on it exists. Tevildo (talk) 16:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, as noted this is not a "generic term" as intimated, but a specific anatomical term used in paleontology for Megacheira#Morphology arthropods. If there is notable usage for non-arthropods, please show it--Kevmin § 21:10, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I have jokingly seen men refer to their thing as a "appendage", however A) no RS seems to back this up and B) I couldn't find anything on "great appendage" Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:26, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas characters

[edit]

A) No such list of Characters exist anywhere on the target B) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_September_19#List_of_Grand_Theft_Auto:_San_Andreas_characters - a similar redirect - was closed as Delete Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 09:25, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaiian style

[edit]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
    i was actually thinking of acoustic guitars and shaved ice, two things widely known for being closely related[citation needed] cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:03, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aydoh8[contribs] 06:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate between Hawaiian pizza, aloha shirt / hawaiian-style shirt, Hawaiian cuisine, the inevitable BABH reference just in case and probably some others I'm missing as well Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 09:11, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
problem: hawaiian pizza still has nothing to do with hawaii or styles cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:44, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hawaiian pizza is regularly and commonly called Hawaiian style pizza., even though (as I was shocked to learn) it is Canadian in origin. Fieari (talk) 23:12, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chowda

[edit]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • Retarget to The Boy Who Knew Too Much (The Simpsons)#Plot, per the IP above. BarntToust 21:43, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, or as suggested by Jessintime retarget to clam chowder. Very surprised by the suggestions to link to an episode of The Simpsons. A quick search on Google Books shows quite a few hits for chowda, and when excluding its use as a name it is almost always in lieu of chowder: [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22]... Shazback (talk) 16:21, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a cutesy spelling used in products and recipe names, or in dialog-written-with-accent to evoke the New England accent, to which clam chowder is closely associated. This could be done for any word ending in -er, but we don't do that, because it would be silly to do so. On the other hand, we do have some material that talks about this very particular use of the accented word, as an actual plot point in something. I think the retarget to the Simpsons episode is by far the better option. Barring that, deletion would be my next choice. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:53, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Clam chowder or Keep, slight preference for retargeting. This is a very commonly used eye dialect spelling of a word with affinity for the subject. WP:RFOR applies with only a minor stretch to apply it to a relevant accent as opposed to a completely separate language-- clam chowder is in fact strongly associated with Boston, as the article text confirms. The association is strong enough I'm debating whether the clam chowder article actually should mention this eye dialect spelling... I have few doubts that a reference for it could be found. Is it WP:DUE? Maybe... maybe. But certainly there's enough to have a redirect at the very least. Fieari (talk) 23:39, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. For the record, I strongly oppose a retarget to Clam chowder per WP:RASTONISH. And to address the point above, eye dialect redirects should generally be avoided; very often, they cover up more specific content that a search might reveal. But in this case, we actually have something appropriate to redirect to. If someone wants to look up information about chowder, they're just going to search for "chowder". On the other hand, if someone wants to look up information about the gag from the Simpsons episode, this is a wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy more useful search term if you don't know what episode it's from. Reward the searchers looking for specific information using a plausible search term. Punish those using a misspelling. However, in this case, it's a very mild punishment, since upon reading the linked-to section, even if someone didn't know what it was, they'd realize what it was. You could even put in a hatnote if you really wanted (although I think that would be a little overkill). 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:38, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    My view is that WP:RASTONISH would on the contrary lead to opposing a redirect to a specific gag in one episode of The Simpsons. Wikipedia aims to have a broad readership, and there are many, many more cases of chowda being used to refer to chowder (see above, also in brand names or 'routine' mentions in travel guides, recipe names etc. in print or online). Saying that the reader can just infer from the plot summary of the article that chowda is chowder with a Boston accent does not sit well with me, and quite frankly if I searched something I saw in a cookbook or travel guide on wikipedia and were redirected in such a manner I would be WP:RASTONISHED. Shazback (talk) 20:20, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as is, retargeting to clam chowder or a TV gag is too specific. -- Tavix (talk) 16:20, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
what even makes clam chowder a possible target here, especially more fitting than chowder? honestly, i'm also against keeping at this point because, simply put, we're not a boston-centered wiki (at least not yet, just you wait...) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 10:53, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nearly every hit on a quick google search for "chowda" relates to clam chowder, not the generic chowder. ~~ Jessintime (talk) 14:42, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
nearly all of the clam chowder-related results i could find seem to refer to "clam chowda" (notice the specific use of the word "clam"), a product of a not very notable brand named "boston chowda". the only others are products from even less notable brands or miscellaneous restaurants. does google think i'm a tourist? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:33, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Aydoh8[contribs] 06:22, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Yum Goong

[edit]

Originally created in 2005 as a redirect to the film Tom-Yum-Goong, but was retargeted to Tom yum (the dish the film is named after) by WhisperToMe in 2009. I think the capitalised form, with this specific spelling, may be more likely to be typed by those looking for the film. Paul_012 (talk) 05:50, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget back to the film Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 06:15, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tom-yum-goong

[edit]

Originally created in 2005 as a redirect to the film Tom-Yum-Goong, but was retargeted to Tom yum (the dish the film is named after) by User:WhisperToMe in 2009. I think this specific spelling and hyphenation is more likely to be typed by those looking for the film. Paul_012 (talk) 05:44, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget back to the film Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 06:15, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Flammeo

[edit]

Not mentioned at target, though it is mentioned at Neoniphon argenteus. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 05:01, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nazi persecution of Jews

[edit]

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:50, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As said by Ivanvector, the current target has much more info than Persecution of Jews#Nazi Germany, so it's more useful to readers. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 20:51, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Retarget" per Ivanvector to History of the Jews in Germany#Under the Nazis (1933–45). Do agree that the original target has more information, best to target it to the proper section though. VolatileAnomaly (talk) 04:02, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

TikTok Rizz Party

[edit]

Not mentioned at the current target. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:33, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quandale Dingle

[edit]

Not mentioned at the current target. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:32, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Sandbox (2021 video game)

[edit]

I created this redirect, though it is essentially a recreation of a page that has been previously delete The Sandbox (blockchain platform) QuantumFoam66 (talk) 04:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per WP:G7 (author requests deletion) Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 06:20, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep just because a redirect's subject matter is essentially the same as a deleted page, doesn't mean it can be deleted. A redirect doesn't have the same deletion criteria as articles. And The Sandbox (company) does indeed mention the presence of a 2021 video game titled The Sandbox. QuantumFoam66 (talk) 17:41, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:QuantumFoam66, you're not making yourself understandable. What is the reason you opened this discussion? --Paul_012 (talk) 07:29, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment QuantumFoam66, as mentioned by another user, it is unclear why you brought this redirect to RfD. Based on your reply it seems that you want to keep the redirect, in which case you didn't have to create the RfD entry in the first place. Are there any questions or concerns you are wishing to address? Do you feel that this redirect may be better targeting someplace else? If not, we can just close this as a speedy keep and move on. VolatileAnomaly (talk) 03:45, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trump John, Donald

[edit]

Lastname Middlename, Firstname is an extremely uncommon way of writing names. QuicoleJR (talk) 01:53, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Specialization in bees

[edit]

is there a chance of it being used to refer to some other type of specialization, like beekeeping? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:48, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:24, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

antiwhatever, helminth

[edit]

same-ish rationale as worms, animals below, but "helminth" refers to parasitic worms, so even if not deleted, it points to the wrong target (and the right one doesn't mention antigens or antibodies). could also be a case of xy, thinking about it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:35, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The title of this nomination made me chuckle. Further thoughts on retargeting to Helminth protein?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:24, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy vehicle

