Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion
This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators. This notice will automatically hide itself when the backlog is cleared. |
Skip to table of contents · Skip to current discussions · · Archives |
Deletion discussions |
---|
|
Articles |
Templates and modules |
Files |
Categories |
Redirects |
Miscellany |
Speedy deletion |
Proposed deletion |
V | Feb | Mar | Apr | May | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 17 | 16 | 33 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 10 | 52 | 62 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 7 |
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 what should be 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:
- Wikipedia:Redirect – what redirects are, why they exist, and how they are used.
- Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion – which pages can be deleted without discussion; in particular the "General" and "Redirects" sections.
- Wikipedia:Deletion policy – how we delete things by consensus.
- Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – guidelines on discussion format and shorthand.
The guiding principles of RfD[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]
This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Redirect/Deletion reasons. (edit | history) |
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):
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam. (Speedy deletion criterion G11 may apply.)
- The redirect makes no sense, such as redirecting "Apple" to "Orange". (Speedy deletion criterion G1 may apply.)
- 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, are an exception to this rule. (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:.)
- 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.
- 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.)
- 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. - 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:
- 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.
- 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 the article texts 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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:
- Articles that are created using non-neutral titles are routinely moved to a new neutral title, which leaves behind the old non-neutral title as a working redirect (e.g. Climategate → Climatic Research Unit email controversy).
- 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).
- 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
| ||
STEP II. | List the entry on RfD.
Click here to edit the section of RfD for today's entries.
| ||
STEP III. | Notify users.
It is generally considered good practice to notify the creator and main contributors of the redirect(s) that you nominate. 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.
If this page has been recently modified, it may not reflect the most recent changes. Please purge this page to view the most recent changes. |
Current list[edit]
May 21[edit]
'Umar ibn Sahlan as-Sawi[edit]
- 'Umar ibn Sahlan as-Sawi → Zayn al-Din Omar Savaji (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I am not good at Islamic naming or there about but I can find any clue with this particular redirect. It is also a near close and unlikely when searched on web browsers. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 16:16, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Potassium heptafluoroniobate[edit]
- Potassium heptafluoroniobate → Potassium heptafluorotantalate (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Target does not mention this other chemical. It's been 8 years since redirect was created as a temp placeholder for an article. No prejudice against someone actually writing it at any time. DMacks (talk) 15:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Template:Edit-Protected[edit]
- Template:Edit-Protected → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Protected edit request → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Edit Request → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Edit protected → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Edit Protected → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Edit locked → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Edit-protected → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Protected edit → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Edit protect → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Editprotected → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Requestedit → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Edit requested → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Changerequest → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Editprotect → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:EditProtected → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Editrequested → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Editrequest → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Requested edit → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Requested Edit → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Reqedit → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Req edit → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Request Edit → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:Edit request → Template:Edit fully-protected (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
These templates were all created before other editing protections were anything other than semiprot was available, but are now vaguely titled and (as far as I can tell) no longer used to actually request edits to fully-protected pages (I have yet to see one after about 2015). I retargeted these redirects to the dab template {{request edit}} and was in the process of updating usage but the action was contested, which is why we're here. I will of course fix extant uses if this goes through. (please ping on reply) Primefac (talk) 11:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Just noting that I discovered this RfD through using one of these redirects to request an edit. I know what {{Edit fully-protected}} is though. I don't think these redirects being changed will confuse anybody, unless maybe they're so ancient that they don't know there's multiple protection levels yet. Retarget. Snowmanonahoe (talk ·' contribs · typos) 11:48, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I have no strong opinion on what should happen here, but the premise of this nom is slightly faulty; When "Editprotected (the original title of the "Edit fully protected" template) was created in January 2006, semi-protection had been introduced the previous month. The separate semi-protection template was created in July 2008. Graham87 (talk) 13:08, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Meh probably keep all these -- edit requests are an important check on the protection system; unless there is something actually wrong leaving all these plausible typo's isn't something I'm worried about. — xaosflux Talk 13:14, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Xaosflux, I'm not looking to delete them, I'm looking to replace and retarget them. Primefac (talk) 14:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm a bit lost then - for example Template:Editrequest goes to Template:Edit fully-protected (and has since 2017); if someone uses it it will get the edit request open -- you want to change it to Template:Request edit which will not enqueue the edit for review, but put more work on the requester? I'm not sure that is going to help get the edit reviewed better. — xaosflux Talk 14:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- If someone uses the wrong template, do we not encourage them to use the correct template? (alternately, if there is a "better" template, should we not tell them it exists?) When {{request edit}} was moved to {{edit COI}} there was a period of transition where folks were using the wrong template, but that has stopped and now the latter template is properly used by folks with a COI (most of the time). Someone asking for an "edit request" should be informed that there are multiple types of edit request; after all, we regularly change {{adminhelp}} into {{helpme}} when the request does not require and admin, and I have on multiple occasions changed a {{TPER}} into an {{EPER}} when the protection level was marked incorrectly. We should have names for templates that reflect what they do (that's why dabs existin the first place), and an "edit request" template doesn't reflect what it does. Primefac (talk) 14:28, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm a bit lost then - for example Template:Editrequest goes to Template:Edit fully-protected (and has since 2017); if someone uses it it will get the edit request open -- you want to change it to Template:Request edit which will not enqueue the edit for review, but put more work on the requester? I'm not sure that is going to help get the edit reviewed better. — xaosflux Talk 14:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Xaosflux, I'm not looking to delete them, I'm looking to replace and retarget them. Primefac (talk) 14:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all Since the target template autodetects the protection level which template used is really a distinctio without a difference. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Mohamed ben Issa[edit]
Shinichi Tanaka (rugby)[edit]
- Shinichi Tanaka (rugby) → Mamiko Tanaka (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Suggest deleting per WP:RETURNTORED. Only linked to from its own target. Hameltion (talk | contribs) 02:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - per nom, this would be a good application of redlinking to encourage article creation and tell people that we don't currently have information on this person. Fieari (talk) 07:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete this circular redirect as per WP:REDLINK. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 09:43, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Windows 8.2[edit]
- Windows 8.2 → Windows 10 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Windows 8.2 does not exist, and does not refer to Windows 10. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 17:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per previous RfD. I know it was 9 years ago and Wikipedia:Consensus can change, but the arguments made back then are still convincing. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 18:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:19, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per previous RfD listed above. I also agree with the arguments made in said previous RfD. Fieari (talk) 07:38, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete unless mentioned: I'm not convinced. It's true that Windows 10 is the next major version release to come out after 8.1, but we don't redirect Windows XP SP 4 to Windows Vista. As for the argument that Threshold (the dev name for Win 10) was referred to in the press as 8.2 before it was referred to as Windows 10... That should really be mentioned in the article (presumably in the sections Windows 10#Development or Windows 10#Announcement) if we're going to redirect mentions of Windows 8.2 here. If we're going to keep this redirect, someone should go into the article and add a mention to it. At the very least it should be hatnoted, the way "Windows 9" is hatnoted in Windows 10#Announcement-- or perhaps added to the Windows 9 hatnote? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 09:41, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
May 20[edit]
Kallar(caste)[edit]
- Kallar(caste) → Kallar (caste) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Unnecessary redirect with no space before a parenthetical disambiguation that has only minor page history, no incoming links from mainspace, and where a page with an otherwise identical but correctly spaced disambiguator exists, speedy contested by User:Rosguill for having too many pageviews; while that is not an exception to WP:X3, I have no problem bringing this here. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:B02F:7668:BB5B:365 (talk) 23:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Jason Carter(fiddler)[edit]
- Jason Carter(fiddler) → Jason Carter (fiddler) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
X3 eligible redirect with significant edit history as a result of a histswap. Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 23:25, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I decided to let this one get a discussion specifically because the decision at the time was to hist-swap rather than move over and that might just have been a deliberate action for a reason. However the content was an just an old microstub moved aside to make way for acceptance of a draft, so not inherently substantive. If someone thinks this should still be speediable go ahead I won't contest it, but there was just enough doubt for me to rethink this one and err on the side of caution. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:B02F:7668:BB5B:365 (talk) 23:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Stressed out[edit]
- Stressed out → Stressed Out (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This redirect has targeted Psychological stress, Stressed Out (disambiguation) and Stressed Out, the Twenty One Pilots song. Its was pointing to the DAB from 2019 until last month and I changed it back to the DAB today. In terms of the discussions it seems there is a consensus that the Twenty One Pilots song is primary for the title case version per WP:DIFFCAPS, see discussions at Talk:Stressed Out and an older one at Talk:Stressed Out (A Tribe Called Quest song)#Requested move 26 November 2015. In terms of Psychological stress I understand we aren't a dictionary but at the same time it could be argued that its safest to disambiguate the lower case. In terms of the options, option A, target Twenty One Pilots song, option B, target DAB, option C, target Psychological stress. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:31, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- B either the generic meaning or Twenty One Pilots song could be primary so its probably best to have no primary topic. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Option A, revert back to Stressed Out. This is the primary topic, and was the target of the Stressed out redirect until an undiscussed edit by User:Crouch, Swale in 2019.[1] Previous RMs discussing Stressed Out (Twenty One Pilots song) and Stressed Out (A Tribe Called Quest song) are not relevant to the lowercase Stressed out. I see no evidence for DIFFCAPS here; all the articles at the Stressed Out (disambiguation) dabpage are spelled with both capital letters. 162 etc. (talk) 22:18, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Flamethrower(song)[edit]
- Flamethrower(song) → Flamethrower (song) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Unecessary redirect with no space before a parenthetical disambiguation that has only minor page history, no incoming links from mainspace, and where a page with an otherwise identical but correctly spaced disambiguator exists, speedy contested by User:Rosguill for having too many pageviews; while that is not an exception to WP:X3, I have no problem bringing this here. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:DC21:22F4:5B2A:90E7 (talk) 15:52, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete it was at this title for less than a day in 2015. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Might as well nominate 365(number), 24th Mixed Brigade(Imperial Japanese Army), and Moon of the Spider(novel) for deletion too. 104.7.152.180 (talk) 23:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
F-Indy[edit]
- F-Indy → IndyCar (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Formula Indy → IndyCar Series (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete; besides being unused (because nobody calls Indy car racing by those terms), they are ambiguous, and could mean IndyCar, IndyCar Series, or American open-wheel car racing. RegalZ8790 (talk) 21:05, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 03:58, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural, not properly tagged.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:38, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I've seen Euro-press call it Formula Indy, so it is a misnomer. {{R from incorrect name}} Such as [2] -- 65.92.244.237 (talk) 04:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per European misconceptions on the name -- 65.92.244.237 (talk) 04:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- What is the utility of a redirect that facilitates a misconception? RegalZ8790 (talk) 04:07, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- wP:RKEEP IT gets users where they want to go so is a viable {{R from search term}} -- we have these tags, so obviously, they are being used. -- 65.92.244.237 (talk) 20:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- What is the utility of a redirect that facilitates a misconception? RegalZ8790 (talk) 04:07, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per European misconceptions on the name -- 65.92.244.237 (talk) 04:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:38, 20 May 2024 (UTC)- Comment - @65.92.244.237 has illustrated that Formula Indy may be a viable search term. Is there any rationale for F-Indy? RegalZ8790 (talk) 00:27, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Get out[edit]
I can see that the redirect target has been changed a couple times recently, so I'm going to bring this to discussion rather than just change it again without consensus. I think this should be retargeted to Get Out, the undisambiguated film article (as was decided with significant support in 2017) and be tagged as {{R from miscapitalization}}. If we accept that Get Out is PTOPIC (which, of course, I support) then it would make more sense that someone typing those precise words, regardless of capitalization, should be directed to that article. It's where I was expecting to be taken just now when I encountered the dab page instead. Seems pretty cut-and-dry to me. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:08, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:DIFFCAPS, there are several lower case uses and the film is linked at the top of the DAB page. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:31, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget: per WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, which it clearly is. None of the other works mentioned on Get Out (disambiguation are remotely as notable as the film, as is reflected in the film being linked at the top of the disambiguation page. Pluma (talk) 03:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
⚔[edit]
A better target for this redirect would be Crossed swords since the title of this page matches what the glyph depicts and the glyph is discussed at this page. The current target brings no information about it at all. --TadejM my talk 10:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
OpposeRedirecting to a disambiguation page is never a good idea. The proposed change to a disambiguation page will give no information at all, it is in fact a link to nowhere. The Banner talk 11:13, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per nom, as it is mentioned at the proposed target but not the current one. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Killed in action as stated on the disambiguation page. The Banner talk 18:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete ⚔ is too undefined of a character to specifically refer to one article. I notice that ⚔️&redirect=no, which shows up as the same character when I type it into this text box but as a different once when I enter it in the search bar, redirects to battle, which could also be a valid interpretation of the symbol. ⚔ could also justifiably redirect to swordfight or crossed swords or conflict or any other number of articles. Pluma (talk) 04:03, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Crossed swords, which expressly has this symbol as one of its entries, thus giving the name to this emoji character and the location of it in the unicode block, which is all the information we have on this glyph. I would also like to reply to the comment above that "redirecting to a disambiguation page is never a good idea"... that statement is patently false. We redirect to disambiguation pages all the time, it is very frequently a good idea, as disambiguation pages are often the best way to direct the user to the information they want in the fastest way possible. Fieari (talk) 07:36, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
May 19[edit]
Heidi Strobel[edit]
- Heidi Strobel → Cole Hamels (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Inappropriate redirect. Nothing at the target page gives any information about this subject aside from the fact that they're married. Bgsu98 (Talk) 19:52, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep What makes that inappropriate? This fits the purpose of a redirect. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as this is an {{R from merge}}. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:30, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- I think that she is more notable for being a survivor contestant than as Hamels wife.. suggest retargeting to Survivor: The Amazon. The Hamels page doesn't even mention her time on the show. Spanneraol (talk) 21:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Cole Hamels § Family describes her personal life, whereas Survivor: The Amazon describes her appearance in one TV series. That said, I would support adding a {{redirect}} tag at the top of the "Family" section with a link to Survivor: The Amazon. Additionally, {{R from person}} should be changed to {{R from spouse}}. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Neal Stephenson books[edit]
- Neal Stephenson/Snow Crash → Snow Crash (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Neal Stephenson/Cryptonomicon → Cryptonomicon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Neal Stephenson/In the Beginning → In the Beginning... Was the Command Line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Neal Stephenson/The Big U → The Big U (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Neal Stephenson/Zodiac → Zodiac (novel) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete. These were created over 20 years ago, very early in Wikipedia's history, possibly when article titling was done differently. There is no substantial history on any of them. Some of them were originally the pages for the book before a move, and some were created as redirects. Apart from that creation/move, there are only some bot/maintenance edits. None of the redirects have any incoming links except for the Cryptonomicon one, which has userspace links on a list of redirects that some user is maintaining. --superioridad (discusión) 18:07, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:RFD#K4, which advises that
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.
. - Eureka Lott 20:36, 19 May 2024 (UTC) - Keep as per Eureka. While there is no history on the links themselves, they themselves are history. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 09:47, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Cedar Ridge Middle School[edit]
- Cedar Ridge Middle School → Decatur City Schools (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete for no mention at the target, and therefore confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- This is a former article that was WP:BLARed in 2014 per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES. The mention in the target article was removed in 2019 and it's no longer listed on the school district's website, because it was renamed. A mention could be added back to the target article, and the school is mentioned at Austin High School (Alabama). A different school of the same name is mentioned Oregon Trail School District, but I don't know if that's enough to justify disambiguation. - Eureka Lott 19:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- The school is listed at the target article in the listing of middle schools. That's enough for the redirect. 4.37.252.50 (talk) 01:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Added the previous name mention at the target. Jay 💬 09:10, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate: to Decatur City Schools and Oregon Trail School District as neither appears to be the PTOPIC. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Hyperstar[edit]
- Hyperstar → Metallicity#Stars (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Hyperstars → Stellar population#Population III stars (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at target. For the former, note that Iran Hyper Star also appears to be written without a space on the logo. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:13, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom for now. Seems to be a camera accessory and also a name for a series of hypermarkets according to GSearch. --Lenticel (talk) 01:59, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Only mention in published research as a type of star is this, which is not even about metallicity but about a pathway for black hole formation. And the article it cites doesn't actually use this term. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget Hyperstar to Carrefour, Delete the plural. Jay 💬 15:20, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:GREENGABLES[edit]
- Wikipedia:GREENGABLES → Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Same reason as Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_May_1#Wikipedia:LITTLEORPHAN; this was created at the same time as that redirect. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:94B3:D441:1507:1AE8 (talk) 15:02, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: the basis for that nomination seems to have been that the redirect target was confusing(?). What alternate target do you think exists for 'green gables'? jp×g🗯️ 18:53, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
-
- @Waylon111: The inside joke is based on the novel Anne of Green Gables. Lenticel (talk) 00:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as a confusing inside joke at best. --Lenticel (talk) 00:22, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as harmless and no better target, also WP:FUNPOLICE. This isn't a mainspace redirect, there's no need to be so serious. Fieari (talk) 05:24, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Fieari. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 02:37, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Leo Trotskij[edit]
- Leo Trotskij → Leon Trotsky (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
"Trotskij" appears to be the spelling of Trotsky's name in various North Germanic languages and this spelling isn't used in the article. The mention in the article was removed as part of another RfD for Lev Trotskij that was deleted. Delete this as well. Jay 💬 19:34, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Some romanizations of Russian do use ⟨ij⟩ for the letter-combination ⟨ий⟩. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:27, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per @LaundryPizza03. 48JCL (talk) 17:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and per precedent at the linked RfD. No use in keeping unless a mention is re-added to the target. CycloneYoris talk! 01:36, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:06, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: per my rationale at the previous RfD. There's no evidence that this Romanization is used for Trotsky. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:53, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Turing recognizable[edit]
- Turing recognizable → Recursively enumerable language (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Turing-recognizable → Recursively enumerable language (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Turing-recognizable language → Recursively enumerable language (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I think this should redirect to the more general notion of Computably enumerable set. (When this discussion is closed, a Turing-recognizable redirect should be created with the same target.) 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:02, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- You may want to treat the redirect Turing-recognizable language the same way. –jacobolus (t) 20:05, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- ...Or you could just create Turing-recognizable and add it to this nomination ... like I just did... Steel1943 (talk) 20:52, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget the first two to Computably enumerable set as they are not about languages specifically, but keep Turing-recognizable language as it is. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 14:47, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Latin peoples[edit]
History indicates that this used to be a problematic article that was then redirected to Italic peoples, then to Romance-speaking world which was relatively recently deleted (2023), and now re-created as a redirect to Latins by a new user. This should be discussed before we let it stay. Joy (talk) 13:19, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'd argue that Latin people or Latin peoples can be rather vague. It's been seen used colloquially just to mean "Latin Americans" and also been used in European contexts whether for present day Romance-speaking groups or for historical populations like the Italic Latins of antiquity. Since the article Latins covers broadly all "people-related" uses of this term since antiquity it seems like a good fit for a redirect. Evaporation123 (talk) 01:31, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Evaporation123, broad target fitting for a broad redirect. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 14:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:01, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Evil Mario[edit]
could also be referring to bowser jr., doopliss, or mario himself in earlier continuities. also arguably not fitting in the first place after... his debut, but that's besides the point cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:19, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: I believe "Evil Mario" is pretty synonymous with Wario in the same way Waluigi is with Luigi. Note that Evil Luigi also exists as a redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- granted, there is that one literal evil luigi in super paper mario... cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:05, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom as it could easily mean several other different entities and characters, not just Wario. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:32, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Overly vague, and could conceivably refer to numerous different characters. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:34, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Very ambiguous. Okmrman (talk) 04:13, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Also bundle Evil Luigi along with this discussion Okmrman (talk) 04:16, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:40, 4 May 2024 (UTC)- Keep, while not explicitly called "evil Mario", Wario is designed as his evil counterpart, and is the most plausible target for "evil Mario" compared to various Mario games antagonists. Same for evil Luigi (Waluigi). Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 14:43, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as vague, multiple "evil Mario" target possibilities exist and Wario does not equal Mario. If anything I'd expect this to go to a Mario (red hat) related article or respective list of characters, as no mention of "Evil Mario" exists at the current target for Wario. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:41, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)- on second thought, i implied a suggestion for a dab, but it would be better to delete, since none of the possible targets are explicitly "evil marios" in the same way that mr. l (the l stands for "winner") is an evil luigi
- amd wario has gone farther and farther from being a caricature of mario, and went from outright evil to "mostly good, but only because that's more profitable"
- unless waluigi is on screen, in which case he's just an asshole cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:16, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: The article discusses Wario as an evil version of Mario, he's colloquially referred to that way, and this is the most plausible redirect. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:57, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- The delete !votes claim that the term "Evil Mario" is vague because there are other possible targets, but they have not provided examples of those possible targets. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- i mentioned doopliss and bowser jr. before, so i can understand them not mentioning it to avoid redundancy, but that could also apply to shadoo (then again, shadoo copies 4 people, so he's as much of an evil mario as he's a debatably slightly more evil bowser) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:37, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- The delete !votes claim that the term "Evil Mario" is vague because there are other possible targets, but they have not provided examples of those possible targets. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Baak film redirects[edit]
- Baak (Telugu film) → Aranmanai 4 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Baakghost → Aranmanai 4 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Both of these redirects have no point. Both these redirects (Baakghost and Baak (Telugu film)) along with Baak (Telugu Film) were initially created by SenthilGugan as Articles for the Telugu dubbed version of Aranmanai 4. After seeing no need for another article, when there's already a primary article and an Afd the pages were turned to redirects. But, there is no need these many redirects, as not even the Google recognizes these names. I only included two redirects because, the other one has already been Rfded. 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 11:16, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Vestrian24Bio, what's the reason for nominating this redirect for deletion? I could be missing a potential problem with it; but, from what I can see, this title is mentioned at the target under Aranmanai 4#Release. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 11:21, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- I am typing it; please wait for me to post it. 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 11:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry - I was confused as to why the redirect was nominated without a rationale, but that makes sense. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 11:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- That's fine 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 11:33, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Ah, sorry - I was confused as to why the redirect was nominated without a rationale, but that makes sense. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 11:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- I am typing it; please wait for me to post it. 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 11:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: It's Baak. See this. Kailash29792 (talk) 11:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Noting that the above !vote was made underneath the entry for Baakghost, before the two nominations had been combined - see [5]. Best, —a smart kitten[meow] 12:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but make the target more precise to a section in the article: Aranmanai_4#Theatrical The title in the target section of this Telugu version of the film IS Baak. The second R was Redirected after an Afd and the first BLARed as ATD, so that the pages history and credits could be kept, which is always good. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 09:09, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with the first one, but the second R: A Google search of that name would give the results for Baak (Assamese folklore), so how much of an accurate redirect that would be? 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 14:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Then, in order to preserve history and credits for both, rename the second (but then the double redirect needs to be fixed) OR change target so that it redirects to the Assamese folklore page (which will preserve the history, only upon a different topic). A DISAMB page can also be considered. Thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I say we retarget to Baak (Assamese folklore) and move Baakghost to Baak ghost without leaving a redirect. You agree Mushy Yank? Kailash29792 (talk) 10:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sure! Thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:55, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- I say we retarget to Baak (Assamese folklore) and move Baakghost to Baak ghost without leaving a redirect. You agree Mushy Yank? Kailash29792 (talk) 10:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough. Then, in order to preserve history and credits for both, rename the second (but then the double redirect needs to be fixed) OR change target so that it redirects to the Assamese folklore page (which will preserve the history, only upon a different topic). A DISAMB page can also be considered. Thanks. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:57, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with the first one, but the second R: A Google search of that name would give the results for Baak (Assamese folklore), so how much of an accurate redirect that would be? 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 14:48, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Summarizing the above discussion, Keep and Re-target Baak (Telugu film) to Aranmanai 4#Theatrical while, Move Baakghost to Baak ghost without leaving a redirect and Re-target to Baak (Assamese folklore). Is that correct Kailash29792 and Mushy Yank? 𝓥𝓮𝓼𝓽𝓻𝓲𝓪𝓷24𝓑𝓲𝓸 (ᴛᴀʟᴋ) 04:07, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yes you are right. Kailash29792 (talk) 04:30, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- As far as I’m concerned, yes, I think that’s a good solution. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Unlabeled[edit]
per wp:SRD --MikutoH talk! 23:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to wikt:unlabeled again. --MikutoH talk! 23:13, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: dabifying is also possible as Unlabeled coloring, Unlabeled sexuality, Unlabeled - The Demos also exist --MikutoH talk! 23:15, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't object. It seems like I incorrectly assumed your article was spam. My apologies. EdmHopLover1995 (talk) 23:16, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I went ahead and restored the soft redirect, though I think this discussion should remain open since dabifying is also being considered as an option. CycloneYoris talk! 00:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Template:Wiktionary redirect. Wikipedia is not a dictionary and we don't need Wiktionary redirects for common words. A disambiguation page wouldn't be appropriate, because all of the potential entries are WP:PTMs. - Eureka Lott 13:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Eureka Lott: As WP:PTM describes, some partial title matches do belong on disambiguation pages. I think title-subtitle is one of the more obvious cases for that. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- I suppose that could apply to Unlabeled - The Demos. Are there other good candidates for a potential disambiguation page? - Eureka Lott 18:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Eureka Lott: As WP:PTM describes, some partial title matches do belong on disambiguation pages. I think title-subtitle is one of the more obvious cases for that. jlwoodwa (talk) 04:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify per MikutoH's last comment, plausible search term with several relevant entries. A Wiktionary link could be present on the dab if necessary. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 18:26, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:51, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate: per the several pages listed by MikutoH with the term "unlabeled" in them. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:01, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Evil Luigi[edit]
as opposed to "evil mario" which was nominated a few days ago, which could have referred to a good handful of characters (ironically not including wario), there is a very concrete "evil luigi", that being mr. l from super paper mario, though he's only mentioned by name in luigi's article. i'd say retarget to super paper mario and mention his name there cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:06, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete since it can plausibly refer to multiple subjects. On top of Mr. L and Waluigi, I'm sure there's other "evil" variants of Luigi that exist that could be conflated with them. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 14:23, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- to my knowledge, those are actually the only ones. shadoo (also from super paper mario) could maybe probably count since he takes the shapes of the main cast (funnily enough, he copies mr. l's design instead of luigi's), though i haven't been able to find any other clones or doppelgängers wanting to be the better mario brother cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- should probably clarify that i mean evil luigis, i will accept no gooigi slander in this house cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- to my knowledge, those are actually the only ones. shadoo (also from super paper mario) could maybe probably count since he takes the shapes of the main cast (funnily enough, he copies mr. l's design instead of luigi's), though i haven't been able to find any other clones or doppelgängers wanting to be the better mario brother cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: I believe the expected result for "Evil Luigi" is Waluigi, same as somebody searching "Evil Mario" would expect to be redirected to Wario. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:56, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose deletion with no opinion on keep vs. dabify. There is, I think we all agree, at least one plausible meaning of "Evil Luigi," so something should exist at that title. "Delete since it can plausibly refer to multiple subjects" does not match any of the rationales listed at WP:R#RCD. If there is only one meaning, then it can target that meaning. If there is more than one meaning, then it can be dabified (or we can pick a primary topic). There's no situation where you delete something that has at least one valid meaning. --NYKevin 07:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Evil Luigi is Mr. L at most. Waluigi is not Luigi, and therefore cannot be "Evil Luigi" (as he would need to be Luigi to be evil, which he is not, and is a separate character). We do have a character on Wikipedia that is Luigi, and is "evil", i.e. Mr. L, so this if anything is the only possibility that exists. However, I would not expect this description of Mr. L to be a redirect, as "Mr. L" is a suitable and workable search term. No reason to have Bad Luigi or Devious Luigi. Utopes (talk / cont) 19:51, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Utopes Okmrman (talk) 03:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: per NYKevin. Evil Luigi is a colloquial way of referring to Waluigi and is a useful search term. Do not disambiguate because Waluigi is the PTOPIC and Mr. L is not a major character in the franchise. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per the principle of WP:LEAST surprise. Someone typic this is not looking for anyone other than Waluigi. Mr. L is not the primary topic here. At most, a hatnote could be used, but I don't think even that's necessary. Fieari (talk) 23:26, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Dougie (disambiguation)[edit]
- Dougie (disambiguation) → Dougie (given name) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The set index is not a disambiguation. I can only find Dougie as a dance, and Dougie (given name), but I can't find the 3rd. If you can't find the 3rd one, will this page be deleted or kept? 176.42.17.150 (talk) 16:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Dougie (given name) does not involve the dance, and does Dougie from Bluey count as 3rd? 176.42.17.150 (talk) 16:12, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. If there's enough content to create a disambiguation page, that's certainly fine. If not, the redirect should be kept because the target provides a disambiguation-like function. - Eureka Lott 17:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- We generally avoid pointing Foo (disambiguation) titles to non-disambiguation pages. BD2412 T 17:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- We do point them at pages that "serve a disambiguation-like function" though, which anthroponymy pages do. Oops, I thought I removed this comment before saving — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ivanvector (talk • contribs) 19:20, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
- We generally avoid pointing Foo (disambiguation) titles to non-disambiguation pages. BD2412 T 17:51, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Restore the separate disambiguation page at Dougie (disambiguation). It's the best solution out of no particularly good solutions. BD2412 T 17:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Eureka Lott. If Dougie is the only title needing disambiguation that is not a person or character's name, which seems to be the case, it's silly to have nearly-identical disambiguation and anthroponymy pages that only differ by that one link. Just add a hatnote or see-also to the existing list. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Ivanvector. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Should be treated as an average redirect from incorrect disambiguation. The correct disambiguator in the title "Dougie (given name)" is "given name", and the disambiguator "disambiguation" is incorrect. No need to add an irrelevant see also link or hatnote to the anthro list. Someone who is at "Foo (given name)" doesn't need to be directed to "Foo" that is not name-related (not a "related or comparable" topic).—Alalch E. 22:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- We actually need this to exist because there's a broken piece of software, which is used by a lot of people who disambiguate, that thinks links to "Dougie (given name)" need to be disambiguated, so they can at least pipe link this to avoid the software bug. --Joy (talk) 07:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Restore disambiguation page per BD2412 and because ... since Dougie exists, claiming that a page about a given name is the de facto disambiguation page is erroneous. Steel1943 (talk) 17:10, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or restore dab?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Don't delete. In addition to what's already been said, redirects that end in
(disambiguation)
which target a page performing a disambiguation-like function (rather than a disambiguation page) are also helpful for linking to Wikidata items. To use this redirect as an example, the French and Italian Wikipedias have a disambiguation page for the termDougie
, which are both linked to Dougie (Q13364643): Wikimedia disambiguation page. However, as Dougie (given name) is an article about the name & isn't a dab page, it's linked to the Wikidata item about the name itself (Dougie (Q3037978): male given name). Redirects such as Dougie (disambiguation) are able to be connected to the Wikidata item about the disambiguation page as a sitelink to redirect (as I've just done); and therefore allow readers of the French and Italian Wikipedias to access the enwiki article (that serves a disambiguation-like function) via an interlanguage link. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 14:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC) - Move Dougie to Dougie (dance): it isn't the primary topic. Put a disambiguation page at Dougie and point this redirect at it. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per Shhhnotsoloud. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more relist, since there's some momentum away from keep despite the initial lead in numbers.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:43, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Box 850[edit]
Not mentioned in target, nor anywhere else on Wikipedia for that matter. 2001:999:68C:AC40:8038:7BCB:6859:B02D (talk) 15:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Valid {{R from alternate name}}. "Box 850" is a nickname for MI6. See, e.g., [6]: "The United Kingdom's Security Service, MI5, for example, is colloquially known as Box 500 after its official wartime address of PO Box 500 and similarly MI6, the UK's external intelligence agency, is colloquially known as Box 850." voorts (talk/contributions) 01:09, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Right, but this information should be available on the target page. 2001:999:68C:AC40:95AB:EBFF:5287:8BF0 (talk) 14:42, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Cyclone Fabien (2023)[edit]
- Cyclone Fabien (2023) → 2022–23 South-West Indian Ocean cyclone season#Intense Tropical Cyclone Fabien (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Also, another redirect from unnecessary disambiguation that is not suitable for primary redirect. If CSD G7 requires a deletion, then the author request for blanking — but it is declined without an evidences occur. Fabien is only one storm for the naming storms in Southwestern Indian Ocean last 2023. This should be delete to prevent the typo parentheses like "(2021)". Icarus58 (talk) 07:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - standard practice for tropical cyclone redirects. Noah, BSBATalk 11:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Hurricane Noah, I'm also disagree about the standard practices on each tropical cyclone. Since lasts 4 months that I deleted the disambiguation article "Cyclone Fabien (2023)", Flux55 created the redirect again without a reasonable excuses. Icarus58 (talk) 11:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - standard practice for tropical cyclone redirects. Noah, BSBATalk 11:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep unless I'm missing something else. This is a standard {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}} redirect for all topics where there's any chance at all of using the disambiguator. Don't see how this increase the risk of typos as described nor why it could possibly be A7 eligible. Skynxnex (talk) 12:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I see nothing wrong with it. 2003 LN6 00:31, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Kion[edit]
Kion may also refer to the one from The Lion Guard. So, retarget to KION and add the character to this disambiguation. 176.42.18.33 (talk) 07:23, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to List of The Lion King (franchise) characters as the likeliest target per WP:DIFFCAPS. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 12:59, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Move KION to Kion; I have added senses to the disambiguation page. BD2412 T 16:37, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Cyclone Hamoon (2023)[edit]
- Cyclone Hamoon (2023) → Cyclone Hamoon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The previous redirect is unnecessary disambiguation and I wonder how will transposed the main article as "Cyclone Hamoon". I suggest that this redirect should be delete without putting disambiguation as "(2023)" respectively. Icarus58 (talk) 01:52, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - standard practice and not something to be decided in a single RfD. Noah, BSBATalk 10:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Hurricane Noah, there is also a wrong typo like the disambiguation title like the parentheses "(2023)" and I surprised more redirects have standard practices by the other users. But for me, it is better to delete rather than spread more redirects like the only one storm naming in North and Southwest Indian Ocean basins. Icarus58 (talk) 11:50, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - standard practice and not something to be decided in a single RfD. Noah, BSBATalk 10:58, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Noah and the bits of my comment on Cyclone Fabien (2023) that are relevant in this case. Skynxnex (talk) 01:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Educating[edit]
Unlikely redirect; currently it's used in only one article (N._Ravichandran). Deleting this redirect would help clean up the lead of Education, by removing a distracting dab hatnote. fgnievinski (talk) 01:20, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as someone searching for "educating" is most likely looking for Education. The redirect receives page views almost every day. Mia Mahey (talk) 02:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per above, verb forms redirecting to the relevant noun should be kept. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as seems reasonably useful. Alextejthompson (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 18:25, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Wich[edit]
Having created Wich (disambiguation), I doubt that there is a primary topic of the term, and propose to move the disambiguation page over this redirect. BD2412 T 00:02, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Judging by the relative unnotability compared to the common -wich suffix, the existing page being a redirect to -wich town and keeping the existing hatnote on that page is fine. Just add a note at the top of wich (disambiguation) stating the primary topic. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 07:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
May 18[edit]
West Ardougne[edit]
This location in RuneScape is not described in the target article. A reader is better served by not having been redirected there. WP:RFD#DELETE #8 and 10. Викидим (talk) 21:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep It's a pretty major city within the game, and is part of a major plot, if we're going to discuss this redirect, we might as well pull Ardougne into it as well, heck what about Varrock. and Lumbridge? Thief-River-Faller (talk) 17:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- What is the use of these redirects? The text of RuneScape does not even mention these major cities. A reader, either already reading some text about the RuneScape or performing a search related to this game, will simply waste: a click to go in, a search within the page, and a click to return back feeling duped. Викидим (talk) 18:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- I personally wouldn't be opposed to a seperate Gielinor article (the game's world), especially since there's multiple media linked including Runescape, Old School Runescape. Betrayal at Falador etc. then these cities would be mentioned and redirected to the new article. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 12:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- A section on the Gielinor in RuneScape will be just fine to validate the redirects. IMHO in order to justify stealing someone's attention Wikipedia should offer at least some information at the target of a redirect. That said, I also happen to think that Gielinor might be notable on its own: I had found a significant amount of genuine scholarship on the subject. Викидим (talk) 19:54, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- I personally wouldn't be opposed to a seperate Gielinor article (the game's world), especially since there's multiple media linked including Runescape, Old School Runescape. Betrayal at Falador etc. then these cities would be mentioned and redirected to the new article. Thief-River-Faller (talk) 12:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- What is the use of these redirects? The text of RuneScape does not even mention these major cities. A reader, either already reading some text about the RuneScape or performing a search related to this game, will simply waste: a click to go in, a search within the page, and a click to return back feeling duped. Викидим (talk) 18:34, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Blagger[edit]
- Blagger → Social engineering (security)#Pretexting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This was flagged up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation#Searching for "Blagger" currently redirects to a page with no mention of the word. by user:Oathed with the comment seems weird that it doesn't link or disambig to Blagger (video game). Not sure how to mark a page for "Disambig page needed".