[edit]

heavy equipment fans are in shambles right now. maybe planes and tanks too. really, results gave me a little bit of everything cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:11, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:23, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

London Bridge task force

[edit]

Cross-namespace redirect that hasn't been linked anywhere for the year it's been in mainspace, and that doesn't seem especially convenient or important to warrant a mainspace-to-Wikipedia redirect. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 20:28, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per wp:returntored - sources posted above show that this had enough coverage to be a mainspace article, so redirect should be deleted to encourage article creation. BugGhost 🦗👻 00:57, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not deserve a cross-namespace redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:56, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Calicrat

[edit]

while likely a plausible r from alternative scientific name or something, it's unmentioned, and results only gave me a brand of adult juices (i think it's booze, at least) and a list of words that rhyme with "matpat" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:47, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete The word appears to be documented as a synonym for ant in The Endangered English Dictionary: Bodacious Words Your Dictionary Forgot, p. 30 (the only evidence of it I could find), but without any other use of it anywhere, I'm having trouble thinking of it as a reasonable redirect. Still, might be useful for someone reading "calicrat" in an old book and wondering what it means, so not too sure. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:30, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete The fact that it only appears in "Endangered" English Dictionary is a cause for concern. OED has an entry, though the definition is under a paywall. The etymology section says "The only known use of the noun calicrat is in the late 1500s." So, no, I don't think it is a scientific name or anything of that sort. WP:RDELETE's obscure synonym clause appears here. Ca talk to me! 23:30, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Exactly one documented actual usage I could find ever, and it's from 1596. Oxford seems to concur with this. So we're talking about one line from one poem of no note written by one passably notable poet in the 1590s. The only context it's ever been used in outside of that as best I can tell (about 10 minutes' worth of searching) is Grambs 1994 and a select few obscure websites piggybacking off of Grambs 1994 by defining it as well. There's zero reason to think anyone would be stymied by this word's meaning and search it on Wikipedia. We wouldn't even include this on Wiktionary, which is extremely generous with arcahic words, because it fails inclusion criteria. WP:CHEAP, sure, but this is so implausible as to be literally worthless. (Also, this has nothing to do with scientific naming; this was over 100 years before Linnaeus was born.) TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 23:32, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I know a lot of obscure English terms thanks to Wiktionary, and if it took me a massive amount of digging on the internet just to get a hint as to what it means then it's too obscure for Wiktionary - let alone something as notability-driven as ENWP Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 06:12, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Quest for Thelda

[edit]

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:15, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Guren Island

[edit]

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 16:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lymbriciform

[edit]

won't argue that it's not a plausible spelling of lumbriciform, but shouldn't it be retargeted to lumbricidae? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

should note while i'm at it that i'll create lumbriciform after this discussion is closed and if it's not closed as delete (for any reason not related to its plausibility as a tpyo) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 14:59, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Lumbriciform" is a descriptor for a general shape (which is, well, worm-shaped) rather than a scientific classification, so targeting it to "worm" makes more sense here. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:32, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ascensorium

[edit]

results gave me "things that make you go up" in general, but mostly hiking equipment. mentioned in #terminology as a synonym for spiral stairs, but it seems the meaning has been changed cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:53, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep Online search for me only shows stairs and latin/polish results. Ca talk to me! 01:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sanduíche

[edit]

no particular affinity with portuguese (whatever that is). created because the creator thinks sandwiches are good. e tá certo kkk cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:45, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete because while i agree with the creator this is not WP:FORRED compliant in the slightest Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 06:13, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sonnich

[edit]

unmentioned. apparently plaudietch for "sunny". results gave me random guys and... sonichu... why do i feel my sins crawling on my back cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:40, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mex-Mex

[edit]

obscure synonym. results gave me sneks (really cute ones at that), keyboards, and assorted restaurant names. as noted in the creation, an explanation is provided in tex-mex cuisine in houston, though in passing, and i don't think it'd be better off retargeted there. as is, it might be a somewhat plausible misremembering of tex-mex, but i'm not really too keen on that cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:33, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a neologism and it is used in reliable sources. 1983 New York Magazine; 2007 U.S. newspaper; 2012 book; 2014 book; 2017 book; 2023 book; -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 04:28, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 03:55, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

comment: an ip added a mention to the target cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:36, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Most Famous Barbadian

[edit]

(NPP action) This isn't an alternative name or title – it's just a statement about Rihanna (which isn't what redirects are meant for) and it's not supported by the target article. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:27, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep To be fair, she is the most famous Barbadian by a landslide. Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 08:04, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GABAAL

[edit]

No evidence that these initalisms are in use for these compounds; WP should not be creating these on our own. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:39, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FitMC

[edit]

While this famous YouTuber does have a connection with the subject (I enjoy watching him myself), there is virtually no mention of him in the article. Unfortunately, there are no RSs that connect him to the subject, either. EF5 22:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Couldn't find a good source to add a sourced mention Ca talk to me! 23:32, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Karstarma ardea

[edit]

WP:RETURNTORED. It's good, common practice to not redirect a taxon to its parent, for three main reasons: 1) There is usually almost zero unique information about each child taxa in the parent's article. 2) When a reader is on the parent article, they may click on a blue link (templates like 'linked taxa list' are typically used to efficiently mass-wikilink all child taxa) only to be redirected back to the article they just clicked away from. 3) It makes it unnecessarily difficult for a prospective editor to know that a taxon needs an article (all valid taxa are considered notable by default). Thus, editors trying to find these taxa are frustrated by a lack of information about them; readers on the parent page are frustrated by being directed in a loop; and editors trying to create or improve these articles are frustrated by a deceptive sea of blue. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 18:16, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The three points given by the nom are exactly why recent, validly described species are kept as redlinks. Do you think this kind of article exists just for the fun color scheme? --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:55, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And - you want to remove the list of links in the genus article, where they are most useful (and the only place where they are likely to ever be listed), in order to prevent circular redirects? That is a nonsensical approach. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 07:05, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is it really @Elmidae nonsensible? I personally think we need far fewer individual species articles, despite what I recognize as inherent notability. Not sure why you mention anything about a "fun colour scheme". I'm entitled to my opinion, and I don't think it's ill-informed based on my NPP work, but you're entitled to disagree with my perspective. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:26, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Global T20 Canada

[edit]

It looks like the event typically takes place in July, but there's no relevant information at the target whatsoever, making this a misleading redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Something Something for the Advancement of White People

[edit]

I'm not sure how this is a plausible redirect, especially since the reference linked is...someone's livestream? Even if the term were somehow mentioned, that doesn't mean anything, as searching yielded precisely zero results (not sure if G1 would apply (let me know if otherwise), which is why I'm doing this instead). Procyon117 (talk) 14:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Something Something Delete this Redirect doesn't make even a modicum of sense or plausibility Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:58, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, simply stated. LeónGonsalvesofGoa (talk) 20:41, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unmentioned Doom II enemies

[edit]

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:47, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

you know what? return to red per nom. h*ck knight and arachnotron aside, i think the others have at least a bit of a chance of being articles someday... in around 5 years, give or take cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:57, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cogsan: Just so you know, I added one more redirect which I forgot to list. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:58, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
same case applies cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:01, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HammerHead (company)

[edit]

Barely mentioned in target article for its existence. Obscure company which developed four games and is not notable for any more than that, and there is no suitable redirect target with sufficient info on the company. MimirIsSmart (talk) 14:35, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Future season redirects not mentioned at targets

[edit]

Not mentioned at the targets at all, making these misleading redirects for anybody who searches for these. Delete as WP:TOOSOON. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:31, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete this and all the 2025-26 redirects above. maybe clump those noms together too cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:40, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dick Tantrum

[edit]

Name not used at the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:30, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

legally rename him to "dan ticktrum" to at least make it an anagram... and then delete as vandalism anyway cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:41, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete – Not seemingly intentional vandalism (the stated rationale was: "He is referred to as this by some social media users"). But while this does have some presence on social media, this derogatory nickname has no documentation I can find in reliable sources. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 18:20, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Technician. mwwv converseedits 12:47, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep - Definitely not vandalism, google does confirm that this nickname gets some use. Not a lot of use, but it does get use. Redirects do not require the same level of reliable sourcing to be useful... confirmed usage alone is enough, if the redirect would assist in navigation. That is to say, are people using this nickname without it being clear who is being spoken about? Well, no. Every instance I can see using this name also includes the real name for clarification, or is in a context where the target is very clear. As such, I'd normally just say delete and get on with it, but then I waffle because sometimes these kinds of nicknames can become more memorable than the real name, particularly when the real name is unusual in English, and I think "Ticktum" qualifies as unusual enough to be harder to remember. Consider my !vote to be mostly neutral, with an ever so slight lean towards keep. Fieari (talk) 23:30, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    User had multiple edits that were reverted for being unconstructive and created The Most Famous Barbadian for humor so this particular redirect does resemble a vain attempt in juvenile humor over an actually constructive redirect. MimirIsSmart (talk) 15:59, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Still gonna WP:AGF and evaluate redirects on their own merits, regardless of who made them. Fieari (talk) 07:20, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2026 SA20

[edit]

No relevant information at the target, making this is a misleading redirect. Delete as WP:TOOSOON. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:50, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2026 Bangladesh Premier League

[edit]

No relevant information at the target, making this is a misleading redirect. Delete as WP:TOOSOON. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:49, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: given the 2024 season was just inagurated its WP:TOOSOON for 2026. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 14:27, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Damehar, Himachal Pradesh

[edit]

There is a town called Domehar in Himachal Pradesh, but given that it is 150 km from Mandi, the redirect doesn't seems appropriate. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 12:21, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! Damehar, Himachal Pradesh, shows up on the Weather Network here: https://www.theweathernetwork.com/en/city/in/himachal-pradesh/damehar/7-days, and is a seperate entity from Domehar. Hilly towns in Himachal aren't reported on - but this one is in the district of Mandi. As someone with familial heritage from here, I guarantee you it does exist and town signs and borders are there which i could upload on wikimedia commons. Rushtheeditor (talk) 23:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

National Kabaddi Association

[edit]

I suggest to delete these. Neither association is mentioned at the target page. These seem to be the former names of defunct or renamed/reorganised associations. There are already various confusingly named organisations involved in the sport of kabaddi. See the World Kabaddi and Kabaddi World Cup disambiguation pages, for example.

As best I can tell, the National Kabaddi Association did exist (founded in 1992) and is defunct. It is only linked in the articles about two teams (from Scotland and England) that formerly belonged to it. There also appears to be a "National Kabaddi Association of Ontario" (Facebook page here) and a "National Kabaddi Association of Canada" (Facebook page here). There is one mention of "National Kabaddi Association" in Kabaddi in Canada (about an unfortunate event in 2023), but I think the Canadian associations are different from the earlier association that had a national team from Scotland and a national team from England.

I would be tempted to think that "International Kabaddi Association" refers to the International Kabaddi Federation (IKF), but it doesn't seem to. It is only linked in two articles. One of those talks about a player in an event held by the association in 1993, which is more than a decade before the IKF was established. The other one provides no clear indication of why it is linked.

—⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 19:09, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No comments yet, going again!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 11:23, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

O'Doyle Rules

[edit]

The text is not mentioned in the redirect target, so the redirect should be deleted. This has been discussed at Talk:Billy Madison#O'Doyle Rules. Graham87 (talk) 11:22, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Scream (Greek TV miniseries)

[edit]

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

Also okay with restoration and subsequent listing at Articles for Deletion; I doubt Lenticel or the IP nom would have any qualms with that. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 03:06, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No issue on my end if there's a WP:BLAR problem. --Lenticel (talk) 05:28, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@CFA: Why do you think the article should be restored? Have you found evidence that it may have notability? -- Tavix (talk) 03:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't looked, but RfD is for discussing redirects and shouldn't be used to backdoor-delete BLARed articles in the page history. C F A 02:35, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, RFD shouldn't be used to delete redirects with notable articles in its page history. If it's obvious that the article isn't notable, that's something that can and should be handled here in order to save a second discussion. -- Tavix (talk) 16:25, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on the page history - take to AfD or delete directly?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:54, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

delete. nothing worth keeping, we're not doing this again. afd is for articles, rfd is for redirects, and blars are redirects. surprisingly, restoring content that violates policies on quality and original research... violates policies on quality and original research cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:19, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
TNT it up and start anew. Huffington Post is a good start and is even allowed per Wikipedia:RS/P for anything that isn't political. Indiegogo, on the other hand Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 06:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adimo

[edit]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified on this discussion at the target and creator talk pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:45, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've reinserted "Adimo is the first human, and Heva the first woman, in a creation story." Regards, Joshua Jonathan - Let's talk! 07:50, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

⚭/equaric unicodes

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 06:26, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Gender symbol#Sexual orientation and gender politics. That's the article about the gender symbols, and that's the article with the most information on these two in particular. If anybody searches for these two symbols, they will get the most information from the Gender symbol article. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 06:33, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget both to LGBTQ symbols: My first thought was to retarget them to achillean and sapphic, respectively, because they're technically more correct. My second thought, though, was that those two terms are comparatively obscure and most people searching using the symbols would, in fact, probably be looking for gay man and lesbian. My third thought was... how likely are those to be actually used as search terms? Probably not very. Finally, my fourth thought, upon reading Gaismagorm's comment above, was that, yeah, in the unlikely event that someone copy and pastes those symbols into the search bar, they are probably better served by the article about the symbols themselves, rather than what they represent. Gender symbol would also work because it basically contains the same content, but I think LGBTQ symbols is slightly preferable because it's somewhat more narrowly focused and would probably leave readers less confused. -- 3 kids in a trenchcoat (talk) 02:54, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2024 AP Poll

[edit]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 06:25, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Athletic Field (Seattle)

[edit]

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

There was a previous athletic field at the site variously called Athletic Park (Seattle), Athletic Field (Seattle), YMCA Park, Y.M.C.A. Park, etc.
The original reliable, secondary sources surely exist for these names in the back issues of the original newspapers. I have not yet had a chance to expand the article.
PK-WIKI (talk) 17:13, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kingsmasher678 (talk) 06:24, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gamma-Aminobutanol

[edit]

The target is an aldehyde, a derivative of butanal, not a derivative of an alcohol, butanol. These names would refer to 4-amino-1-butanol, but the Greek letter prefixes aren't used for alcohols like that. Delete. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:43, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'll go through and make all the appropriate alt name redirects, but these don't belong. These were created via AfC by an IP request. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:46, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bandahara