At the very least this does need a hatnote to the video game, but I'm not acutally sure the video game isn't the primary target. Neither the present target nor Pretexting (linked as the main article) use the term. The only other uses I'm finding (Blaggers ITA (formerly known as The Blaggers) and The Blaggers Guide would be at most see-alsos on a dab page.
The video game article was created at this title but moved in March 2018 by Zxcvbnm with the summary "Merge, in order to disambiguate" but they just changed the redirect target and added a hatnote. The hatnote was removed without explanation by an IP in 2020, but the mention of "blagging" had been removed in July 2018 as part of a cull of unreferenced information by Michaelgt123. None of "blag", "blagging" or "blagger" has ever been included in the Pretext article. Thryduulf (talk) 20:27, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and move Blagger (video game) to it.
- The redirect made at least some sense at the time it was created. The article Pretext, as it appeared at the time, was about the general well-understood meaning of a "pretext"; a reason given in justification of a course of action that is not the real reason. It had only a single paragraph describing the social engineering trick.
- Meanwhile, the article Social engineering (security), as it appeared at the time, in the section Pretexting, said "Pretexting..., also known in the UK as blagging". So that made at least some sense as a target (although even then, I think the video game article would have been a more appropriate target).
- The video game seems pretty clearly to be the primary use for "Blagger"; if the "blagging" text is re-added to the Social engineering (security) article (as it probably should, there seems to be sufficient documentation of that, e.g., [7] at the BBC), it can be dealt with by ordinary disambiguation (hatnote or a Blagger (disambiguation) page, as appropriate). TJRC (talk) 02:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Freaky deaky Dutch[edit]
- Freaky deaky Dutch → Austin Powers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
possible WP:FANCRUFT Okmrman (talk) 14:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- The phrase is used by Dr. Evil in Goldmember, addressed to the titular character. I don't think it's mentioned anywhere. --BDD (talk) 22:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the target talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:43, 18 May 2024 (UTC)- Delete, fancruft. The phrase is spoken in the movie Goldmember but it is implausible as a reasonable redirect, as people familiar with the phrase will undoubtedly be familiar with the film name. Jip Orlando (talk) 18:27, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
ANDSF[edit]
- ANDSF → Access network discovery and selection function (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Likely primary topic is Afghan National Security Forces, not this internet protocol component. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:01, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- ANDSF (disambiguation) will likely be deleted unless it decided to be moved to this title. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per nominator. Internet search results for "ANDSF" alone refer overwhelmingly to the former military. --NFSreloaded (talk) 18:40, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget and add hatnote per nom. Okmrman (talk) 21:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, since the current target is also known as "ANDSF" and a hatnote has already been placed there. CycloneYoris talk! 01:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or Retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:39, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to the disambiguation page (first, restore the dab, as there is WP:NOPRIMARY). Google search ANSDF is dominated by military, ANSDF abbreviation - by 3GPP. --Викидим (talk) 23:42, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget, restore ANDSF (disambiguation) and round-robin move them, as neither of the two articles seems to be an overwhelmingly primary topic. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:46, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Dark (MCC cricketer) and others[edit]
- Dark (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Daley (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Cooke (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Curtis (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Copden (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Bonniface (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Blair (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Broughton (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- J. Cockerill (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- J. Bushby (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Godfrey (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Jackson (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Jones (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- J. Lewis (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Laurent (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Markham (MCC cricketer, 1791) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Maddon (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- J. Macnamara (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Newland (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Need (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- C. Onslow (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Short (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Warren (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Wareford (MCC cricketer) → Marylebone Cricket Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
These redirects were articles created in 2017 by (blocked user) BlackJack, and PRODed by @Blue Square Thing: in 2019, but redirected by @Andrew Davidson:. The names of the subjects of the redirects do not appear in the target article, and are never likely to, and do not appear in List of Marylebone Cricket Club players (1787–1826) because that list is for first-class players, which these apparently weren't. It's confusing to have a redirect to a target with zero substantive information about the subject so I recommend delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:13, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- I've checked each person in CricketArchive's database to check whether any additional information has been added about them, but in no case has anything that might be able to suggest notability been added. There are still no forenames, dates or so on. None of them played first-class cricket either. There are, by the way, three players simply called Warren who have played non-first-class matches for MCC, two Markhams, two J Lewis', three Jones', three Jacksons and two Cookes, so I'm not sure how helpful such redirects would be. If I came across these articles today I'd be likely to PROD them still, so, unsurprisingly, I'd suggest deleting the redirects. Blue Square Thing (talk) 19:42, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete None of them appear to have played FC cricket for the MCC, so there is no suitable list to redirect to, so delete. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:47, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
"What about the children?! Won't somebody please think of the children!?"[edit]
- "What about the children?! Won't somebody please think of the children!?" → List of recurring The Simpsons characters#Helen Lovejoy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
A variant of the title without quotes, What about the children?! Won't somebody please think of the children !?, redirects to Think of the children (which prominently mentions Helen Lovejoy). Additionally, I don't think redirects surrounded by quotes often exist here. Xeroctic (talk) 09:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Another variant, with minor typographical differences, "What about the children?! Won't somebody please think of the children?!" (notice the reversed interrobang in the last sentence) redirects to Think of the children as well. Xeroctic (talk) 09:53, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Think of the children consistent with the others, because that's the most logical and helpful target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:36, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Valéncia[edit]
Nominating on behalf of Agpshi, who nominated this redirect via PROD with the following rationale: The name with an acute accent is not used either in academic or official sources and, in spite of some recent attempts at making it official (stemming from one of the parties currently governing the city, Vox), it has never been so and it is unlikely that they will succeed
. CycloneYoris talk! 09:19, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep –
First of all, why was the redirect target changed? As far as I know that shouldn't happen until the discussion is closed, should it?Ok I see this is standard for rfd.
- Second, the question here isn't whether Valéncia is some kind of official name. It's a name that is in use, and even if you consider it to be a misspelling, some people are likely to type it in when looking for Valencia. So it needs to be a redirect. GA-RT-22 (talk) 11:51, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. What does this have to do with politics? As far as I'm aware the new local government wants to change it to Valencia/Valéncia as these are the official names in both Spanish and Valencian. It didn't "stem" from Vox but actually from the own Valencia's major, Maria José Catalá, from the People's Party of the Valencian Community. Here you have a source from a regional Valencian centre-left newspaper (as opposed to the local and regional centre-right / right government) so you can see it's even mentioned there: https://www.levante-emv.com/valencia/2023/09/21/catala-he-acuerdo-acento-cerrado-92324310.html
- "Valéncia" itself is an historical name. It's also mentioned on LOTS of Valencian articles as well as books written in Valencia. Here you have a prime proof of this, coming from a Valencian Book Editorial (L'Oronella) = https://www.oronella.com/botiga/histories-de-valencia/
- I have found this 1996 source from the University of La Rioja based on 1850-1930 information, that is already mentioning this name: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=6888722
- Same mentioned in the University of Valencia Scientifical Production website = https://producciocientifica.uv.es/documentos/6409378dc654e74950596fde
- The official Spanish Government Judiciary and Justice Courts website (MUGEJU) directly writes it as Valéncia/Valencia, and this is an official government site, ruled by Partido Socialista Obrero Español which is the opposing party to both regional ruling PP and even more Vox. Source: https://www.mugeju.es/que-es-mugeju/nuestras-oficinas/delegaciones-provinciales/valenciavalencia
- Without mentioning tons of many more reliable sources, historical sources... And without mentioning that all Valencian regionalism parties and associations always write Valéncia, as it's also written in the Norms of El Puig standarized Valencian, which is part of the Royal Academy of Valencian Culture, the oldest Valencian language institution (much older than the actual Academia Valenciana de la Llengua which was created in 1998 and RACV in 1915) so the page Valéncia should include the redirect to the page of Valencia.
- And not only that, but also written text that Valéncia is a correct form of spelling Valencia in Valencian. As both Valéncia and València are accepted. Even an inform from the actual AVL (the organisation that regulated the Valencian language) from 2007 said that the proper Valencian name of Valencia is Valéncia: https://www.esdiario.com/valencia/138023357/avl-defendio-acento-cerrado-valencia.html
- I am Galician and I have been living in Valencia for a good amount of years. I'm neutral over this, but I do actually know quite a lot about the local and regional history. There is no benefit from trying to hide out what a lot of people think and what also is backed up by many RSs. I have deleted myself the word "Valéncia" from the lead of the page Valencia and I wrote by myself that's officially called València (check my history) but still, we can't delete the will of many people, especially when it's properly sourced even with academical sources.
- I hope you will take a proper look at this as I've spent 30 minutes writing this. Thanks. LucenseLugo (talk) 16:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- First of all, the AVL has never accepted "Valéncia" as a proper spelling. As you can check from reading the newspaper beyond the headline, that was just a personal statement by Abelard Saragossà (a great academic, on the other hand). So you are wrong: "Valéncia" is not a correct form and it is not accepted by the AVL.
- The RACV may be as old as they want, but that does not legitimate them. The Society of Homeopaths, for example, is about the same age. To begin with, the ortographic rules developed by the RACV are from 1979, whereas the rules employed by the AVL are from 1932 (Norms of Castelló). And, in terms of usage, it should be quite clear that you cannot compare. L'Oronella, which you have mentioned, is the only secessionist editorial currently active in Valencia, they are highly linked to the RACV and their production is scarce (153 books between 1999 and 2005).
- In the second place, the proposal did stem from Vox, insofar as the mayor of Valencia (PP) wanted the name to be changed to València/Valencia, instead, as you can see here: https://valenciaplaza.com/vox-impone-al-pp-el-acento-cerrado-en-el-nombre-de-valencia-y-desata-la-primera-pelea-entre-ediles
- In the third place, "Valéncia" is not a historical name. It did not have an accent back when accents still did not exist and the only accepted name ever since Valencian was made official again is "València".
- Four, the University of Valencia and the one you think is from the University of La Rioja sources are the same. I should mention that the La Rioja source is not from the University of La Rioja, but, just as any Spanish academic knows, from Dialnet, an bibliographic database hosted by the University of La Rioja. And Producció Científica UV takes its data from Dialnet (I know it because I work there). So the source is not from that university, but from whoever authored the article (in this case, Joaquín Azagra).
- And, highly related to my fourth point, that source (the only academic source you provided) seems to be a misspelling based on the fact that Spanish does not have a grave accent. Check the index of the book in which that chapter is contained: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/libro?codigo=9785
- As you will see in that index, whoever transcribed the name of the article made many accent-related mistakes. He writes "origens" instead of "orígens" and "demográfica" instead of "demogràfica", for example (and those two accents are the same no matter whether you use the Valencian official rules or the alternative rules employed by the RACV).
- Finally, I suggest you take a look at the introduction to the book in which that chapter is contained, which is accessible online and which was authored by Azagra himself: https://www.raco.cat/index.php/HistoriaIndustrial/article/download/63111/84922
- If you are willing to accept that that book chapter supports your claims about "Valéncia" being an academically acceptable name, I guess you will also accept that "Valencian Country" is an appropriate name for the Community, right? But, still, you have in the past called a source biased only because it used that name (here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Valencian_language&diff=prev&oldid=1180807282). So I guess you are no longer willing to use that book chapter as a source.
- So the only source you are left with is MUGEJU, which is not, as you claim, "the Judiciary and Justice Courts website" but just a mutuality for the members of the judiciary.
--Agpshi (talk) 16:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as {{R from modification}}. The redirect does no harm. (By the way, there is a useful essay Wikipedia:Official names). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- DeleteThe main problem with that name is that its only promoters are the members of a highly pseudoscientific and academically marginal institution, the RACV, who have gone as far as to claim that Valencian language has a prehistoric origin that can be traced back to the Iberians (here https://cadenaser.com/comunitat-valenciana/2023/09/26/la-real-academia-de-cultura-valenciana-sostiene-que-el-origen-del-valenciano-se-remonta-a-la-mas-profunda-prehistoria-valenciana-radio-valencia/ or here: https://www.abc.es/espana/comunidad-valenciana/teoria-sobre-origen-valenciano-prehistoria-lengua-anterior-20230928090651-nt.html). Accepting that name implicitly entails accepting their theses.--Agpshi (talk) 17:18, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- I won't read all of that.
Here we are voting to keep it or deleting it.
:At the moment 3 of us voted to keep it and you are the only one who wants to delete it, as you made this. Please stick to the voting. LucenseLugo (talk) 20:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)- RfD is not a vote, but a discussion to determine WP:CONSENSUS. Thryduulf (talk) 07:47, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Question, is there some way to find out how many people searched on this term before the redirect was in place? If it's "none" then I could be convinced we don't need it. GA-RT-22 (talk) 23:10, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- No, because the stats are only recorded for pages after creation. It takes a few days after creation before the stats become a reliable indicator of usage patterns (my theory is because of hits by new page patrollers) and being at RfD also generates hits so we won't get relevant usage figures until a few weeks after this discussion is closed. Thryduulf (talk) 07:47, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as a standard {{R from modification}}. We don't care what the official or correct name is, all that matters is whether a term will plausibly be used to search for the target, and given the campaign to make this official that is unquestionably true here (regardless of the outcome of that campaign). Thryduulf (talk) 07:47, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as likely {{R from misspelling}} of the native València, plus the fact that it has been proposed recently as a name of its own. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:49, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Medicare’s problems[edit]
- Medicare’s problems → Medicare (United States) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This redirect was an article for less than an hour. While the Medicare (United States) article does mention "Medicare's problems" relating to fiscal policy, they are not the same "problems" ("coverage limitations") mentioned in the WP:BLARed article. Additionally, "Medicare" may also refer to the Canadian and Australian systems, each of which surely has its own problems. I think this is a figurative WP:XY case, and this redirect should be deleted; there are just too many things its title could mean. (Note: the apostrophe is a curly one, not the straight one ordinarily used on Wikipedia.) PleaseStand (talk) 06:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Bharatiya Janata Party, Mrghalaya[edit]
- Bharatiya Janata Party, Mrghalaya → Bharatiya Janata Party, Meghalaya (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Unlikely misspelling of Meghalaya. Gotitbro (talk) 05:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:47, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Gastrosexual[edit]
- Gastrosexual → Metrosexual (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Gastrosexuality → Metrosexual (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned. Retarget to wikt:gastrosexual if there's no mention anywhere else. --MikutoH talk! 04:51, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Soft redirect Gastrosexual to wikt, and delete Gastrosexuality. Not mentioned anywhere in enwiki. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:50, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. Gastrosexuality existed as its own page before, though the correct term is gastrosexual because it's named in reference to lifestyles like lumbersexual, spornosexual, retrosexual, cosmosexual, frustrosexual, megasexual, ubersexual, ultrasexual, macrosexual, cinesexual, machosexual, and many others. --MikutoH talk! 19:27, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Flexisexual[edit]
- Flexisexual → Metrosexual#Other terms (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Flexisexuality → Metrosexual#Other terms (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Retarget to wikt:flexisexual or sexual fluidity. This section doesn't exist or was changed nor is it mentioned there (anymore). --MikutoH talk! 04:46, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to wikt. Not mentioned anywhere in enwiki. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Albert Rosenfeld(rugby league player)[edit]
- Albert Rosenfeld(rugby league player) → Albert Rosenfeld (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Apparently, this redirect has too significant of an edit history to be speedily deleted for WP:X3. However, the page history doesn't look that substantive and it's just someone trying to make a page for a topic that already had a page. 104.7.152.180 (talk) 04:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete it was an article for less than a month in 2006/2007 and doesn't appear to contain any content not in the target. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:27, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- comment content was merged in special:diff/99335323 —a smart kitten[meow] 22:10, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Parser function[edit]
- Wikipedia:Parser function → Help:Magic words#Parser functions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Wikipedia:Parser Functions → mw:Help:Extension:ParserFunctions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Both of these redirects should probably target the same page. I'm neutral on which option to pick. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget the latter to Help:Magic words#Parser functions. Its title does not unambiguously refer to either target, whether the list of parser functions available here (both words are capitalized) or those provided by the ParserFunctions MediaWiki extension (there is a space between the words). The first target is nevertheless better, because it provides useful information regarding this particular site that the reader may be looking for, as well as a link to the same MediaWiki.org page in the section hatnote (no extra click versus a soft redirect). PleaseStand (talk) 06:16, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
American actress[edit]
This seems oddly and overly specific. I feel like we wouldn't want to make a habit of having nationality-plus-profession redirects to articles on professions that do not have an affinity for nationalities (which most do not). I note, by the way, that American actor redirects to Lists of American actors. BD2412 T 00:27, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Lists of American actors. Much more useful to readers than the current target. Thefficacy (talk) 03:21, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Lists of American actors per User:Thefficacy --Lenticel (talk) 00:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Lists of American actors. I was going to suggest List of American film actresses as an alternative, but List of American television actresses also exists, would be a potentially valid target, and both of those are located at Lists of American actors, so... that's where this should point. Alternatively, we could make a mini-dab that only contains those two links (with the potential to create a List of American broadway actresses and other such ilk?). Fieari (talk) 05:30, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on creating a mini-dab at this title?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)- Retarget to Lists of American actors to match American actor. No real opposition to making a mini-dab, but I'm not particularly swayed by the idea, either. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:33, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Lists of American actors per above. I don't think a mini-dab is needed since the proposed retarget is itself a DAB page. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:36, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Lists of American actors, no need for a mini-dab here as all entries are already present in the list of lists. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:51, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
May 17[edit]
Template:R ac[edit]
- Template:R ac → Template:R from other capitalisation (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Ambiguous between {{r acronym}} and {{r from alt cap}}. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete (prefer) or disambiguate, but there are so few uses that you could easily remove the links manually. Looking at the history shows that the page author also swapped between the mentioned targets a month after creation. ― Synpath 01:48, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: For what it's worth, this redirect has about 10 transclusions that need to be resolved prior to this redirect being deleted or retargeted. Steel1943 (talk) 01:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose disambiguation. Template shortcuts need not be unambiguous. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 23:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:00, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or disambiguate as acronym would seem more likely. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:23, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
CommentDelete: I cleaned up the usages except one that's WP:GOLDLOCK'd.No opinion on this otherwise. Actually this is ambiguous and confusing due to only being two letters. It's not hard to type out any of the categories and the insert a template button has a search feature for a reason. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 18:26, 18 May 2024 (UTC)- Delete Confusing, useless. Typing a few more characters isn't hard. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Millennium Council[edit]
- Millennium Council → Basingstoke (UK Parliament constituency)#Elections in the 2000s (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Currently redirects to Basingstoke (UK Parliament constituency)#Elections in the 2000s because someone used "Millennium Council" as a ballot paper description while standing for election in Basingstoke, England 2005. He received 0.3% of the vote. Not sure this is appropriate nor the most suitable target. Suggest deleting or retargeting to White House Millennium Council. AusLondonder (talk) 18:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget or DAB, Google even from England doesn't return anything for the Basingstoke one and returns the likes of the White House one, Australian one and others in England. Also its only mentioned once in the target. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:11, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:50, 17 May 2024 (UTC)- Retarget to White House Millennium Council. The current target is so obscure (per nom) that it is implausible to be the intended target for 99% of readers. Thefficacy (talk) 00:51, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Iranian nuclear scientist killed[edit]
- Iranian nuclear scientist killed → Assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
the redirect is way too specific, and seems almost like a search engine query. Gaismagorm (talk) 20:26, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Looks fair enough to me, since there have apparently been five Iranian nuclear scientists killed. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Bannzil Kwéyòl[edit]
- Bannzil Kwéyòl → Saint Lucia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Bannzil Kweyol → Saint Lucia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Literally cannot see why people would search for this and the fact that I cannot find it anywhere in the article makes me want to strongly delete it. The unaccented Bannzil Kweyol will also be nominated for the same reason JuniperChill (talk) 20:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Unaccented version now combined. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Web searches indicate that this is an organization dedicated to promoting Creole languages. A red link is preferable here. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Nom: let's not speculate about why people search for things. Bannzil Kwéyòl is linked from Music of Saint Lucia but this isn't a good target. I agree that a redlink is better in this case. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Criticism of Apple Inc.[edit]
- Criticism of Apple Inc. → Apple Inc. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Listing this here for discussion stemming from my glance at its page history. No personal comment on this, but what do you think? Intrisit (talk) 19:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Either Delete as per WP:REDLINK, or Retarget to Apple supply chain, with a heavy lean to Deletion. This is an interesting case-- The current target, Apple Inc., is a bad target because it... well, doesn't discuss criticism of the company, or at least doesn't do so in a concise, easy-to-find manner. However, the page that this very redirect has been pointed to in the past-- Apple supply chain-- is too narrow in scope (given it only covers criticism of the supply chain, and not criticism of, for example, Apple's war against Right to Repair, or its removal of the headphone jack on the iPhone 7, or any number of other topics-- and furthermore, the article is in heavy need of a rewrite anyways, it reads more like a screed against Apple rather than an impartial discussion of the topic. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 20:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete As Lunamann notes, the main article doesn't discuss criticism of the company. I am opposed to retargeting because the supply chain surely isn't the only controversial thing about Apple. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Criticism of Apple Inc was a full page that was moved to Practices of Apple Inc and then moved and cut down to just be Apple supply chain. I tried fixing this to target back there earlier. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 01:57, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Might as well just delete the redirect to encourage people to create an actual criticism article again. I'm not sure why the original criticism article was cut down so much. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 02:00, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per redlink, could be an article, isn't an article, has no place to send readers to right now. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:52, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete to allow for article creation. Highly notable topic, but all potential targets are too vague and unhelpful. Apple has been criticized for a variety of issues, from its supply chain to its "walled garden" to the recent iPad commercial. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Practices of Apple Inc.[edit]
- Practices of Apple Inc. → Apple Inc. (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Listing this here for discussion stemming from my glance at its page history. No personal comment on this, but what do you think? Intrisit (talk) 19:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Unlike with Criticism of Apple Inc., the current target does a fairly decent job of discussing, at full breadth and appropriate scope, the entirety of Apple Inc.'s practices-- being, everything that the company does. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, implausible that anyone would look for it, appears to meet none of the WP:RPURPOSE, takes up a slot in the search suggestions of WP's built-in search engine for a relatively common term ("practices"), and redirect receives almost no pageviews. DFlhb (talk) 23:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as not discussed on the article. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:42, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
2023-24 Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament[edit]
- 2023-24 Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament → Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 2023–24 Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament → Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete to encourage article creation, consistent with 2022–23 Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:02, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Pretty common for these types of redirects to exist and there's nothing stopping someone from starting an article. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Hey man im josh and the clear fact that this is a future rdr to a title with en-dash(es), like the 2023-24 FA Cup. By the way, the redlinked title the nominator brought up is to me what happens when info on this exist(s) at that/the time and is/are not documented here with sourcing. Just like the 2023–24 Ghana FA Cup, 2023–24 Samartex F.C. season and the 2024 Absa Cup articles which I'll create soon. Intrisit (talk) 19:41, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Boston Incident[edit]
- Boston Incident → Boston Massacre (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This isn't commonly referred to as "Boston incident"; searching the term finds little about the massacre compared to other incidents (such as the 2007 Boston Mooninite panic). In the cases where the massacre is referred to with this term, it's only in a descriptive fashion and not as an actual name. Redirect was created by a quickly-reverted WP:POINTy page move in 2006. Elli (talk | contribs) 02:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete one would think the Boston Tea Party or Battle of Bunker Hill would be better -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 03:08, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep - although it seems ambiguous (my first thought was the Boston Marathon bombing) the article on the Boston Massacre notes in the lede that the event is also known as the "Incident on King Street"; "Boston incident" is a plausible misremembering. It's a more neutral title anyway, the article also notes in the lede that calling it a "massacre" was American patriot propaganda. As far as I can tell, the other events listed here aren't widely known as named "incidents". If deleted then don't disambiguate, search results would handle this better. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep per Ivan. Queen of ♡ | Speak 20:30, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:30, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I can't find a primary topic. GScholar results, for example, are split primarily between the current target and the Boston Marathon bombing. When referring to the current target, they seem to be mainly quoting from primary sources. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete seems to ambiguous/generic. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:22, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Seems more specific to the massacre than the bombing. PARAKANYAA (talk) 14:57, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Telephonics Corporation[edit]
- Telephonics Corporation → Griffon Corporation#Telephonics Corporation/Defense Segment (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Telephonics Corporation is no longer owned by Griffon Corporation. If Telephonics is not sufficiently notable for its own article, the redirect should be deleted. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:44, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Telephonics Corporation has a section at the target article (Griffon Corporation#Telephonics Corporation), which includes a mention of its sale. I'm unsure why this redirect needs to be deleted - even though the company seems to have been sold, this section of the Griffon Corporation article still seems to contain the most information on the company that Wikipedia currently has, and so - in the absence of an article on Telephonics Corporation - seems to be the best target to send readers looking for information on it to. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 11:22, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Jonny cochrane[edit]
- Jonny cochrane → Johnnie Cochran (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
honestly, i feel like it could refer to both Johnnie Cochran or Johnny Cochrane. Probably even more to the latter since the redirect uses the exact last name. Okmrman (talk) 00:55, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate with links to both. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete for 2 errors (from whichever target is intended). There's no justification for any further disambiguation: both targets have a hatnote. 16:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Shhhnotsoloud (talk)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:26, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep A disambiguation page consisting of nothing but errors is questionable IMO, especially with only two entries. Since both articles appropriately have hatnotes to each other and the lawyer is ultimately more notable, I'm fine with the status quo. As a second choice, go ahead and redirect it to the football manager—the nominator has a point that at least there's an exact match for the surname. --BDD (talk) 19:45, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)- Delete as per Shhhnotsoloud. Two errors away from either potential target is beyond the tolerance of WP:RTYPO, and the double error also introduces an WP:XY issue that a disambiguation, as pointed out, feels like the wrong call to resolve. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 20:25, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, no obvious target and we shouldn't make a dab for typos. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:53, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
PORTIA[edit]
Although I see PORTIA (in all caps) mentioned here, I think it makes sense to redirect to Portia (disambig page) instead. JuniperChill (talk) 10:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- REtarget to dab page -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 05:45, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. This capitalised redirect is correctly targeted and there's a hatnote to other uses. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:37, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:32, 4 May 2024 (UTC)- Keep per SHHH Okmrman (talk) 15:23, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the current and proposed targets and the creator talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:09, 17 May 2024 (UTC)- Keep per shhh. mwwv(converse) 14:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Doctor (rapper)[edit]
Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target article unclear. Per the edit history trail left by the redirect, the subject of this redirect may have a connection to the subject at Life (Sigma album). Steel1943 (talk) 18:58, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: This redirect previously targeted the page now at Rudeboy (Sigma song), where the sole reference (outside of the infobox and citations) to the rapper was that the song was
featuring vocals from British singer MC Doctor
(permalink). That page was BLARed in Jan 2023 and now targets Life (Sigma album), which - outside of the tracklist - references Doctor once, in the sentence"Rudeboy" featuring Doctor was released as the album's first single on 15 December 2013
. (The reason Doctor (rapper) currently targets Rude boy is because the redirect Rudeboy (song) was retargeted to that article not long after a move, causing a bot to retarget this redirect there as well.) All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 22:04, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom unless page gets updated Okmrman (talk) 04:04, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)- Either Delete, or retarget to Dr. Dre, given he's the first "Doctor rapper" my brain thinks of. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 20:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Please remember that we don't use what first comes to your mind as a way of determining appropriate targets. - Eureka Lott 23:51, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Enwiki doesn't appear to have anything substantive about a rapper known as Doctor (or indeed doctors who are rappers). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Pan-American English[edit]
- Pan-American English → North American English (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I just created it but I'm not sure if it's the best idea. I based it on Pan-American Spanish, but English language has no specific article for all the Americas. Or does it have under another name? --MikutoH talk! 22:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, cannot find use as one subject, usually "Pan-American" "English school", nothing about a grouping of varieties. Caribbean English is even considered separate, so the article is purely on the US and Canada. So the redirect not necessary nor representative of the article. I cannot find any wider article, under Category:English language in the Americas, possibly one could be made, so a redirect made then. DankJae 20:01, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:24, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Jhanak[edit]
Redirect with confusing history left over from promotional copy-and-paste moving. A draft of this television show exists at Draft:Jhanak (and has also been created at other titles). Target is one of the networks it has aired on, but has no information on the show at all. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:56, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:06, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Desi (Tibetan)[edit]
- Desi (Tibetan) → List of modern political leaders of Tibet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Desi (Tibet) → List of rulers of Tibet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The target doesn't tell me what "Desi" means in the context of Tibet. Is there a better target, or should we delete it if there's no substantive information? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The most substantive information I can find is at Dalai Lama, where the term is used several times and briefly defined once as "regent" or "viceroy." I am not sure that would be a suitable target, however, since the discussion is so brief. It might be better to leave as a redlink or perhaps find a more suitable article where a substantive mention could be added (maybe Ganden Phodrang?). - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Several of the rulers or regents listed at List of rulers of Tibet used the title desi, most notably Changchub Gyaltsen, Sangye Gyatso, and Shatra Wangchuk Gyalpo, but I'm not aware of an exhaustive list. Wikipedia does have an article on the slightly more specific title Druk Desi ("dragon viceroy") formerly used in Bhutan. Maybe we should make one of the redirects into a disambiguation page linking to those notable individuals and Druk Desi?—Greg Pandatshang (talk) 00:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:56, 10 May 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is a disambiguation page feasible?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)- I don't think so. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:15, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Category:Fictional musical instruments[edit]
- Category:Fictional musical instruments → Category:Fictional objects (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Misuse of category redirect. Merged per Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2023_November_14#Category:Fictional_musical_instruments. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:54, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
D-bar operator[edit]
- D-bar operator → Complex differential form (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- DBAR operator → DBAR problem (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
These should presumably go to the same target (note also ddbar lemma). 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: the operator is somewhat overloaded: the operator might be applied to complex functions in one or several variables, or to complex differential forms. It might be a Dolbeault operator or a Wirtinger derivative, in other words. I think the most helpful target is complex differential form. (Ideally the short section in Cauchy–Riemann equations on the several variables case should also be expanded, but a {{details}} link to complex differential form would anyway be good.) Charles Matthews (talk) 02:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Some other relevant pages are Dolbeault cohomology#Dolbeault–Grothendieck lemma and Holomorphic vector bundle#Dolbeault operators. I suspect a disambiguation page may be the best solution. Tazerenix (talk) 04:40, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate, several operators sharing the same mathematical notation. Ideally, redirect it to a section of the recently made Dbar disambiguation above. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 02:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Hisham Saleh[edit]
- Hisham Saleh → Mohamed Helmi (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Mahmoud Saleh Hisham → Mohamed Helmi (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The target page for this redirect is about another person. Same applies to Mahmoud Saleh Hisham, which also redirects to the same target page. Ben5218 (talk) 00:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note target now changed from Mohamed Helmi to Mohamed Helmy; and Mahmoud Saleh Hisham now bundled here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:30, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
May 16[edit]
Noise(manga)[edit]
Malformed title. Noise (manga) already exists. Recent speedy deletion tag was removed without explanation. Lithopsian (talk) 20:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete meets all WP:X3 criteria, which is why I tagged it. Would be nice if User:Shah Of Nowhere would provide an explanation when contesting speedies though that is not required. Since it has been contested though I have no problem with the listing here. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:A165:7AFC:68F9:104D (talk) 20:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete although its existed since 2006 its always been a redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:21, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- speedy delete under the recent WP:X3 criteria. InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 23:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete. This is a valid speedy delete. The only way a WP:X3 could be contested is in the case of extensive histories or copy-paste moves such as National Expressway 1(India) 104.7.152.180 (talk) 03:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Forbidden hot dog[edit]
Not mentioned at target, google yeilds nothing Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 18:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete not mentioned, potentially confusing, ambiguous and obscure. In sum D2 and D8 are both clearly applicable here. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:A165:7AFC:68F9:104D (talk) 20:19, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. D8 – "novel or very obscure". Nurg (talk) 23:55, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete just a variant of the obscure forbidden meme. Basically something that looks like food but is actually not. For example, a landmine is considered a forbidden can of tuna. --Lenticel (talk) 11:17, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Something, something, WP:SNOW? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 20:34, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete (and send to WP:DAFT) Seems too neologistic or obscure. Xeroctic (talk) 09:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Forbidden redirect, also known as a delete. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Open Fire(album)[edit]
Unecessary redirect with no space before a parenthetical disambiguation that has only minor page history, no incoming links from mainspace, and where a page with an otherwise identical but correctly spaced disambiguator exists, speedy contested by User:Rosguill for having too many pageviews; while that is not an exception to WP:X3, I have no problem bringing this here. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:A165:7AFC:68F9:104D (talk) 17:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete it was at this title for less than a day in 2010. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:39, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- delete due to malformed dabifier --Lenticel (talk) 11:19, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per X3: One pageview over an entire 366-day period is not a non-trivial number of pageviews. "Minor page history" is rather generous; actually, the redirect has no content history. The speedy deletion tag should probably be restored. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 16:53, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- User:Dsuke1998AEOS, because speedy deletion is supposed to be uncontroversial, so long as someone who is not the creator contests a speedy in good-faith (i.e. not a vandal, troll, UPE etc.) then that particular speedy tag should not be readded and if no other ones apply then the page goes to the appropriate XFD.