[edit]

(Procedural nomination on behalf of Ariankntl Mdewman6 (talk) 03:15, 4 December 2024 (UTC)). I propose that the redirect Bandahara be deleted or replaced, as the current redirect to Bendahara is inappropriate. "Bandahara" refers to a specific geographical feature, Mount Bandahara in Indonesia, while the title of Bendahara in the context of traditional Malay government is generally no longer used in modern government structures. The two are entirely unrelated, and this redirect may confuse readers seeking information about the mountain.[reply]

I suggest deleting the redirect and allowing Bandahara to become an independent article about the mountain. Thank you for your attention. Ariankntl (talk) 02:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably oppose, alternative suggestion - does this re-direct fall under the Reasons for not deleting 2,3 and 6? Would the better alternative not be a disambiguation page? - Master Of Ninja (talk) 16:06, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirecting "Bandahara" to "Bendahara" is inappropriate because the term "Bandahara" is more relevant when associated with Mount Bandahara. A better solution would be to direct "Bandahara" to an article about the mountain. This ensures that the information provided is more accurate and meets the user's search expectations. Ariankntl (talk) 01:44, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
How do you prove that it is more relevant? I think in the grand scale of things very few people will go and look for either article. I generally would not care about this topic, but someone posted it on my talk page. I note that I created "Bandahara" in 2014, and the "Mount Bandahara" article was created this month - I think this probably points to how important these articles looking at the greater picture - I don't think the generic user is looking for either of these. I think my points under reasons for deleting still stand. However, a disambiguation page might be better for the user to point to the correct article. - Master Of Ninja (talk) 10:14, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank Goodness

[edit]

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). [reply]

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: What's the primary topic here?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra ‹ uc › 01:36, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Repeat after me...Wiktionary redirects are BAD. This one is especially bad. Native speakers do not need to look up the meaning of such a common phrase. Non-native speakers shouldn't be looking up meanings in an encyclopedia; they should use a dictionary. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. It's claimed immediately above that this isn't the primary topic, but then what is? We have no encyclopedic content about the phrase itself, so it can't be that by default. We do have a mention of this as a song title, which is at least something. Delete it if you must, but soft redirects to Wikt should really be avoided...what would even be the point of this one? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:06, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:DIFFCAPS. The song is the only topic in English Wikipedia by this exact name. Literally every single other one of the 260 hits in Special:Search/~"Thank Goodness" is either a WP:PTM or a coincidental use of the phrase in the title of a source cited. There's nothing to disambiguate here. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 05:33, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per WP:DIFFCAPS, as the only target with this capitalization. I will not repeat after IP above, as I do not agree that wiktionary links are default bad, but we have a better target here, and it's the target we already have. Fieari (talk) 07:25, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

X.

[edit]

Delete. Pointless redirect. There are no topics on X (disambiguation) referred to as "X." GilaMonster536 (talk) 00:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

it's not pointless, there's a point right there smh smh smh
delete per nom. don't think middle names starting with x would cut it either cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:55, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Child suicide bomber

[edit]

Child suicide bombers have been used in multiple conflicts by multiple groups. This redirect has pointed to this page since 2005-ish and is apparently the result of a page move, so I don't feel comfortable unilaterally retargeting. (The page it points to originally referred to the concept of child suicide bombers in general, as per earliest revisions - [27]) GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 00:20, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What do you propose as the new target? Children in the military? Suicide attack? I couldn't find a lot of options to choose from. - Ïvana (talk) 00:47, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm. I'm not entirely sure. There's a valid argument to be made for both, and I still haven't made my mind up. I just know that the current target is...less than acceptable and I was hoping that wider community discussion would make things clearer. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 06:34, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to suicide attack per above. Not mainly a military thing. PARAKANYAA (talk) 00:28, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to suicide attack per my original suggestion/question and the above comments. The other article does mention that it includes non-state armed groups, which presumably covers groups that are not strictly military or have at most some military components (like liberation movements), but the title doesn't reflect that, in my opinion, so this seems the best choice. - Ïvana (talk) 03:35, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict in Ukraine

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

2025–26 I-League

[edit]

No relevant information at the target about the season, making the redirect currently misleading. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:03, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Ritwik Mahatat@lk 18:57, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gerecter

[edit]

Does not appear to be relevant to the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:35, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Cuphead speedrunning records

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Tower Cam

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Alternative language redirects to Shohei Ohtani

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

CraftBukkit

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

Chaur

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

polypifer

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#polypifer

Save battery

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Save battery

Battery save

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Tshiamo Nong

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

2027 Formula One World Championship

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ac/DC

[edit]

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

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)[reply]

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:43, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is literally the kind of scenario WP:CHEAP was made for Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:CHEAP. The capitalization isn't hurting things here, and it's also potentially helpful—it'll get readers to their intended destination regardless. Regards, SONIC678 07:52, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Db-pagemove

[edit]

Retarget to Template:Db-move to respect the present, not decade-old oddities. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:48, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per nom. G3 is a CSD for vandalism, not technical page moves. Ca talk to me! 10:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak retarget seems a more likely target but maybe due to RMT where most such moves are requested its not sugnificantly more common than redirects created during cleanup of page move vandalism. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:32, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cicindela redirects

[edit]

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 ‹ uc › 23:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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! 02:21, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Trump Won

[edit]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
Delete This title is extremely vague and unamenable to disambiguation. Ca talk to me! 05:55, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I support a retarget per Michael Aurel below Ca talk to me! 00:18, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
Do the other elections make noteworthy use of the phrase? -- Tavix (talk) 18:47, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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! 02:18, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Strong retarget to Presidency of Donald Trump Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 05:27, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paw, Paw

[edit]

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)[reply]

  • Weak retarget to Paw Paw (disambiguation) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 14:36, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • Delete The comma makes this very implausible to target anywhere. QuicoleJR (talk) 20:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per above. Not sure if there's any good target in the dab page. --Lenticel (talk) 00:14, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Paw Paw (disambiguation) Edit: the disambiguation tag is not needed. 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Same question as previous relister… Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:17, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Paw Paw. Yeah, this one seems rather obvious to me :P Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 05:33, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeebus

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Peter "Pete" B. Hegseth

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Pamintâ

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Spicier

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Spicier

Cooking/Seasoning

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:WHITEWASHING

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Naked snail

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Ideologies:panarabism

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Tshiamo Nong

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Actshy

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Criticism of object-oriented programming

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
@Mathnerd314159: I already fixed the broken section anchor. Why is it better to delete it? Jarble (talk) 15:11, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:22, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Criticism of Donald Trump

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Criticism of Donald Trump

SN-7619

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ellen feiss

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Moseley tea service

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Moseley tea service

National Italian American Foundation

[edit]

(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)[reply]

delete per nom cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:28, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. This is the English language wikipedia, not the Italian. The Banner talk 17:05, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
method 2 is sounding really good right about now... cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:04, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:20, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems we do severely disagree; I support the idea of speedily deleting such redirects. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 09:20, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, but you have not really said why; you've just made the unsupported assertion that they are "[s]ending readers to non-English content is not helpful". I don't think that's true. --Trovatore (talk) 05:33, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Our target readership is those who can read in English and all of our content is written on the assumption that the reader can read English. Redirects to foreign language Wikipedias are outside the scope of our target audience and discourage the creation of articles in English at those titles. The argument that 'such redirects are useful to some English readers and harmless to the others' would also apply if someone tried to insert foreign language passages into any of our articles. In regard to 'technical articles being beyond many readers comprehension,' it is our job to provide something they can read (not something they have as of yet the prior knowledge necessary to understand). Foreign language material is likely fundamentally inaccessible to a very large portion of our readers. Even when our readers do read a foreign language, we cannot anticipate which foreign language(s) they might be able to read. Anyone seeking to use machine translation (a novel predicament) can do so through location on their own accord (not our prerogative to encourage and we may not want to for many reasons). That aside: firstly, we have no selection criteria as to when, if ever, such a redirect would be appropriate as opposed to a redlink. Secondly, we have no criteria for which language should be chosen if an article exists in multiple other languages. Thirdly, sister projects naturally cover content we do not (this is why they exist) and we have stringent guidelines about when soft redirecting to them is appropriate; on the other hand, other language versions of Wikipedia have the same generalized scope as us (for a different language) but may vary wildly in their content policies (e.g. something reasonably covered there may likely never be appropriate here)—this is problematic as it creates a backdoor for pseudo-coverage of things not up to our standards. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 09:18, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Other languages are entitled to their own content policies, and really I think that ought to create an entry to surfacing them in searches on en.wiki. Especially in cases like this one, where the topic is "intuitively notable", but may not hit the exact criteria developed in the arcana of en.wiki notability "law".
That the foreign-language content is "inaccessible to a very large portion of our readers" I don't see as a problem. That's also true for highly technical articles. The WP:MANYTHINGS essay is on point here. Note though that foreign languages are a bit more accessible to most readers than technical content, because of auto-translation.
The question of which language to surface is indeed problematic in general (though for the article under discussion here it seems pretty clear), which is why I didn't !vote for a soft redirect exactly, but said that some solution should be found to surface the it.wiki article; I'm not sure exactly how. I've been noodling on it without a clear answer yet. --Trovatore (talk) 18:13, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I addressed the 'highly technical article' argument above. The 'auto-translation argument' (alluded to above) would also apply to importing machine translated foreign language articles; we have harsh restrictions against (Raw or lightly edited machine translations have long been considered by the English Wikipedia community to be worse than nothing.) it locally. Thus, we should not overtly encourage readers to use machine translation. The question of when is much greater than the question of which in my opinion. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 19:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I missed your response to the "technical" argument. But I don't agree. I think someone with no knowledge of point-set topology trying to read our Stone–Čech compactification article would find it no easier than a monoglot reading something in a language close enough to English that they can recognize roots.
Using machine translation to write articles is very different from using it to read them. I completely agree we should not do the former. Machine translation has gotten much better than I ever thought it would which to be honest I regret to some extent, as it reduces the apparent value of learning languages, an activity with great benefits beyond the obvious but it's nowhere near good enough to produce encyclopedic content by itself. But reading it is different — there you just need enough to be able to work your way through it.
As to "when" we should surface foreign-language articles — why not always? If another WP has an article on the exact topic, I think we should make that known somehow to users searching for the term. (Again, I don't know exactly how. Maybe through teh search engine itself, which would require dev help.) --Trovatore (talk) 20:06, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
again, interlanguage link template. no need for a redirect with one of those bad boys around cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:40, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On what page would you put the template? I could see inventing a new sort of navigational page that hosted specifically templates of that sort, but it would be a new innovation, not a classic disambig, not a classic soft redirect, something new entirely. I do think that might be worth considering. --Trovatore (talk) 20:43, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
the template is supposed to go where the redirect is currently linked, to replace it. of course, that'd make the search bar kind of useless, but that's an unavoidable issue when there's no info here cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:59, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lectka enantioselective beta-lactam synthesis

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

So hell

[edit]
Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: move to .so hell

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Next Singaporean presidential election

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Mortazza

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Template:Puffery inline

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Template:Puffery inline

Marie Stopes Myanmar

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2024–25 Pilipinas Super League season

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

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

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Recent

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Recent

Big Bank Black

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Home Page Home Page

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Mario Tennis Ultra

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Buffsuki

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Mêlée (engine)

[edit]

Not mentioned in the article it points to. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 06:06, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Melee (later "Super melee") was a game mode where you could fight without strategic gameplay. Not seeing it as an "engine". Cremastra ‹ uc › 23:16, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Solider

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Battle of Ulithi

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Battle of Simara (1945)

[edit]

"Simara" not mentioned anywhere at target, and the battle described at the target took place in 1944. There is a battle described at Corcuera#Modern history to which this may refer, but the term isn't used there either. Unless there is evidence this is a term in use, the fact this is disambiguated and the base name Battle of Simara does not currently exist suggests deletion may be best. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:32, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was part of Leyte Gulf and took place in October 1944, not 1945. Mdewman6 (talk) 08:46, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dionian(ism)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Dionian(ism)

List of Billboard 200 number-one albums of 2025

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Amateur Home Page

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Amateur Home Page

Mian Page

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Mian Page

UEFA Euro 2028 squads

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Trump nominations for independent agencies

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Trump nominations for independent agencies

Longest Wikipedia Article

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Longest Wikipedia Article

Director-general of Justice and Home affairs

[edit]
Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Keep all-lowercase variant, Delete other two

Richard Wagner hates Jewish music

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Criticism of George Bush

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Plannet terror

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

UTF-2000

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#UTF-2000

The B

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Korean People's Revolutionary Army

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

German Medical Science

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

[edit]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    Have any of the WP:RSP described this as a pogrom in their own voice? — hako9 (talk) 11:41, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    @LaughingManiac How is calling it a pogrom bordering on antisemitism? MaskedSinger (talk) 14:56, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • Strong delete or redirect as suggested. Not a pogrom, though there was violence against Jews. Natg 19 (talk) 21:45, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:12, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you point me to where The Holocaust in the Netherlands covers actual pogroms? Jay 💬 16:33, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • DeleteThe Holocaust in the Netherlands does not appear to cover pogroms, and the use of this to 'November 2024 Amsterdam attacks' is a massive neutrality violation.
TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 17:05, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cite AV media

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 9#Cite AV media

Raleway

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Virus'

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Virose

[edit]

Portuguese for virus, or a uncommon adjective in English meaning poisonous or fetid. Delete? Plantdrew (talk) 01:52, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete. This link gets a hit once every three to four days, and if that's people looking for the English definition of virose then a soft redirect to wikt:virose could be appropriate, but if it's people looking for virus in Portuguese then it would better to delete as there's no particular affinity between the language and the topic. I'd lean delete as I'd rather not guess and search results has a Wiktionary link anyways. ― Synpath 15:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete no particular affinity with the Portuguese language --Lenticel (talk) 00:31, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
eh... sort of. it's actually portuguese for "virosis", but no one really cares about the difference. that aside, delete, as i still haven't found any evidence of brazil's existence, much less of viruses and virosises having any particular affinity with it or portugal cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:15, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Forked Decision Path Well, this all depends on why people are accessing this page every 3-4 days. If they're looking for a definition of the English term virose, then soft redirect to wikt:virose. If, on the other hand, they're looking for virus in Portugese, then delete due to WP:FORRED Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 04:56, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Soft Retarget per WP:FORRED. In the other case, Virose is an uncommon word and the users may be looking for a defintiion. Ca talk to me! 12:58, 7 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

South Georgia (version 2)

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Alex Shrub

[edit]

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 14:36, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 22:34, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fpoon