- I too disagree with User:Rosguills assertion, but a few extra XFDs here and there are no big deal. The only reason we even have CSD is to keep the volume down; a few extra days on pages that have existed for years are insubstantial. And there is always a chance they get snow-closed anyway so the time difference is even less. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:2C4B:B172:D025:C559 (talk) 21:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- For my part, my thinking is that, particularly since X3 is a new criterion, I should err on the side of caution when considering speedy deletion tags. Once there's a clearer track record as to what level of usage is actually considered enough to keep a bad redirect at RfD, I and other admins will be able to calibrate accepting or declining X3s accordingly. signed, Rosguill talk 22:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- As I said, I don't mind. Though if one pageview in the last year is enough to disqualify them WP:X3 might as well not exist so that bar seems too low. RFD discussions like this one will actually help to further determine best practices going forward so there is benefit regardless. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:2C4B:B172:D025:C559 (talk) 22:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- For my part, my thinking is that, particularly since X3 is a new criterion, I should err on the side of caution when considering speedy deletion tags. Once there's a clearer track record as to what level of usage is actually considered enough to keep a bad redirect at RfD, I and other admins will be able to calibrate accepting or declining X3s accordingly. signed, Rosguill talk 22:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Behind the Garden - Behind the Wall - Under the Tree(album)[edit]
- Behind the Garden - Behind the Wall - Under the Tree(album) → Behind the Gardens (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Unecessary redirect with no space before a parenthetical disambiguation that has only minor page history, no incoming links from mainspace, and where a page with an otherwise identical but correctly spaced disambiguator exists, speedy contested by User:Rosguill for having too many pageviews; while that is not an exception to WP:X3, I have no problem bringing this here. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:A165:7AFC:68F9:104D (talk) 17:15, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete it was at this title for less than a month in 2009. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:41, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete because the page history isn't significant enough in order to keep it. Also, there seems to be another redirect with "substantive history": Where Do I Begin (remix)(Shirley Bassey single) 104.7.152.180 (talk) 02:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Kingspade(album)[edit]
- Kingspade(album) → Kingspade (album) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Unecessary redirect with no space before a parenthetical disambiguation that has only minor page history, no incoming links from mainspace, and where a page with an otherwise identical but correctly spaced disambiguator exists, speedy contested by User:Rosguill for having too many pageviews; while that is not an exception to WP:X3, I have no problem bringing this here. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:A165:7AFC:68F9:104D (talk) 16:59, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete it was at this title for a few weeks in 2007. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:40, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete due to malformed modifier. --Lenticel (talk) 11:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per CSD X3 --Leonidlednev (T, C, L) 21:59, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Draft:2025 IndyCar Series[edit]
- Draft:2025 IndyCar Series → 2025 IndyCar Series (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Redirect in draftspace created as a result of disruptive article creation by an IP user over an existing redirect, and NPP not reverting the disruptive edits, but instead draftifying their "work" (which consisted of a lazy, unreferenced stub). Suggest deletion. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 13:20, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- HistSplit or just override the redirect with the previous draft, noting attribution in the edit summary if more convenient. Too soon applies to articles, but drafts are fine. Should have been histsplit the first time as the existing redirect should not have been deleted, but we can remedy that now. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:A165:7AFC:68F9:104D (talk) 20:11, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Severa[edit]
I don't see why this name should redirect to this person. ★Trekker (talk) 12:58, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Move Severa (disambiguation) to here over redirect. I'm not finding evidence that the software is the primary topic. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 13:29, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Move per Presidentman, clearly not the primary topic. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:A165:7AFC:68F9:104D (talk) 20:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Move dab per Presidentman --Lenticel (talk) 11:15, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- This is a redirect with history, so if the consensus is to move the disambiguation page, it probably should be moved away from the base title (maybe to something like Severa (software)) instead of deleting it. - Eureka Lott 13:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- That sounds fine to me. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Concur 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:2C4B:B172:D025:C559 (talk) 21:59, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- That sounds fine to me. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:20, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. It is the primary topic: all other entries at the disambiguation page are WP:Partial title matches. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:42, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Oggcast[edit]
Whatever mention that was in the podcast article was removed in 2020 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=942832128 Okmrman (talk) 20:31, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Dan Bloch (talk) 00:08, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Google says that this term is strongly related to/correlated with the Ogg file format... top result says that oggcast is an RSS equivelent for ogg-format podcasts specifically, while other sources state that it is a streaming protocol for ogg format audio (of any sort). I suppose the google top result is why this redirect was created. I wonder if this term is notable enough to get a brief mention on the ogg page, and then we could redirect there... but I'm not sure, so I'll refrain from !voting at the moment. Fieari (talk) 05:38, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Ogg or Vorbis and add mention per Fieari. Enix150 (talk) 15:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:16, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Pomosexuality[edit]
- Pomosexuality → wiktionary:pomosexual (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Retarget to Sexual identity#Unlabeled sexuality as it's mentioned there and links to Wiktionary. Though I wouldn't oppose retargeting somewhereelse if defined. --MikutoH talk! 02:14, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
May 15[edit]
Gorbino's Quest[edit]
- Gorbino's Quest → Cruelty Squad (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
A fictional element and/or creative work that is not mentioned at the target. "Gorbino" does not appear at the target, nor does "Gorbino" appear anywhere on Wikipedia. Much less their quest appearing anywhere on Wikipedia; no quest is ever alluded to at the target page either. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:41, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- gorbino's quest is a fictional game and recurring... "thing" there, and probably maybe the setting of one of the levels
- this is just like gorbino's quest. this is the gorbino's quest of redirects i'd keep if a mention can reasonably be made (probably in the plot section), or weak delete otherwise cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:51, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- gorbino's quest is found in cruelty squad and i wholeheartedly promise you anybody who form some bizarre reason searches for "gorbino's quest" on wikipedia is looking for the game's article Formaldehydemaster (talk) 00:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as per WP:CRUFT + unmentioned. We're not the Cruelty Squad wiki, and pageviews reflect that-- this redirect gets practically no views whatsoever. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:45, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - mentioned enough in the game that it is worth looking up to determine if it is an actual game (possibly by the developer of Cruelty Squad). It turns out it is an entirely fictional element but the redirect is useful for a reader looking for that information. It'd be better if there were a mention in the target article, though. (I found and used that redirect back in 2021 in that context, and then added rcats to it afterwards.) (A redirect for just "Gorbino" would not be useful, though, and one does not currently exist either.) --Pokechu22 (talk) 00:51, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:34, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:33, 26 April 2024 (UTC)- Delete per nom. Okmrman (talk) 00:40, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Deleteper nom, although could later be recreated if material about Gorbino's Quest is added to the article. Right now, it misleads the readers into thinking there is information there which there just isn't—someone looking up that specific quest probably already knows what game they're playing and isn't looking for generic information. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)- was bold and did it, though i feel it could have been worded and explained better
- will be voting to keep based on this, as said before cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 21:34, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Changing my vote to keep based on this. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:04, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:12, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: As it is mentioned on the page now and is an in-universe game. (Sidenote: what the heck is this game? The Steam screenshots look like something out of LSD Dream Emulator) StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 20:01, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- as someone with entirely too many hours spent dissecting its lore and civilians (brain is gonna skyrocket soon, trust me), i can safely say that it's exactly what it looks like
- which is to say "idk lol" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - We have the info, may as well redirect to it. Fieari (talk) 02:56, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Iflea[edit]
- Iflea → IPod (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- IFlea → IPod (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Unclear relationship between "Iflea" and an iPod. Not mentioned at target page, 0 page views in the last year (other than me), not linked from any Wikipedia pages. Searching returns flea bites, an ancient mobile game, a few companies, but I'm not seeing anything related to iPods. Not a commonly used nickname either as far as I'm aware. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 16:02, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator's reasoning. Waylon (was) (here) 17:06, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 01:07, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- The same IP also created IFlea (capital 'F') as a redirect to iPod. jlwoodwa (talk) 02:54, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- I have bundled it StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 18:17, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete We have no relevant information in article space; see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/IPod Flea. The original target (iPod flea) was deleted even earlier, in November 2006, less than a year and a half after the redirects were created. PleaseStand (talk) 04:52, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per PleaseStand, seems this is a reference to a completely non-notable humorous video from 20+ years ago. Fieari (talk) 04:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
Anita Alvarez(politician)[edit]
Return to Oz(song)[edit]
New Super Mario Bros. U : Luigi's Turn[edit]
- New Super Mario Bros. U : Luigi's Turn → New Super Luigi U (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No pages link to it, and doesn't seem that likely of a search term. Kolventra (talk) 13:56, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- delete per spaces before and after colons being a violation of basic grammar rules cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:35, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Implausible search term with an included typo on top of the implausible terminology (the space before the colon). Sounds like an alternate title made up by some friends hanging out one day. Fieari (talk) 04:17, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - A cursory search fails to find any source that refers to NSLU with this title. This plus the incorrect colon placement makes this redirect unneeded. MooseMike (talk) 05:06, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:03, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per above. JoshuaAuble (talk) 17:12, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
UA (India)[edit]
- UA (India) → Uttarakhand (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
There is no indication that the abbreviation UA is used in any context for Uttarakhand. There is a vehicle code column in the table at States and union territories of India where UK is used for Uttarakhand, but no UA. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 11:39, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- Please see Vehicle registration plates of India, this was the vehicle registration code for the former name of the state "Uttaranchal". Gotitbro (talk) 11:57, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- A 17-year out-of-date vehicle code seems an unlikely search term to merit a redirect from "UA (India)" to Uttarakhand. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:21, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- It still appears on vehicles in the state, and is also used by the state government in communications (e.g.: https://uaresults.nic.in/; main contact adresses still operating at "ua@nic.in", ua.nic.in) among others. Do not see why it would not be a likely search term. Gotitbro (talk) 13:42, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- A 17-year out-of-date vehicle code seems an unlikely search term to merit a redirect from "UA (India)" to Uttarakhand. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:21, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:43, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Leaning keep per Gotitbro. This is listed on the disambiguation page, UA, and I see nothing else on that page that would specifically refer to India. BD2412 T 17:36, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Hatnote (disambiguation)[edit]
- Hatnote (disambiguation) → Wikipedia:Hatnote (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Appears to be a bad cross namespace redirect. Note that the page Hatnote was brought up for discussion multiple times and closed as no consensus. One may not even be searching for this. ToadetteEdit! 07:54, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete I didn't know about WP:R2 at the time. JoshuaAuble (talk) 11:40, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- The project space is one of the exceptions to R2. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Added previous RfDs box (with one AFD!). I'll also note that in the 2022 discussion, HATLINK was deleted while Hatnotes and Hat note were part of the no consensus close. Skynxnex (talk) 13:19, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
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! 08:19, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - there are no articles titled "hatnote" which require disambiguation, and a cross-namespace redirect from mainspace to a project disambiguation page is not useful. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: XNR, no pages titled hatnote to disambiguate. (Hatnote itself is also a controversial redirect). StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 16:42, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Delete per se. Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 18:27, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per above. Not useful in article space. --Lenticel (talk) 08:52, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete As explained in WP:INTDAB, (disambiguation) redirects are created where there is a need to link to a disambiguation page. WP:G14 says that "Disambiguation pages that have titles ending in '(disambiguation)' but disambiguate only one extant Wikipedia page" may be deleted at any time, and afterward, any (disambiguation) redirect pointing to the disambiguation pages may be deleted as well. While G14 does not apply in this case, the implied expectation is that for titles ending in "(disambiguation)", we need only fix links from other Wikipedia pages and needn't worry about links from other sites. As such, there is no need to keep this cross-namespace redirect around, as any Wikipedia page linking to it can and should be updated to link directly to Wikipedia:Hatnote (disambiguation) instead. PleaseStand (talk) 05:35, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Shihab Chottur (walker)[edit]
- Shihab Chottur (walker) → List of longest walks (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This is an article (Shihab Chottur (walker)) with a notable WP:1E from a long walking list. Please move this article to its own main page, or take it back as an article ~~ User:Spworld2 (talk) 07:31, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I took the liberty of tagging this redirect, which wasn't tagged initially by the nom. CycloneYoris talk! 08:27, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shihab Chottur. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:06, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
1930–31 Notre Dame Fighting Irish men's basketball team[edit]
Redirect should be deleted so editors know which seasons still need to be made, otherwise every season would be a redirect. poketape (talk) 21:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
May 14[edit]
Template:Campiagnbox Gang war in Haiti[edit]
- Template:Campiagnbox Gang war in Haiti → Template:Campaignbox Gang war in Haiti (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Result of move from typographical error. No links. No apparent purpose to keeping. Bsherr (talk) 23:45, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Sea of Moving Ice[edit]
- Sea of Moving Ice → Forgotten Realms (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Unlikely search term. Could refer to lots of frozen bodies of water, and not mentioned at the target article. It may have been mentioned at a point when Wikipedia was more lax with its standards, but it would not fit with Wikipedia standards today. Jontesta (talk) 22:14, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. If you reply here, please ping me. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 22:16, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget - it is mentioned on the article Faerûn. BOZ (talk) 22:55, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Faerûn#Northern regions. Sea of Moving Ice could perhaps be renamed "Sea of Moving Ice (region)" (a la the Icewind Dale (region) redirect) to keep the article history while deleting the more general redirect. Sariel Xilo (talk) 22:57, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:16, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Jimmy Patterson[edit]
- Jimmy Patterson → Medal of Honor (video game series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Unlikely search term. Not mentioned at the target article. It may have been mentioned at a point when Wikipedia was more lax with its standards, but it would not fit with Wikipedia standards today. Jontesta (talk) 22:13, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. If you reply here, please ping me. thetechie@enwiki: ~/talk/ $ 22:17, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - I don’t have time to look into this deeply right now, but this edit summary suggests that this might be an {{R from merge}}, in which case its history might need to be preserved for attribution. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 07:29, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to James Patterson (disambiguation). Seems implausible that none of those people have ever been referred to as "Jimmy" and the current target is mentioned there. (Maybe not the ideal link since the article doesn't mention the name but multiple other Medal of Honor articles do so it probably deserves to be there in some manner per WP:DABMENTION). Skynxnex (talk) 19:15, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Per the talk page, the former article at this title was merged into three different articles. Deletion isn't an option, because we need to maintain proper attribution. While the character isn't mentioned at the current target, it appears to be the most sensible target among the various game articles. None of the other articles listed at James Patterson (disambiguation) mention that their subjects were called Jimmy. - Eureka Lott 20:34, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- Response you're referring to outdated information from 2009. There is no more merge and there is nothing left to attribute. As I said in my nomination, it is from a time when Wikipedia standards were more lax. It should not and is not coming back, and thus a redirect is not suitable. Jontesta (talk) 15:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:15, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to James Patterson (disambiguation). See, for example, this book imprint. --Bsherr (talk) 13:44, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Pax Britannica (video game)[edit]
- Pax Britannica (video game) → Pax Britannica (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete. Redirects to disambiguation page, the entry was without a wikilink. The game and developer No Fun Games are both non-notable, unlikely to be turned into articles. Mika1h (talk) 15:37, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, there's no video game listed at the disambig page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:09, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Harley Quinn (pornographic actor)[edit]
- Harley Quinn (pornographic actor) → Bailey Jay (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I can't determine why this redirects here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:39, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: it seems like her screen name used to be/occasionally was, based on the IMDb [8] page and (all following links may contain pornography) [9] and just general Google search results showing video titles that mention both names "Bailey Jay" "quinn". Now, redirects don't need quite the same level of reliable sourcing to exist so I'm still on the fence if this is useful enough to exist and if a mention of the name could be added in the article. Skynxnex (talk) 20:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep, better if mention added at target. If people are looking for information on this pornographic pseudonym, this person's biography is where they will find it. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No mention at the target yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:28, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. A redirect with a disambiguator without possibilities is needless. Harley Quinn (disambiguation) will have to be edited to link directly to the target. --Bsherr (talk) 13:53, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- I have added mention at the Infobox where other screen names were mentioned. Jay 💬 06:05, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
2020 Games[edit]
- 2020 Games → 2020 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The Summer Olympics are not known simply as "Games". See also Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 January 3#2022 Games. Mia Mahey (talk) 02:22, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I'll note, they are in many occasions, such as [10] [11] [12], none of which use the "summer" qualifier but do refer to the 2024 as Games. These aren't the Winter Olympics. There's the colloquial Olympics, and the Winter Olympics. The word "summer" is often dropped on most occasions when discussing the Olympics that take place in the summer, so I wouldn't consider the winter games to be on the same level. 2008 Games and 1992 Games are current redirects to their respective Olympics and have existed since 2007 and 2006, respectively. This is in conjunction with similar titles such as 2006 Winter Games and/or 2014 Winter Games as expected. These were created through AfC so I don't have a strong attachment, but if you have any alternate titles that have a higher significant usage of "2020 Games" that could be useful to note. Utopes (talk / cont) 02:48, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- disambiguate, or retarget to 2020 in video games, since it ignores the winter olympics and those other things people refer to almost exclusively as "games"
- would suggest "2020 summer games", but that also seems to refer mostly to games released in the summer of 2020 cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Strong disagree on the summer games part, 2020 Summer Olympics has 50x more views than 2020 in games. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- But there were no Winter Olympics in 2020? Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:40, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I don't think this is a useful redirect, and I don't think it would be a useful dab page either. If you search for "2020 games", ignoring this redirect, you'll get results that take you to the likely spots mentioned in this discussion. -- asilvering (talk) 04:04, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 16:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Originally closed as "delete", but reopened upon request for additional consideration of the arguments above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 13:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)- Keep per Utopes, the Summer Olympics are commonly the Games, and are referred to as, say, "Games of the XXXII Olympiads". The capitalization makes it clear that this is not about, say, video games, but one specific event. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 13:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:26, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Female Rage: The Musical[edit]
Doug Ross (ER)[edit]
Littlehampton Book Services[edit]
- Littlehampton Book Services → Hachette Livre (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No mention in article Isla🏳️⚧ 00:01, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, see Orion Publishing Group#History. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:14, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Orion Publishing Group#History per Shhhnotsoloud's findings. I oppose keeping since there's no mention at the current target. CycloneYoris talk! 03:51, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
May 13[edit]
Stars and planetary systems in fiction[edit]
- Stars and planetary systems in fiction → Extrasolar planets in fiction (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete per WP:XY per the rationale at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 3#Fictional stars and planetary systems. Steel1943 (talk) 19:53, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Long standing title. Keep as
{{R from move}}
or at worst, dabify. —Kusma (talk) 20:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC) - (edit conflict) This is an {{R from move}} - from what I can see, the page now at Extrasolar planets in fiction was at this title from its creation in August 2006 until less than a week ago. Because of this, I'd be very wary of supporting this redirect's deletion (per WP:R#K4); however, given the WP:XY issues, I'm currently leaning in favour of turning this title into a disambiguation page pointing to both articles. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 20:18, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as an {{R from move}}; see WP:LINKROT. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:49, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per the other comments. It looks like there is too much traffic at this time to consider deleting this link. Perhaps a ways down the road, the traffic will stop and this can be renominated. -2pou (talk) 20:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Would it be feasible to create a dab at this title?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)- Comment The first step either way should be to convert incoming links to point to Extrasolar planets in fiction (the less ambiguous title) if that was the intended target, or to Stars in fiction, and, if links specifically pointing to the WP:XY title remain (e.g., intended to link more generally to fictional systems of star+planets), we can see if there are enough to warrant either a disambiguation page or a section in one of the two articles. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 11:11, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- All links in mainspace and templates have already been taken care of. TompaDompa (talk) 19:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- So all the traffic is from external websites? In this case I'm guessing it was intended to point to Extrasolar planets in fiction, so keep per above to avoid linkrot. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:08, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- All links in mainspace and templates have already been taken care of. TompaDompa (talk) 19:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Category:Television series by CBS Television Studios[edit]
East Midlands Mainline[edit]
[edit]
- Universal Classic Monsters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ] →
A "shared universe" is never discussed at the target article, and is only mentioned within one of the external links. In my opinion this is not currently a likely or helpful redirect in the article's current form, as there is no substantial coverage of a shared universe. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:34, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep It's a plausible search term. And honestly the only reason shared universe isn't mentioned is because so much material that used to be in the article has been deleted a few years ago in a controversial rewrite.★Trekker (talk) 19:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. The controversial edit by Trekker is referring to my own re-write. On trying to organize the films as a whole proved to be fruitless. Namely they don't cross-over until late into the end of the series and there is no rush to lump them all together as a series until they were marketed on home video. They don't narratively connect (and even when they attempt to, it is very loose). As there won't be any mention of how these films connect in that article currently, I'd suggest we remove the re-direct. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:26, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 20:52, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 21:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC)- Comment: I've recently re-vamped the content to show where the Universal Monsters connect with sources that deal with this specifically. That said, the term "Univerasl Monsters Shared Universe" was not a term I came across and suggesting they are all within the same universe is not really explicitly the case and the this specific term is not mentioned in the article. Andrzejbanas (talk) 21:07, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The target article previously included content regarding Universal Pictures' cancelled "Dark Universe", which maps more closely to current use of "shared universe". That content is still present at The_Mummy_(2017_film)#Cancelled_franchise.
Kingofthepirates.com[edit]
Dead website that was probably fanmade as well. Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 07:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete probably not even worth a redirect when alive. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Mazewaxie: It was not a fansite. It was 4Kids Entertainment's official One Piece site (the privacy policy goes to 4Kids) https://web.archive.org/web/20051001030033/http://kingofthepirates.com/
- @Allan Nonymous: would this change if it was revealed that this was 4Kids' One Piece site?