[edit]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • 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 () 15:34, 28 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    @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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • Keep or soft redirect to wikt:fpoon. Enix150 (talk) 03:14, 11 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 18:51, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep If foon exists as a humorous term for spork, then surely fpoon wouldn't be that much different? Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 05:58, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

FC8671

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Yoshi's Island series villains

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Fado (character)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 7#Fado (character)

Wokingham Town

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Izzle O' Wizzle

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Benzema 15

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Barotrauma and Wind turbines

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 7#Barotrauma and Wind turbines

WP:NOTWIKIA and WP:NOTFANDOM

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Headwaters Country Jam

[edit]

Not mentioned in target article or rest of Wikipedia. Delete. Retarget per below -1ctinus📝🗨 23:03, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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! 09:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Macchar

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

HAL America

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Argufying

[edit]

Looking at wikt:argufy, this term has more to do with disputes and disagreements than a series of sentences, statements, or propositions some of which are called premises and one is the conclusion. But I can't find an appropriate place to retarget it – apparently, we don't have an article on the general concept of disputes. (Disagreement (epistemology) and Objection (argument) are far too specific and theoretical, Dissent is only about disputes against authority, and Controversy is about a broad public state of affairs.) Another possibility is to target William Empson, who wrote Argufying: Essays on Literature and Culture (1987). jlwoodwa (talk) 06:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Idk, i just made it since it was a synonym. CheeseyHead (talk) 09:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Use Myanmar English

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Template:Country data Government of East Pakistan

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Main Line Railway Preservation

[edit]

Unnecessary capitalization of a two-sentence article that I had merged into a related article. MimirIsSmart (talk) 03:40, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Make Me Look Good

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Capture and replay testing

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Multivariant testing

[edit]

Term not at target; term is mentioned at Software testing tactics and A/B testing, but could seemingly refer to any of the topics at Multivariate testing (disambiguation). Not sure what's best here. Mdewman6 (talk) 02:31, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Positive and negative test cases

[edit]

Doesn't seem specific to software testing, and the term is not described there. A better target may be test case, but it still might be a bit WP:XYish. Negative test is a disambiguation page; positive test redirects to Medical test#Positive or negative. Not sure what's best here. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC) Note this redirect is the result of a single line stub that was immediately redirected. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:47, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reading through False positives and false negatives, which discusses tests that can be falsely negative or falsely positive, they would be a form of Binary classification in general. I was thinking in a DAB, but these concepts are very similar to each other, except for the software tests, which also adds Stress testing (software), linked in the negative test dab. LIrala (talk) 23:09, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See also Positive and negative predictive values. LIrala (talk) 23:10, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hallelujah night

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 7#Hallelujah night

List of killings by law enforcement officers in Sri Lanka

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Fox (channel)

[edit]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This would end up being a complicated index to create. Is anyone up for the challenge?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:38, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uncomfiness

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 7#Uncomfiness

Wading bird(s)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 7#Wading bird(s)

Maria, Hilfe der Christen

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 8#Maria, Hilfe der Christen

Luigi Circuit

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Coconut Mall

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Rising And Setting Of The Sun

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Kid named Finger

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

some regional honeys

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 6#some regional honeys

Club Penguin Locations

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Club penquin

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Gary the gadget guy

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for the Public Service, Employment and Women

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

4 (album) by matisse

[edit]
Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Redundant nomination

WP:DICK

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

2024 VP Debate

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Musha-gaeshi

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Musha-gaeshi

Zubon

[edit]

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)[reply]

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 23:41, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

on the topic of the relisting, the pre-blar diff was an unsourced stub. really, nothing worth considering in this discussion cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:21, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

3.1415926535…

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: No consensus.

The Communiqué

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Taiyu

[edit]

Retarget to Taiwanese Hokkien. While "Taiyu" (臺語 台语 táiyǔ) literally translates to Taiwanese language, it is almost unambiguously used to mean Taiwanese Hokkien in Chinese. In the English Wikipedia, it is also the name of a temple (Taiyū-ji) and a village (Taiyū, Akita), so delete could also be the best course of action. 三葉草 San Yeh Tsao 22:40, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fork Knife

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Forkknife

[edit]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 19:24, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

019

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Heavy vehicle

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 5#Heavy vehicle

Camión

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Lymbriciform

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 5#Lymbriciform

antiwhatever, helminth

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 5#antiwhatever, helminth

Worms, animals

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Bo Hagon

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Talk:FC Porto-Sporting CP rivalry

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Talk:F.C. Porto-Sporting CP rivalry

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Talk:F.C. Porto and Sporting C.P. rivalry

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

F.C. Porto and Sporting C.P. rivalry

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

F.C. Porto–Sporting CP rivalry

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

FC Porto-Sporting CP rivalry

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

F.C Porto and Sporting C.P. rivalry

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Specialization in bees

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 5#Specialization in bees

floor sugar

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Fireworks (TV Series)

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Maha Abdelrahman

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

BreakThrough News

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: refine to the BreakThrough News section

Stephen Hume

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Clarissa: Or the History of A Young

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

The History of a Young Girl

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

National Kabaddi Association

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 4#National Kabaddi Association

Personal weapon

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Mex-Mex

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 5#Mex-Mex

Oberon in fiction

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Sunny country

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

September 2017 bridge incident

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

⚭/equaric unicodes

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 4#⚭/equaric unicodes

Cilla Single

[edit]

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). [reply]

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)[reply]

  • Comment surprisingly (to me) this seems to be attested despite very limited online hits: Franklin, Benjamin; Smyth, Albert H. (1905). The writings of Benjamin Franklin. New York, London: Macmillan Co.; Macmillan & Co. OCLC 1158474884. Retrieved 2024-11-28. (on page 186). I'm very unsure how someone would end up searching for this term without knowing it was a pseudonym of Franklin's however.
  • This may be added to the target at the "Success as an author" section where it says He frequently wrote under pseudonyms. If we have 3 or 4 names, Cilla Single can be mentioned alongwith them. Jay 💬 06:21, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Franklin (swim coach)

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2024 AP Poll

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 4#2024 AP Poll

Unmentioned Pikmin 2 caves

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • No pages currently link to Hole of Heroes; it received 4 page views in the 90 days before the RFD opened.
  • No pages currently link to Glutton's Kitchen; it received 3 page views in the 90 days before the RFD opened.
  • No pages currently link to Submerged Castle; it received 2 page views in the 90 days before the RFD opened.
Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 04:47, 6 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DuPage 3

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Thank Goodness

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 4#Thank Goodness

Athletic Field (Seattle)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 4#Athletic Field (Seattle)

Cicindela redirects

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 3#Cicindela redirects

Trump Won

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 3#Trump Won

Paw, Paw

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 3#Paw, Paw

Easy and cheap

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

WP:INTERNETPROCTOL

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy delete per G7

MeTV Plus

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Swing the hairy ones

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

...Re

[edit]

...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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • (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)[reply]
Comment –We shouldn't be moving a page based purely on an RfD discussion that goes against a previous RM. If people want the film moved to this title, an RM should be started. Cremastra ‹ uc › 01:49, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CTTOI

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 8#CTTOI

Andrew Gower (programmer)

[edit]
Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Withdraw. [non-admin closure. Will change redirect target to Andrew Gower (disambiguation) per discussion at WT:VG and recommendation of Axem Titanium, see final comment.]