- WhisperToMe (talk) 00:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- That's... really weird. I mean, maybe it would have changed my mind were it up any time in the past decade-and-a-half but now it's the kind of obscure trivia that's just irrelevant. Allan Nonymous (talk) 00:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- I created the redirect in 2009, when the 4Kids dub was only a few years old. WhisperToMe (talk) 00:32, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- That's... really weird. I mean, maybe it would have changed my mind were it up any time in the past decade-and-a-half but now it's the kind of obscure trivia that's just irrelevant. Allan Nonymous (talk) 00:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- I have added the webarchive link to the External links section. Jay 💬 13:38, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to One Piece (1999 TV series), which is what the website was about. Jay's external link has since been moved there from One Piece. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to One Piece (1999 TV series) WhisperToMe (talk) 16:31, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mention added to One Piece (1999 TV series). Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:50, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Genie (feral child and etc.[edit]
- Genie (feral child → Genie (feral child) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Kuru (disease → Kuru (disease) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- USS Pueblo (AGER-2 → USS Pueblo (AGER-2) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Flow (psychology → Flow (psychology) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- List of countries by GDP (PPP → List of countries by GDP (PPP) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Rectifier (neural networks → Rectifier (neural networks) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Address (geography → Address (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- E (mathematical constant → E (mathematical constant) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- My Way (2011 film → My Way (2011 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Glob (programming → Glob (programming) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Davy Crockett (nuclear device → Davy Crockett (nuclear device) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Easter egg (media → Easter egg (media) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Well, in for a penny, in for a pound... this nomination consists of every remaining redirect with unclosed parenthesis, of which there are now only twelve. All of these typos are not plausible to intentionally make on their own. Because there's been cumulatively 1000+ or so of these redirect types deleted over the last few months, this nomination seeks to determine whether there's a threshold that makes these redirects acceptable, or if one even exists. Most of these redirects have come to exist through erroneous links, which are updateable. While it's good to have redirects from common misspellings lying around for ease of navigation on Wikipedia, the presence of implausible redirect errors sets unreasonable expectations and portrays the faulty notion to readers that "infinite typo variations are encouraged, regardless of likelihood", when this is not currently the case. For the most part, spelling variations are accepted in redirects; especially with words that are tricky to spell, having a set of titles with minor differences can be useful to capture likely, intentional errors. When it pertains to disambiguation, though, there will never be a time where errors in the act of disambiguation are expected, for any title. While someone might spell a title like Hampster with an intentional (but incorrect) "P", one can generally have 100% confidence that a title with a left parenthesis will contain a right parenthesis, and, as an extension, typing in a title that doesn't contain a right parenthesis will have a 0% likelihood of being redirected to the correct title, as it will never be correctly expected. The disambiguator is Wikipedia's "official insertion" onto the title based on other article names that co-exist here. The tagline's format can be safely assumed as error-free, or if there is an error in the disambiguation, that it will be corrected ASAP without hesitation. Being locked into keeping tabs on any and all errors within this "topic title guarantee" inherited from Wikipedia disambiguation precedent, just because of one (or twelve remaining) bad links on the internet, is just not worth for titles that are one punctuation mark away from the correctness that was already assumed beforehand. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:46, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all. When typing in to the search bar, the search result will be autocompleted with the missing parentheses. As for websites that cannot handle parentheses, that is, as has been established quite clearly over the last few months, their problem, and not Wikipedia's-- they need to fix their formatting handling. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 04:12, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all - Note that I !voted delete on the last batch you nominated. This batch I'm !voting keep for the simple reason that they are demonstrably useful to someone... in that these redirects are all getting use (noting again that this is unlike the last batch). They're WP:CHEAP, they're useful, they're harmless. Note that I expressly do NOT support the creation of more of these things, for all the reasons cited by nom, but I don't think we should deliberately go out of our way to break someone's workflow just because it makes our database tidier. If, at some point in the future, these stop getting regular use for an extended period of time, I'd be happy to see them gone. But for now, they get use, they're unambiguous, they should stay. (No offense to nom, by the way, I appreciate getting community input on where the limits are / should be) Fieari (talk) 07:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all per Fieari. Deletion would inconvenience readers without brining any benefits to anybody. Thryduulf (talk) 10:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all as unnecessary. One parenthesis missing does not justify these redirects when the search function automatically fills in the desired results for anyone searching for them. These are just pointless redirects. Trailblazer101 (talk) 16:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all per Fieari and Thryduulf, and the previous discussions. Genie (feral child has gone down in use since the prior discussions except that it got over 6,500 hits on March 29, more than some articles get in a year. It's clearly still useful; Wikipedia's mission is to provide information to its readers, not to break things and hope that an external website notices (they won't). Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:17, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: WP:UNNATURAL typos. The search box fills in the parentheses for you, I doubt anyone is going to type an opening parenthesis, forget to close it, and then hit enter without selecting the correct option from search. As for other websites, that's their problem. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 18:50, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- These redirects are not typos for the benefit of people already on Wikipedia, but people navigating to Wikipedia from external sites. Many sites most prominently Reddit, have an issue where the trailing parenthesis is cut off in URLs without some HTML wizardry. The site "forces" users to make these "typos" when you just copy the link sometimes. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 17:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all I think my past self would have (and did) support deleting these. But we come down to yet another delete these convention failing to uphold a challenge on its merits, and so it goes. * Pppery * it has begun... 22:21, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:00, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all per nom and WP:RDAB due to the missing end parentheses. Also, delete per precedence set at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 27#Redirects with disambiguators missing ")" and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 14#Conjunction (grammar and etc.. Steel1943 (talk) 14:04, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all — the assertion in the description "Most of these redirects have come to exist through erroneous links, which are updateable." is vague and misleading: it hides the useful truth which is that "At least some of these links are NOT updateable.", for example in IRC chat logs (e.g. for "Address (geography"). Agreed with prior Keep all arguments that a small handful of such redirects are WP:CHEAP. The net-net here is that a small handful are providing more utility (fixing unchangeable slightly erroneous links to Wikipedia, for a smoother Wikipedia experience) than cost. That's also a reasonable standard to apply for future such exceptions (source of link is apparently unchangeable). The arguments for Delete all appear to mostly be forms of the "Perfect is the enemy of good" problem. Tantek (talk) 17:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- All links are updateable, through either direct editing, or replacement if locked. The notice that appears on every page saying "did you mean to close your parentheses" would not discourage readers from reaching their destination being just a click away, and encourages the phasing-out of any erroneous links. "Perfect is the enemy of good" does not seem to be accurate when we aren't dealing with an out-of-reach concept of totality; there's no 80-20 about it. This the entire set of titles that are out of alignment with redirect fundamentals, and the problem can be solved with just this RfD. The lack of these redirects will not prevent anyone beyond finding it gone a single time, and immediately finding a new solution in seconds, whether it comes from adding a parentheses to their search term or url, or adding it to the link itself if handy, or generating one's own link. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:43, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all if you are going to rescue typos by redirection then why stop with close parenthese. Why not redirect E Mathematical Contant and Genie (ferral child) OrewaTel (talk) 02:44, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all per nom and RDAB, and also per precedence of previous discussions. CycloneYoris talk! 02:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all - per all above, also a) Aren't these only "getting used" because as people type in names, the auto-fill starts listing results and as they get to the end of the name, but before they type in the closing parathesis, the redirect without one populates to the bottom of the auto-fill box making it most obvious and easy to click on,(but at that point, the correct, full name is right there at the top of the results as well).
b) It doesn't seem anyone wants to see more of these types of redirects created, so wouldn't deleting help with that? (There are people who literally spend all their time looking for pages to create, and having redirects like this to obstensibly compensate for typos in page names will just encourage the creation of more.)
Their usage is a false positive, they don't really assist with anything, removing them will not hamper anyone's ability to search, and if we don't want these types of redirects, then we shouldn't be making a special exception to this group just because they exist. (jmho) - wolf 04:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all based on the fact there are legitimate reasons why people might be visiting these redirects other than simply typos. For example, in Markdown, unescaped right parentheses are interpreted as the end of a URL, so often times when people link these Wikipedia pages in Reddit comments, people will be directed to these sorts of titles. In addition, of course redirects are cheap. --Habst (talk) 16:46, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 15:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all These redirects are explicitly discouraged and would fall under WP:R3 if created today. There is precedent for deleting them, and keeping them would have WP:PANDORA issues. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- delete all per all the other times those redirects with missing parentheses got deleted cogsan (nag me (stalk me 18:06, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all. Redirects are WP:CHEAP, and these are all likely from external links on sites such as Reddit and are absolutely pointed at the correct targets. These also all appear to be popular enough to get regular use about 5 users a day or so. Genie especially is frequently posted and can get very high daily page views (e.g. 6k a few weeks ago). It does Wikipedia no good to delete it or to force them to make an additional click. Arguments to delete because no one is going to forget typing the closing parentheses or because of auto-fill should be ignored, as the use case for this is almost exclusively linking from external sites. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Here is an example of the formatting issues with Reddit's Markdown language for its posts that is the primary reason for these redirects existing in the first place: [13]. Very few people are using these links deliberately. They are being forced to, and we should've deliberately inconvenience readers because of minor stylistic issues. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- We shouldn't be responsible for creating redirects accounting for bugs in other platform's errors. A bug that has been fixed years ago, from the looks of it, being fixed well before the reddit post was made, as implied. People using old reddit are doing so knowing full well its limitations. So now there's zero surprise that a parenthesis could go missing at the end of a URL, as it's been long-since documented and understood, apparently. The solution is not "allow infinite redirects with botched-up disambiguation because old-reddit users might run into a broken link here and there, despite it being fixed for many years but refuse to upgrade to avoid it"; or, we can stop supporting "Foo (bar" titles due to the pollution it causes on our end, allowing implausible misnomers among redirects, splitting histories and causing messes and clutter that can be simply avoided. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- (Also in response to the reddit poster's query linked, I tried the second hyperlink on both old and new reddit and it seems to be working fine for me; I'm getting to Paris (surname) both ways.) Utopes (talk / cont) 20:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- i hear the error (whatever it actually is) was fixed ages ago cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- For what it's worth, it does not work for me in Old Reddit either on PC or mobile, with or without RES. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 14:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Reddit is an absolutely massive website with hundreds of millions of users, so even a small percentage of Old Reddit users represents a significant population. Old Reddit users aren't people who just forgot to upgrade or something, there are real downsides to New Reddit (mainly ads-related) that lead them to opt out. A bug being documented is not equal to the bug being understood and 100% of end users having the technical know-how to avoid it. While not a scientific survey of any sort, anecdotal open-source evidence [14] seems to show that approximately 5% of Reddit users seem to use the older version.
- No one is saying that we should enthusiastically encourage or go out of our way to create a duplicate redirect for each page with a parenthetical disambiguator. But for ones that did get created, someone found them WP:USEFUL and where we have proof that they do get use as is the case here, which are two reasons explicitly listed as the #4 and 5reasons not to delete redirects at WP:R#KEEP, where's the harm in keep them? Far more editor time has been wasted trying to delete these than has ever been spent on creating them in the first place. These titles are not misnomers, with only a clear typographical difference and the page histories are usually extremely short. Many of these have also stood a decade or more without any serious issues. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 14:06, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- (Also in response to the reddit poster's query linked, I tried the second hyperlink on both old and new reddit and it seems to be working fine for me; I'm getting to Paris (surname) both ways.) Utopes (talk / cont) 20:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- We shouldn't be responsible for creating redirects accounting for bugs in other platform's errors. A bug that has been fixed years ago, from the looks of it, being fixed well before the reddit post was made, as implied. People using old reddit are doing so knowing full well its limitations. So now there's zero surprise that a parenthesis could go missing at the end of a URL, as it's been long-since documented and understood, apparently. The solution is not "allow infinite redirects with botched-up disambiguation because old-reddit users might run into a broken link here and there, despite it being fixed for many years but refuse to upgrade to avoid it"; or, we can stop supporting "Foo (bar" titles due to the pollution it causes on our end, allowing implausible misnomers among redirects, splitting histories and causing messes and clutter that can be simply avoided. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:48, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Here is an example of the formatting issues with Reddit's Markdown language for its posts that is the primary reason for these redirects existing in the first place: [13]. Very few people are using these links deliberately. They are being forced to, and we should've deliberately inconvenience readers because of minor stylistic issues. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 19:18, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all These are pointless, as people are unlikely to be typing in the full disambiguation anyway. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Keep all – Many chat programs and similar, when making links clickable, automatically omit a trailing parenthesis, considering it part of the surrounding punctuation, so redirects repairing this are always useful. Gawaon (talk) 09:50, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Vote changed to delete all, since, as Shhhnotsoloud pointed out (below), our software already handles this automatically, so there is no need for creating or maintaining such links manually. Gawaon (talk) 22:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)- Keep all per WP:CHEAP. Would I have created these redirects myself? Possibly not. Do they do any harm to the encylopedia and/or readers by existing? Also no - as far as I can see, they are practically harmless. I'm not seeing how these types of redirect are problematic enough to warrant deletion, and deletion may well do harm by breaking external links (WP:R#K4). To answer Utopes' point above, we're not responsible for creating these sorts of redirects for every title that exists, but I don't see how deleting the ones that do get created benefits the project. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 13:11, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all. These are exemplar cases of WP:RDAB. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:48, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Out of curiosity are any of the other examples at RDAB the result of programming error? -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 15:16, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Patar knight: I don't know, but arguably Wikipedia isn't here to provide redirects to get around everyone else's bugs. (And anyway ... in old Reddit a redirect that misses the trailing parenthesis gets you to, for example, Harris (surname. The first thing at that page and many others is "Did you mean: Harris (surname)?". We simply don't need these redirects, and already have a useful essay which lists the kind of redirects we don't need. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Out of curiosity are any of the other examples at RDAB the result of programming error? -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 15:16, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Steel1943 JoshuaAuble (talk) 22:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, noting the nomination has been open for over five weeks, as consensus has yet to precipitate. Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC)- Delete all per Lunamann and Steel1943. mwwv(converse) 14:37, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all per WP:RDAB and Steel1943. These are not only unhelpful as a link but also unnecessary as a search term as the valid title exists and will autocomplete anyways. Gonnym (talk) 16:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
TotalMedia Theatre[edit]
- TotalMedia Theatre → ArcSoft (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Arcsoft TotalMedia Theatre → ArcSoft (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- ArcSoft TotalMedia Theatre → ArcSoft (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No mention of TotalMedia or TotalMedia Theatre at the target article. This is not a helpful redirect as there is no content about this subtopic, and the stub for ArcSoft does not help enlighten readers here. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history of Arcsoft TotalMedia Theatre?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- As part of #MediaImpression, Ubcule had enhanced the target and added the products, including the one under discussion. Jay 💬 14:28, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all since they're now mentioned at the current target. CycloneYoris talk! 07:19, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all the list ArcSoft#Products is inherently promotional cruft and should be removed. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:20, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all per PPP Okmrman (talk) 03:30, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Mentions added to target. Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
⇢[edit]
This refers to birational maps. Right now the target article has a hatnote for three of the arrows redirecting there, but I'm not sure expanding that indefinitely would be the best option. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)- Retarget to Birational geometry#Birational maps or the more general Rational mapping (which also uses either this or the similar notation ⤏), someone copy-pasting this specific symbol is much more likely to look for what it means than for a generic "arrow symbol" page. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 14:34, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep / refine to the "Usage" section and mentioned dashed arrows there. They also occur in sequence diagrams and various other places including commutative diagrams. —Kusma (talk) 20:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 19:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Ancient United States[edit]
Sucking peepee[edit]
- Sucking peepee → Fellatio (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Peepee sucking → Fellatio (talk · links · history · stats)
I think the title makes it obvious why. Yes, it's technically pointing to the correct page, but seriously. I doubt "Sucking peepee" is really an encyclopedic redirect to have. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 23:41, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Redirects are allowed to be "unencyclopedic". This is an unambiguous redirect, so it's valid. Fieari (talk) 23:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – Being a comprehensible synonym isn't sufficient grounds to include an expression. Yes, redirects are cheap—very cheap—but that doesn't mean we need to go Full Neelix and include every possible comprehensible synonym that no one would ever use. If there are actually instances of people searching for this, I'd be fine with it; but are there? Google Trends says no. (That one spike today is me just checking.) Please delete this, before someone decides that if this works, then so does hoovering hoohaa, lapping labia, tonguing twat, and savoring snatch, none of which are on Google Trends.[citation needed] (Actually, I didn't bother to check; but wouldn't it be something if one of them *is* on Trends, whereas sucking peepee is not? Then what are we gonna do?) Mathglot (talk) 05:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and Mathglot. Can successfully get to this target from a plethora of different searches, including but not limited to, Google. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:22, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Unlikely/unhelpful search terms. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:57, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- torn between voting to delete based on "peepee" being a general term for the thing that expels the bladder juice (i'm sure there's a better term for that), and to keep based on it being funnyultimately though, i'd say retarget them to sexual intercourse or a more general target. can't check for a specific target at the moment, my isp would have me killed within the next 3 hours cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Utopes. Jay 💬 18:05, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Mathglot; we don't need redirects for every euphemism people might invent. And when it comes to sex acts, there are a lot. Crossroads -talk- 23:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 00:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:CHEAP and as plausible search terms, and tag with {{R from colloquial name}}. To respond to concerns in the nomination, redirects are allowed to be unencyclopedic - I’m not aware of a policy/guideline that disallows such redirects, and WP:RNEUTRAL states that
perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion
. Arguments have been made above regarding the likelihood of these as search terms — however, google:"sucking+peepee" tells me that the phrase is one that is in use on the wider Internet, and these therefore strike me as plausible search terms (engaging WP:R#K3). The question I’m asking myself is ‘could these redirects potentially refer to articles besides the current target?’ - and, from what I can see, they seem fairly unambiguous.Would I have created these redirects myself? Probably not. However, are they problematic such that they require deletion? My answer to that question is no — and therefore, my !vote is to keep: just because Wikipedia doesn’t need these redirects doesn’t mean that the project and/or readers are harmed by their existence. To respond to Mathglot’s and Crossroads' concerns regarding potential other redirects being created, pandora’s-box-style arguments are a form of WP:OTHERSTUFF: if such redirects are created, they can be judged on their own merits (including deletion per WP:R#D8 if anovel or very obscure
term without a mention in the article) - and the currently nominated redirects should be judged on their own merits likewise. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 10:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)- If your argument is based on a google search telling you that "that the phrase is one that is in use on the wider Internet" I would have to respond, "Do you have any idea how small a number 49 results is on the entire internet?" That is functionally equivalent to zero. Some statistician among us might estimate the number of unique English bigrams on the internet with over 49 hits, and that number would be enormous, but they don't all rate redirects, only the ones searched for possibly do. There is no evidence that anybody searched for this bigram (at least, before this thread was started). Mathglot (talk) 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- If it would help, I could link individual pages which use this term. In my mind, the question is whether or not this is a
novel or very obscure
phrase, and - based on the usage I found from the search - my opinion is that it doesn’t meet that bar. (As a side note, I’m unsure where49 results
originates from - for me, the search returns ~1,700.) Given the size of the internet, lots of terms could be said to have a usagefunctionally equivalent
to zero; however, if a redirect from such a term would potentially be helpful, and its existence wouldn’t be problematic, I don’t see why it couldn’t exist - just because a phrase is insignificant compared to the internet as a whole, doesn’t necessarily mean that that phrase isnovel or very obscure
. While evidence of usage can be a factor in favour of keeping, a lack of usage is not a reason to delete a redirect. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 10:26, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- If it would help, I could link individual pages which use this term. In my mind, the question is whether or not this is a
- If your argument is based on a google search telling you that "that the phrase is one that is in use on the wider Internet" I would have to respond, "Do you have any idea how small a number 49 results is on the entire internet?" That is functionally equivalent to zero. Some statistician among us might estimate the number of unique English bigrams on the internet with over 49 hits, and that number would be enormous, but they don't all rate redirects, only the ones searched for possibly do. There is no evidence that anybody searched for this bigram (at least, before this thread was started). Mathglot (talk) 23:07, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - per {{R from colloquial name}}.See Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_April_25#Kissing_pussy GobsPint (talk) 22:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - if a reader wants information on these topics, the current target is where they will find it. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:58, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – an Unlikely and unhelpful search terms. Drdpw (talk) 18:46, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Useless. Wikipedia is not a profanity de-censorer. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:20, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete? (I count 9 deletes and 4 keeps.)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 07:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: per Mathglot. What next? Tongue poking the one eyed snake? Does every possibility need to exist regardless of whether it is likely or helpful? TarnishedPathtalk 07:50, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as per arguments already put forward above, and also anyone who actually searches for this term is likely to be a child. Plenty of other redirects lead to fellatio (65 in total) and as far as I can see none of them are as juvenile (with the possible exception of cockgobbling) and unlikely to be searched. Obviously, juvenile content is allowed on Wikipedia but together with the rest of the arguments put forward is it really necessary in this case? Adam Black talk • contributions 12:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Couldn't English learners also search for this term? Air on White (talk) 06:08, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- I am a language learner. When learning Dutch, I learnt the word "penis" (admittedly I could have taken a guess at that one) long before the colloquial "lul". In Swedish I know the word "manslem", and in Spanish "pene" but don't know any other ways of saying penis in either language. Maybe I'm an oddity, but in my experience language learners learn the actual word first and then the colloquialisms. I'm sure language learners are more likely to use the word "penis" as it's the same in Dutch, German, French (with an accent), Swedish, Portuguese (with an accent), Danish, Bosnian, Norwegian, Turkish and Latin, I'm sure amongst others. The point is, I don't think the argument that maybe English learners will use a relatively obscure euphamism for male genitalia holds up under scrutiny. Adam Black talk • contributions 18:23, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- Couldn't English learners also search for this term? Air on White (talk) 06:08, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, not because it is particularly bad, but to avoid a repeat of the WP:X1 Neelix issues, even if those were more prominently about breasts. —Kusma (talk) 12:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Kusma: Forgive me for asking this, but isn't this just WP:OTHERSTUFF? If this redirect isn't particularly bad, I don't see why it should be deleted based on the idea that other redirects might be created - if they are, RfD can deal with them as/when they occur. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 15:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- If you want a policy, it is Wikipedia is not a dictionary, especially not a slang dictionary. We even have WP:NOTURBANDICT as a shortcut to that page. Ignoring this just leads to [15]. —Kusma (talk) 18:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- My reading of WP:NOTDICT is that it applies to the content of articles rather than redirects, and so would be applicable if e.g. someone wrote a dictionary-definition article on a slang term (which is where
Wikipedia is not a...slang...guide
would apply). However, per WP:R#K3, redirects from plausible search terms for article subjects are allowed - redirects existing from colloquial terms doesn't violate NOTDICT by my understanding. Best, —a smart kitten[meow] 20:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- My reading of WP:NOTDICT is that it applies to the content of articles rather than redirects, and so would be applicable if e.g. someone wrote a dictionary-definition article on a slang term (which is where
- If you want a policy, it is Wikipedia is not a dictionary, especially not a slang dictionary. We even have WP:NOTURBANDICT as a shortcut to that page. Ignoring this just leads to [15]. —Kusma (talk) 18:02, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Kusma: Forgive me for asking this, but isn't this just WP:OTHERSTUFF? If this redirect isn't particularly bad, I don't see why it should be deleted based on the idea that other redirects might be created - if they are, RfD can deal with them as/when they occur. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 15:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Despite how silly these redirects seem, they are still plausible search terms. Google shows 1,700 results for the exact phrase "sucking peepee." Meanwhile, the alternate spelling "sucking pp," which does not yet have a page, records 11,100 results. The arguments that "sucking peepee" is an unlikely search terms are speculative, as these two were nominated for deletion within an hour of being created, leaving no time to collect pageview data. The likelihood of a redirect being useful should correspond with how often it is viewed, after all. Why not just keep these new redirects? There's no harm. If they truly are useless, we can always RfD again. Air on White (talk) 06:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try… Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 19:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I don't even know how long the discussion will last. I'm gonna vote weak keep. Ahri.boy (talk) 07:29, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Shuggie[edit]
Drove[edit]
Anonima italiana petroli[edit]
Windows 8.2[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 21#Windows 8.2
Kafka-trapping[edit]
Knightfall (comics)[edit]
- Knightfall (comics) → List of DC Comics characters: K (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Knightfall (character) → List of DC Comics characters: K (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete. No mention of "Knightfall" in the target article. Mika1h (talk) 11:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget "(comics)" to Batman: Knightfall, a DC Comics comic book storyline; when Bruce Wayne Batman broke his back and was replaced by Azrael and then Nightwing as Batman -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 05:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For an opinion on Knightfall (character). Also notified of this discussion at the current and proposed target talk pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget Knightfall (comics) per 65.92.247.66, Delete Knightfall (character). -Elmer Clark (talk) 04:05, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Tagged Knightfall (character) with {{R with history}}. Its AfD had closed as redirect last year. Jay 💬 11:31, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I'm reverting my close (and relisting) because, as Jay pointed on my talk page, this discussion would be better served by a relist. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 12:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- At the Knightfall (character)'s AfD, 5 out of 6 participants voted merge, and two list targets were proposed. However, Explicit closed the AfD as redirect, not merge. Merge to the current target, or restore and tag with a {{merge to}}. Retarget "(comics)" to Batman: Knightfall per all. Jay 💬 16:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The Road (upcoming film)[edit]
Draft:Kokkarakko[edit]
LGD redirects[edit]
These 282 "foo LGD" redirects were created in the last two days, on 11 and 12 May 2024.[16] Chocolateediter briefly described their intent as to aid editing "When you have long-ish lists";[17] they are intended to redirect to UK local government districts, hence the novel initialism "LGD". They have now been used to shorten the targets of piped links, eg changing [[London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham|Hammersmith and Fulham]] to [[Hammersmith and Fulham LGD|Hammersmith and Fulham]] (with 30 other such changes) at London boroughs[18] and similarly with 7 other new redirects at Greater Manchester[19]. This obscures the targets for other editors and does nothing to help readers. "LGD" is not an initialism in common use in the UK and can't be expected to make searching easier for readers. NebY (talk) 10:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Procedural request: how best can we consider all 285 new "foo LGD" redirects? Must each be tagged and how, and do we want a full list here? Totally outside my experience and toolkit. NebY (talk) 10:53, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- @NebY: I can go through and tag them semi-automatically using WP:JWB if you'd like. I'm unsure of whether there's a standard for how to list large nominations; but two ideas I had are (a) placing the list on the log's talk page and linking to it from here, or (b) including them above but wrapping the list in {{cot}}/{{cob}} tags. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 12:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- @A smart kitten Thank you! Tagging them all seems good and proper, as long as it doesn't make far too much work for the closer if they're kept. I guess having them listed on this page would be better - but yes, definitely wrapped. NebY (talk) 12:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Doing... —a smart kitten[meow] 12:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Done (courtesy ping NebY, as I modified your nomination slightly to reflect the fact that all the 282 redirects are now bundled.) —a smart kitten[meow] 13:30, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Doing... —a smart kitten[meow] 12:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- @A smart kitten Thank you! Tagging them all seems good and proper, as long as it doesn't make far too much work for the closer if they're kept. I guess having them listed on this page would be better - but yes, definitely wrapped. NebY (talk) 12:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
intitle:/ LGD/ insource:/REDIRECT/
limited to article space seems to find basically all of them (not sure why it appears to be finding only 282 as of this writing), in case it helps. Skynxnex (talk) 13:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- @NebY: I can go through and tag them semi-automatically using WP:JWB if you'd like. I'm unsure of whether there's a standard for how to list large nominations; but two ideas I had are (a) placing the list on the log's talk page and linking to it from here, or (b) including them above but wrapping the list in {{cot}}/{{cob}} tags. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 12:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- The redirects don't appear to be particularly plausible but seem harmless and unambiguous. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:22, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep at least most I agree with Crouch Swale that the majority of these are harmless and unambiguous, which is an obvious keep. However, London LGD → City of London doesn't feel right to me - there isn't a single local government district for London, but if there was one it would be the Greater London Authority (or, in historical contexts, Greater London Council, London County Council or Metropolitan Board of Works). The City of London is never referred to as just "London" in administrative contexts. Thryduulf (talk) 21:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all - they're not plausible search terms and just create unnecessary overheads. Shortcuts aren't conventionally used for the article namespace and I think we'd need project-wide consensus to change that convention. WaggersTALK 09:14, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Harmless? Maybe. Useful? Probably not and LGD isn't really used as an initialism for "local government districts". 104.7.152.180 (talk) 20:52, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Wikipedia is for readers not editors and these redirects don't help readers: in fact they might be confusing if a reader assumes "LGD" is a legitimate well-used abbreviation, which it isn't. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 08:35, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- Confirming delete as nominator after listening; they don't help searching and could confuse, are an invention not seen "in the wild" or on Wikipedia, shouldn't be used as a pipe target, and if in the long-term the UK's local government is modified, editors will find they have to take unusual steps to update the encyclopedia. NebY (talk) 11:21, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).</noinclude>
NOT:DICTIONARY[edit]
May 12[edit]
Champcar[edit]
- Champcar → Champ Car World Series (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Champcars → Champ Car World Series (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete as the redirect is ambiguous. Champ car is a type of racing car; Champ Car was a motorsport sanctioning body. In addition, the talk page for Champcars leads not to Champ Car World Series, but to Championship Auto Racing Teams. These were two separate organizations. RegalZ8790 (talk) 20:27, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retain. The CCWS was the successor via bankruptcy of CART. In fact, the "Champ Car World Series" name was used by CART as the name of the series it sanctioned for the last season before the bankruptcy filing by CART, purchase of its assets by a group of team owners and reorganization under the CCWS name. The first question is was the split of the article (it used to be one article at Champ Car before the separate CCWS article was split out and the other article moved to the CART name) really necessary? I'd lean yes because it's a logical point for a break under summary style, not necessarily because of the legal structures (there was much more continuity than break in operations).
- So the question then becomes which article is the best target for the "Champ Car" redirect (the redirects here are just alternate spellings and should point to the same place). Well, "Champ Car" was the common short name of the CCWS organization and likely primary meaning of the term. The general category of American open-wheel racing is most commonly known as IndyCar, but CART couldn't use that anymore after the Indy Racing League split (CART did use the name before, calling their series the IndyCar World Series prior to 1996) so they went with the more obscure Champ Car term after the split, but it didn't become part of the organization's name until the reorganization. As long as Champ Car redirects to the CCWS article, we should be consistent with spelling variations. oknazevad (talk) 23:35, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Does Wikipedia need the unused redirects? At what point do the spelling variations simply become misspellings? Champ car, Champ Car, Champ cars, and Champ Cars already exist as redirects, in addition to a plethora of others.