Trim level

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Adimo

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 4#Adimo

Giant ground sloth

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Tradiční Lovecký salám

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Keep per L.tak's changes. Thanks. Jay 💬 07:53, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
corrected the page now in line with what I stated. Thanks for bringing the oversight to my attention. L.tak (talk) 22:36, 8 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mortazza

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Mortazza

Openptail g

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jewish pogroms in Amsterdam

[edit]

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

Struck per WP:ARBPIA's extendedconfirmed restriction. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 22:22, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
The vast majority of these sources are not calling it a pogrom in their own voice and are simply quoting people describing the event as such, or just mention it in the headline (WP:HEADLINES). The only sources that are asserting it was a pogrom are 6: Townhall (WP:MREL), Legal insurrection (not a RS, looks like a glorified blog), Israel National News (not a RS, it's an Israeli Zionist media network), NYSun (a conservative news website known for dishonest reporting), a blog from ToI (WP:NEWSBLOG) and finally, and unsurprisingly, Jpost (not precisely known for fact checking and currently under discussion re: their reliability). - Ïvana (talk) 02:10, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Smallangryplanet (talk) 16:51, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

LGBT in Chile

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Next Singaporean presidential election

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Next Singaporean presidential election

Atlantoöccipital articulations

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

Ap (ghost)

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Big Bank Black

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Big Bank Black

The Scream (Greek TV miniseries)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 4#The Scream (Greek TV miniseries)

Under-16 and Under-17 teams

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2026 NFL team redirects

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Recent

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Recent

Template:NWHL profile

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

King Edwards

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

AR-M100390

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Bus Testing and Research Center

[edit]

Quite ambiguous title not discussed at target. Cremastra ‹ uc › 15:35, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article does discuss the Altoona Bus Testing and Research Center, which is a part of the Pennsylvania Transportation Institute which is frequently mentioned in articles discussing public transit. Perhaps it'd be better to redirect from Altoona Bus Testing and Research Center. 42-BRT (talk) 05:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that would be unambiguous. Cremastra ‹ uc › 01:27, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Puffery inline

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Template:Puffery inline

Illustrative aid

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

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

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Field hockey at the 2028 Summer Olympics – Women's tournament

Algeria national under-16 and under-17 basketball team

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Adult Swim (Latin American TV channel).

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2024–25 Pilipinas Super League season

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#2024–25 Pilipinas Super League season

Marie Stopes Myanmar

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Marie Stopes Myanmar

Taxi to Heaven

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

Ultrajectine Communion

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Mate tea (drink)

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

2025 Dutch general election

[edit]

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

  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Kikurage

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

MOS:JEW

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

A Night

[edit]

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)[reply]

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).
[32] RachelTensions (talk) 07:01, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Male protagonist bingo

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

RubRub

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Shen an calhar

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Flag of North Yemen

[edit]

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

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
Under which title is the article? Jay 💬 16:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ハンマーブロス

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

PKS 1402-012

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • Galaxybeing created the article in June and BLARd it in September as non-notable. Delete considering this as a de facto WP:G7, as the most siginificant contributor who decided that the article should no longer be there. Also, remove the mention of it from the target, since it won't be a bluelink, and should not be a redlink or an unlinked entry, and remove it from {{Virgo (constellation)}} as well. Jay 💬 15:47, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ro (antigen)

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Indy HeroClix (heroclix)

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Chingisid

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]

Kentuchy

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#凧

Lu Tianna

[edit]

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

  • 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)[reply]
    • 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)[reply]
  • 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" [33][34][35]. 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. Sun8908Talk 14:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

FC Türkiye II

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Enteractive

[edit]
Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete Nobody wants to keep this as is, there's some movement to retarget to the disambiguation, but even there deletion is prefered and I have to close as one or the other

September 31

[edit]

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

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

It seems the current target page talk wasn't notified. Web-julio (talk) 01:44, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
  • 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: [36] ✴️IcarusThe Astrologer✴️ 03:53, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

List of Chalcolithic cultures of China

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Karhusaari (island)

[edit]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Matsubara dialect

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Nueva Hampshire

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Nueva Hampshire

Turkish Turkish

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: No consensus

Putting wedge

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Tata (Persian King)

[edit]

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

Delete per nom. The Persians haven't been created as separate ethnicity at that time. Ahri Boy (talk) 00:26, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
  • Delete as misleading per the abovementioned findings --Lenticel (talk) 01:35, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    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)[reply]
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).[reply]
  • Delete, the target is simply not a Persian king. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:19, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv converseedits 14:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Harapanahalli railway station

[edit]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Linjian

[edit]

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)[reply]

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

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

サイゴン

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Keep No actual argument to change anything has survived the sockstrike.

Mongola

[edit]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

History of the United States (2008–2024)

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Vendamonia

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Californian city redirects

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jamie Boo Birse

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Google Currents (2011–present)

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Kingite

[edit]

Ambiguous and not explained at target. (Soft) retarget to wikt:kingite? Cremastra ‹ uc › 14:09, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Fay Spaniel

[edit]

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

  • Delete Per nom. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ () 16:06, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Lanyard class

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Great Depression in the Middle East

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Asmodel

[edit]
Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Restore and send to AfD

GGKEY

[edit]

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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).[reply]
  • Delete per IP. I disagree with Rich Farmbrough entirely - we should have redirects only if they are mentioned at the target, and any exceptions to that rule are traps that it's our duty to defang as we come across them. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:26, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Pppery et al. The fact that this redirect was nominated by a sock is irrelevant. Nobody will find this useful if it isn't mentioned anywhere, and we don't want to leave readers asking themselves what this means. CycloneYoris talk! 07:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 1#Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

Ted, Ned and Ed

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Joseph Stalin's death conspiracy Theories

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cite AV media

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 1#Cite AV media

Five Finger Discount (That's So Raven episode)

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Raleway

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 1#Raleway

So hell

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#So hell

Arthur J. May

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Hent

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Just one more thing

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Clock/calendar

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    ...and all of that is explained at Time#Measurement. -- Tavix (talk) 16:41, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Time#Measurement per Tavix. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:02, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:HEAVY

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Black Mesa Golem Ape

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

The Crumbles (illness)

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wario 4

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Chimneybot hat

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Zubon

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 28#Zubon

Richard Doty

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Furry Shadaya

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: soft delete

Furry Happy Monsters

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: soft delete

Forkknife

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 28#Forkknife

Fork Knife

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 28#Fork Knife

Henry the Hermit

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: soft delete

Alex Shrub

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 30#Alex Shrub

unmentioned suikoden characters (episode 1: a-h)

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
Humphrey Mintz too has mention. Jay 💬 16:56, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
nice-a cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:57, 14 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Moseley tea service

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Moseley tea service

Kattie

[edit]
Disambiguate Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Musha-gaeshi

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 28#Musha-gaeshi

Foot taboo

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ellen feiss

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Ellen feiss

Paul Feiss

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Adult contemporary progressive death metal

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

FC8671

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 30#FC8671

2.4-dihydroxybenzoic acid

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Sontochin

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

SN-7619

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#SN-7619

Template:Use Myanmar English

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 30#Template:Use Myanmar English

Criticism of Donald Trump

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Criticism of Donald Trump

Baby gaetz

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Zhuhui Stadium

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

4 (album) by matisse

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy keep

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedily deleted
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Akari Date

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

xxps

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Criticism of object-oriented programming

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 2#Criticism of object-oriented programming

Helstinki

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Cricoarytenoid

[edit]
Disambiguate Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Disambiguate

James J. Finn

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Criticism of George Bush

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 1#Criticism of George Bush

Fisking

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Retarget to Glossary of blogging#Fisking

Black Myth: Waking

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Plannet terror

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 1#Plannet terror

Web interfaces

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Cute number

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Work is an honor

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Northern countries

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Christmas in the United States, for children of the baby boom era

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete all The article in the history was written by a banned sockpuppet, so I don't think we need to give it much weight.