- But my point is that there is no obvious destination for the redirects I originally listed. They are grammatically incorrect, and could be taken by an editor to mean either a type of car, OR the sanctioning body. Using a small 'c' for car, they should probably direct to the AOWR page, but as one 'word' they are simply incorrect spellings, and I am questioning why they need to exist. RegalZ8790 (talk) 00:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- ChampCar and ChampCars also exist. Probably because IndyCar is properly written as one word prior editors assumed Champ Car was as well. WP:REDIRECTSARECHEAP, so there's no particular harm in having the non-CamelCase versions kept as well. oknazevad (talk) 20:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- The harm is that the redirects I have placed for discussion facilitate sloppy, ambiguous writing. RegalZ8790 (talk) 04:05, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- ChampCar and ChampCars also exist. Probably because IndyCar is properly written as one word prior editors assumed Champ Car was as well. WP:REDIRECTSARECHEAP, so there's no particular harm in having the non-CamelCase versions kept as well. oknazevad (talk) 20:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom due to ambiguous term. Okmrman (talk) 04:05, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural, not properly tagged.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:41, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate aside from the cars that raced in the post CART/IRL split, and the series that they raced in, there is also the synonym with any sort of indycar, and any rear-engined open-wheeled open-cockpit single-seater. Thus there are enough terms. Disambiguate at champ car -- 65.92.244.237 (talk) 04:19, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
F-Indy[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 20#F-Indy
Big Valley Bash[edit]
Big Country Bash[edit]
Emerald Music Festival[edit]
Real Country (U.S. TV Series)[edit]
Lost Trail Hot Springs Montana[edit]
I lol'd[edit]
Pittville, California[edit]
Fortitude Music Hall[edit]
Lake Red Bluff Recreation Area[edit]
Moondance Country Fest[edit]
List of film accents considered the worst[edit]
Face cancer[edit]
- Face cancer → Devil facial tumour disease (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
John Campbell died of facial cancer according to the article on him. So "face cancer" or "facial cancer" is not limited to Tasmanian devils. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 17:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Weak retarget to Head and neck cancer. Seems to be the closest target for this term although I usually get skin cancer among the top hits in my Google search. I'm also fine with deletion if we cannot find an agreement with each other. --Lenticel (talk) 05:39, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate between the different cancers (in both humans and Tasmanian devils) that have been referred to as "face cancer" or "facial cancer". Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 12:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
90scars[edit]
Reee[edit]
Core i2[edit]
Grooving[edit]
Yelping[edit]
Shaky Boots Festival[edit]
Ottertail River[edit]
Flint Creek Valley (Montana)[edit]
Alder Gulch Short Line Railroad[edit]
Moralfaggotry[edit]
May 11[edit]
Vetter Stone Amphitheater[edit]
Lewis & Clark Caverns State Park Amphitheater[edit]
Country Concert 19[edit]
Aroostook Trail[edit]
Morning Eagle Lake[edit]
Hamler Country Fest[edit]
Hambler Country Fest[edit]
Great River Folk Festival[edit]
Country Concert 18[edit]
Draft:TPT[edit]
Trampampoline[edit]
Cedar Ridge Middle School[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Cedar Ridge Middle School
RXJ2129-z8HeII[edit]
Population 0[edit]
- Population 0 → Stellar population (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Does not appear at the target. Only mention I could find is on Wiktionary at wikt:frozen star. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:18, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- comment would this be a plausible synonym for Population Zero? --Lenticel (talk) 02:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm quite skeptical one that stuff since it does make some sense but barely anyone really does it. Okmrman (talk) 02:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- "0" and "Zero" could be searched either way. Unless someone actually sees the logo of them they are unlikely to know which uses which term and even still they may assume we always use numbers or letters. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm quite skeptical one that stuff since it does make some sense but barely anyone really does it. Okmrman (talk) 02:39, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Appears to be a speculative term for a future star population, but couldn't find any published research on it. "Population 0" was mentioned once as a synonym for Population III stars, but this could stem from a misreading of this paper calling them "Zero-population stars". Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 19:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate there is also Aftermath: Population Zero so maybe Population Zero should be a DAB. I used to use "Population Zero" to get to Aftermath: Population Zero and suddenly found a different article there. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:10, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Weak disambiguate per Crouch's findings (and also maybe this is gallows humor but the first thing I thought of was Extinction or especially Human extinction, so that should be added as well). Duckmather (talk) 18:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yes Extinction and Human extinction should be included on the DAB. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:27, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate - There are enough potential targets that a DAB would be worthwhile. I don't find this an implausible search string either. Fieari (talk) 05:20, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Hyperstar[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Hyperstar
Wikipedia:GREENGABLES[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Wikipedia:GREENGABLES
Intel core zero[edit]
Intel core 0[edit]
Intel Core 4[edit]
Template:Transcluded section2[edit]
Template:End U.S. judge succession 2[edit]
Template:Wide image-2[edit]
Template:Wiki category 2[edit]
Template:Infobox software2[edit]
- Template:Infobox software2 → Template:Infobox software (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This has completely been migrated to {{Infobox software}} and has been unused for years Magioladitis (talk) 08:44, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep or move without redirect to a plausible title: {{R with history}}. Steel1943 (talk) 02:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Denis Cohen[edit]
Technofascism and Techno-fascism[edit]
- Technofascism → Internet censorship (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Techno-fascism → Techno-populism#Technocratic populism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Same terminology, different meanings. Does its meaning depend on the absence/presence of the hyphen, or can it have both meanings either way? – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 21:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- My thought exactly. Either it is a term legitimately attested to in the literature, or else it is POV and should be deleted. Which of these it is, I will leave to smarter contributors than myself – the top Google “hit” points to one of the target Wikipedia articles and the second one points to this RfD itself! (and subsequent “hits” point to academic articles that are way “above my head.”) Bwrs (talk) 05:02, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- did some looking around and "technofascism" apparently means "fascism that uses technology", not "fascism in technology", so both of those are wrong
- either retarget them to fascism or a more fitting target, or
cause them to mysteriously disappeardelete cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)- I imagined "technofascism" being a portmanteau of technocracy and fascism (with the former referring to governance by experts, not technology itself) and that it would refer to a blend of both. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 19:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- We should target both to Techno-populism#Technocratic populism. There's a brief bit about it there. I don't know that it has a particular stable meaning, but at least we clearly attribute one of them at that page. -- asilvering (talk) 01:34, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 17:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:27, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Dulah, California[edit]
- Dulah, California → Solimar Beach (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Originally this was a stub article that was PRODded by me; another user removed the PROD and converted the article to a redirect. The problem is, the target does not mention Dulah at all, and (per the original stub) Dulah was nothing more than a rail siding located near Solimar. I find it incredibly unlikely that anyone would search for a rail siding, and even if they did, they won't find any information about it here. The article should have been simply deleted and so should this redirect. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 02:45, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: The page was partially merged. I've made an attribution notice in an edit summary at the target to avoid attribution issues in case the page does get deleted. --Paul_012 (talk) 10:29, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I redirected the page because I merged content to Solimar Beach and redirects are cheap. The only other reason to keep the redirect is that if you search for the Solimar Beach community in GNIS, the only entry that comes up is Dulah; that's the only reason I started an article under Dulah in the first place, since Solimar Beach is used on local signage and I started the article way back when I assumed GNIS was reliable. TheCatalyst31 Reaction•Creation 04:27, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak restore article (
per WP:PROD, can be taken to AfD if desired), but could this name not be added to the current target? As things stand this is confusing for someone searching this. A7V2 (talk) 00:05, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 04:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 17:29, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as a {{r from merge}} to maintain proper attribution. We can revisit the redirect if that situation changes. - Eureka Lott 02:17, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Move without redirect to Solimar Beach Colony, the only portion of the source page that was merged to target. Note that we would need to deal with Dulah, CA as well. Jay 💬 17:17, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:26, 11 May 2024 (UTC)- Move without redirect to Solimar Beach Colony per Jay Okmrman (talk) 15:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Colonia Ulpia Traiana[edit]
In 2018, Colonia Ulpia Traiana was redirected to Xanten. The page has had some debates in the history, and another user is now indicating that this should not redirect to Xanten, though they haven't created a page, only a 'See also' section to Vetera. Given that they have reverted the redirect, I figured it should come to RfD. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:33, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging JoNeuen: Instead of reverting the redirect, please discuss here why you think the current redirect target is incorrect and where you think the page should redirect to. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:34, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
- The piped link mentioning Colonia Ulpia Traiana at the current target goes to Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa, so retarget there. There's also Ulpia Traiana, which redirects to Ulpia Traiana Sarmizegetusa. I think both redirects should point to the same place. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 03:01, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi there! So, the link to Vetera was made because I created this article myself. As with Colonia Ulpia Traiana, the Vetera article was redirecting to Xanten before, but I cancelled it because I was working on a translation from the German article. I considered this justified, because I didn't get a response on the Xanten talk page in over a week. Since translating and complementing articles using translation is what I mostly do here, my intention is to do the same with Colonia Ulpia Traiana. The Xanten page is already considered incomplete and these German pages are full of valuable historic and archaeological information that might benefit English speaking Wikipedia. JoNeuen (talk) 22:40, 30 March 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:51, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- How about restoring this version? The editor in question was a suspected sock, but the article was neither deleted nor the edits hidden for socking. Jay 💬 17:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Strongly oppose doing that. It wasn't deleted because there was a pre-sock version to revert to. It wasn't revdelled because that's generally not done. We don't reward socking like that. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:05, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 17:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC)- Support Jay's proposal to restore the earlier version, and use it as the basis of further development (which would heavily involve translation from de.wiki). Refusing to use the article on the grounds that it would "reward socking" is cutting off WP's nose to spite its face. Furius (talk) 13:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:25, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Snow White remake[edit]
PanoramaMaker[edit]
There is no information about a panorama maker at the target stub, much less a brand called PanoramaMaker. Not currently a helpful redirect. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)- Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 04:21, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Comparison of photo stitching software. Jay 💬 14:15, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and AfD Comparison of photo stitching software too. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:16, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Comparison of photo stitching software per Jay. I don't see a reason to AfD that target... possibly it could be renamed "List of..." instead of "Comparison of..." but as a list I think it would pass WP:NLIST and seems well sourced. Anyway, right now it has all the information we possess, and probably all that we should posess, on PanoramaMaker, so that should be the target. Fieari (talk) 03:53, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
Baak (Telugu Film)[edit]
- Baak (Telugu Film) → Aranmanai 4 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Indian films sometimes do this thing were they reshoot 10% or less of the film in another language. Either way, there is absolutely no need for this redirect when Baak (film) exists. only 10% or less of people interest seeing Aranmanai 4 will likely opt to see this version due to low key release. DareshMohan (talk) 05:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: No point of existence. Kailash29792 (talk) 05:59, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Delete: I think this is the same film as Baakghost. It looks like there is no point for this. Cleo Cooper (talk) 06:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)(Striking account globally locked as an LTA —a smart kitten[meow] 16:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC))
- Keep: This is obviously linked with the Afd of Baakghost. Here too, I suggest to Keep the redirect (and then rename. Baak (Telugu film) if needed, and maybe ask for page protection. Like that, history can be kept and further work on the article is easier. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 13:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Move to Baak (film) without redirect as the title has incorrect capitalization which is arguably an RDAB error. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:27, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Okmrman (talk) 04:23, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Baak (film) already exists, no point in moving stuff around. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:32, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Move without redirect to Baak (film) to keep the page history. Baak (film) was created by nom 5 minutes before the nomination. With regards to the target, follow the outcome of the lowercase f RfD WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#Baak (Telugu film). Jay 💬 12:58, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Move to Baak (film) without redirect to keep editing history. Hzh (talk) 14:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Blockbuster Monster Movie[edit]
American actress[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 18#American actress
May 9[edit]
黑鬼[edit]
Dendrolaelaps aberratus[edit]
- Dendrolaelaps aberratus → Dendrolaelaps (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Autogenerated article based on one reference, which has now been deleted. Only is mentioned at the List of Dendrolaelaps species article. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:49, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- Of note, there are give-or-take 100 other dendrolaelaps articles in a near identical situation. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:50, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to List of Dendrolaelaps species as the relevant article that gives (admittedly, very little) information about each species. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 03:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Notably, the only blue links on the page are (or at least should be) links to standalone articles, or are (currently inappropriate) unmentioned redirects to the main genus. If we don't have a dedicated article, a red link seems more appropriate in this instance. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Good point, although deleting the redirect would remove the ability to reach the species list from somewhere else. Another proposal could be to unlink the redirects and red links from the species list page, leaving only blue links to actual species articles. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think there would be a need to reach the species list from somewhere else. Per WP:REDYES and also via a lot of species' precedent, it's more useful to keep species that we have no content on as red links (instead of redirects). Someone who types in "dendrolaelaps aberratus" will already know that it is a species of the dendrolaelaps genus, so the list of dendropaelaps species list doesn't add benefit; a red link may be more beneficial to indicate a true lack of content for the specific species they searched for. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:28, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- That's a good point actually, thanks! Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 12:56, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think there would be a need to reach the species list from somewhere else. Per WP:REDYES and also via a lot of species' precedent, it's more useful to keep species that we have no content on as red links (instead of redirects). Someone who types in "dendrolaelaps aberratus" will already know that it is a species of the dendrolaelaps genus, so the list of dendropaelaps species list doesn't add benefit; a red link may be more beneficial to indicate a true lack of content for the specific species they searched for. Utopes (talk / cont) 22:28, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Good point, although deleting the redirect would remove the ability to reach the species list from somewhere else. Another proposal could be to unlink the redirects and red links from the species list page, leaving only blue links to actual species articles. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 15:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Notably, the only blue links on the page are (or at least should be) links to standalone articles, or are (currently inappropriate) unmentioned redirects to the main genus. If we don't have a dedicated article, a red link seems more appropriate in this instance. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Qp pocket[edit]
Electric Vehicle Associates[edit]
PDFcast[edit]
Podguide[edit]
Podcasting by traditional broadcasters[edit]
Podfade[edit]
List of radio stations with podcasts[edit]
Podjack[edit]
Podnography[edit]
Missed that one. Whelp! Into the bin it goes. Okmrman (talk) 21:01, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- It does appear to be mentioned in history of podcasting. Still extremely skeptical since it is literally just made of a single sentence and with only one source. Okmrman (talk) 21:38, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Honestly, I'm leaning towards delete and remove reference in History of podcasting as not really noteworthy. Okmrman (talk) 01:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)- Retarget to History of podcasting then due to reliable sources being added. Okmrman (talk) 22:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and remove reference in History of podcasting as not really noteworthy is my first reaction. If there isn't consensus to remove the reference, however, then Retarget to history of podcasting instead. Fieari (talk) 00:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to history of podcasting. "Podnography" is defined in multiple papers on Google Scholar as pornography for iPod or via podcast. --Викидим (talk) 01:14, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to History_of_podcasting#Podnography where the word is used and is supported by a reliable source. TipsyElephant (talk) 03:47, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I've added a source in The Guardian and The Seattle Times that discuss this topic. TipsyElephant (talk) 19:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
ThinkFree Office[edit]
The Perpetual Virginity of Mary[edit]
List of Decepticons[edit]
Category:21st-century African singers[edit]
Inosine triphosphatase[edit]
W2000[edit]
Wikipedia:ANI AUTISM IP[edit]
May 7[edit]
Panther Memorial Stadium, McBee[edit]
- Panther Memorial Stadium, McBee → McBee High School (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No longer mentioned at the target after a 2012 merge/redirect AfD closure. A high school's stadium does not need to be a redirect to the school if the stadium has no discussion at the target page, although the history may need to be dealt with. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:44, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on dealing with the history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 21:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:49, 7 May 2024 (UTC)- Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 04:25, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Sea of Moving Ice[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 14#Sea of Moving Ice
Jimmy Patterson[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 14#Jimmy Patterson
Doofenshmirtz the pharmacist[edit]
"badger boys state"[edit]
Peodeiktophilia[edit]
Originally created as a redirect to exhibitionism before being retargeted to anasyrma, this term is mentioned at neither of the articles in question and is not something that we have good coverage on at the moment, with the only mention of this word anywhere on Wikipedia being at the List of paraphilias. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:55, 21 April 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect back to exhibitionism, since this term apparently refers to sexual arousal or gratification arising from exposing one's genitals (some definitions seem to specify male genitals), while anasyrma seems to be primarily a jesting or ritual exposure of genitalia (frequently women's) in a religious context or to ward off evil. As with all nominations dealing with "the term is not mentioned in the target article", it would be a good idea to find somewhere to mention and define it within the article, thereby making renomination less likely. P Aculeius (talk) 13:27, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:40, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No mention has yet been added to Exhibitionism.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:20, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Animated Disey movies[edit]
Law of fives[edit]
Stone Table:[edit]
Wikipedia:Racism[edit]
- Wikipedia:RACIST → Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch#Contentious labels (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Wikipedia:Racism → Wikipedia:WikiProject Discrimination (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Shouldn't they have the same target? --MikutoH talk! 00:40, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep – I can't think of a better target for each. It makes sense for WP:RACIST to redirect to the policy on contentious labels; I don't think racism is relevant to that policy in the same way. It wouldn't make sense for WP:RACIST to redirect to Wikipedia:WikiProject Discrimination. It would be better if there were a policy WP:Racism could redirect to, but I couldn't find one that was relevant and useful. MClay1 (talk) 14:12, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Mclay1, Ivanvector, and Crouch, Swale: no policy, but an essay: wp:no racists. ~~~~ --MikutoH talk! 21:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- WP:No racists feels like an appropriate target for WP:Racism (without having any background knowledge of the essay or redirect) – in fact, WP:Racism would seemingly be a better page name for the essay. But I think WP:RACIST should be kept to its current target. I don't think they necessarily need to have the same target. MClay1 (talk) 01:15, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Mclay1, Ivanvector, and Crouch, Swale: no policy, but an essay: wp:no racists. ~~~~ --MikutoH talk! 21:02, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yes I think they should. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:23, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- How about disambiguation between the 2 uses above and no racists? Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:13, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:SMALLDETAILS and WP:AINTBROKE. The RACIST shortcut refers to the policy subsection about not using contentious labels and lists "racist" as its second example of words not to use, while WikiProject Discrimination is an appropriate target for someone looking for Wikipedia writings about the subject of racism and the project that directs those efforts. Both have been around for many years without being a problem, both have hatnotes to possibly related topics (but not to each other, interestingly), and I don't think that wanting things to be the same is a good reason to mess with these titles. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:49, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:47, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Pinkblood[edit]
Pawanism[edit]
Pluri-[edit]
May 6[edit]
Ryan Boden and Alan Fleck[edit]
Helicopter.md[edit]
Controversies Surrounding Genetically Modified Organisms[edit]
Stars and planetary systems in fiction[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Stars and planetary systems in fiction
"Undead" (Yoasobi song)[edit]
Template:R to publisher[edit]
Template:R to artist[edit]
Category:Television series by CBS Television Studios[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Category:Television series by CBS Television Studios
I Beheld His Glory[edit]
Shams ud Duha (disambiguation)[edit]
- Shams ud Duha (disambiguation) → Shamsuzzoha (name) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The target does not disambiguate (or mention) "Shams ud Duha" Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:42, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Shams ud Duha is a variant spelling of the name, which is also sometimes also rendered as Shamsud Doha, or Shamsuddoha, including in biographies linked on that page. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:814B:EA3E:5ED7:3206 (talk) 16:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- That's as may be, and explains why Shams ud Duha redirects there, but none of the entries on the name page are of that form. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- I was merely explaining why someone would create the redirect, though it is possible, even if unlikely, that a notable person who's name is usually rendered that way will be listed at some point in the future. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:DDE1:EF29:F8DF:334 (talk) 03:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- I was merely explaining why someone would create the redirect, though it is possible, even if unlikely, that a notable person who's name is usually rendered that way will be listed at some point in the future. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:DDE1:EF29:F8DF:334 (talk) 03:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- That's as may be, and explains why Shams ud Duha redirects there, but none of the entries on the name page are of that form. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:44, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- If Shams ud Duha is a valid redirect, then Shams ud Duha (disambiguation) is no different, since it points to a target performing a disambig-like function. Otherwise, bundle Shams ud Duha here, if the concern is with the u in Duha. Jay 💬 08:52, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Undertow (Transformers)[edit]
Grand Prize SNP[edit]
East Midlands Mainline[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#East Midlands Mainline
Entoptic art[edit]
Larissa Hodge[edit]
- Larissa Hodge → Flavor of Love season 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Larissa Hodge Aurora → Flavor of Love season 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Larissa 'Bootz' Aurora → Flavor of Love season 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Larissa "Bootz" Aurora → Flavor of Love season 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Larissa Aurora → Flavor of Love season 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not discussed at target with sufficient substance to warrant a redirect. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:31, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Also bundle Larissa "Bootz" Aurora, Larissa 'Bootz' Aurora, Larissa Hodge Aurora and Larissa Hodge. Jay 💬 11:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled with other similar redirects.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:49, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Larissa Hodge, we have information on this person and it's found at this target. It doesn't matter that it's very little information - this is what we have and that's where it is. Delete the others as they are unsourced alternates and nicknames and also not described at the target. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:48, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 17:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)- Keep Larissa Hodge. Trash the others. Okmrman (talk) 04:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Rail Sim Pro[edit]
Huntington, South Carolina[edit]
Ross and Rachel (song)[edit]
Roshutsu[edit]
RTV News Inc.[edit]
Scary sharp[edit]
Scientific sexism[edit]
Solowheel[edit]
Shoo-in[edit]
⇢[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#⇢
OperaMail.com[edit]
- OperaMail.com → Fastmail (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Operamail.com → Fastmail (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Neither Opera mail nor "OperaMail" are mentioned at the target, much less its supposed .com domain. This domain currently exists on the web as a redirect to opera dot com, and as for Wikipedia, without a mention of operamail this does not seem to be the most helpful currently. (Even if it's a mail site that was acquired by Opera from 2010 to 2013. Notably, this redirect was created in 2011 when the "opera" description was accurate, but Fastmail became independent again very shortly after and has been so for the last decade.) Utopes (talk / cont) 01:38, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 07:03, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:14, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Note: I've bundled Operamail.com as there's been no votes and it should have the same outcome, I believe (pinging Utopes). Skynxnex (talk) 17:29, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Opera Mail if they are related, delete otherwise. Jay 💬 09:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Kafka-trapping[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Kafka-trapping
Nutrient Recovery and Reuse[edit]
Las Vegas Umbrella Facility[edit]
Umbrella Security Service[edit]
Mimi from Rio[edit]
Mi Música (album)[edit]
Perry the Platypus Plumber?[edit]
2020 Games[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 14#2020 Games
Unintelligible sequence of characters[edit]
Imperator Romanorum[edit]
Ancient United States[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Ancient United States
Sucking peepee[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Sucking peepee
Scranton lax[edit]
Rkkody[edit]
Shuggie[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Shuggie
Supplemental Result[edit]
A topic not discussed at the target page, as "supple" nor "supplement" ever appear at the target page. Was BLAR'd in 2017 as being based on almost entirely unreliable sources, but does not serve its purpose as a good redirect if there is no content to be read about this at PageRank. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:12, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Google's Supplemental Results (technically still there - just not labeled as such) were not relevant to an article about the PageRank algorithm. Technically, the Supplemental Results are all the low-value content for which Google makes room available in its index, but they're not likely to be selected for competitive (high-interest) queries. Nor are the pages likely to be recrawled or refreshed very often. The only real connection anyone from Google ever confirmed was that these types of pages usually had very little PageRank. It would be more appropriate to redirect the page to the article about Google and add something there, assuming a suitable resource could be found (probably one of Danny Sullivan's articles from Search Engine Land from around 2006-2010). Michael Martinez (talk) 06:30, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Here is an article from 2007: Google Dumps The Supplemental Results Label (searchengineland.com) Danny Sullivan now works for Google but in 2007 he was just a journalist covering search engines. Michael Martinez (talk) 06:33, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:58, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Modmin[edit]
No mention of this term at the target article. Almost assuredly has a plethora of other uses outside of... just Fark. The portmanteau of "mod" and "admin" is likely to come up in a number of other more relevant contexts related to moderation and administration. Cautiously though, this term has zero mentions on all Wikipedia, so I'm hesitant to just "retargeting and calling it good". Utopes (talk / cont) 06:56, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:31, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak retarget to wikt:modmin, which seems to be the most useful target (according to my google search). Duckmather (talk) 04:38, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget: to wikt:modmin. I guess. Not exclusive to fark but seems to pop up enough. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 00:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. If there were incoming links, wikt would have been a useful target. Jay 💬 14:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete? Retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:57, 6 May 2024 (UTC)- Delete per Jay, doesn't feel like a common enough term that would justify a soft redirect. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 12:35, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as per points already raised. Does not seem necessary to redirect to wikt, and almost definitely used on more than just this one website. Adam Black talk • contributions 12:42, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: per Jay. I know it's a semi-common term in Facebook groups but this isn't there and there are no incoming links. TarnishedPathtalk 10:43, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to wikt:modmin. Enix150 (talk) 15:24, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
SuperCops Vs Super Villains[edit]
- Task Force:Khatarnak Khalnayak → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- SuperCops vs Supervillains → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Hum Ne Li Hai...Shapath → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Hum Ne Li Hai- Shapath → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Supercops vs Supervillains → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Hum Ne Li Hai - Shapath → SuperCops Vs Super Villains (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Misspelled alt titles. Someonewhoisusinginternet (talk) 06:25, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep both "Supercops vs Supervillains" redirects, which are perfectly plausible search terms. No opinion on the others for now. CycloneYoris talk! 20:10, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- There are two more redirect with the same alt title (SuperCops Vs SuperVillains & Super Cops Vs Super Villains) and these I mentioned above are misspelled cause the letter C and V in "Cops" and "Villains" are written in small letter instead of capital. Someonewhoisusinginternet (talk) 02:44, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I noticed. But miscapitalization is not that big of a deal, and not enough reason to warrant deletion. That is why {{R from miscapitalisation}} exists. CycloneYoris talk! 21:11, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- What about the other 4 redirects I mentioned above? Someonewhoisusinginternet (talk) 04:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- They can certainly be deleted, since they do seem quite odd and badly formatted. CycloneYoris talk! 07:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- What about the other 4 redirects I mentioned above? Someonewhoisusinginternet (talk) 04:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I noticed. But miscapitalization is not that big of a deal, and not enough reason to warrant deletion. That is why {{R from miscapitalisation}} exists. CycloneYoris talk! 21:11, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on the other 4 redirects?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Duckmather (talk) 06:51, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep SuperCops vs Supervillains and Supercops vs Supervillains and tag as "R from miscapitalisation". Delete the rest per nom. --Lenticel (talk) 02:29, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep the two with Supercops and SuperCops, delete the other 4 per above. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:36, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Supercops vs Supervillains and Supercops vs Supervillains and Delete the rest Okmrman (talk) 03:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Harley Quinn (pornographic actor)[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 14#Harley Quinn (pornographic actor)
New Red Room[edit]
Antisemitism in the Australian Greens[edit]
Ruby on Iaails[edit]
Ruby on Яails[edit]
Virtual technology[edit]
Drove[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Drove
Anonima italiana petroli[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Anonima italiana petroli
May 4[edit]
Airport route[edit]
Na Sé Contaethe[edit]
- Na Sé Contaethe → Northern Ireland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Na Se Contaethe → Northern Ireland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not a plausible search term. Also not mentioned in target (I tried ctrl+f/F3) JuniperChill (talk) 21:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Also nominated Na Se Contaethe per the two comments below for the same reason JuniperChill (talk) 20:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 07:01, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Not mentioned anywhere. Also delete Na Se Contaethe. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and bundle Na Se Contaethe along with this. Okmrman (talk) 04:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Shhhnotsoloud / @Okmrman Done JuniperChill (talk) 20:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The Irish term translates to 'The Six Counties' which is an alternative name for Northern Ireland. I believe that this is a plausible redirect and does not violate WP:RFOREIGN hence I would opt for keep. Golem08 (talk) 21:19, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:16, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- That would be valid if it were used as such, but Google returns next to nothing, and The Six Counties is a redlink. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Alternative names for Northern Ireland, which mentions a form of this in its "other names" section. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:26, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, there is mention. Refine to Northern Ireland#Nationalist which has na Sé Chontae. Alternatively an anchor by that name may be created, and the redirects can point to that. Jay 💬 10:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Nanashi (MÄR)[edit]
- Nanashi (MÄR) → MÄR#Characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Separating this out from the below because there is an episode of the manga titled just "Nanashi" so this could justifiably be thought of as a redirect for that. But really people typing this are likely to be looking for the character, on whom there's not enough substance to warrant a redirect. Has prior history but Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of MÄR characters establishes sufficient agreement from AfD that there's no need to restore. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:47, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 06:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)- Delete per nom Okmrman (talk) 04:01, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but retarget to the chapter list. I don't see a reason to delete it since it's mentioned and redirects are WP:CHEAP. Link20XX (talk) 15:52, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:15, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
Turing recognizable[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Turing recognizable
Doctor (rapper)[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Doctor (rapper)
Dr. Rapp[edit]
2025 PDC World Darts Championship[edit]
Latin peoples[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Latin peoples
Getting Out Our Dreams II LLC[edit]
United Penn Bank[edit]
Evil Mario[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Evil Mario
PORTIA[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#PORTIA
Russell Westbrick[edit]
Rape of Nancheng[edit]
Jonny cochrane[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Jonny cochrane
Bedbg bite[edit]
G-Men(Slang)[edit]
Cetian[edit]
May 3[edit]
Rigel IV[edit]
Eta Ursae Majoris in fiction[edit]
Atlas (star) in fiction[edit]
Epsilon Canis Majoris in fiction[edit]
Delta Eridani in fiction[edit]
Sigma Sculptoris in fiction[edit]
Iota Persei in fiction[edit]
Gamma Hydrae in fiction[edit]
Iota Geminorum in fiction[edit]
Vegan (fiction)[edit]
Zeta Tucanae in fiction[edit]
Zeta Persei in fiction[edit]
Zeta Ophiuchi in fiction[edit]
Zeta Draconis in fiction[edit]
Zeta Aquilae in fiction[edit]
Xi Puppis in fiction[edit]
Theta Hydrae in fiction[edit]
Theta Centauri in fiction[edit]
Theta Capricorni in fiction[edit]
Tau Coronae Borealis in fiction[edit]
T Coronae Borealis in fiction[edit]
Ross 248 in fiction[edit]
Ross 154 in fiction[edit]
Ross 128 in fiction[edit]
Phi Orionis in fiction[edit]
Phi Ophiuchi in fiction[edit]
P Eridani in fiction[edit]
Nu Ophiuchi in fiction[edit]
Mu Herculis in fiction[edit]
Mu Capricorni in fiction[edit]
Mizar and Alcor in fiction[edit]
Mintaka in fiction[edit]
Luyten's Star in fiction[edit]
Luyten 726-8 in fiction[edit]
Lambda Serpentis in fiction[edit]
Lambda Scorpii in fiction[edit]
Lalande 46650 in fiction[edit]
Kruger 60 in fiction[edit]
Kappa Velorum in fiction[edit]
Kappa Coronae Borealis in fiction[edit]
Groombridge 34 in fiction[edit]
Gliese 876 in fiction[edit]
Gliese 754 in fiction[edit]
Gliese 687 in fiction[edit]
Gamma Ursae Majoris in fiction[edit]
Gamma Trianguli in fiction[edit]
Gamma Serpentis in fiction[edit]
Gamma Leporis in fiction[edit]
Gamma Andromedae in fiction[edit]
Eta Orionis in fiction[edit]
Eta Cassiopeiae in fiction[edit]
Eta Boötis in fiction[edit]
Epsilon Scorpii in fiction[edit]
Epsilon Indi in fiction[edit]
Epsilon Gruis in fiction[edit]
Epsilon Boötis in fiction[edit]
Delta Draconis in fiction[edit]
Delta Crateris in fiction[edit]
CY Aquarii in fiction[edit]
Chi Draconis in fiction[edit]
Beta Virginis in fiction[edit]
Beta Tauri in fiction[edit]
Beta Hydri in fiction[edit]
Beta Eridani in fiction[edit]
Beta Corvi in fiction[edit]
Beta Cassiopeiae in fiction[edit]
Beta Canum Venaticorum in fiction[edit]
Beta Caeli in fiction[edit]
Beta Aurigae in fiction[edit]
Beta Aquarii in fiction[edit]
Beta Andromedae in fiction[edit]
Bellatrix in fiction[edit]
Barnard's Star in fiction[edit]
Alpha Tucanae in fiction[edit]
Alpha Serpentis in fiction[edit]
Alpha Pavonis in fiction[edit]
Alpha Hydri in fiction[edit]
Alpha Draconis in fiction[edit]
Alpha Coronae Borealis in fiction[edit]
Alpha Ceti in fiction[edit]
Alnitak in fiction[edit]
Alnilam in fiction[edit]
Alkalurops in fiction[edit]
Alioth in fiction[edit]
Alhena in fiction[edit]
Algenubi in fiction[edit]
Achernar in fiction[edit]
Acamar in fiction[edit]
94 Aquarii in fiction[edit]
61 Cygni in fiction[edit]
47 Ursae Majoris in fiction[edit]
Spica in fiction[edit]
Wolf 359 in fiction[edit]
List of stars in Star Trek[edit]
Fictional planetary systems and stars[edit]
Fictional stars and planetary systems[edit]
Rigel 7[edit]
Rigel VII[edit]
[edit]
Pokegear[edit]
Pollux in fiction[edit]
Regulus in fiction[edit]
Beta Lyrae in fiction[edit]
Sheliak in fiction[edit]
Sigma Draconis in fiction[edit]
Zeta Reticuli in fiction[edit]
Gamma Draconis in fiction[edit]
Beta Librae in fiction[edit]
Epsilon Pegasi in fiction[edit]
Groombridge 1618 in fiction[edit]
Delta Sagittarii in fiction[edit]
Lalande 21185 in fiction[edit]
107 Piscium in fiction[edit]
70 Ophiuchi in fiction[edit]
Delta Pavonis in fiction[edit]
Iota Horologii in fiction[edit]
Lacaille 9352 in fiction[edit]
Mu Cassiopeiae in fiction[edit]
Tau Cygni in fiction[edit]
Van Maanen 2 in fiction[edit]
82 Eridani in fiction[edit]
Theta Ursae Majoris in fiction[edit]
61 Virginis in fiction[edit]
Gliese 710 in fiction[edit]
Zeta Piscium in fiction[edit]
List of fictional desert planets[edit]
That girl is so dangerous[edit]
Lady Godiva syndrome[edit]
Super Saiyan 6[edit]
Knightfall (comics)[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 13#Knightfall (comics)
Rizalito David[edit]
Hubert’s Lemonade[edit]
- Hubert’s Lemonade → The Coca-Cola Company (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Neither "Hubert" nor, surprisingly, "Lemonade" comes up at the target article. Seems to be a brand of lemonade owned by Coca-Cola, but targeting this specific brand to the overarching company is not useful for people looking for Hubert's Lemonade. If people wanted to read about the Coca Cola company instead, they'd just search for the Coca Cola company directly. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:50, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to List of Coca-Cola brands#H. I've added an entry with a couple of citations. --BDD (talk) 15:35, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete The title with a curly quote that this has is useless. Feel free to create the correct Hubert's Lemonade. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:11, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 18:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC)- Delete or move without creating additional redirect per PPPery Okmrman (talk) 21:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per BDD and create the additional redirect. There is nothing "incorrect" about curly quotes. 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:53, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Retarget to Blue Sky Beverage Company. Mentioned there. Steel1943 (talk) 18:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)- Delete: Considering I did not read through the other comments before posting my "retarget" comment, I did not notice the odd apostrophe until now. Create Hubert's Lemonade if necessary (but thinking about it, creating it may not be necessary.) Steel1943 (talk) 15:53, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A new target has been proposed. Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:32, 3 May 2024 (UTC)- Retarget to List of Coca-Cola brands#H per BDD's comment. Waylon (was) (here) 16:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and do not retarget per Pppery. I think people may still be missing that this has a special character in it: it's Hubert’s Lemonade and not Hubert's Lemonade. The latter might be worth retargeting, but this version is not. -Elmer Clark (talk) 04:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: If Hubert's Lemonade is created, keep the curly quote version. When typing on an iOS keyboard, it defaults to using curly quotes
’
rather than'
when you mean to type an apostrophe. Fork99 (talk) 04:05, 5 May 2024 (UTC) - Delete, do not retarget per Pppery. I've created Hubert's Lemonade targeted to the entry created by BDD; this curlyquote version needs not exist. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Головна сторінка[edit]
Thonk[edit]
Yet another confusing vocabulary word redirect. Apparently "Thonk" was the title of one album this guy made in 1994, but as many of y'all might know, it's also the name of a commonly used emoji (particularly on Discord). I think Thinking, wikt:thonk, or (if mentioned there) List of Generation Z slang would all be better targets than this, but I'm not quite sure - I'd be happy with Michael Manring being mentioned in a hatnote though. Duckmather (talk) 04:28, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to wikit Okmrman (talk) 21:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Several targets were proposed by the nom, and it's not entirely clear which one is best.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:00, 3 May 2024 (UTC)- Soft redirect to wiktionary. mwwv(converse) 11:43, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. Between the album (which appears to be titled Thoṅk (with a dotted n)), the We (illbient group) song, and (possibly) Galileo Records, it looks like there's just enough to satisfy WP:DABMENTION. The wiktionary link can also be part of that page. - Eureka Lott 17:05, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per Eureka Lott or Keep current target. The wikt:thonk concept does not need to be mentioned until when/if it gets an article. Suggested alternative redirect targets make no mention of it. -Elmer Clark (talk) 03:43, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify per Eureka. I'm one of several people that would be very WP:SURPRISEDed by the current target. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
Islamist insurgency in Somalia (2007–present)[edit]
- Islamist insurgency in Somalia (2007–present) → War in Somalia (2006–2009) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Islamist insurgency in Somalia (2007-present) → 2007 timeline of the War in Somalia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not appropriate for a "2007-present" redirect to point to events from a decade ago. * Pppery * it has begun... 19:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history of Islamist insurgency in Somalia (2007–present)?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think this should be kept as a minimum due to the page history. Another possibility is retargeting to Somali civil war (2009-present), which does cover recent events. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:29, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Probably delete per nom. Okmrman (talk) 04:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think keeping these are necessary, but if kept, I think the best target would be Somali Civil War#TFG, Islamic Courts Union, and Ethiopia (2006–2009). Sections below that one continue through present should someone be seeking more recent events. That said, the more recent events don't document any Islamist insurgencies. -- Tavix (talk) 18:01, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - may have been useful as a search term years ago, but isn't any longer. No incoming mainspace links. -Elmer Clark (talk) 03:48, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Also bundle the uppercase P version Islamic Insurgency in Somalia (2007-Present). To solve the page history problem, move without redirect to a title that does not have "present" in it. Jay 💬 11:59, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
Axis victory in world war ii[edit]
Bonde (disambiguation)[edit]
I listed this rdr for a G14 because the target, as I stated in my nomination, is now an article with a list of names bearing this title/name. This IPv6 address (2601:5cc:8300:a7f0:9d60:98f8:7049:a67e) reverted my edit as "explicitly" not so, but I want it deleted since it longer serves the purpose for which it was created in the first place. Intrisit (talk) 02:10, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment that is because WP:G14 does not apply when a page "performs a disambiguation-like function (such as set index articles or lists)". As such, "targeting an article with a list of names bearing this name" is never a reason to tag for G14.
- With that explained, it is true WP:INTDABLINK is no longer a concern, and permanent hatnoting for other people with the name could be done through say Bonde (surname), though there is the additional complication of its use as one of the estates of the Swedish Riksdag which may justify maintenance retention. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:9D60:98F8:7049:A67E (talk) 04:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Current text of "Bonde" should be moved to House of Bonde or Bonde family or similar, and there should be a separate list as a way to reach Bill Bonde, Alexander Bonde, Arne Bonde, Line Bonde, James Bonde, William Bonde and a number of other people with that surname. (Disambiguate) --Joy (talk) 07:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
Keep- anthroponymy pages disambiguate people with the same name. If someone were to look for the disambiguation page for articles titled "Bonde", the current target is it. If we moved Bonde to a different title with similar content, it would still serve this function and the redirect would still be valid. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:27, 3 May 2024 (UTC)- I also support Joy's solution for those individuals who are surnamed "Bonde" but aren't members of the noble house. The current list is confusing. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- To that end I've created Bonde (surname). Retarget to the newly-created dab page, which links to the House article. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
@Ivanvector it'd be a two-entry disambiguation page, so I'd just squash the surname list into the base title, and keep the link to the medieval nobility on top. We do that elsewhere, and I don't recall seeing anyone having an issue with that.superseded --Joy (talk) 14:53, 3 May 2024 (UTC)- BTW looking into the history, this actually started off ambiguous twenty years ago, but was reformatted. In the meantime, that other topic mention was deleted five years ago with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Foundation universe planets. --Joy (talk) 14:58, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Looks like three topics actually since the current page also disambiguates one of the four estates of the Swedish Riksdag, which could still be kept on the same DAB. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:32:BC47:A9D:406B (talk) 17:00, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- The linked article Riksdag of the Estates doesn't actually mention the term as such, only as part of words Bondeståndet and bönder. Are there actual ambiguous references to this term as such, or is it just part of the etymology? --Joy (talk) 18:12, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- The situation is somewhat analogous to say Mississippi River since once context is supplied Bonde may be used to refer to the Bondeståndet in the same way that Mississippi will be used to refer to the river. But you make a point and the standard way to resolve that is to place it within a "see also" section. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:95B3:1631:747A:2941 (talk) 21:48, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- What you describe are actual ambiguous references to this term as such, we just don't have it on record in the linked article. If there's a reasonable chance that an average English reader reads e.g. an article about Swedish parliament history, sees the use of the term "Bonde" there, and looks it up as such, I would put it in the main disambiguation list, not a see also section.
- So let's try that then. --Joy (talk) 09:33, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds good, I'll make a formal recommendation below. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:64D4:1CAD:2D37:C84B (talk) 15:18, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- The situation is somewhat analogous to say Mississippi River since once context is supplied Bonde may be used to refer to the Bondeståndet in the same way that Mississippi will be used to refer to the river. But you make a point and the standard way to resolve that is to place it within a "see also" section. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:95B3:1631:747A:2941 (talk) 21:48, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- The linked article Riksdag of the Estates doesn't actually mention the term as such, only as part of words Bondeståndet and bönder. Are there actual ambiguous references to this term as such, or is it just part of the etymology? --Joy (talk) 18:12, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- To that end I've created Bonde (surname). Retarget to the newly-created dab page, which links to the House article. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:40, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I also support Joy's solution for those individuals who are surnamed "Bonde" but aren't members of the noble house. The current list is confusing. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Make it into a disambiguation. Apart from already discussed items, there is also Bondé, a village in Burkina Faso. Andejons (talk) 12:26, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Per Joy, mostly. Move the "House of Bonde" article to House of Bonde. Move non-family members the list of nameholders from that article to Bonde (surname). Make Bonde a disambiguation page as drafted. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:07, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- Per Joy see above discussion, and of course the additional page identified by Andejons should also be on the DAB. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:64D4:1CAD:2D37:C84B (talk) 15:23, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yep, we added it into the draft already. --Joy (talk) 10:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- My apologies, I hadn't checked since last time. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:A165:7AFC:68F9:104D (talk) 16:21, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
- Yep, we added it into the draft already. --Joy (talk) 10:09, 16 May 2024 (UTC)
May 2[edit]
Pan-American English[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 10#Pan-American English
-ic[edit]
Johnny be good[edit]
Telephonics Corporation[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Telephonics Corporation
WP:BRRRD[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 10#WP:BRRRD
Romani people in Paris[edit]
Romani people in Pristina[edit]
Jhanak[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 10#Jhanak
Mestecănești[edit]
Shoob[edit]
Wikipedia:FLUFF[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 10#Wikipedia:FLUFF
Desi (Tibetan)[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 10#Desi (Tibetan)
Liquid nails[edit]
Lower case version of what's apparently a brand of glue...? Adhesive? In any case, liquid nails are not mentioned at the target, and anyone typing this in instead of adhesive seems to be looking for something else. Has some history, but has also been to RfD before (13 years ago). Utopes (talk / cont) 05:08, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to PPG Industries (the owner of the brand), where the product is mentioned. - Eureka Lott 23:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Delete without a strong objection to retargeting to PPG Industries instead. The product is mentioned there, but no details are given, not even "it's an adhesive". Stating what the thing actually is should be minimum viable information. Here, it's just stated to be a part of an acquired product line related to the "architectural coatings" industry, which doesn't say much about what it is. Lacking the information, I think redlinking may be more useful... but I don't feel strongly about that, and so don't object to the retarget either. Fieari (talk) 06:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:27, 2 May 2024 (UTC)- Delete per Fieari Okmrman (talk) 15:17, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Mental gymnastics[edit]
- Mental gymnastics → Cognitive dissonance (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I had to do some serious mental gymnastics to wrap my head around why this redirect exists. Sure, some people may perform mental gymnastics when "they're uncomfortable from their beliefs being inconsistent and contradictory". A similar idea I feel could be people perform the act of running to get from Point A to Point B, although that doesn't make the "running" a good redirect to "pathfinding". It's a singular mean to the end, and not everyone that has cognitive dissonance is "performing mental gymnastics", and not everyone that does mental gymnastics has cognitive dissonance. Example: I'm fairly sure I'm performing mental gymnastics right now in an attempt to jump through the logical hoops that went into this redirect, and I don't think I'm too uncomfortable from cognitive dissonance. I believe I've come to understand why, although I don't think it's a great end-all-be-all redirect that takes people to the right location at 100% intentions every time. To me, I feel like Convergent thinking or Divergent thinking are what I would have associated mental gymnastics with, i.e. following along with someone's thought process jumping through hoops with twists and turns to an eventual endpoint. Also, "mental gymnastics" is not mentioned at the target article. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:46, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to wiktionary Okmrman (talk) 16:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 14:35, 25 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:24, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to wikt:mental gymnastics. The second definition there mentions
otherwise unjustifiable
things, but that's only a loose connection to cognitive dissonance. If we were sticking to non-interwiki redirects, I'd say Rationalization (psychology) § Cognitive dissonance is a slightly better target than Cognitive dissonance – at least rationalization is an act. jlwoodwa (talk) 09:08, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
Cocaine hippos, Cocaine Hippos, Cocaine Hippos (film)[edit]
- Cocaine hippos → Hippopotamuses in Colombia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Cocaine Hippos → Hacienda Nápoles#Cocaine Hippos (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Cocaine Hippos (film) → Lists of Netflix original films (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Rather odd situation with these three redirects. For one, the film which these redirects are possibly meant to refer to does not seem to be mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia. Regarding the other two redirects, it seems that one targets in anchor that does not exist, and the other redirect targets a different page than the redirect with the nonexistent anchor. At the minimum, I'm thinking the redirect with the "film" disambiguator needs to be deleted, and the other two redirects should at least target the same location. Otherwise, it might be best just to delete the whole lot of these. Steel1943 (talk) 08:07, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- did snowflame make those?
- keep as it's mentioned,
delete and create a redirect along the lines of "colombian nose candy hippos (documentary)" as that's what's mentioned theredelete as there's just one mention at the end, and delete as there seems to be no netflix slop with that name (yet), respectively cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:28, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget both "cocaine hippos" redirects to Hippopotamuses in Colombia, the article about the hippopotamuses left over from the cocaine kingpin's estate. Links are provided there to Escobar and his estate. Retarget the film title to Pepe (2024 film), a recent film which has one of these hippos as its protagonist. I don't see the mention that Cogsan is referring to. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:15, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- lead on the first article, last paragraph on the second cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't see where you're getting any reference to a documentary on "colombian nose candy hippos", and the page Cocaine Hippos (documentary) does not exist. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- i did link it to the correct name, so eh
- but in retrospect, a single mention of the documentary near the end of an article might not be worth a redirect, so i'll quietly have it changed... cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 23:35, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't see where you're getting any reference to a documentary on "colombian nose candy hippos", and the page Cocaine Hippos (documentary) does not exist. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- lead on the first article, last paragraph on the second cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:40, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget the first two to Hippopotamuses in Colombia (technically, only the second has to change), delete the last one as other more plausible targets would exist (but have not been created), such as the planned Netflix production, the documentary or this 2011 TV series. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 18:01, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
The Other Mrs.[edit]
Last Sons of America[edit]
Boston Incident[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 17#Boston Incident
May 1[edit]
Bobita[edit]
2033 World Men's Handball Championship[edit]
Hemang Raval[edit]
Wikipedia:Articles for destruction[edit]
Wikipédia (disambiguation)[edit]
- Wikipédia (disambiguation) → Wikipedia (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Because of the presence of "(disambiguation)", is an unlikely misspelling. No inbound links on Wikipedia. Bsherr (talk) 17:17, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to List of Wikipedias. The current target does not include any titles with the accented é, but when this was created it targeted Wikipédia, which at the time was a disambiguation page listing the four (again, at the time) language editions natively titled with the accented é. Later that page was briefly retargeted to French Wikipedia, then targeted back after this RFD. The list of Wikipedias "serves a disambiguation-like function" so this is valid redirect, and even if it doesn't get much use it's harmless. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipédia is a redirect to List of Wikipedias. Given that, is there a need for "Wikipédia (disambiguation)", which itself has no history of being a disambiguation page? --Bsherr (talk) 19:25, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- It was originally created as a redirect to a disambiguation page which did not have the (disambiguation) disambiguator. At one time that was considered reason enough to create a redirect that we had a bot do it, I don't know if it still does though. Redirects generally shouldn't be deleted without there being a reason to delete them, and being redundant generally isn't a good reason on its own. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:32, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipédia is a redirect to List of Wikipedias. Given that, is there a need for "Wikipédia (disambiguation)", which itself has no history of being a disambiguation page? --Bsherr (talk) 19:25, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Culture Jam (mixtape)[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 8#Culture Jam (mixtape)
Kawaii Leonard[edit]
Nba allstar 2007 mvp[edit]
- Nba allstar 2007 mvp → Kobe Bryant#2006-07 season (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No page links here, also an implausible typo or misnomer. Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 13:54, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Crowsus (talk) 14:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep (though it should be refined to Kobe Bryant#Scoring records and playoff upsets (2004–2007), as the current target no longer exists). Bryant was indeed the MVP in the 2007 NBA All-Star Game, so this is not an implausible search term IMO. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:36, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but possibly retarget to 2007 NBA All-Star Game pbp 15:50, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, random conglomerations of terms are a better fit for a Google search, and will not help readers. "MVP" is only mentioned once in the sixth paragraph in the section, not a useful redirect or precedent. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:28, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Utopes. Not a useful redirect. CycloneYoris talk! 22:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:08, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Utopes. --Bsherr (talk) 17:19, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Utopes --Lenticel (talk) 00:06, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, the odd use of capitalization makes this a very unlikely search term. Esolo5002 (talk) 04:06, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep; cheap and unambiguous. Queen of Hearts (talk) 20:09, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Draft:Taylor Swift[edit]
- Draft:Taylor Swift → Taylor Swift (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Pointless redirect from a supposed draft article. Mazewaxie (talk • contribs) 13:32, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Crowsus (talk) 14:55, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - totally pointless for inclusion and drafts are rarely or not at all linked on any articles on Wikipedia. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 16:27, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep (and delete the extra text): Actually, Swan, drafts do redirect to the articles once they get approved, that's a regular part of the process. In this case, it was out of process, because the draft was created in 2019 for an article that exists since 2006. However, having a "draft:article" redirecting to "article" is commonplace by now across the encyclopedia, so there's hardly a point in deleting this. Cambalachero (talk) 16:44, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:SRE, this is the standard way of dealing with these. There is no benefit to deleting, but there is benefit in avoiding RFD discussions for them. Extra text should be deleted and then the page should be tagged with Template:R from Draft. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:5450:3A3:46CC:17EC (talk) 17:10, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Cambalachero's explanation. This was never a viable draft, so it should have been deleted instead of redirected. -- Tavix (talk) 01:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hang on, Cambalachero's explanation indicates this should be kept from that user's view, so it looks like both arguments are presented above. The removal of the extra text should not be a problem either way. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 18:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm aware. Cambalachero's explanation is a good summary of why it should be deleted. Cambalachero then pivots a bit and says there's hardy a point in deleting it, which is agreeable, but I think while we're here we might as well delete it—there's also hardly a point in keeping it. -- Tavix (talk) 18:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Hang on, Cambalachero's explanation indicates this should be kept from that user's view, so it looks like both arguments are presented above. The removal of the extra text should not be a problem either way. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 18:31, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. This is not an WP:RDRAFT. The draft was created 13 years after the fact (in 2019) and never should have existed. Utopes (talk / cont) 07:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep ... ish. Someone created a draft under this redirect prior to it being nominated. If need be, disable the redirect and then send this to WP:MFD. Steel1943 (talk) 03:03, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- What would be the desire to send this to WP:MFD? There is clearly not any salvageable material in the draft so there's nothing to discuss on that front. If the redirect is disabled, it would become eligible for WP:G13 deletion six months later. (Although, I don't see the point in waiting that long given that it's already been nominated for deletion). -- Tavix (talk) 16:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- The 2023 IP edit should just have been reverted. But now that we're at RfD, Delete per Tavix. What I understand from SRE is it is applicable at MfD. Any draft may be boldly redirected to a corresponding article, and this avoids an MfD, such as this draft under discussion, hence was not a case of SRE. Jay 💬 17:17, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:07, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete for the reason given by Tavix. --Bsherr (talk) 17:21, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep This is all pretty pointless. The reasoning for keeping RDRAFTS isn't magically entirely invalidated by the fact that the redirect was created later and had no links. And yes, this comment is also pointless. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:41, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- RDRAFTs are defined as
redirects that are a result of page moves from the draft namespace to the main namespace
. This redirect was not the result of a page move, so this is not an RDRAFT. -- Tavix (talk) 15:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)- I am not saying that this is an RDRAFT. I'm saying that the reasoning behind keeping them applies to this redirect as well. Aaron Liu (talk) 16:21, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying. For what it's worth, RDRAFT redirects should be retained because they show where drafts have been published. That does not apply here because the underlying draft was never moved to mainspace and was never viable, magically or otherwise. That said, I do appreciate that other rationales that can apply here came up during that discussion. -- Tavix (talk) 16:55, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- There were several other reasons, including:
- Prevent accidental re-drafting of published articles
- including by showing the draft redirect title in search results for skins that aren't Vector 2022
- including by blocking the article creation wizard due to having an existing page
- Redirects being cheap and such redirects being not harmful
- Prevent accidental re-drafting of published articles
- I don't see any benefit at all for this redirect being deleted. Aaron Liu (talk) 17:03, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- There were several other reasons, including:
- Thanks for clarifying. For what it's worth, RDRAFT redirects should be retained because they show where drafts have been published. That does not apply here because the underlying draft was never moved to mainspace and was never viable, magically or otherwise. That said, I do appreciate that other rationales that can apply here came up during that discussion. -- Tavix (talk) 16:55, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I am not saying that this is an RDRAFT. I'm saying that the reasoning behind keeping them applies to this redirect as well. Aaron Liu (talk) 16:21, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- RDRAFTs are defined as
- Weak keep I've seen a fair number of drafts create for long existing articles and redirects like this are harmless. If having a redirect from the draft name to the article reduces that at all and gets the editors to improve the article, it'd be a net positive. Skynxnex (talk) 17:53, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Originaldo[edit]
Diego Marradonna[edit]
The King of Football[edit]
DZHH-AM[edit]
Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 05:19, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- If deleted, incoming links from 75 pages need to be fixed if we don't want this to be a redlink. Jay 💬 09:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- KEEP an old station that Philippine Air Force has been dated back in 1970s. It was mentioned on YouTube like this one, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjKYgmgMZB4. 2001:4454:733:4100:9DA9:E768:BA8B:C7CB (talk) 05:38, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- That's irrelevant if the target includes no information on the station. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:58, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- REDIRECT instead. 2001:4454:718:9400:1038:10E0:F21A:D6EE (talk) 11:41, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 22:44, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete unless sourced and WP:DUE information can be added at a target. signed, Rosguill talk 15:59, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the target talk.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:06, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Best cite that I got was it exists with address at the former Nichols Air Base. With that said, I don't think we have any material to work with to warrant a mention in any related articles. --Lenticel (talk) 00:19, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep - a redirect from a radio callsign to relevant information like where it broadcast[s|ed] from is useful, like if you saw it on an old navigation chart or something. It's not very useful but it's also harmless. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:37, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Per Ivanvector. This is the only source I found about the station's ownership. Though, I don't know which part of the article this piece of info can fit. Nonetheless, a redirect is deemed harmless. ASTIG😎🙃 10:15, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Very weak keep per Ivanvector. Although it is not mentioned, it gives information about where it broadcasts from. Queen of Hearts (talk) 20:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- If it's not appropriate to mention it at the target (for reasons Lenticel and others said) then why is it appropriate to subtly hint that it is in some vague way related without explaining how and leaving people confused. That's just mentioning it by the back door. * Pppery * it has begun... 15:18, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
John Seena[edit]
Scorsesi[edit]
Scorsezi[edit]
Japanator.com[edit]
Climate change in Bahrain[edit]
- Climate change in Bahrain → Geography of Bahrain#Climate (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Climate change in Qatar → Geography of Qatar#Climate (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Climate change in Iceland → Climate of Iceland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Climate change in Yemen → Geography of Yemen#Climate (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
We currently have many "Climate change in country x" titles that redirect to either "Geography of country x" or "Climate of country x". The style guide of WikiProject Climate change describe many aspects that should be in "Climate change in country x" articles that do not belong in articles about the climate or geography of country x. E.g. an article about climate change in a given country is supposed to discuss the greenhouse gas emissions that the country produces and the policies around emissions reductions in the country. The presence of these redirects discourages the creation of more complete articles so I propose that they be deleted. There are many other redirects following the pattern but I am starting with four of them to get community feedback before mass-nominating dozens. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 17:45, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment WP:RFDHOWTO says that new nominations go to the top of the page. I moved the discussion accordingly. Nickps (talk) 18:17, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Clayoquot: Deleting these redirects might also discourage the creation of more complete articles. Should an article about the climate of a given country not describe the effects of climate change in that country? Jarble (talk) 18:25, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that "Climate in country x" articles should describe the effects of climate change in that country. These redirects are not necessary to make those expansions happen. What these redirects do is leave no place to talk about the role of the country in causing climate change. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 18:31, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Mild support. If the deletion of the redirects is likely to lead to creations of new CCC articles then I am all for it (CCC = climate change in country X). I've been disappointed myself on a few occasions when I followed a link of "climate change in Country X", only to find that I was being redirected to "Country X#Climate" which then had only minimal info on climate change in that country. EMsmile (talk) 09:26, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: Better a redirect to a good (or at least acceptable) article than a bad stub. In my (admittedly relatively short) experience on here, a hope that the community will passively take a hint and be nudged into doing something after a different action from you is not a plan. Good country-level climate change articles should be our goal - unfortunately, there is probably no substitute to either doing the work yourself and/or working with that country's WikiProject/most active editors if the WP is inactive. InformationToKnowledge (talk) 20:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Iceland, delete others Climate of Iceland#Climate change is a whole section dedicated to climate change in the country, and so it's sensible to redirect there. For the other countries, the target sections are generally about climate in general in those countries, with little to no content about climate change specifically, and so it's a misleading redirect, and deleting to encourage article creation is better. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:53, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Iceland, delete others.--Snævar (talk) 22:28, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Iceland per Joseph. Queen of Hearts (talk) 20:22, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- I would say keep only those that have substantial content (e.g. Iceland) but delete the rest. EMsmile (talk) 07:51, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
List of deputy chief ministers of Puducherry[edit]
- List of deputy chief ministers of Puducherry → List of chief ministers of Puducherry (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
no such role exists or has existed -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:45, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to List of current Indian deputy chief ministers which has:
..one state (Uttarakhand) and one union territory (Puducherry) have never had a deputy chief minister.
Jay 💬 12:00, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:07, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I don't really see the point of redirecting it to List of current Indian deputy chief ministers, since there's no list of deputy chief ministers of Pudducherry there, either. -- asilvering (talk) 03:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- This is part of {{Deputy Chief Ministers of Indian states}}. So we either remove the entry from there, and have readers wonder why is Puducherry missing, or have it as unlinked. The non-link entry will provide the only information that a deputy CM is "Not established", whereas the proposed target adds some more. Jay 💬 07:42, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:46, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Weak retarget per Jay. The target explains the absence of this role. Queen of Hearts (talk) 20:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
Adriel Jasmear Green[edit]
Flexes[edit]
J.[edit]
Kyra Tierney[edit]
Wikipedia:LITTLEORPHAN[edit]
Horse News[edit]
- Horse News → My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fandom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This redirect survived CSD through a charitable BLAR. Not mentioned at the target, not likely to be mentioned at the target. Not a useful redirect in the page's current form. Utopes (talk / cont) 03:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. This was/is a site run by 4chan's /mlp/ board as an alternative to Equestria Daily. Break that down-- this is a fansite run by a subsection of the MLP fandom because the main, more-notable site used by the rest of the fandom didn't conform to that subsection's views (because... it's 4chan.) I challenge ANYONE to find a credible secondary source for this, which would be required to mention it on any of the possible non-mention targets of My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fandom, Equestria Daily, or 4chan#/mlp/. Send it to the moon. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 10:56, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Hunterdon County Democrat#Sister publications. Jay 💬 09:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as unsourced fancruft. Also, do not redirect to Hunterdon County Democrat#Sister publications because there is no citation showing they have a "sister publication" with the name "Horse News", and search of their own website finds no mention of it. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 14:43, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Lack of citation is an article content concern. In fact the presence of the redirect will lead readers to Hunterdon County Democrat, and lead editors to decide to add a citation or remove content. Jay 💬 22:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- That is backwards. Not only was there no citation there, but I couldn't find any evidence that it was true. Though I could have removed the content, I marked it instead with "citation needed". My point was why send a redirect to something that might not even exist? It's not like the redirect already pointed there (and a citation has gone missing) but you're proposing that this redirect should be created-anew to point to something new based on what... an insource-search of Wikipedia for the words "horse news"? ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 23:04, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Lack of citation is an article content concern. In fact the presence of the redirect will lead readers to Hunterdon County Democrat, and lead editors to decide to add a citation or remove content. Jay 💬 22:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
King Karlomann[edit]
Odiogo[edit]
Redirected to the history of podcasting after an AfD, because there was no sourced content worth merging. However, it doesn't appear at the target any longer, if it appeared to begin with if the merge idea fell through. Does not seem to be a useful redirect in the target's current form. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep/add mention to target. The site isn't mentioned at the target article because an editor disregarded the outcome of the deletion discussion and WP:BLARed the article instead of merging it properly. - Eureka Lott 22:00, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Pinging BLARer Aircorn and the participants of the AfD - @Ansh666, Northamerica1000, Kvng, Nakon, MSJapan, Davey2010, Coffee, Enterprisey, and SwisterTwister:. Jay 💬 15:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep/add mention to target per EurekaLott - The AFD was closed as Merge so why Aircorn decided to go against consensus and do whatever they please I will never know, Obvious keep. –Davey2010Talk 15:28, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Not going to dig into a decision I made 6 years ago too deep. Judging from the timeframe, editnotice comment and content of the article at the time I would hazard a pretty good guess that I was working through the merge backlog and came across an article that closed as merge nearly 2 years previously, but had no mergeable content in it. A case of a bunch of editors saying merge, not providing info on what to merge and then being closed as merge without any guidance on what to merge (see Wikipedia:Merge what?). Its perfectly fine to redirect that in this case and is not ignoring consensus. Hopefully someone commenting here that it should be kept will follow through and add sourced content to the article if that is the consensus reached. Aircorn (talk) 23:39, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still no mention at the target at this time
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:36, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Look how they massacred my boy[edit]
- Look how they massacred my boy → The Godfather (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This redirect is categorized as follows: A meme quotation from film and television, that is not mentioned at the article. Wikipedia is not an infinite compendium of unmentioned memes. Not a helpful redirect as people who want to read about The Godfather would search for The Godfather. Specifying a meme implies a search for specific content that we don't have on WP. Delete. Utopes (talk / cont) 05:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Support, how often do people search for films via quotes? Regardless a simple search engine search will tell them the film's title and they can search for the title from there. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - stats show utility (WP:RFD#K5) and this is the correct target. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 09:21, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as per Ivanvector; people could be searching this redirect in order to find out what the quote is from. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:04, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's a meme, people are attracted to the novelty, but Wikipedia isn't a collection of memes to gawk at. Searching for a phrase on Wikipedia to see the movie it comes from is an absolutely unreliable method that works 0% of the time. A google search is more effective in 100% of situations due to the usability and predictability it offers, which are two things that "typing a quote and receiving a redirect coupled with no context at the target page" does not provide. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.
UtilityUtilization per page statsisdoes not necessarilyindicate
usefulness. Readers looking for the meme, or a context of it, will be disappointed. Jay 💬 17:34, 25 April 2024 (UTC) - Delete No mention at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:27, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. If you're looking for this, knowyourmeme or google are going to get you the answer. Wikipedia will not; we don't mention it at the target. -- asilvering (talk) 03:25, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC)- Keep: it's a page about a meme (memes are frequently notable, or later become so) and it redirects to what the context is.
- jp×g🗯️ 18:55, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
Hornless unicorn[edit]
Unicorns are not real. The article makes no mention of unicorns. It would be impossible for a hornless unicorn to be a horse because that would require a fictional creature variant to be real, which it is not and never will be. The target page does not mention unicorns in the slightest. Anyone that specifies "unicorn" instead of "horse" is likely looking for a unicorn related subtopic, instead of the general WP:SYNTH explanation for horse. Unicorn, Unicorn horn, or deletion are all preferable outcomes for this title which currently exists unmentioned at the horse page. Utopes (talk / cont) 19:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: It's a valid search term, regardless of unicorns being fictional. One of the first things I found when searching was a definition on Urban Dictionary, as well as a number of images in which people refer to their horses as hornless unicorns. Using this logic, I do believe you should have also nominated horse with a horn (which points to unicorn). We also have horned horse and magic horse for consideration. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:50, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- All of those are fine titles. Urban dictionary is not a reliable source. People searching for the unmentioned "horses are hornless unicorns" meme will not receive any content at the target page, so that's another reason why a redirect would be harmful to those readers. At least with Unicorn and Unicorn horn, people can get context as to the crucial adjective of "hornless" in their search term, especially when the Horse article mentions neither "hornless" nor "unicorn". For all other cases you've provided, the article on Unicorn actually does a DEEP dive into those topics. "Magic" and "magical" comes up a bunch, and the topic of "horns" is thrown around in basically every paragraph. Nobody is confused when they type in a fictional phrase (i.e. "magic horse") and end up at a fictional article (unicorns). The same is not true of the inverse. The horned and magic horse redirects should be kept. Utopes (talk / cont) 19:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's not about urban dictionary being a reliable source, it's about whether it's a valid search term, is relatively unambiguous, and contextually makes sense. I strongly believe, based on some searching, that hornless unicorn is synonymous with a horse and fits these criteria. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:59, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's impossible, and also already a stretch. Unicorns are a fictional species. Any variant of a fictional creature cannot be synonymous with a real creature. And especially for using such a specific term as "hornless unicorn", targeting "Horse" instead of a unicorn related article is original research. My childhood would be highly eager to see the reliable, published source that says that unicorns exist, in order for a hornless version to as well and justify this redirect targeting a real animal and not a mythology-related article. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- OR? C'mon now. It's simply a reversal of a common description of a unicorn.
- Unicorn's short desc on en-wiki:
Legendary single-horned horse-like creature
- Wikidata:
Legendary animal, that looks like a horse with a horn on the forehead
- Unicorn's short desc on en-wiki:
- If a horned (magical) horse is a unicorn then it's entirely reasonable to assume or draw a connection to a hornless unicorn being a horse. Again though, I urge you to do some Googling and see that it's a common thing to refer to a horse as. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm just quoting what OR says: "On Wikipedia, original research means material for which no reliable, published source exists.". The term "hornless unicorn" does not appear at the target page. Moreover, it does not appear ANYWHERE on Wikipedia besides one passing mention at Henry Manners, 2nd Earl of Rutland. But definitely not at Horse. Even including a mention at the horse page would be wholly inappropriate there, as it's a real animal, fundamentally rooted in biology. The article isn't about how horses appear in pop culture or mythology, so unicorns shouldn't ever come up. Because we are redirecting a unicorn variation to a real animal, if there is no reliable, published source exists for this redirection-equation material, it is considered original research. Citing Urban Dictionary would also be considered original research, if no reliable, published source exists. A Google search funneling into various memes and the RuneScape wiki is also not a reliable source. If there is a reliable source that suggests that unicorns are a real thing, in order to justify the existence of hornless versions and target a real biological animal, then please let me know. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:32, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- OR? C'mon now. It's simply a reversal of a common description of a unicorn.
- It's impossible, and also already a stretch. Unicorns are a fictional species. Any variant of a fictional creature cannot be synonymous with a real creature. And especially for using such a specific term as "hornless unicorn", targeting "Horse" instead of a unicorn related article is original research. My childhood would be highly eager to see the reliable, published source that says that unicorns exist, in order for a hornless version to as well and justify this redirect targeting a real animal and not a mythology-related article. Utopes (talk / cont) 20:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- It's not about urban dictionary being a reliable source, it's about whether it's a valid search term, is relatively unambiguous, and contextually makes sense. I strongly believe, based on some searching, that hornless unicorn is synonymous with a horse and fits these criteria. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:59, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- All of those are fine titles. Urban dictionary is not a reliable source. People searching for the unmentioned "horses are hornless unicorns" meme will not receive any content at the target page, so that's another reason why a redirect would be harmful to those readers. At least with Unicorn and Unicorn horn, people can get context as to the crucial adjective of "hornless" in their search term, especially when the Horse article mentions neither "hornless" nor "unicorn". For all other cases you've provided, the article on Unicorn actually does a DEEP dive into those topics. "Magic" and "magical" comes up a bunch, and the topic of "horns" is thrown around in basically every paragraph. Nobody is confused when they type in a fictional phrase (i.e. "magic horse") and end up at a fictional article (unicorns). The same is not true of the inverse. The horned and magic horse redirects should be kept. Utopes (talk / cont) 19:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Unicorn: (would be open to other targets) my initial impression was to keep since "hornless unicorn" is commonly[by whom?] "known" to be a jokey way to refer to a horse. But, horse doesn't mention or link to unicorn and is unlikely to ever cover this term. While unicorn mentions and links to horse and says unicorns are horse-like creatures with a horn. Skynxnex (talk) 20:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete It is simply too vague, as it may refer to a horse, or a literal unicorn that lacks a horn. But, it would also be pointless to disambiguate, as DAB pages are not a search index. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:21, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: as incorrect and unused. A hornless unicorn is not a horse. Maybe it's a unicorn whose horn has been cut off, or one which was [fictitiously] born without a horn (an anomaly). But it has nothing to do with a horse. Horse article doesn't mention unicorns. If you must keep the redirect, send it to Unicorn. Leaving it as a redirect to Horse is an uncited definition (WP:OR), which is also an incorrect meaning. If it was in Wiktionary, I'd say redirect it there, but it's not. There is no article in Wikipedia which uses this redirect. There is a single article which refers to a "hornless unicorn" (linked to Unicorn), and it is a creature on a tomb monument, which can be seen here. Delete. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 15:15, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, this isn't ambiguous whatsoever. "Unicorns aren't real" is not a reason to delete this redirect; what matters is that people know what a unicorn is, and more importantly, know what a unicorn looks like and how that appearance relates to horses. My mind goes to the word games that non-fluent people sometimes resort to when they don't know the word for something-- the anecdote of someone in a grocery store, wanting chicken, not knowing the word for "chicken", picking some eggs up, heading to an employee, and asking, "Where's the mother?" 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:15, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- There is a description in Unicorn article: "depicted as a white horse-like or goat-like animal with a long straight horn with spiralling grooves, cloven hooves, and sometimes a goat's beard" and often "an ox tail". Far from a horse; closer to cattle. If someone wants to know what a "hornless unicorn" is, they can go to Unicorn and figure it out. Going to Horse won't help them at all, since horses don't have cloven hooves, horns, beards, or tails like that. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 21:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- ...Huh. That's... not usually what I think of when I think of unicorns. In the modern day, unicorns really are depicted as "just slap a horn on a horse"-- after all, if you need a live-action shot of a unicorn, getting cloven hooves and an ox tail is a tall order, and the thing people notice first has always been the horn anyways. There's also the My Little Pony franchise, where unicorns are simply ponies with horns, but given a pony is just a horse with dwarfism...My point is that that article needs some work, clearly-- it completely fails to talk about contemporary understanding/depiction of unicorns. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Lunamann: Reminder... WP:NOTFORUM. This RFD is about whether or not to delete or change the redirect Hornless unicorn. You're welcome to edit Unicorn to add whatever you can appropriately source, but based on your edit history you don't actually do any content editing, but just post comments on RFDs. I can't even imagine being holed up here. You really should branch out and get more experience around Wikipedia. It's much more fun. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 20:24, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- I don't really think My Little Pony ponies are horses either: they have no separate hooves at all, and you can't really distinguish if that's an ox tail or a horse tail, so you can't see if they're unicorns that fit the article's description. I agree that you should probably get a really reliable source that says that hornless unicorns are just horses. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- ...Huh. That's... not usually what I think of when I think of unicorns. In the modern day, unicorns really are depicted as "just slap a horn on a horse"-- after all, if you need a live-action shot of a unicorn, getting cloven hooves and an ox tail is a tall order, and the thing people notice first has always been the horn anyways. There's also the My Little Pony franchise, where unicorns are simply ponies with horns, but given a pony is just a horse with dwarfism...My point is that that article needs some work, clearly-- it completely fails to talk about contemporary understanding/depiction of unicorns. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
- There is a description in Unicorn article: "depicted as a white horse-like or goat-like animal with a long straight horn with spiralling grooves, cloven hooves, and sometimes a goat's beard" and often "an ox tail". Far from a horse; closer to cattle. If someone wants to know what a "hornless unicorn" is, they can go to Unicorn and figure it out. Going to Horse won't help them at all, since horses don't have cloven hooves, horns, beards, or tails like that. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 21:49, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Since any other action appears to be ambiguous guesswork. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:26, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep A unicorn is a horse with special features, so when you eliminate those features it reverts back to its original state. The whole unicorn belief is based on the supposed magical powers of the horn. In fact, the horn is what makes the unicorn, not the horse. I rest my case. Wolverine XI (talk to me) 22:34, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- That is a misunderstanding about this subject which is not supported by reliable sources. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 22:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Not really, you just have to apply common sense here. Not everything has to be used/supported by reliable sources. Urban terms are a thing. Wolverine XI (talk to me) 08:55, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- That is a misunderstanding about this subject which is not supported by reliable sources. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 22:48, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: To suggest that people will search for a member of an empty set such as a hornless unicorn is
laughablenot an argument which has a solid basis. Incorrect search term that is not remotely likely to searched for. TarnishedPathtalk 13:55, 30 April 2024 (UTC)- @TarnishedPath: Laughable is an obviously extreme interpretation. I might avoid disparaging others with comments such as these. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh apologies I didn't mean disparage. TarnishedPathtalk 05:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- No worries, I understand if it wasn't meant that way. Hey man im josh (talk) 11:35, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Hey man im josh apologies I didn't mean disparage. TarnishedPathtalk 05:38, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see how it "is not remotely likely to searched for" when it does have pageviews (and substationally more than the similar pages horned horse and magic horse linked above if you think this RfD is the cause of those pageviews). Doublah (talk) 02:13, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- @TarnishedPath: Laughable is an obviously extreme interpretation. I might avoid disparaging others with comments such as these. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Discussion is leaning delete but consensus could be clearer.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep pretty much for Hey man im josh's reasoning. Redirects don't need to be reliably sourced; they need to be useful for navigation. This is a term others have used, clearly to refer to horses; there's no reason to not direct our readers there. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:38, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: An important purpose of redirects is to be useful for navigation and search engines, considering the substantial results on search engines for hornless unicorn in reference to horses does prove the usefulness of a redirect with no real downsides to such existing (And no, "Unicorns are not real" is not an downside).
- Doublah (talk) 02:25, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- I will remind that the purpose for a redirect as a search tool or a navigation tool is to arrive at an article which says more about the topic. The article Horse doesn't even mention unicorns, let alone hornless ones. So anyone spouting "it aids navigation" is just fantasizing about something that doesn't even exist in Wikipedia. (As a member of the WikiProject Equine, I can assure you that any content about "hornless unicorn" would be unlikely to survive in the article Horse, should anyone try to add it there.) To make matters worse, since there is no source which says a hornless unicorn is a horse, to leave this redirect as-is would violate several Wikipedia key policies such as verifiability, no original research and WP:FRINGE (if not dozens more). ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 02:54, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
So anyone spouting "it aids navigation" is just fantasizing about something that doesn't even exist in Wikipedia.
– @Grorp: That's quite the lofty claim, and an argument made in bad faith....to leave this redirect as-is would violate several Wikipedia key policies such as verifiability, no original research and WP:FRINGE (if not dozens more).
– That's factually incorrect, it wouldn't violate any of those policies as a non-derogatory redirect. It's about expected result and possibility of usefulness (even if minor) when a redirect is searched. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:50, 10 May 2024 (UTC)- It quite literally violates all of those policies almost immediately in each's first paragraph. You're saying that original research isn't original research as long as it's not derogatory? Per WP:OR policy, "On Wikipedia, original research means material for which no reliable, published source exists." Pseudo-science isn't derogatory either, but it sure is filled with original research most of the time. Is there a derogatory-clause that makes certain types of OR more acceptable than others as long as its nice enough? Per WP:V policy, "All material in Wikipedia mainspace must be verifiable from a reliable source". If you can find a reliable source that hornless unicorns are horses (and by extension that unicorns exist for hornless versions to exist), and can insert that into the article or even as a note on the redirect itself, that would actually be miraculous. WP:FRINGE is generous because that means that there's people out there studying a division of Unicorn Biology and can give a basis that hornless unicorns are indeed horses, but indeed per the WP:FRINGE guideline, "Wikipedia is not and must not become the validating source for non-significant [fringe theories]". What other reputable source is saying that hornless unicorns and horses are basically the same thing, if not Wikipedia? Wikipedia is not meant to spread "common sense" about what's left after taking the horn off of a unicorn, but only spread information that has been reported on by reliable sources. Wholly inappropriate redirect without mention. If you think it's a search term that's fine but it's current target is a major pseudo-scientific no-go across several layers. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:01, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- I will remind that the purpose for a redirect as a search tool or a navigation tool is to arrive at an article which says more about the topic. The article Horse doesn't even mention unicorns, let alone hornless ones. So anyone spouting "it aids navigation" is just fantasizing about something that doesn't even exist in Wikipedia. (As a member of the WikiProject Equine, I can assure you that any content about "hornless unicorn" would be unlikely to survive in the article Horse, should anyone try to add it there.) To make matters worse, since there is no source which says a hornless unicorn is a horse, to leave this redirect as-is would violate several Wikipedia key policies such as verifiability, no original research and WP:FRINGE (if not dozens more). ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 02:54, 4 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but no prejedice to "retarget" a better target can be found. For example in Runescape there are unicorns but no horses. The in universe mythological "hornless unicorn" is clearly a meta-reference to the horse. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 11:15, 11 May 2024 (UTC).
- Keep per Rich Farmbrough and Hey man im josh. As for me, it seems plausible that a "hornless unicorn" might be a thing in mythology (i.e. what happens if you cut off a unicorn's horn? does it go back to being a horse or does it become some other third thing?). jp×g🗯️ 18:56, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- It might be nice if we answered this mythological-specific question somewhere on Wikipedia, instead of sending these mythology searchers to a biology page with none of the content they were looking for. People who really want to know the dynamics of horn removal of mythological creatures would not be typing "hornless unicorn" on Wikipedia, and certainly would not be happy with a page about horses when they could have just searched "Horse" to begin with if they really were that interested. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:03, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: After a month here, no one has yet to provide a single reliable source that even infers a "hornless unicorn" = a horse. One month in and the arguments are WP:ILIKEIT, WP:DOESN'THARM and "it's plausible" versus WP:OR and WP:V. Why is this not yet closed? ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 23:27, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unicorn -- "
a mythical, usually white animal generally depicted with the body and head of a horse with long flowing mane and tail and a single often spiraled horn in the middle of the forehead
". jp×g🗯️ 01:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC)- Inadequate. Asked for a source for "hornless unicorn". "Depicted" isn't the same as "is", and doesn't mention hornless. You are engaging in SYNTH. It's a big leap to go from a mythical creature that allegedly "looks like" something known on earth, to a real live flesh and bone earth creature. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 02:09, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- It's pretty clearly not SYNTH or OR, so I'd drop that stick. It also appears as though you're unwilling to be convinced, which is fine, but at this point you're best off leaving it to the closer to interpret. Hey man im josh (talk) 00:54, 17 May 2024 (UTC)
- Inadequate. Asked for a source for "hornless unicorn". "Depicted" isn't the same as "is", and doesn't mention hornless. You are engaging in SYNTH. It's a big leap to go from a mythical creature that allegedly "looks like" something known on earth, to a real live flesh and bone earth creature. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 02:09, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
- https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/unicorn -- "
Cat:NN[edit]
W2000[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 9#W2000
Neb-er-tcher[edit]
Halo 1 pistol[edit]
Turkish bath[edit]
The target of this redirect should likely be reconsidered. The most helpful solution may to turn this into a DAB, merging with Turkish Bath (disambiguation). Reason: The term "Turkish bath" in a Western context is fairly generic and might also denote other types of steam baths, in addition to the mainly Islamic ones covered at Hammam. Since this was last discussed in 2021 (see here), a more fully-fledged Victorian Turkish bath article now exists. Other articles might also be relevant to link. Note: This came out of a discussion at Talk:Turkish Bath (disambiguation) between myself and Ishpoloni. Feel free to read there for more context & explanation. R Prazeres (talk) 00:17, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Hammam is the primary topic. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:47, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget: I don't know the correct Wiki terminology to use, but searchers from different communities seeking information on so-called 'Turkish baths' (which no longer appears as an article) could equally be looking for Hammam or Victorian Turkish baths and some type of 'See:' reference should offer these two clear redirecting link options.
- Hammam is neither primary nor secondary. Hammam and Victorian Turkish baths only have in common that they are baths, and are both derived from the ancient Roman thermae. Victorian Turkish baths are not steam baths. Nor are they really, as the Hammam article states, "A variation on the Muslim bathhouse"—which is why in France and Germany they are called Roman-Irish baths.
- The only guiding principle here should be: 'Save the time of the reader' Ranganathan's 4th law. Ishpoloni (talk) 13:53, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- On Wikipedia, we follow our own policies and guidelines, not library science (for better or for worse, I can't say). The guideline for how to deal with ambiguous terms (like Turkish bath) is WP:D. The first step is to determine whether there is a primary topic. One way to do that is to look at page traffic. The page traffic for Hammam shows that most people get to that page via an "other-search", such as searching for the term "Turkish bath" via an external search engine, but that only 15% of people then click away to Victorian Turkish baths from that article. We can infer that most readers were, in fact, looking for Hammam when they searched "Turkish bath". We can also look at comparative pageviews, which shows that Hammam gets far more views than Victorian Turkish baths. Then, if we've determined a primary topic, the guideline tells us to redirect the ambiguous term to that page, with hatnotes to the appropriate disambiguation pages. voorts (talk/contributions) 17:39, 20 April 2024 (UTC)
- Having had time to familiarise myself more with the often complicated Wikipedia guidance notes, I now believe that the most equitable solution is the one suggested above by R Prazeres, ie, to change the current Redirect into a DAB, merging with Turkish Bath (disambiguation). This could either be based on the existing one or, perhaps preferably, like the Mercury page example given in the guidance notes. I believe this is a solution on which we should easily be able to reach consensus.
- Reasons:
- 1. Of the 22 reasons for a redirect given on Wikipedia:Redirect the overwhelming majority relate to different forms of words, grammar, punctuation, etc. Not one exemplifies a redirect of one subject to another subject.[a]
- 2. On Wikipedia:Disambiguation page the three important points seem to be:
- (a) naming articles so each has an unique title, eg, Hammam and Victorian Turkish baths;
- (b) making links so that a term points to the correct article;
- (c) "Ensuring that a reader who searches for a topic using a particular term can get to the information on that topic quickly and easily, whichever of the possible topics it might be." (My emphasis)
- Proposed resolution:
- Change the current Redirect into a DAB, merging with Turkish Bath (disambiguation)
- An allied matter:
- In case there are Western European readers of this Wikipedia, there should be Redirects < Irish-Roman baths and < Roman-Irish baths > Victorian Turkish baths. Ishpoloni (talk) 07:46, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Turkish Bath (disambiguation) per nom. -- asilvering (talk) 03:52, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- ^ For any newcomer to the discussion, 'Victorian Turkish baths' is not a subdivision of 'Hammam', Hammam being an Islamic steam bath and Victorian Turkish baths being Victorian (Roman-Irish) baths using hot dry air. Both are direct descendants of the Roman thermae.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there a primary topic?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:39, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Baak film redirects[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Baak film redirects
Opposition to Chavismo[edit]
Aku Type[edit]
Pokédex (Sinnoh)[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 10#Pokédex (Sinnoh)
Bird Pokémon[edit]
- Bird Pokémon → Gameplay of Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Bird Pokemon → Gameplay of Pokémon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
not sure if this is referring to bird pokémon (like corviknight and the worse corviknight), in which case i'd say retarget to the list of pokémon or delete (more so delete) or to the unused bird type, in which case redirect to missingno without a second or first thought cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:56, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to MissingNo. due to the unique bird type trait. Bird type doesn't equal flying type so it's not vague per se. --Lenticel (talk) 00:26, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to MissingNo.#Characteristics per above "without a second or first thought". I'm putting that into my phrasebook. Aaron Liu (talk) 01:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Among Pokémon fans, this term is typically used to refer to the likes of Pidgey and Spearow, being weak Normal-Flying birds found early in the game. A redirect to MissingNo. would be too confusing, and this term doesn't have a good single Pokémon to send it to. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Cogsan, Lenticel, and Aaron Liu: Pinging so that you can reconsider your positions. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- It is not unlikely for people who heard of the missing type to search it. Hence, retargetting to relevant information at MissingNo.#Characteristics would be helpful. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:39, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- my opinion, after several minutes of questioning unrelated things like how hattrem can knock boxers out with punches when it has as much attack as an acorn and less than a mug, is that "bird pokémon" either doesn't narrow things down in the slightest or narrows it down to exactly one pokémon which has an unused type game freak forgot to completely remove. so i'm even more confused, and recommend deleting so i never have to think about it again :D cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:52, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm also fine with deletion if we find the redirects too vague. --Lenticel (talk) 23:36, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Cogsan, Lenticel, and Aaron Liu: Pinging so that you can reconsider your positions. QuicoleJR (talk) 21:31, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Leaning towards delete. Why isn't Ho-Oh or Lugia considered a bird Pokemon? Seems ambiguous to me. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:55, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to MISSINGNO. -- the other pokemon aren't "bird" type, they're "flying". @Hey man im josh: Since this is one of few times anybody on Wikipedia gives a crap about my vast knowledge of the subject I will indulge you: MISSINGNO. is famously the only "bird" type because it's a glitch that exposed certain pieces of pre-release dummy code to the player, including a "bird" type subsequently unused in the following 30 years of games. The way MISSINGNO. works, you ask? Oh I'd love to explain...
- jp×g🗯️ 19:00, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Interesting, thanks for the explanation @JPxG. Believe me, I remember MISSINGNO and the sixth item slot! I'm neutral on this now, kinda leaning to support retargeting. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:07, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Comment legendary birds are also classified as bird Pokémon, such as Articuno in its official description. Hisuian Braviary is described as "ferocious bird Pokémon". I would support listifying or dabifying. --MikutoH talk! 00:15, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- the pokédex also makes mention of plenty of "bird pokémon" when it comes to bullying bug types
- this usually refers to pidgey and taillow lol cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
The Big One (earthquake)[edit]
- The Big One (earthquake) → San Andreas Fault#The next .22Big One.22 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Previously discussed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 28#The Big One (earthquake). However, multiple sources prove that "The Big One" does not only refer to the anticipated mega-quake in Los Angeles, but also refers to a similar feared one that can devastate Metro Manila, the Philippines. Here are some of the reliable sources that prove "The Big One" is not just a U.S. thing: from Rizal Medical Center, from DOST, from Inquirer.net, from Manila Bulletin, from a World Bank blog, from Philippine Star, and from Manila Standard Today. This redirect should be made as a disambiguation page. JWilz12345 (Talk|Contrib's.) 08:27, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate: Agree with nomination. Not everything is about the US and if there are WP:RS demonstrating the terms usage in reference to other occurrences then this redirect should be made as a disambiguation page. TarnishedPathtalk 10:32, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
Pokémon Master[edit]
Legendary Pokémon[edit]
Yuno Miles[edit]
Hazeltown[edit]
The Province of Bessarabia[edit]
- The Province of Bessarabia → Budjak (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Province of Bessarabia → Budjak (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Nonsense redirects. Bessarabia is a region in Eastern Europe. Budjak is a subset of it. Super Ψ Dro 12:44, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget both to Bessarabia Governorate. "Province" appears to be an alternative translation (see [20], [21], etc.) - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- In both links you gave province is not capitalized, there is no proper names but a descriptive combination of words. There was also Bessarabia Governorate (Romania) by the way. We could disambiguate but I see it as really unnecessary. Also, come on, The Province of Bessarabia is completely implausible, it should be deleted. Super Ψ Dro 23:25, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Does it matter if it's not capitalized in the specific sources I found? It will still be a plausible search term. I thought about disambiguation, but I think the hatnote at the proposed target is sufficient. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 03:03, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
- In both links you gave province is not capitalized, there is no proper names but a descriptive combination of words. There was also Bessarabia Governorate (Romania) by the way. We could disambiguate but I see it as really unnecessary. Also, come on, The Province of Bessarabia is completely implausible, it should be deleted. Super Ψ Dro 23:25, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I think the key word in the nominating statement is: "is". Bessarabia is a larger region in Eastern Europe. However, it appears that it was a smaller Turkish province/governate/eyalet, from the late 15th century through the early 19th century. Here's the article as it stood before being redirected in 2005:
This is uncited but sounds plausible, and it aligns with the bit in Budjak#Name and geography (i.e., the redirect's target) that uses the name historic Bessarabia. There are sources such as this 1927 book (about the Russian annexation of the province) and this 2019 book (about ethnicity, but summarizing the pre-Russian state, in which Bessarabia was vaguely delimited but generally congruent with Budjak), and "province"+"bessarabia"&pg=PA59&printsec=frontcover this book (which confirms Izmail was part of the province of Bessarabia when the Russians took the province from the Ottomans, before they gave it to Moldovia) that verify at least parts of it. At any rate, though I'm unfamiliar with the history of this area, it appears that it's not "nonsense", but merely a detail of history that is not widely known. Consequently, we should probably keep this redirect, and probably improve the target article. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:18, 10 April 2024 (UTC)The Province of Bessarabia or Besarabya pashalyk in Turkish, was an Ottoman province from 1478 to 1812. Its size varied, however by 1600, it included the towns of Cetatea Alba, Izmail, Tighina, and Kilia.
The Ottoman Province of Bassarabia was annexed by the Russian Empire in 1812, along with all Moldovan territory east of the Prut river, which the Russians governed jointly in one single Russian province of Bessarabia.
The Ottoman Province, only, is more or less the same size as the territory of modern-day Bugeac, which is currently part of the Ukrainian Odessa oblast.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:23, 14 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 18:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC)- Retarget to Bessarabia given the ambiguity of several historical provinces being named "Bessarabia". Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 20:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist — keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:29, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
Winged spear[edit]
- Winged spear → Bohemian earspoon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Between Corseque, Spetum, and the fact that this redirect is not mentioned in the current target, it's not clear which subject readers are desiring to locate when searching this term. (However, used to be a section at Polearm#Winged spear, a section which was present in 2012, but was removed at some point that year.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:42, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- I must admit the Bohemian Earspoon is not the most obvious redirect. Winged spears are probably ancestral to the spetum and corseque too. If I were to plump for one, it would probably be spetum. But there is an argument that a separate article or article section on the weapon would ultimately be preferable. Be hard to make it above a start though. Monstrelet (talk) 09:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ToadetteEdit! 17:57, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:25, 1 May 2024 (UTC)- weak delete per WP:REDYES Okmrman (talk) 15:14, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Link baiting[edit]
Battle of appommatox courthouse[edit]
April 30[edit]
Radio-Canada[edit]
Panther Memorial Stadium, McBee[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 7#Panther Memorial Stadium, McBee
Paramount Television International Studios[edit]
Goulash (magazine)[edit]
- Goulash (magazine) → Harrow School (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This is a local(?) satirical(?) magazine published by a boarding school. Zero standalone notability, existed as two sentences that were BLAR'd immediately into the school it was published from. No mention of "goulash" anywhere at the target page. Utopes (talk / cont) 06:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete No mention No redirect. To be honest, I doubt if this magazine is even real. Couldn't find anything in Jstor and Gscholar Ca talk to me! 15:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to The Harrovian and unlink there. Jay 💬 09:45, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:26, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
ELLIS, DICK[edit]
Pluri-[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 7#Pluri-
Finite dimensional Hilbert spaces[edit]
Royal tart[edit]
Pawanism[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 7#Pawanism
Pinkblood[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 7#Pinkblood
Jackahuahua[edit]
- Jackahuahua → Jack Russell Terrier#Post-World War II (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Dog breed redirected at a 2008 AfD, seemingly been unmentioned at the target for over a decade. It's misleading to maintain breed redirect for a dog type that holds zero information on Wikipedia. Utopes (talk / cont) 16:41, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
- Could go to list of dog crossbreeds but that page doesn't mention it; however, it's only had 3 views in the past 30 days which probably includes me looking at it. I don't think this designer dog breed has much notability. Traumnovelle (talk) 19:24, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:13, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Restore and merge to the list page per the AfD close of Daniel, who in 2008, anticipated that the contents could be merged to a list page. Jay 💬 09:01, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Easing function[edit]
Lev Trotskij[edit]
Bounding Into Comics[edit]
Bessel potential space[edit]
Template:National football Cups (CAF region)[edit]
A Platypus?[edit]
Frances and Richard Lockridge[edit]
- Frances and Richard Lockridge → Richard Lockridge (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Frances Lockridge now has her own page separate from her husband Bookworm-ce (talk) 14:48, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and WP:XY. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- I’m not sure. On the one hand, WP:XY; however, on the other hand, Richard Lockridge#Personal and professional life indicates that this phrase was a by-line used by the couple for the Mr. and Mrs. North, meaning that this is a plausible search term - which is backed up by this redirect getting an average 28 views/month since its creation. Perhaps retarget to Mr. and Mrs. North? But I don’t know if that would be the most ideal thing either. Best, —a smart kitten[meow] 16:38, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Weak delete not clear that Mr. and Mrs. North is the primary target, not suitable for dabification, and of course WP:XY. We are probably best off just letting the search engine do its job. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:BCC1:74D:C5C8:CF76 (talk) 16:53, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per points raised by a smart kitten. The covers of Mr. and Mrs. North books do indeed depict the names of the authors as "Frances and Richard Lockridge", thus confirming the existence of a single pen name that encompasses the names of both collaborators and enabling the existence of at least a redirect (to Mr. and Mrs. North) or even a separate article which would focus on the details of the writing collaboration. Examples of other team-based articles can be found in Wikipedia entries for such collaborations as Rodgers and Hart, Rodgers and Hammerstein, Lerner and Loewe, Kander and Ebb, Comden and Green, Holland–Dozier–Holland, etc. Each of the collaborators — Richard Rodgers, Lorenz Hart, Oscar Hammerstein II, Alan Jay Lerner, Frederick Loewe, John Kander, Fred Ebb, Betty Comden, Adolph Green, Brian Holland, Lamont Dozier, Eddie Holland, etc. — also has a separate Wikipedia article that focuses on his or her entire life, not simply the collaboration. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 16:56, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Merge Frances Lockridge and Richard Lockridge to a joint biography at this title. The articles are almost identical. The differences are biographical in nature and can be combined in a biography section with sub-sections dedicated to each person. -- Tavix (talk) 17:46, 3 May 2024 (UTC)
- Would alternatively support proposal by Tavix. Unlike, for example, Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein II, who have extensive detail in their individual articles, independent of the Rodgers and Hammerstein collaboration, Frances Lockridge and Richard Lockridge are indeed proper candidates for a Frances and Richard Lockridge joint biography entry. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 17:02, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Having created the Frances Lockridge article, merging the pages seems like an OK alternative, although Richard's career continued for a decade or two after Frances' death. I just would prefer not to have a joint page directing to Richard specifically, or have only Richard have his own page but not give Frances her own, which would feel dismissive of Frances. —Bookworm-ce (talk) 13:59, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- As an alternative proposal, how about dabification? This probably isn't a standard outcome for WP:XY-type redirects; however, given that this is a valid search term (as opposed to a combination of 'X' and 'Y' that isn't used anywhere else), I'm leaning towards ignoring the rules to the extent necessary for this proposal. I'd be in favour of this outcome as opposed to merging, due to the fact that (in my opinion) RfD isn't the ideal forum for considering/discussing article mergers, and I'm not sure if it's strictly within its remit -- to be clear, a merger could still be discussed, but by a process such as WP:PAM rather than at RFD. I've started a draft disambiguation page below the current redirect. Pinging previous participants: @Bookworm-ce, Presidentman, Roman Spinner, and Tavix. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 15:28, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why we would need three pages where one is sufficient. -- Tavix (talk) 15:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- One may turn out to be sufficient, but I don't personally feel comfortable opining on that matter in this discussion; as (to me) it's more of an article content question than one regarding redirects, and due to the fact that the two pages in question aren't aware that a merger is being considered at this RfD. If the consensus at (e.g.) WP:PAM is to merge the articles, this proposed dab page would no longer exist - however, prior to such a merger (if one occurs), this disambiguation page would serve as a navigational aid. My view is therefore that RfD could dabify this redirect, but without prejudice to a merger discussion (which would, in my view, be better suited to make that determination). All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 15:51, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why we would need three pages where one is sufficient. -- Tavix (talk) 15:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Articleify into an article about their collaboration under a pen name. The articles with their individual biographies can be kept if they meet GNG outside of their collaboration, otherwise a full merge could work. Chaotıċ Enby (talk · contribs) 18:24, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
Template:R subtopic, Template:R subpage, Template:R plural[edit]
- Template:R subtopic → Template:R from subtopic (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:R subpage → Template:R from subpage (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Template:R plural → Template:R from plural (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
These redirects are ambiguous between the R to
and the R from
versions of the rcat templates:
- {{R from subtopic}} & {{R to subtopic}}
- {{R from subpage}} & {{R to subpage}}
- {{R from plural}} & {{R to plural}}.
If consensus is to delete, I'm happy to do a JWB run to replace transclusions. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 12:43, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and disambiguate each with a hatnote in the {{Redirect category shell}}'s
|h=
parameter, such as|h=See also: {{R to subtopic}}|
, for example. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 12:59, 30 April 2024 (UTC)- With respect, I don't see how this would solve the issue regarding ambiguity. When these rcat-redirects are used, they are used by typing the template code into a wikitext editor; and it seems unlikely that most editors using them will go to the redirect's own page (which, in addition to navigating to the redirect's title, generally requires clicking the
Redirected from [X]
link after arriving at the redirect's target).Keeping these redirects would also seem to be making a determination that the (de-facto) primary topic for an{{R foo}}
rcat-redirect is{{R from foo}}
, even where{{R to foo}}
also exists - to me, this just seems to be an WP:XY-type situation, where keeping these redirects could cause confusion. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 13:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- With respect, I don't see how this would solve the issue regarding ambiguity. When these rcat-redirects are used, they are used by typing the template code into a wikitext editor; and it seems unlikely that most editors using them will go to the redirect's own page (which, in addition to navigating to the redirect's title, generally requires clicking the
- Delete unless someone has a better technical solution to address potential misuse. The redirects don't seem useful enough to risk the ambiguity. Though to be honest, I'm not sure what {{R to subtopic}} is for – I understand the intent but I can't think of an example where it would be needed. (I originally created it as a redirect to {{R to related topic}}.) Looking at Category:Redirects to subtopics, it appears to be frequently being used incorrectly. If that template returned to being a redirect, I would support {{R subtopic}} remaining as a redirect to {{R from subtopic}} as I created it. MClay1 (talk) 14:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Empty and delete - an AWB (I don't know JWB but assume it's similar) run would not be appropriate, these will need to be manually reviewed to determine whether they are "R to x" or "R from x" redirects. But once that's done they should be deleted so that nobody adds more pages to them. Disambiguation doesn't solve the problem of the redirects being miscategorized - these are supposed to be part of a semi-automatic process. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: Notified Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect of this discussion. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 19:27, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: These are ambiguous and could result in improper use. Disambiguation is not appropriate, as a smart kitten explained. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Paine Ellsworth JoshuaAuble (talk) 19:07, 6 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. When we have to and from variations, one without the type just isn't helpful. If this passes, please list it at WP:TFD/H. Gonnym (talk) 17:11, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Sidebar. Congratulations, Jay, for your upcoming 21 years registered on WP in July – thank you for that! P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 22:54, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: As they are ambiguous between to and from. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 20:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Enbian[edit]
Wikipedia:Racism[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 7#Wikipedia:Racism
April 29[edit]
Unlabeled[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Unlabeled
Template:Arizona Coyotes roster[edit]
Inosine triphosphatase[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 9#Inosine triphosphatase
Template:R sub[edit]
- Template:R sub → Template:R to subpage (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Extremely ambiguous. See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 14#Template:R from sub. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:32, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - the title is ambiguous between (at least) {{R from subpage}}, {{R to subpage}}, {{R from subtopic}}, {{R to subtopic}}, {{R from subsidiary}}, {{R from subdivision}}, {{R from subreddit}}, and the rcat-redirect {{R to subsection}}. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 10:11, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Forgot to say - if consensus is to delete, I'm happy to do a JWB run to replace this template's transclusions. —a smart kitten[meow] 10:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Note: Notified Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect of this discussion. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 19:20, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
- Bypass and delete - Too confusing, and you can't usefully dabify a template. I would also suggest that, while we're doing an automated task anyway, it would be helpful to look out for redirects that transclude {{r sub}} but do not actually target subpages. Such pages may need the template replaced with a different one. I spot-checked a few transclusions at random, but didn't find any that needed to be fixed. --NYKevin 20:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
you can't usefully dabify a template
What about {{Template disambiguation}}? Nickps (talk) 17:18, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify I see no reason why ambiguity alone is a good enough reason to delete. As I said above, there are ways to dabify templates. Nickps (talk) 00:34, 8 May 2024 (UTC)
- Speaking personally, I’m not massively opposed to a template disambiguation, but I don’t see that one would be of much value here - this is a template shortcut, and could refer to a non-trivial number of rcats and rcat-redirects that contain the word
sub
. I can see the value of template-dabs for (e.g.) full titles like {{R from subtitle}}, as that title could plausibly be an rcat in itself (and was its own rcat-redirect, prior to a recent RfD). However, I’m not personally convinced of the value of disambiguation pages for template shortcuts such as this - I’m inclined to think that the search functionality might be more useful for finding the redirect templates that start withR from/to sub
. All the best, —a smart kitten[meow] 18:23, 9 May 2024 (UTC)- Template shortcuts are disambiguation pages sometimes, examples include {{SPA}} and {{ADB}}. Redirects of the form "R *" without from or to are also more common than you'd think. Examples include {{R ant}} and {{R sect}} which happen to be shortcuts as well so I'd argue that "R sub" is a plausible search term. To be fair what I'm arguing for is a WP:PTM that wouldn't pass in mainspace, but this isn't mainspace and we don't have to follow WP:D to the letter. Nickps (talk) 18:57, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- Speaking personally, I’m not massively opposed to a template disambiguation, but I don’t see that one would be of much value here - this is a template shortcut, and could refer to a non-trivial number of rcats and rcat-redirects that contain the word
- Delete per A smart kitten. Also, it's nice to cut down on confusion when editing pages. Encountering {{R to subpage}} under the redirect is much clearer than encountering {{R sub}}. -- Tavix (talk) 20:32, 9 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Tavix. {{R sub}} makes no sense. {{R to sub}} or {{R from sub}} would have been better. Jay 💬 08:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- @Jay: They did exist, but were deleted in Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 14 § Template:R from sub due to their ambiguity. I found it odd that {{r sub}} remained, despite being even more ambiguous than those two. jlwoodwa (talk) 19:57, 10 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: As too ambiguous. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 20:56, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
Walter Rhodes (murderer)[edit]
Wikipedia:←[edit]
First Gulf War[edit]
Template:R to publisher[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Template:R to publisher
Template:R to artist[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Template:R to artist
Animals (2023 film)[edit]
East Midlands Mainline[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#East Midlands Mainline
Entoptic art[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Entoptic art
Wahstoronòn:ke[edit]
Nintembo[edit]
Evil Luigi[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 19#Evil Luigi
Perry the Platypus Plumber?[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Perry the Platypus Plumber?
Peodeiktophilia[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 7#Peodeiktophilia
Pearland NGC[edit]
Mi Música (album)[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Mi Música (album)
Man's red fire[edit]
7.92[edit]
- 7.92 → 8 mm caliber (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 7.92mm → 8 mm caliber (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 7.92 mm → 8 mm caliber (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
searching it up on google doesn't result in 8 mm but it does show another bullet type Okmrman (talk) 21:21, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify, there are quite a fair number of ammunition types and/or firearms that we have articles on, that could be targeted to. Of note are the following:
7.92x57mm Mauser
7.92×33mm Kurz
7.92×94mm Patronen
7.92×107mm DS
7.92×36mm EPK
7.92 mm Rifle Anti-Tank Mascerzek
7.92mm Bergmann MG15Na 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 23:05, 31 March 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Rather than create a disambiguation page of what are probably WP:Partial title matches, improve the current target article – the appropriate section of which is already tagged {{Missing information}} – and/or the linked List of rifle cartridges. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:49, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Dabify or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to 7 mm caliber, which is for the
7.00 to 7.99 millimetres (0.2756 to 0.3146 in) caliber range.
Anything at 7.92 mm should be listed there. -- Tavix (talk) 16:42, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 18:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)- @Shhhnotsoloud: What is your opinion about the 7mm target? Jay 💬 16:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment As the creator of the three redirects, I would note there are ambiguities due to nominal vs actual diameter. All the articles above: 7.92×57mm Mauser (commonly referred to as 8 mm), Bergmann MG 15nA machine gun (which uses 7.92×57mm Mauser), 7.92×33mm Kurz, 7.92×107mm DS, 7.92 mm Rifle Anti-Tank Mascerzek (which uses 7.92×107mm DS), 7.92×36mm EPK, and 7.92×94mm Patronen, have an actual bullet diameter greater than 8 mm. These could be included in both 7 mm caliber and 8 mm caliber. I can't seem to find any convention on this, as the 7 mm caliber has no actual diameters above 7.95, while 8 mm caliber has five cartridges with diameters of 7.9 mm. 93 (talk) 05:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist — should 7.92 be rounded up or down (or neither)? Bundling in 7.92mm and 7.92 mm. Notifying proposed target 7 mm caliber.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 03:26, 29 April 2024 (UTC)- Dabify per above. Partial title match or no, there are still numerous valid targets shown here. The original target can be listed among them and the task will be accomplished just fine. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:55, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
Hillcrest, California[edit]
Forced out of US Air Force for asking about sane president[edit]
Point of interaction[edit]
April 28[edit]
Nick Desjardins[edit]
Grand Prize SNP[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Grand Prize SNP
Freeze, everybody clap your hands![edit]
- Freeze, everybody clap your hands! → Cha Cha Slide (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Freeze! Everybody Clap your Hands! → Cha Cha Slide (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The addition of "Freeze" means that it can't be confused with Live at Tokyo Dome, but despite that, without a mention of this lyric, we don't have anything for readers that search the specific lyric of "everybody clap your hands" instead of the song itself. Utopes (talk / cont) 23:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as an
{{R without mention}}. This line is basically the only one in the entire song, and I don't see any other likely target. FWIW, I didn't know the title of the song for several years but knew this line. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:09, 10 April 2024 (UTC)basically the only one in the entire song
Wa-huh?? The Cha Cha Slide is basically nothing BUT lyrics, associated dance moves, a backing beat, and after the line Cha-Cha now, y'all, a short funky sting. Have you been listening to the same song I have??The main issue is that the song isn't referred to as the "Cha-Cha Slide" in the lyrics-- it's referred to as the Casper Slide Part 2.
...Wait, whyisn'twasn't THAT a redirect...? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 09:26, 12 April 2024 (UTC)- Changing my preferred tag to {{R from lyric}} as suggested by Ivanvector based on the discussion below. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. In addition, tagging a redirect with {{R without mention}} places the redirect in a maintenance category, Category:Redirects to an article without mention, that is cleared by adding a mention to the target article, deleting the redirects via WP:CSD, or nominating the redirects for WP:RFD ... meaning tagging the redirect as so then "keeping" the redirect is akin to kicking the can down the road, which is unhelpful since we are literally having the discussion about the redirect right now. Steel1943 (talk) 13:56, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- Y'know, maybe we should edit R Without Mention to more clearly state "hey, this is a maintenance category akin to {{template:Citation needed}}, it's not meant to be kept on a redirect that intentionally doesn't have a mention on the target, don't tag it as this and then keep". Seems like I see quite a bit of people erroneously using R Without Mention's existence as an rcat as proof that Rs without mention are Okay in certain circumstances, akin to {{template:R from non-neutral name}}. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 17:59, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
- Or maybe the maintenance category should be seperated from the tag, because there are plenty of situations where we don't need or want a mention at the target, but the redirect is still helpful to have. Incidentally, I agree with Presidentman above that this should be one such. Imagine if I get knocked down didn't redirect to Tubthumping... how would people find it? (yes I know Tubthumping does reference the line, but even if it didn't I'd hope this redirect would exist!) Keep. Fieari (talk) 07:32, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- The issue with that is that there would be nothing left to populate said maintenance category. ...Maybe there should be two separate rcats? {{R without mention}} and {{R intentionally without mention}}, perhaps. (also rq: editing my first comment here to link to a relevant essay) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 09:15, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Or maybe the maintenance category should be seperated from the tag, because there are plenty of situations where we don't need or want a mention at the target, but the redirect is still helpful to have. Incidentally, I agree with Presidentman above that this should be one such. Imagine if I get knocked down didn't redirect to Tubthumping... how would people find it? (yes I know Tubthumping does reference the line, but even if it didn't I'd hope this redirect would exist!) Keep. Fieari (talk) 07:32, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- Y'know, maybe we should edit R Without Mention to more clearly state "hey, this is a maintenance category akin to {{template:Citation needed}}, it's not meant to be kept on a redirect that intentionally doesn't have a mention on the target, don't tag it as this and then keep". Seems like I see quite a bit of people erroneously using R Without Mention's existence as an rcat as proof that Rs without mention are Okay in certain circumstances, akin to {{template:R from non-neutral name}}. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 17:59, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:57, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and tag {{R from lyric}}, which doesn't put the page into a maintenance category. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
- "R from lyric" is a template for "lyric redirects that point to a source that describes the lyric". Redirects should not exist for every lyric that people can think of. The long-established metric applicable for all of the actually-valid "R from lyrics" is based on whether or not there is a mention in the article (and thusly a reliable source that can be attributed to and corroborate the lyric mention, in practice) Utopes (talk / cont) 06:16, 25 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Redirects that are not mentioned are not useful. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:25, 26 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC)- Delete per PPP Okmrman (talk) 15:12, 12 May 2024 (UTC)
Clean vocals[edit]
- Clean vocals → Singing (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Clean Vocals → Singing (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Clean vocal → Singing (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Clean vocalist → Singing (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No mentions of "clean" at the target page. At the target page, the act of singing is never implied to be "clean", or even consist of "clean vocals". The primary justification for this redirect existing is that unclean vocals is a redirect to death growl. Yet, its antonym has no mention at the general page for "singing". If clean and unclean vocals are antonyms, and both are redirects, this seems to imply that the concepts of "singing" and "death growl" are also "antonyms" in regard to vocal quality? Likely true, but never addressed (nor does it need to be imo). For someone specifically looking for information on the topic of "clean vocals", it seems to be preferable for these readers to end up at a topic that is directly pertinent to vocal quality. If people wanted to end up at Singing instead, they'd type singing, a concept everyone would have already been familiar with. Utopes (talk / cont) 21:14, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Of note, an RfD for Clean vocals closed as retarget in 2015, but was pointed back to Singing after its conclusion three different times by two users, citing different material at the page for Screaming (music) (the resulting retarget). Utopes (talk / cont) 21:23, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I agree with the nominator that someone searching for "Clean vocals" or "Clean vocalist" is looking for more than the page on singing, and wants to know about the quality of the voice instead. I've been searching around, and the best page for information on vocal quality appears to be at Vocal pedagogy, but that page is super technical and seems a bit more deeply theoretical and broad topic than someone looking for information on voice quality. I'm not sure we actually have the perfect article to target for these... in which case maybe WP:REDLINKing it (that is, deletion) would be appropriate to encourage article creation. But I'm on the fence, so no formal !vote from me as of now. Fieari (talk) 06:49, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Clean vocals is a highly likely search term Geschichte (talk) 07:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:46, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This thing is really begging for a WP:RA, isn't it? Bwrs (talk) 04:46, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget ... somewhere. The term "clean vocals" is only relevant in the context of certain genres of music which use vocal techniques commonly called "unclean". Singing doesn't describe any of those techniques and is the wrong target; the word "clean" doesn't appear in the article at all. The problem is that this makes sense as an {{R from antonym}} to both screaming (music) and death growl, which are both different techniques, and both of those articles describe "clean vocals" in context. There's a former article in the redirect's history ([22]) which was prodded many years ago for having no sources at all. We shouldn't restore that, but maybe a short set index/disambiguation, to give the term context? Or else expanding the very bare section on those two vocal styles at Extended vocal technique#Distortion and then targeting there? As an antonym to unclean vocals and harsh vocals, which probably should get the same treatment as this redirect. I can find a few sources to draft something but I'm about to be in meetings for the foreseeable future (ugh). Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:51, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'll note that R From Antonym is not a "categorize this kept redirect" rcat, but instead, a "populate this maintenance category" redirect. I don't know WHY, but it IS. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 20:33, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Ivanvector, any chance you've got the time to throw a quick stub/section together now? -- asilvering (talk) 01:31, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:36, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete on WP:R#DELETE #10 grounds. signed, Rosguill talk 16:47, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Han (state)[edit]
Antisemitism in the Australian Greens[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Antisemitism in the Australian Greens
Mimi from Rio[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Mimi from Rio
Wikipedia:UKR[edit]
Umbrella Security Service[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Umbrella Security Service
Umbrella Trashsweepers[edit]
Umbrella corp.[edit]
Umbrella, Inc.[edit]
Las Vegas Umbrella Facility[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Las Vegas Umbrella Facility
Umbrella Corporation[edit]
Positive cone[edit]
Detective constable[edit]
April 24[edit]
Sucking peepee[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Sucking peepee
Helicopter dick[edit]
List of lists[edit]
Daniel Striped Tiger (band)[edit]
Netflix films no longer mentioned[edit]
Star Wars™[edit]
Larissa Hodge[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 6#Larissa Hodge
Ductal[edit]
Comedy Shorts Gamer (entertainer)[edit]
National culture[edit]
Technofascism and Techno-fascism[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 11#Technofascism and Techno-fascism
F-Bomb (film)[edit]
The F-Bomb (film)[edit]
F-Bomb (movie)[edit]
Wikipedia:FLUFF[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 2#Wikipedia:FLUFF
2022 abortion performed on a 10-year-old in Ohio[edit]
F-Bomb (documentary)[edit]
The F-Bomb (movie)[edit]
Dulah, California[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 11#Dulah, California
Colonia Ulpia Traiana[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 11#Colonia Ulpia Traiana
Draft:2021 Wikimedia Foundation's actions in Chinese Wikipedia[edit]
Culture Jam (mixtape)[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#Culture Jam (mixtape)
Kawaii Leonard[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#Kawaii Leonard
LeBron Jim[edit]
LeOld LeBald Le4and6[edit]
Nba allstar 2007 mvp[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#Nba allstar 2007 mvp
The ceiling is the roof[edit]
God's team[edit]
Draft:Taylor Swift[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#Draft:Taylor Swift
King Kev[edit]
Eleven of Hearts[edit]
Leo Di[edit]
Regordinho[edit]
Originaldo[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#Originaldo
Diego Marradonna[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#Diego Marradonna
The King of Football[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#The King of Football
You cant see me move[edit]
John Seena[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#John Seena
Scorsesi[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#Scorsesi
Scorsezi[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#Scorsezi
Cris Ron[edit]
Chris Ronaldo[edit]
Rehan ronaldo[edit]
The World's Top Goal Scorer 2011[edit]
Messidona[edit]
Messimagician[edit]
LM19[edit]
Joever[edit]
Dr. Seuss Enterprises[edit]
Kannagi (upcoming film)[edit]
Phone computer[edit]
- Phone computer → Smartphone (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Computer phone → Smartphone (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This seems overly technical. Nobody would really refer to smartphones as a phone computer outside of drawing some comparisons between smartphones and computers. Okmrman (talk) 04:04, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. This is what a smartphone is, and I wouldn't be surprised if the terms were used before "smartphone" became the established term (I can't check as Google is refusing to show me results that are both verbatim and before a given time, and either one alone is overwhelmed by irrelevant results where the two words happen to be adjacent, especially in lists in adverts). Thryduulf (talk) 18:43, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
- Comment shouldn't this actually link to telco equipment? Such as a PBX or other phone computers -- 65.92.247.66 (talk) 07:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. The phrasing of these redirects makes me believe they could also refer to Modem, thus making these redirects ambiguous. Steel1943 (talk) 04:59, 4 April 2024 (UTC)
- I reaffirm my "delete" per Ivanvector's comment: A disambiguation page would not be the solution since none of the subjects mentioned so far are title matches. Let Wikipedia search do its job instead. Steel1943 (talk) 16:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:04, 9 April 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:07, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I think it is easy for English first speakers (or young people) to say they aren't needed, but they probably serve some utility and they perfectly describe what they are. Dennis Brown - 2¢ 11:31, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify. As Steel mentioned, a viable interpretation of this would be Modem, being "a phone used by a computer". However, I'd also think that VoIP phone-- a phone that uses the Internet instead of normal phone lines-- or softphone-- a software program that could call other people, which could be downloaded and installed on a PC-- would be valid interpretations of "Phone computer" or "Computer phone". Given I'm sure none of the above- including Smartphone (a phone which is a computer)-- would be a primary target, dabification is warranted. edited at 14:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - disambiguation pages are for topics that have the same title, not for manually compiled search indexes of possibly related keywords. We have a search engine for that, let it do its job. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:08, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
- Disambig - The modern context is the smartphone. The historical context is a computer that you dialed through your phone, computer telephony integration. See JSTOR 43915583. GobsPint (talk) 22:56, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Vague, ambiguous guesswork. Also per Ivanvector. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:17, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget Computer phone to One Per Desk to match Computerphone. Delete Phone computer per all as ambiguous but not suitable for a dab page. Jay 💬 18:16, 13 May 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate - given Jay's find of Computerphone pointing to One Per Desk, deletion seems undesirable as it would leave a redirect to a niche usage that is nevertheless justifiable as a search term and redirect. signed, Rosguill talk 19:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Colonial haiti[edit]
Side-dump condola[edit]
April 22[edit]
Climate change in Bahrain[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#Climate change in Bahrain
2021 Chinese FA Super Cup[edit]
Deplorable[edit]
- Deplorable → Basket of deplorables (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Another confusing vocabulary word redirect. Not everything that is deplorable is part of Hillary Clinton's "basket of deplorables". We don't have deplore, so maybe a soft redirect to Wiktionary will have to do. Duckmather (talk) 06:47, 8 April 2024 (UTC)
- Crosswiki to wiktionary. I don't foresee an article being created with more than the definition. Fieari (talk) 07:28, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to wikt:deplorable as per nom and Fieari. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 10:06, 9 April 2024 (UTC)
- Crosswiki to wiktionary per nom Okmrman (talk) 21:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Switching my vote to Delete because WP:NOTDICT Okmrman (talk) 18:34, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I'm partial to the stance in the previous discussion that search results are adequate here and there does not need to be a DAB page for partial title matches. However, there are partial title matches so I don't think a soft redirect to Wiktionary is the best option. Though, I'm not really familiar with when it is best to use them. ― Synpath 06:21, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:41, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
- Combine a {{Wiktionary}} link with a “see also” section as well. Bwrs (talk) 05:09, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Synpath. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Synpath. No incoming. WP:NOTDICT. The pageviews were the highest in 2022 for some reason, and died down. I don't think those readers were looking for the dictionary definition of deplorable. Jay 💬 11:09, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Synpath, I'm more swayed by their arguments and agree that there is a good chance that a reader is not going to be looking for a dictionary definition here. signed, Rosguill talk 16:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
📵[edit]
Sultan Abd-al-Rahman I of the Umayyad Sultanate[edit]
Walter Rhodes (murderer)[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 29#Walter Rhodes (murderer)
Wikipedia:←[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 29#Wikipedia:←
Donkey Koung 64[edit]
Hollywood and the United Kingdom and Ireland[edit]
Hollywood and the Republic of Ireland[edit]
A. A. Abbott[edit]
[edit]
Lev Trotskij[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 30#Lev Trotskij
Easing function[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 30#Easing function
Jackahuahua[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 30#Jackahuahua
January 1, 2003[edit]
January 2, 2003[edit]
Kyra Tierney[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 May 1#Kyra Tierney