Here's how Bernie can still win

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Neurospicy

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Jackask

[edit]

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)[reply]

: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). [reply]

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)[reply]

September 2017 bridge incident

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#September 2017 bridge incident

Unietd States

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Canadaa

[edit]

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). [reply]

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)[reply]

Then wouldn't it target Canada (disambiguation) ? -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:33, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

美利坚合众国

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Crown grant

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Comprehensive strategic partnership

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

⚭/equaric unicodes

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#⚭/equaric unicodes

Perplexing Pool

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ernest McGillicuddy

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

BO⅂ICE

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted

Le4and6

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Shak.

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: No consensus

Bill Shakespeare

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

A Night

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy keep

A Child's Garden of Poetry

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Genoicide

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Benjamin Franklin (swim coach)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#Benjamin Franklin (swim coach)

Unmentioned Pikmin 2 caves

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#Unmentioned Pikmin 2 caves

A little temporary security

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cilla Single

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#Cilla Single

A Sam

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy keep

Fabian'’s lizard

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Dr A

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Wonderful; A song from Wicked

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Thank Goodness

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#Thank Goodness

Eytp

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Eypt

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Retarget to EyePoint Pharmaceuticals

Egpyt

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

A .R . EGYPT

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

DuPage 3

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 27#DuPage 3

List of Neverwinter Nights characters

[edit]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]
  • 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 [38] 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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Since when do redirects need sources? Jclemens (talk) 23:58, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Well, since COMMONSENSE can satisfy V, then, V's not really an issue, is it? Jclemens (talk) 00:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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 [39] or [40]. 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)[reply]
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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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)[reply]
@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)[reply]
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 [41]. 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)[reply]
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)[reply]
(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)[reply]
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)[reply]
Also, pinging Mark viking, who had suggested the redirect back at the AfD. Daranios (talk) 19:40, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It was the AfD which made this a redirect in the first place. Daranios (talk) 10:54, 7 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • Comment - it appears no one wants to close this as it can't be relisted, and has 4 keeps and 4 deletes. I !voted so can't close it, but I would point out that the keep !votes were all obtained in the first 24 hours or so of listing, and that all delete !votes (other than the nom.) followed later. Also that a fifth keep was struck after engagement in the discussion. Discussions are not a vote, and a straight vote count may be giving an erroneous impression of this one. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 13:01, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm surprised this is still going on a month later. I still feel we would be best served to have the content moved back and kept, but if consensus is going to go to delete, then the old content is still WP:PRESERVED in the user page that I originally noted above. BOZ (talk) 13:52, 4 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Solidarity, Ecology, Left Alternative

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Greater Luxembourg

[edit]
Disambiguate Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Disambiguate Greater Luxembourg, No Consensus on the others

Handwriting expert

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Retarget to questioned document examination

Dana Fuller

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Heathe N. Craig Joint Theater Hospital

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: No consensus

Ra'ad 1

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Ra'ad 1

Username policy

[edit]

Recently-created cross-namespace redirect. C F A 💬 20:38, 12 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Comment: I have added User name policy to this discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 15:41, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]

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)[reply]

  • 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)[reply]
  • Weak keep, per Tamzin. It is an entry-level thing. And as Legoktm says, it could be confusing. But perhaps the search prompt should be something like "Username policy (Wikipedia)", in which case this one should be retargeted as suggested. BucketOfSquirrels (talk) 12:25, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Tamzin et al. I don't feel it has plausible uses outside of Wikipedia space. JayCubby 17:15, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gamma Squeeze

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Stars War

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Radio-Canada

[edit]
Disambiguate Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Cite web

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Göbenä

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Bighead octopus,

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

True positive

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Ap (ghost)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Ap (ghost)

Atlantoöccipital articulations

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Atlantoöccipital articulations

Hebed

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted

Tucker Turner

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Jewish pogrom in Amsterdam

Ted, Ned and Ed

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Ted, Ned and Ed

Ultrajectine

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: soft retarget

Joseph Stalin's death conspiracy Theories

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Joseph Stalin's death conspiracy Theories

Cite AV media

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Cite AV media

Goolge book

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Googlw

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

GGKEY

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#GGKEY

Winkepedia

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Rising And Setting Of The Sun

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Rising And Setting Of The Sun

Miencraft

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Capitol protest

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Capitol protest

"SD"

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Headwaters Country Jam

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Headwaters Country Jam

2007 offseason

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Nueva Hampshire

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Nueva Hampshire

Turkish Turkish

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Turkish Turkish

Putting wedge

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Putting wedge

Tata (Persian King)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Tata (Persian King)

Khaidi No. 150 (soudtrack)

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv converseedits 14:25, 15 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nail You Down

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Justin Bieber dead

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedily deleted by Rsjaffe per WP:G3

W i k i p e d i a

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Zelda: The Wand of Gannon

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Harapanahalli railway station

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Harapanahalli railway station

2001 attacks

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Linjian

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Linjian

ベトナム系オーストラリア人

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

サイゴン

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#サイゴン

Rihanna Death

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedily deleted by Asilvering per WP:G3

人身売買

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

アメリカ合衆国国務省

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Teletubbies characters)

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Nueva York (desambiguación)

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Radiac detector

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: procedural keep

Fishers Island, New York (old edit history)

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

The Licensing Letter

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Racial violence

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 22#Racial violence

Blind tasting

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Pauletta Brupbakher

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Stephoscope

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Mongola

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#Mongola

History of the United States (2008–2024)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#History of the United States (2008–2024)

Talk:Lost (2004 TV series)/Archive 1

[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
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)[reply]

Wikipedia:OPENLETTER

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

History of the United States (2008–2024)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#History of the United States (2008–2024)

Mongola

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#Mongola

Waliugi

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Counrty

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Kentuchy

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 14#Kentuchy

Reccomend

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Gardern

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Stephoscope

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#Stephoscope

Monterrey La Raza (current)

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:Relable sources

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:AUTOCONFIMRED

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Pauletta Brupbakher

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#Pauletta Brupbakher

Racially motivated violence

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#Racially motivated violence

Blind tasting

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#Blind tasting

FC Türkiye II

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 14#FC Türkiye II

Show Business (TV series)

[edit]
Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: resolved

Love Me (TV series)

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

Wikipedia:Picture turorial

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

It's time to d-d-d-d-duel

[edit]

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)[reply]

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 [42], 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)[reply]
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)[reply]
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: [43]. 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)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]
    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)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (uc) 14:28, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Delete per nom. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 07:49, 15 November 2024 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix (talk) 21:59, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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)[reply]

Conerve

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Cowboy Luttrell

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 10#Cowboy Luttrell

April 31

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 7#April 31

Ambiguous "planet 3" redirects

[edit]
No consensus Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Her Royal Hotness

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Site-specific Comedy Opera

[edit]
Delete 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

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 24#2025 Dutch general election

三州府

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 December 7#三州府

The Licensing Letter

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 15#The Licensing Letter

Żwaniec

[edit]
Keep Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Keep

Solidarity, Ecology, Left Alternative

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 November 17#Solidarity, Ecology, Left Alternative

Manush Shah

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete