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 | May | Jun | Jul | Aug | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 43 | 43 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 5 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 3 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 5 | 85 | 90 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 2 |
Redirects for discussion (RfD) is the place where potentially problematic redirects are discussed. Items usually stay listed for a week or so, after which they are deleted, kept, or retargeted.
- If you want to replace an unprotected redirect with an article, do not list it here. Turning redirects into articles is wholly encouraged. Be bold!
- If you want to move a page but a redirect is in the way, do not list it here. For non-controversial cases, place a technical request; if a discussion is required, then start a requested move.
- If you think a redirect points to the wrong target article, this is a good place to discuss the proper target.
- Redirects should not be deleted just because they have no incoming links. Please do not use this as the only reason to delete a redirect. However, redirects that do have incoming links are sometimes deleted, so that is not a sufficient condition for keeping. (See § When should we delete a redirect? for more information.)
Please do not unilaterally rename or change the target of a redirect while it is under discussion. This adds unnecessary complication to the discussion for participants and closers.
Before listing a redirect for discussion
[edit]Please be aware of these general policies, which apply here as elsewhere:
- 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 article text because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links; consider tagging the redirect with the {{R from misspelling}} template to assist editors in monitoring these misspellings.
- 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]Module:Road data/routelist
[edit]- Module:Road data/routelist → Module:Road data/locations (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Created as a fork of Module:Road data and was never used on any pages. Its former functionality still exists at Module:Road data and Module:Road data/locations. – BrandonXLF (talk) 02:23, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
FuBl 2
[edit]- FuBl 2 → Instrument landing system (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned at target. Is this referring to the differently capitalised "FuBL 2" at Luftwaffe_radio_equipment_of_World_War_II#Navigation_and_direction_finding? 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:15, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Crab angle
[edit]- Crab angle → Course (navigation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned at target. Related to Crosswind_landing#Techniques? 1234qwer1234qwer4 01:23, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Fan Reaction to Relena Peacecraft
[edit]- Fan Reaction to Relena Peacecraft → List of Mobile Suit Gundam Wing characters#Relena Peacecraft (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Fan Reactions to Relena Peacecraft → List of Mobile Suit Gundam Wing characters#Relena Peacecraft (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not described at target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:24, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Laws of work
[edit]- Laws of work → Thermodynamics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned at target, and might also refer to Labour law. (Interestingly, work law does not exist as a redirect to that article.) 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:15, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. It is an uncommon term, and i dont think we lose anything by getting rid of it. Ldm1954 (talk) 02:38, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate between Thermodynamics and Labour law. Disambiguations are cheap enough to cover this cost. Work law should exist, as Employment law does. BD2412 T 03:42, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
⧧
[edit]While the Unicode character is called "THERMODYNAMIC", I don't see how the current target would be helpful to any reader. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:12, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - while it might not be the most useful, deleting it would be less useful. If the unicode character represents thermodynamics then we should redirect there BugGhost🦗👻 00:46, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Ajacent angels
[edit]- Ajacent angels → Angle#Intersecting angle pairs (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This redirect has two typos and is of doubtful plausibility. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:10, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Anggulo
[edit]See Anggulo (TV program) and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 February 14#Ángulo. This redirect should be deleted per WP:RLOTE, and the TV program then moved to this title. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:09, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
V̂
[edit]- V̂ → Circumflex (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- T̂ → Circumflex (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- D̂ → Circumflex (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
No description of the character or its usage at the target; delete to encourage article creation. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Ǝ́
[edit]Ə is a different letter from Ǝ, but neither article mentions this diacriticised character. 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:27, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Uppen
[edit]Not mentioned at target. According to a web search, this is also a toponym. 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:15, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete to encourage article creation/update to include it. DRMcCreedy (talk)
͓
[edit]Not mentioned at target. Not sure how helpful Combining Diacritical Marks would be as a target (but note that a bunch of the diacritics listed there are left as red links currently). 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:01, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget U+0353 ͓ COMBINING X BELOW to Combining Diacritical Marks until it's added to the Uralic Phonetic Alphabet article. A reader could at least find out why it was added to Unicode if they look at https://www.unicode.org/wg2/docs/n2419.pdf in the History section. DRMcCreedy (talk)
꜠
[edit]- ꜠ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ꜡ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned at target; Latin Extended-D provides very little information too (as this is not a medieval character). 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:58, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget U+A720 ꜠ MODIFIER LETTER STRESS AND HIGH TONE and U+A720 ꜠ MODIFIER LETTER STRESS AND HIGH TONE to Latin Extended-D until they are added to the Uralic Phonetic Alphabet article. A reader could at least find out why they were added to Unicode if they look at https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2005/05261-n2989-uralicist.pdf in the History section. DRMcCreedy (talk)
˳
[edit]- ˳ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˴ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˵ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˶ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˷ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˸ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˹ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˺ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˻ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˼ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˽ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˾ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- ˿ → Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned at target. Spacing Modifier Letters would be an alternative option (four of the characters listed there already redirect back to it). 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- All of these were proposed specifically for the Uralic Phonetic Alphabet (UPA) but unfortunately only ˿ is in the article. Keep the redirect for U+02FF ˿ MODIFIER LETTER LOW LEFT ARROW and retarget the rest to Spacing Modifier Letters until the UPA article is updated to include them. A reader could at least find out why they were added to Unicode if they look at https://www.unicode.org/wg2/docs/n2419.pdf in the History section. DRMcCreedy (talk)
Japan 2012 (Association football event 1)
[edit]- Japan 2012 (Association football event 1) → 2012 FIFA U-20 Women's World Cup (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Japan 2012 (Association football event 2) → 2012 FIFA Club World Cup (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Qatar 2025 (Association football event 2) → 2025 FIFA Arab Cup (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Here are the latest dumb redirects in Abhiramakella's "Country Year" crusade. There are multiple Association football events in these countries in the given year, so he just added a 1 or 2 in the disambiguator. -- Tavix (talk) 21:49, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Ḙ
[edit]- Ḙ → Circumflex (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Ṷ → Circumflex (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
These were nominated in 2010 as part of a WP:TRAINWRECKy nomination already, but they are not mentioned at the target, which barely talks about a circumflex below (note that this is currently a red link) at all. 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retain The solution surely is to add content about 'circumflex below' to the circumflex article. This is a credible redirect, though I haven't found a citation for it. I came across a suggestion that 'circumflex below' is used in IPA, perhaps Nardog can advise? --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 22:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Not that I know of, currently or historically. The inverted breve below and the caron below are used, but not the circumflex below. Nardog (talk) 01:05, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
AN/VPS-2
[edit]The redirect "AN/VPS-2", created in 2006, points to an article called "M163 VADS". The VADS article only mentions the VPS-2 in passing, with no citations for the comment and no further description. I recommend that this redirect be deleted as it is particularly not helpful. — TadgStirkland401 (TadgTalk) 21:14, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
bros
[edit]- Bros 2 → Super Mario Bros. 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Bros. 2 → Super Mario Bros. 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Bros 3 → Super Mario Bros. 3 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Bros. 3 → Super Mario Bros. 3 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Bros 4 → Super Mario World (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Bros. 4 → Super Mario World (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
missing the "mario" disambiguator leaves this with only a common word... that has a pretty strong association with mario anyway. still, it could realistically refer to any series with "bros." in its title and 4 or more entries, or a number of brothers. opinions? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:59, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- on that note, see bros u, bros wonder, bros wii, and their more punctuated counterparts. not nominating them here because i don't know what number "wii" is supposed to be, and also because the rest of the names might narrow the meanings down to the mario games cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:21, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Can you demonstrate actual ambiguity with other series? -- Tavix (talk) 21:46, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- off the top of my head...
- super smash bros. is a cheap, easy pick
- ...two brothers, apparently. this is as far as my acknowledgement goes, and i don't want to find out if this game's 1.5 fans refer to it as "2 bros" or whatever
- new super mario bros., if you want to be a pedantic ass like me
- loyal bros and loyal bros 2?
- was gonna say snow bros. and snow bros. 2, but... nah
- doing an intitle search or something could net more results, but smash and nsmb alone could warrant the ambiguity with "numbered titles that involve some variant of the word 'brother'" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- off the top of my head...
CYHX
[edit]True democracy
[edit]- True democracy → Direct democracy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The term "true democracy" is used to promote all kinds of reforms, with no one type of reform being the primary topic (I checked both Google web search and Google book search). Hence, convert to DAB with four entries: "any form of democratization", "any type of electoral reform", "scoring well on Democracy indices", and True Democracy (album). Jruderman (talk) 13:40, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete this and True Democracy. I created the nominated redirect 18 years ago and changed the redirection of the second one around the same time, and now realize these were mistakes. It is a hopelessly vague term that I apparently associated with direct democracy back then but back then I didn't realize all the connotations and the future complexities in Wikipedia's content, and to be clear, the Wikipedia was quite a "wild west" in 2006 compared to today. Further, a disambiguation would be rather useless with only one similarly worded term. All the suggestions of similar ideas here aren't really for a typical disambiguation, and comes off as something akin to original research or at best, stretching a phrase's meaning too far. Just delete the sucker. Stefen 𝕋owers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 18:16, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- It might have to be a dab page (or redirect) just because of the music album. Jruderman (talk) 19:14, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- We don't create dab pages to go to one thing. If you're concerned about people finding the album, what you do is delete this redirect and True Democracy (also as unnecessary as the one nominated here), then move True Democracy (album) to True Democracy, since it's the only "True Democracy" entity covered in the encyclopedia. There was not a need to disambiguate that album. Stefen 𝕋owers among the rest! Gab • Gruntwerk 19:24, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- It might have to be a dab page (or redirect) just because of the music album. Jruderman (talk) 19:14, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
2012 OLYMPIC RESULTS
[edit]- 2012 OLYMPIC RESULTS → 2012 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
There are better targets, such as 2012 Summer Olympics medal table and List of 2012 Summer Olympics medal winners but neither one of them give full results for each event. Either way, delete due to the WP:UNNATURAL caps. -- Tavix (talk) 13:31, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete its never really had any content and was only an article for around 11 minutes in 2012. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:07, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as implausible. Not sure if titles like 2012 Olympic results warrant a redirect creation. 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:10, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
US Olympic TEAM TRIALS
[edit]- US Olympic TEAM TRIALS → Wrestling at the 2012 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The subject is much broader than the target. I would think United States Olympic trials the best target, but would prefer deletion due to the WP:UNNATURAL caps. -- Tavix (talk) 13:29, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete it never really had any useful content and was an article for less than an hour in 2012. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:09, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Live Photo
[edit]- Live Photo → Crispin Gurholt (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The Live Photo (iOS) meaning mentioned in the hatnote seems to be the prevalent one. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Seems to be? Do you have something to substantiate that? Perhaps in Olso or Berlin it's the other way around? No justifiable reason to delete. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:57, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Who suggested deletion? 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- You did. By saying this should point somewhere else, you are essentially advocating for deleting what it is now in favor of another. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- I didn't say this should point somewhere else, it might as well be disambiguated. The current meaning will not be deleted, it will stay with the addition of another one. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:15, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- You did. By saying this should point somewhere else, you are essentially advocating for deleting what it is now in favor of another. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Who suggested deletion? 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate At the very least, there's no primary topic here. The artist is almost certainly not primary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:46, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Assuming no primary topic, we can hatnote. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- No. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:12, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, and we're back to proving what is primary and not, without supposition. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- No. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:12, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Assuming no primary topic, we can hatnote. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:57, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget my searches indicate that the iOS feature is by far and away the primary topic - only two of the hits on the first five pages of search results were not about that topic, the other two were about equivalents on Android. Thryduulf (talk) 12:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:04, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per Thryduulf. C F A 💬 14:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. There's not enough there there at the article about the discontinued iPhone 6s to declare it a primary topic. The article just mentions "Live Photos" twice (in quotes, as if it's a neologism). This could just as easily mean Windows Live Photos, a topic we once had an article about, in 2011, or Windows Live Photo Gallery, which still has an article. – wbm1058 (talk) 00:57, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- We should discuss the Live Photo (iOS) redirect as well. Since when is iPhone 6s the primary topic for that redirect? iOS 10 has more discussion about that topic. But it never actually defines what the heck a "Live Photo" (there I go again, putting the term in quotes) actually is. – wbm1058 (talk) 01:16, 19 August 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, CycloneYoris talk! 08:53, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Drafted a dab with no primary at the redirect page. I don't have an issue with Live Photo (iOS) redirecting iPhone 6s. iOS 10 does have multiple mentions of Live Photo, but they are about improvements and interactions with other apps. iPhone 6s does say what a Live Photo is:
The camera app's .. "Live Photos" captures a short video alongside each photo taken.
Jay 💬 11:10, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Overruled
[edit]- Overruled → Objection (United States law) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Overrule → Objection (United States law) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Is the US legal term the primary topic here? We do also have Overruled! (a TV show) and Overruled (play). Thryduulf (talk) 20:01, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify as there are many potential targets --Lenticel (talk) 01:07, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify per nom. I have also bundled Overrule into this. mwwv converse∫edits 21:48, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- You didn't add the tag to that redirect or notify the creator, but I've done so now. Thryduulf (talk) 01:57, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I was going to close this as disambiguate Overruled and redirect Overrule to it, but there doesn't seem to actually be anything else "Overrule" could refer to. I think "Overrule" should be kept as is. C F A 💬 17:46, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as is per CFA. If there are other meanings worth mentioning, add them to a hatnote at the target article. BD2412 T 03:45, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Samuli Miettinen
[edit]- Samuli Miettinen → Children of Bodom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Delete redirect. There is an article for Samuli Miettinen (footballer) who is a different person than the redirect. Searching for Samuli Miettinen from wiki should point the person who has an own article rather than someone who has not. Syvä-äksy (talk) 14:18, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. Looking on google there is no primary topic for people with this name with hits for the footballer, an architect (no article on enwp but the subject of fi:Samuli Miettinen) and an academic (no Wikipedia article in any language I can find) getting about equal numbers of hits on the first three pages. There were two hits for a photographer but none for the bassist. I haven't done enough research to know whether the architect or academic are notable but if they are a primary disambig may be best, if they aren't then moving the footballer to primary and adding a hatnote to the bassist is probably better (the latter does not appear to be notable, a one-line two-sentence sub-stub about him was correctly speedied as A7 a few years ago.) Thryduulf (talk) 16:45, 28 July 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) 19:08, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Move the redirect to Samuli Miettinen (bassist) and add {{R from predictable disambiguation}} to that redirect. Then move Samuli Miettinen (footballer) to Samuli Miettinen and add a hatnote to the footballer article. 2001:999:701:1F8:1C71:F209:179D:36B1 (talk) 19:30, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:52, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Objection (law)
[edit]- Objection (law) → Objection (United States law) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not interchangeable titles. Would suggest deleting so that we can have another shot of rewriting for a broader world audience, and this title would appear red so users don't think we cover a topic that is not well covered around the world. Awesome Aasim 15:40, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment For the benefit of anyone else thinking this feels familiar, Objection! was retargetted to the dab page at Objection following Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 10#Objection!. Thryduulf (talk) 19:53, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Weak retarget to the Objection dab page, where the US law use is mentioned and any future articles about laws in other countries should be linked. If not, delete per WP:REDLINK. Thryduulf (talk) 19:53, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:49, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Rat feces
[edit]Not mentioned at target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:34, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, add mention at target. pages of sources. Hyperbolick (talk) 08:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 05:57, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Libitum
[edit]Not mentioned at target, but readers might also be looking for Ad libitum. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:RLANG. Not sure retargeting would be helpful here given the partial title match and the fact that ad libitum is somewhat narrowly focused on performing arts. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:39, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on the redirect suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Heidosmat
[edit]Not mentioned anywhere on the English Wikipedia. 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:47, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and change target to Rolleicord#Heidosmat, where it is now mentioned. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 20:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
South Korea 1988 (Olympics host)
[edit]- South Korea 1988 (Olympics host) → 1988 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Spain 1992 (Olympics host) → Spain at the 1992 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- United States 1996 (Olympics host) → United States at the 1996 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Japan 1998 (Olympics host) → 1998 Winter Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Australia 2000 (Olympics host) → 2000 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Greece 2004 (Olympics host) → 2004 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Italy 2006 (Olympics host) → 2006 Winter Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Canada 2010 (Olympics host) → 2010 Winter Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- United Kingdom 2012 (Olympics host) → 2012 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- UK 2012 (Olympics host) → 2012 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Brazil 2016 (Olympics host) → 2016 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Brasil 2016 (Olympics host) → 2016 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- South Korea 2018 (Olympics host) → 2018 Winter Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Japan 2020 (Olympics host) → 2020 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Japan 2021 (Olympics host) → 2020 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- France 2024 (Olympics host) → 2024 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Italy 2026 (Olympics host) → 2026 Winter Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- France 2030 (Olympics host) → 2030 Winter Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Australia 2032 (Olympics host) → 2032 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Abhiramakella recently created a bunch of redirects with the "Country YYYY (Olympics host)" format to that year's Olympics article. However "Olympics host" would indicate what the Olympics host did in that Olympics, so some of them have been retargeted to the "Country at the Olympics" article. Olympic games are marketed as a city, not a country, so I can't imagine someone searching with this format anyway. Due to the ambiguity and implausibility, these should be deleted. -- Tavix (talk) 18:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all per nom. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 20:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom ... and consider starting a discussion to place restrictions on the redirects' creator from creating redirects due to repeat WP:CIR and WP:IDHT issues I've seen with their edits and comments over the past few months. Steel1943 (talk) 20:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- (Specifically, their comments near the bottom of a specific ANI discussion come to mind regarding WP:CIR issues. There are other issues which I could dig in the weeds to find, specifically regarding redirect creation, but that's all I have time to figure out at the moment.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:22, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've considered starting that discussion they've recreated a number of things created at RfD and create redirects 3-4 years out for events in hopes they get the authorship for it or something. They also routinely, and repeatedly, fail to properly communicate. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as implausible. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Per nom. I'd also find it acceptable to redirect to CountryName at the YYYY Olympics, which is what I think people would be expecting these to target. For what it's worth, these were created seemingly in response to their CountryName YYYY redirects which were retargeted to YYYY in CountryName. Theres a lot of similar redirects for CountryName Year (association football events), and the like. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:11, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Stetson Bennett's final college football game
[edit]- Stetson Bennett's final college football game → 2023 College Football Playoff National Championship (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Stetson Bennett's final game (college football) → 2023 College Football Playoff National Championship (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Created as a way to sidestep consensus at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 26#Stetson Bennett's final game. This isn't a plausible search term. Also, no one else has redirects of this type (nor should they) so there is no expectation of having such a redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 18:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. While these redirects don't have the same inaccuracy problem as the one previously discussed ("Stetson Bennett's final game", he is currently an active NFL player) they are even less likely search terms. It is worth noting though that the nomination statement isn't quite correct - Peyton Manning's final game exists as a redirect to Superbowl 50 (I offer no opinion here on whether it should exist; Sunday League – Pepik Hnatek's Final Match also exists but that's the title of film). Thryduulf (talk) 21:05, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- There is nothing incorrect about my nomination statement. The redirects of this type for Payton Manning would be Peyton Manning's final college football game or Peyton Manning's final game (college football) targeting the 1998 Orange Bowl. -- Tavix (talk) 21:12, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Implausible search term/not a helpful redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:17, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Anti universe
[edit]- Anti universe → Antimatter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Antiverse redirects to multiverse. Anti universe sometimes also refers to an antigravity universe, not just antimatter universe. Web-julio (talk) 02:51, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- If there is multiple places where this redirect could go, the best option would probably be to turn it into a disambiguation. MrMeAndMrMeTalk 06:25, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Anti universe redirects to Antimatter while Antiverse redirects to multiverse. Redirecting to a disambiguation page as suggested is a solution. 5Q5|✉ 11:15, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- How much content is there on this Wikipedia describing this topic that we could refer to from that disambiguation page? There is also the option of a Wiktionary redirect to wikt:antiuniverse (which could probably be expanded). 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:37, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Anti-universalist redirects to Universalism. Steel1943 (talk) 03:07, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate between the potential available meanings. BD2412 T 04:05, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
List of countries by Military Strength Index
[edit]- List of countries by Military Strength Index → Military#Capability development (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This is a {{R from merge}}, but no such list exists at the target. * Pppery * it has begun... 21:50, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- It was deleted in 2020 as fallout from Talk:Military/Archive 1#About Updating the military power comparison list Capability development section * Pppery * it has begun... 21:51, 11 August 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 💬 17:14, 22 August 2024 (UTC)- It exist in the history of the target, see [1]. Christian75 (talk) 19:30, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
A.e.t.
[edit]Is a.e.t. used in any sports besides association football? I can't find any evidence of another sport using it, but I could be missing results for less popular sports. If not, I propose that we retarget this redirect to go directly the to Overtime (sports)#Association football section instead of just to the Overtime (sports) article. Wburrow (talk) 16:30, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Also, After extra time redirects to the section, not the article. Wburrow (talk) 17:15, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment AET seems to be used for handball too [2], [3]. Google doesn't distinguish between "a.e.t." and "AET" though so I can't say for certain the dotted lowercase isn't exclusive to football. Thryduulf (talk) 17:20, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks - to me that's enough reason to leave A.e.t. alone (and one of the articles you linked to does use the dotted lowercase). Given that, I think After extra time should be retargeted back to the article. I just looked at the page history, and it was boldly retargeted to the section by an IP editor just a couple weeks ago after an RfD in 2015 that resulted in targeting the article. Is this case where I can just revert the IP's edit and we can close this discussion, or do we need a more formal process? (I'm still new to editing at this level.) Wburrow (talk) 17:45, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have reverted the IP's edit to the redirect as unexplained and added that multiple sports use the term "extra time." — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 21:10, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks - to me that's enough reason to leave A.e.t. alone (and one of the articles you linked to does use the dotted lowercase). Given that, I think After extra time should be retargeted back to the article. I just looked at the page history, and it was boldly retargeted to the section by an IP editor just a couple weeks ago after an RfD in 2015 that resulted in targeting the article. Is this case where I can just revert the IP's edit and we can close this discussion, or do we need a more formal process? (I'm still new to editing at this level.) Wburrow (talk) 17:45, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep the redirect as it is, redirecting to the article lead instead of the association football section. As Wburrow seems to have indicated the same willingness to leave the redirect as it is, I would like to suggest that they formally withdraw the RfD to allow for early closure. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 21:13, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Request withdrawn I withdraw my proposal per the above discussion. Wburrow (talk) 21:43, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
CountryName Year redirects to 2026 FIFA World Cup
[edit]- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 July 25 § Korea 2018 – Delete (no appropriate retarget option at the time)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 September 3 § China 2008 – Retarget to 2008 in China
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 September 3 § Brazil 2016 – Retarget to 2016 in Brazil
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 September 6 § Italy 2026 – Delete (no appropriate retarget option at the time)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 September 26 § Japan 2020 – Delete all (China 2022, France 2024, and USA 2028 were included)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 24 § CountryName Year redirects to events – Delete all 10 (no appropriate retarget option at the time)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 20 § Qatar 2023 – Retarget to 2023 in Qatar
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 20 § France 2024 – Retarget to 2024 in France
- Canada 2026 → 2026 FIFA World Cup (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Mexico 2026 → 2026 FIFA World Cup (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
"CountryName Year" redirects are not unambiguously related to events and, per past precedence on the matter, should not be targeted to them. Proposing deletion until a 2026 article for the "YYYY in Country" articles are created. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note that I actually redirected USA 2026 and United States 2026 to 2026 in the United States already. I felt that important to mention for full disclosure. If these are found to be proper, I will, of course, revert. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:16, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete with future aim to redirect them to 2026 in Canada and 2026 in Mexico (once created), as per previous consensuses. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per standing consensus and redirect when the appropriate articles are created. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 16:04, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
CAF Cepia
[edit]- CAF Cepia → Renfe Class 120 / 121 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
No mention of "Cepia" at the target page. Was recently BLAR'd after no response from the page's creator at Talk:CAF Cepia, as the name "Cepia" was seemingly not found anywhere in relation. But furthermore, it's not a helpful redirect as there is no information about this title at the target page, either, nor anywhere on Wikipedia. (AfD might potentially be a suitable venue if non-notable). Utopes (talk / cont) 16:05, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Restore and send to AfD as is the correct course of action when an article is BLARed but there is no suitable redirect target, the content is not speedy deletable and has never been subject to a consensus discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 17:31, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- It depends. I do want to note that I am opposed to a closer sending this to AfD "procedurally". Leave that step for someone who actually wants the article deleted. -- Tavix (talk) 17:49, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Revert to status quo. This was just redirected yesterday, so an improper redirection (due to a lack of mention at the target) should have just been reverted. -- Tavix (talk) 17:44, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Do whatever; as the editor that blanked and redirected the article, I wouldn't be opposed to a restoration and AfD, I don't have the time and energy to do it myself right now. If in this case the BLAR was out of process, as the redirect term isn't on the taget page, I'll brush up my knowledge on the relevant policies before doing deletion-related editing in the future. Nyamo Kurosawa (talk) 21:06, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Ragg tuning fork
[edit]- Ragg tuning fork → Tuning fork (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
that's apparently some brand that produces tuning forks. not mentioned in the target, doesn't seem like there's anything reliable regarding it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:09, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment, it is a brand but from what I can tell it seems to be one of, if not the, most notable manufacturer of tuning forks with at least two apparently reliable sources discussing it in depth [4] and [5] so there would be no verifiability issues with adding a mention. Whether a mention would be due or not I don't know, but I can't say for certain it wouldn't be. The redirect is getting suprisingly many views (over 100 this year), at least some of those will be because it's linked at rock gong but whether that's responsible for all of them I can't say (if the redirect is deleted that link must be updated). Thryduulf (talk) 14:33, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- weird place to put what's effectively an ad (or mistaking "ragg" as being part of the name), but i won't question it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:54, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Quaternary extinction event
[edit]- Quaternary extinction event → Late Pleistocene extinctions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
May also refer to Holocene extinction as well as the Holocene is also in the Quaternary Isla🏳️⚧ 10:29, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep in the scientific literature, "Quaternary extinction event" and the related term "Late Quaternary extinction event" are primarily used to refer to the scope of the Late Pleistocene extinctions article (which was previously titled "Quaternary extinction event" ), rather than to the Holocene extinction. See results in scholar [6]. A hatnote (which is already present) is enough to disambiguate. Hemiauchenia (talk) 10:38, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Hemiauchenia. If not kept then it should be disambiguated, there is definitely no justification for deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 10:59, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Infantile
[edit]Definitely ambiguous with Infantilism. Retarget there or add the disambiguation page to the (long) hatnote already present? 1234qwer1234qwer4 19:49, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- {{wi}} -> wikt:infantile. Looking to backlinks, relation to medicaal term infantilism would be confusing, because people suffering from (medical) infantilism are not called "infantile". IMO the current Wiktionary entry is most useful for those who do not know the word. - Altenmann >talk 21:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe {{Wiktionary hatnote}} instead? 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:23, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:34, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
@CycloneYoris: I see two !votes to retarget as a useful search term and one stricken delete in response to the detail in the second retarget recommendation. The only unconvinced I see is whether this is specifically a British English expression. Thryduulf (talk) 10:41, 22 August 2024 (UTC)- @Thryduulf, I don't think this reply ended up in the right section. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Correct, it was intended for the #Great-chlldren discussion below. I've copied it there and struck it above. Thanks. Thryduulf (talk) 15:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Thryduulf, I don't think this reply ended up in the right section. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:02, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Great-children
[edit]I'm not sure this refers to anything meaningful. FWIW, Grandchild redirects to Family#Roles. 1234qwer1234qwer4 19:38, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Family or Family#Roles. Additionally, I found that Great-grandchild also targets Family (just not the #Roles section), while Great-grandchildren does target #Roles. SmittenGalaxy | talk! 06:48, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Delete. The "great" prefix is only used in conjunction with the "grand" prefix existing; without the "grand" prefix, the "great" prefix makes no sense, so let's not pretend like it does. Steel1943 (talk) 15:13, 15 August 2024 (UTC)- Striking my vote. See my response to Thryduulf for further details. Steel1943 (talk) 19:14, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per SmittenGalaxy. Contra Steel, the term is used without "grand", see e.g. "my great children and great nephews and nieces"[7], "My great children loved the visit"[8], "It's a gift for my great children and should bring back happy memories to my grand son" [9], "I visit all of my children, then I visit all of my grandchildren, then all of my great children etc" [10], "I will be sharing my Nan’s memories about her Dad and Mum and also the memories of Eileen’s grandchildren and a few of her Great-Children."[11]. Thryduulf (talk) 18:47, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Must be an American versus British English difference I was not aware of then. I like to believe I know most differences between American and British English, and to my knowledge, in American English, the prefix "great" always requires a "grand" prefix after it somewhere when referring to direct ancestors or descendants (children or parents), which does not apply to aunts, uncles, nephews, or nieces. I guess British English is different in this regard? Anywho, my vote has been struck. Steel1943 (talk) 19:14, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's not something I've heard in British English either, I just thought I'd check to see whether it did actually get used (kinship terms can be weird). I didn't think to see if it was an AE/BE thing, but based on the very small sample size of the five links above it doesn't seem to be - 2 are from the UK, 1 from the US, 1 from Canada and 1 wasn't able to quickly determine. Thryduulf (talk) 23:53, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Must be an American versus British English difference I was not aware of then. I like to believe I know most differences between American and British English, and to my knowledge, in American English, the prefix "great" always requires a "grand" prefix after it somewhere when referring to direct ancestors or descendants (children or parents), which does not apply to aunts, uncles, nephews, or nieces. I guess British English is different in this regard? Anywho, my vote has been struck. Steel1943 (talk) 19:14, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is "Great-children" truly a plausible search term? Relisting… since participants do not seem entirely convinced.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:33, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- @CycloneYoris: I see two !votes to retarget as a useful search term and one stricken delete in response to the detail in the second retarget recommendation. The only unconvinced I see is whether this is specifically a British English expression. Thryduulf (talk) 15:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Enjoyment
[edit]- Enjoyment → Happiness (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Enjoyableness → Pleasure (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Enjoyable → Enjoy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I feel like this could use some consistency. 1234qwer1234qwer4 20:15, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:10, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all. Can't decide on a target ... like how I cannot? Here's the solution: WP:TNT. Steel1943 (talk) 18:03, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Joy, the root word. -- Tavix (talk) 21:04, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Joy per Tavix --Lenticel (talk) 00:11, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
OoX
[edit]- OoX → The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Misleading redirect if the intent is to refer to a game in the The Legend of Zelda series with "X" referring to a letter wild card (for this target, the respective acronyms would be "OoA" and "OoS"): This redirect could also refer to The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, which is "OoT". Steel1943 (talk) 15:53, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- results gave me... birbs and madness combat. delete cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:58, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, possibly with a hatnote. My results are a roughly equal mix of Zelda (with the term used to refer to the two titles collectively), World of Warcraft ("OOX refers to a series of mechanical chickens created by Oglethorpe Obnoticus" which might as well be written in Greek for all it means to me) and random non-notable stuff. List of airports in Ukraine#Military bases tells me OOX is the IATA code for Melitopol Air Base but that isn't mentioned in the article. I can't find any mention of the WoW meaning on Wikipedia (but someone who understands the game should check that) but the collective term for the Zelda games should be. A hatnote to the air base (and WoW if mentioned) would seem to be useful but I'm not going to lose any sleep if others disagree with that. Thryduulf (talk) 18:13, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- So ... an ambiguous redirect with no connection to either subject at its current target should ... remain with a hatnote placed at the current target? Seems nonsensical. What would make more sense would be to create a disambiguation page and deregulate the current target to a "See also" section. (I'm still in the "delete" camp, but "disambiguate" makes more sense than "keep and hatnote" here since the "keep" part just doesn't make sense.) And I'm just itching to cite WP:PANDORA and claim this opens the door for other wildcard redirects ... maybe XBC (I know there's already an article there) for ABC, NBC, etc? Steel1943 (talk) 18:39, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Extremely ambiguous with no primary topic. Let the readers type up a more specific search term or let the search function do its job. Ca talk to me! 04:05, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Steel1943:
an ambiguous redirect with no connection to either subject at its current target
the redirect refers collectively to both of the games the target article is about. That's very much not "no connection to either subject". When something is ambiguous between one notable and multiple non-notable things, or where only one of the things is mentioned on Wikipedia, then redirecting to the only place we have relevant content is normal and more helpful to readers than deletion. Here the term refers to exactly three notable things, one of which is very clearly not the primary topic (the airbase) and two things which could be primary (Zelda and WoW). However we only have content about one of the latter two (Zelda) so we should redirect there. I don't object to a dab page, but Zelda would be a full entry not a see also. Thryduulf (talk) 10:52, 22 August 2024 (UTC)- even if wikipedia had those wild cards for disambiguating (like xrt and eox being dabs for the first
twofive pokémon mystery dungeon games), this redirect could refer to 3 games in a single franchise, with a disambiguator that isn't even popularly used to refer to any of them in the first place. this redirect would require leaps of logic and frivolous details bordering on gamefaqs-style fancruft to keep or dabify... for the most part, anyway. i won't argue for or against the air base cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:38, 22 August 2024 (UTC)- Except it is commonly used to refer to the games collectively. I have no knowledge about whether the Pokemon games are referred to collectively at all/in that manner, but if they are then they should be included on the relevant dab pages. Windows 3.x is not used to refer to any operating system specifically but it is used to refer to them collectively so we have a disambiguation page. Thryduulf (talk) 17:38, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- even if wikipedia had those wild cards for disambiguating (like xrt and eox being dabs for the first
Nominator vote update: super weak retarget to Melitopol Air Base. I verified "OOX" was the IATA code for Melitopol Air Base, and added the code to the article, as well as created the respective redirect OOX pointing towards Melitopol Air Base. However, I still prefer deletion since IATA codes are in all caps always. (Other than that, I believe I have already made my other relevant points in this discussion and am refraining from further participating in order to avoid performing a WP:BLUDGEON.) Steel1943 (talk) 17:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)- Never mind on all that: Seems the connection between "OOX" and Melitopol Air Base is potential WP:OR per an edit that reverted something I did. Forget that then. (Still "delete" on this redirect.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:07, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Home computer game
[edit]- Home computer game → PC game (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Home computer games → PC game (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not sure if these redirects should be retained at their current target or be retargeted to Video game. Per the result of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 May 5#Computer game, Computer game was retargeted away from PC game and to Video game. Considering the current states of the articles Home computer and Personal computer ("PC" in the current target), it does not seem as though the usage of the phrase "home computer" exclusively refers to "personal computer". Steel1943 (talk) 21:11, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think the target works with the significant home computer game history on the PC game article and is not comparable to the computer game redirect result. A disambiguation hatnote was added to the video game article by me, maybe add something similar to PC game? IgelRM (talk) 08:24, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 00:05, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Who's gonna type this over "computer game"? Unnecessary and pointless over-redirection. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:02, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per IgelRM. The previous RfD outcome for Computer game was proper. The hatnote mentioned by IgelRM is proper, the proposed reverse hatnote is not necessary. Jay 💬 12:32, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Template:Wpest
[edit]- Template:Wpest → Template:WikiProject Estonia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
These unused redirects to be deleted:
- Template:WPEstonia
- Template:WPESTONIA
- Template:Wikiproject estonia
- Template:Wp estonia
- Template:WPEST
- Template:Wpest
- Template:WPEstonia #has 29 usages, but we all will be happy if this redirect also to be deleted
Rationale: Yes, redirects are cheap, but hinders data analysis. E.g. if I want to clean up talk pages consisting of the string "WikiProject Estonia|class=start", then I have to enter all above-mentioned redirects names. Estopedist1 (talk) 04:41, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Making life easier for tool authors and similar is not a reason in and of itself to delete redirects that are of use to readers or editors. Certainly Keep Template:WPEstonia as that's demonstrably useful (as evidenced by being used). Not sure at the moment about the others. Thryduulf (talk) 10:55, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Dr. Trayaurus
[edit]- Dr. Trayaurus → Trayaurus and the Enchanted Crystal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Trayaurus → Trayaurus and the Enchanted Crystal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This character is more well known for being in DanTDM's YouTube videos than for being in this book. I am RedoStone (talk) 20:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I have never heard of the character, or the YouTuber, or the book, and I can't verify RedoStone's assertion that this character is better known for being in YouTube videos than the book. However, if I think about utility for the reader, the redirect currently links to a relevant article (the article about the book) - simply deleting the redirect seems unhelpful. If we were to change the target, we would need a more appropriate article to point at. The article of the YouTuber in question contains a single line about the character Trayaurus, which refers to the book rather than the YouTube videos, so that is obviously less helpful to the reader. FWIW, in Wikipedia terms the book itself is likely to be much more clearly notable than the YouTube videos, having been top of the NYT's relevant best-seller list for some time, so this would likely be the better target even if we were to have an article about the videos the character appears in. In the absence of a better redirect target, it seems obvious that the better course of action is to keep this redirect. Girth Summit (blether) 20:30, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I honestly had forgotten that I had created this, but I concur with Girth Summit's reasoning. --TheSandDoctor Talk 22:50, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Girth Summit BugGhost🦗👻 12:13, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- knowing some dantdm lore, i have some knowledge of who trayaurus is and can verify that his presence in the videos is more popular than in the book, but even if the book about him is notable, i really doubt dan would be notable enough for an artic- BY THE ANCIENTS, DANTDM HAS AN ARTICLE. that actually really caught me off guard. still, the word "trayaurus" is only found twice in dan's article, both times referring to the book, so i'd say keep cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 21:01, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Immigration to Iraqi Kurdistan
[edit]- Immigration to Iraqi Kurdistan → Iraqi Kurdistan#Immigration (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not only does the target section not exist, but the word "immigration" is not used anywhere on the page. Kurdistan Region#Immigration does exist, but Kurdistan Region and Iraqi Kurdistan are not the same thing (the former is an autonomous region, the latter is a larger geographical area without formal borders). The most obvious broader targets, Immigration to Iraq or Iraq#Immigration don't exist. I'm leaning delete over retargetting but this preference is weak. Thryduulf (talk) 18:02, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Australia 2032
[edit]- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 July 25 § Korea 2018 – Delete (no appropriate retarget option at the time)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 September 3 § China 2008 – Retarget to 2008 in China
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 September 3 § Brazil 2016 – Retarget to 2016 in Brazil
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 September 6 § Italy 2026 – Delete (no appropriate retarget option at the time)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 September 26 § Japan 2020 – Delete all (China 2022, France 2024, and USA 2028 were included)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 24 § CountryName Year redirects to events – Delete all 10 (no appropriate retarget option at the time)
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 February 20 § Qatar 2023 – Retarget to 2023 in Qatar
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 20 § France 2024 – Retarget to 2024 in France
- Australia 2032 → 2032 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Does not appear to be branded as "Australia 2032" from what I've searched, just as "Brisbane 2032". Hey man im josh (talk) 16:46, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've added a number of related redirects in which "CountryName Year" redirects ended up being deleted or retargeted. There is precedence for deleting this redirect based on a number of deletions over the years. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:00, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- The redirect seems like a reasonable aid to find the page. As redirects are for helping people find the right page, I don't think it should matter that the name is different from the official brand. It may be worth changing after 2032, but at the moment it seems fine. Safes007 (talk) 05:45, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Safes007: The point is that it's not the expect result based on the tens of thousands of other CountryName Year redirects that exist. As such, it's misleading because this isn't what one would expect to be the "right page". Hey man im josh (talk) 18:20, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- The redirect seems like a reasonable aid to find the page. As redirects are for helping people find the right page, I don't think it should matter that the name is different from the official brand. It may be worth changing after 2032, but at the moment it seems fine. Safes007 (talk) 05:45, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Netriding
[edit]Not mentioned anywhere on the English Wikipedia. 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
SCJD
[edit]- SCJD → Oracle Certification Program (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Retarget to Creutzfeldt–Jakob disease. There's no mention of any SCJD in the article it currently points to. 74.108.22.119 (talk) 15:27, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per nom. The certification was originally "Sun-Certified Java Developer" [12] which may or may not be worth a mention but sporadic Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease is the clear primary topic. The acronym is also used for "Sternoclavicular joint dislocation" and "South Carolina Judicial Department" but we don't appear to have any content about those uses. If we do have mentions of any of these that I've not seen (or which are added in the future) they can be linked in a hatnote or non-primary disambig. Thryduulf (talk) 15:52, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
2026 Peach Bowl
[edit]- 2026 Peach Bowl → Peach Bowl (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The 2026 event is not mentioned at all at the target, which makes the redirect a bit misleading. Should be deleted as WP:TOOSOON / WP:FUTURE / not a helpful redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:17, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. The 2024 event hasn't even happened yet. Thryduulf (talk) 15:54, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
2027–28 NCAA Division I men's basketball season
[edit]- 2027–28 NCAA Division I men's basketball season → NCAA Division I men's basketball tournament (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- 2026–27 NCAA Division I men's basketball season → NCAA Division I men's basketball tournament (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The seasons are not mentioned at all at the target, which makes the redirects a bit misleading. Should be deleted as WP:TOOSOON / WP:FUTURE / not helpful redirects. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:15, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
2027 College Football Playoff National Championship
[edit]- 2027 College Football Playoff National Championship → College Football Playoff National Championship (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
2027 championship is only mentioned at the target to say Beginning with the 2027 championship, ABC will simulcast the national championship with ESPN.
, which makes the redirect a bit misleading. Should be deleted as WP:TOOSOON / WP:FUTURE / not a helpful redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
2027 NCAA Division I men's ice hockey tournament
[edit]- 2027 NCAA Division I men's ice hockey tournament → NCAA Division I men's ice hockey tournament (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
2027 tournament is not mentioned at all at the target, which makes the redirect a bit misleading. Should be deleted as WP:TOOSOON / WP:FUTURE / not a helpful redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:04, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
LHS 2065
[edit]LHS 2065 is not a brown dwarf. This paper states: Given the typical age of a disk Magazzu` star (a few gigayears), LHS 2065 would be a very low mass star rather than a massive brown dwarf.
I suggest retargrting to List of stars in Hydra as a better result. If this star is not in the list, an entry can be created. Actually, we can create an article about this star.}} 21 Andromedae (talk) 15:01, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- So turn it into an article, that doesn't require an RfD. It does appear notable. SevenSpheres (talk) 15:57, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Spouse of Deputy Chief Minister of Maharashtra
[edit]- Spouse of Deputy Chief Minister of Maharashtra → List of deputy chief ministers of Maharashtra (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Nothing about the spouses of deputy chief ministers are mentioned at the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:50, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
First Lady of Maharashtra
[edit]- First Lady of Maharashtra → List of governors of Maharashtra (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Nothing about the spouses of governors are mentioned at the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:45, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Spouse of Chief Minister of Maharashtra
[edit]- Spouse of Chief Minister of Maharashtra → List of chief ministers of Maharashtra (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Nothing about the spouses of chief ministers are mentioned at the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:44, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Multiplicity of a restricted root
[edit]- Multiplicity of a restricted root → Multiplicity (mathematics) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
"restricted root" is not mentioned at the target (and is only used a few times in the entire English Wikipedia's mainspace). 1234qwer1234qwer4 12:48, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Not into mathematics, but searching gave me Plancherel theorem for spherical functions#Harish-Chandra's Plancherel theorem that has "α is called a restricted root and is called its multiplicity." Jay 💬 13:01, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- That does seem like an appropriate target, it looks like I've overlooked it. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:27, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:32, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Multiplicities
[edit]- Multiplicities → Multiplicity (mathematics) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Unclear that this plural form would not be ambiguous the same way as Multiplicity. 1234qwer1234qwer4 12:47, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. The term is used in other disciplines but mathematics is by far the primary topic in my search results. A hatnote to the dab will suffice for those looking for other things. Thryduulf (talk) 18:34, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:32, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
WrestleManias
[edit]- WrestleMania 43 → WrestleMania (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- WrestleMania 44 → WrestleMania (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- 2028 WrestleMania → WrestleMania (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- WrestleMania XLIV → WrestleMania (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
These are for events that are likely to happen in 2027 and 2028, but for which nothing has been confirmed or scheduled (see WrestleMania#Events). Additionally, there's no mentions whatsoever beyond WrestleMania 41 on that page. Not useful or helpful redirects at this point in time and it's too soon to be creating them. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:28, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. This event is three years from now. Abhiramakella (talk) 13:31, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Abhiramakella: What does that have to do with anything? We also don't actually know they'll take place three years from now since nothing about those events has been confirmed. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete due to the lack of information on these (potential) events at the target. -- Tavix (talk) 14:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Lack of current information, WP:CRYSTAL applies. Steel1943 (talk) 18:06, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Malagor
[edit]...i got nothing. results gave me one result related to papaya salad (whatever that is), but it seems to be primarily associated with a warhammer character. haven't found a list of warhammer characters, or a mention of him cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:19, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- wait nvm found it, here it is, and there he is. opinions on retargeting there? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:22, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to List of Warhammer Fantasy characters. My searches also led primarily to information on the character. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:38, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- It seems to be Thai for papaya. Anyways, I'm fine with retarget to List of Warhammer Fantasy characters as the current target doesn't satisfy WP:RFOREIGN. --Lenticel (talk) 01:39, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Mamao
[edit]"mamão" is "papaya" in... brazilian portuguese, and apparently no non-fictional languages. it's unlikely that someone searching for this while high on açaí would forget the tilde (as mamao is a completely different word in other languages), and brazil itself is only mentioned in passing, with seemingly no deep association as far as english wikipedia cares. does rlang apply? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:15, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Convert to a set index page. Name page drafted below the redirect. - Eureka Lott 23:53, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- ooh, i can get behind that~ cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:12, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Set Indexfy per Eureka Lott --Lenticel (talk) 01:46, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Dragon's Keep
[edit]- Dragon's Keep → Princess Fiona (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
vague? not even named in the target cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:57, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambig. This exists due to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dragon's Keep which closed as merge (although I'm not certain if any merge actually happened). There are multiple mentions of things with this exact name, including Full Tilt! Pinball#Dragon's Keep, Janet Lee Carey#Dragon's Keep, Medwyn Goodall#Discography and List of Sierra Entertainment video games#Games. Additionally Dragon Keep would make a good see also. Thryduulf (talk) 12:07, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
שרעק
[edit]seemingly a classic rlang, didn't find a csd tag for this cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:51, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment These redirects are not speedily deletable because there are too many instances where the redirects should not be deleted due to a connection to the current or a different target that isn't obvious to everyone but which is identified during discussion. For example this Yiddish word is mentioned in the lead at Shrek (character). I'm undecided whether that makes it sufficiently useful to keep, but its not clear cut enough for speedy deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 11:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- retargeting it to the character (or heaven forbid, the book) could work cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:26, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Shrek (character) based on Thryduulf's findings BugGhost🦗👻 13:19, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Extremal
[edit]Maximum and minimum would be a more specific target; that said, topics like Extremal combinatorics could also be related to such a search. 1234qwer1234qwer4 11:32, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 11:47, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Maximum and minimum per nom; stationary points are not necessarily extrema, as shown on the main image of Stationary point. Maximum and minimum is the correct ptopic, but adding a hatnote pointing to Extremal combinatorics is a good idea BugGhost🦗👻 12:19, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
All-Star Batman and Robin
[edit]- All-Star Batman and Robin → All Star Batman & Robin, the Boy Wonder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- All star batman and robin → All Star Batman & Robin, the Boy Wonder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- All Star Batman and Robin → All Star Batman & Robin, the Boy Wonder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- All-Star Batman & Robin → All Star Batman & Robin, the Boy Wonder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
all-star batman and robin is a different goddamn comic from all star batman & robin, the goddamn boy wonder, but its only meaningful goddamn mention is in the goddamn list of batman comics, and the goddamn results seem to give goddamn priority to all star batman & robin, the goddamn boy wonder. should they be goddamn retargeted to the goddamn list of batman comics, or are they goddamn fine as is? cogsan (goddamn talk page) (goddamn contribs) 13:12, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- on that goddamn note, should i bring up all star batman and all-star batman (the only goddamn difference is a goddamn hyphen), as they have different goddamn targets, or does the goddamn exclusion of robin narrow them out of this goddamn topic? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 00:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Well, there's no goddamn way that the current goddamn arrangement with those two redirects (ASB and A-SB) is the correct goddamn outcome. Since this conversation seems to be lurching toward to a goddamn DAB, I think that the next goddamn question is whether the goddamn DAB is titled something like "All Star Batman" and includes all of these goddamn titles (ASB, ASBAR, ASBARTBW) or whether it's just ASBAR and ASBARTBW. The former "broader" DAB actually seems like my preferred goddamn outcome. —mako๛ 11:54, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Too many goddamn questions!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- bats like their goddamn questions. they like them a lot. cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:17, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Sorry that I don't get the references here, and I'm thinking many won't. Heck, I don't even understand the nomination statement. What's going on with these redirects? Steel1943 (talk) 14:27, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- asbar and asbartbw (what a nice acronym) are different comics, though only the latter has an article of its own. the joke is mostly that the target really loves plastering the word "goddamn" everywhere, to the point where "the goddamn batman" is an actual redirect to it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:09, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not enough goddamn answers!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv converse∫edits 01:28, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate - Since it was too confusing, we should make into a disambiguation page. Ahri Boy (talk) 03:16, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Question for Cogsan perhaps. This is a very confusing nomination (even without all the goddamns)! Are the very similarly named comics without articles at the moment not notable or do they just not have articles yet? If they are never going to have articles, the proposal sounds reasonable since it seems like this redirect should point somewhere and that seems like the obvious place that currently exists! Otherwise, I like the idea of redirecting to a DAB that explains the situation (perhaps with WP:REDLINKS?). —mako๛ 12:48, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- i'm not the biggest batman fanatic out there so i can't say for sure, but results for "all-star batman" and "all-star batman and robin" are riddled with all star batman & robin, the boy wonder, since robin is a pretty important character in batman lore and "boy wonder" is a pretty common nickname for him, so it's hard to tell
- in case of doubt, i'll assume the answer is "their only notable trait is sharing their names with that one comic", and change my vote to dabifying between all star batman & robin, the boy wonder, dc rebirth, and the list of batman comics so i don't have to think about it again cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:33, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify as per the goddamn response by the goddamn nom and the goddamn conversation here. —mako๛ 15:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify, goddammit - What, are you dense? Are you ^%$&*^%# or something? Just where do you think this should go? It's The Goddamn All-Star Batman & Robin (disambiguation). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 07:39, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- i just realized this implies you either have the line memorized or had to check the comic in some way to see it. in either case, my condolences cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- The panel actually showed up on superdickery.com back when that website was A Thing, and even if it didn't the panel is in our article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 22:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- that still falls within "some way". the condolences are inevitable cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:11, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- The panel actually showed up on superdickery.com back when that website was A Thing, and even if it didn't the panel is in our article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 22:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- i just realized this implies you either have the line memorized or had to check the comic in some way to see it. in either case, my condolences cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Can someone draft a disambiguation page? I would usually do so myself but I am not familiar with the topic. C F A 💬 16:24, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- @CFA like this? nah, not happening
- ...jokes aside, i haven't actually found any info on a comic series named "all-star batman and robin", and none of the wikis i found had any entries under that name either, so it's probably just asb and asbartbw cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:15, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: for goddamn opinions on this goddamn draft
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:13, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Game deck
[edit]Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the target article and the redirect unclear. Per the edit history of the redirect, seems the intent of this term was to correlate with the subject at Handheld game console. However, this term has been WP:SEO'ed on third party search engines to apparently establish that this phrase exclusively refers to Steam Deck. (This redirect is a {{R with history}}.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:57, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Deck-building game or maybe just Playing card (which is where Deck of cards also goes), or Card game. Googling "game deck" (including quotes) supports this. Steam deck doesn't refer to itself as a "game deck" (google results for "game deck" (no quotes) showing Steam Decks are just because the the Steam Deck plays/allows purchase of games. BugGhost🦗👻 10:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 00:06, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Seems overly vague. Search function exists for a reason. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:01, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the pre-redirect page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:56, 21 August 2024 (UTC)- one revision was vandalism, another had nothing of note. delete, i guess, since it seems to also rely on different definitions of "game" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:24, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Four Giants
[edit]- Four Giants → List of The Legend of Zelda characters#Four Giants (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in the target article. This concept is mentioned at The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask#Story, given that this is a story concept in that game, but I'm not sure if that is a sufficient target or not. (I'm leaning "delete".) Steel1943 (talk) 18:13, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- surprisingly, a name composed of a number followed by a relatively common word can refer to more than one thing, though none of the other possible targets seem to be notable. i'd say delete, if only until someone decides to reminisce about their legs or something cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:41, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask given their significant plot role in the game. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 18:59, 6 August 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! 01:55, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to the story section of Majora's Mask, as they are mentioned there as major characters. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:06, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk page. Any opinion on the pre-redirect page history in case of deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:49, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Onox
[edit]- Onox → List of The Legend of Zelda characters#Onox, the General of Darkness (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in the target article. The subject of the redirect as intended is related to The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages as the subject's antagonist. However, there are other unrelated mentions of "Onox" at Katonah (Native American leader) and Taphow that could potentially be a target for this title. (Leaning "delete" and "weak disambiguate".) Steel1943 (talk) 18:38, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- delete. none of the other onoxes seem noteworthy enough to warrant redirects either cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:42, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages since Onox was the primary antagonist of Oracle of Seasons making it a plausible search term. The other Onexs mentioned are seemingly nonontible relieves of Native Americans we have articles on so I see making a Dabpage as unnecessary.--65.92.162.79 (talk) 06:29, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Seasons and Oracle of Ages. Onox is a plausible search term for Oracle of Seasons per the IP. Also, it would be absurd to consider Veran notable enough to warrant top billing in her dab page but Onox not notable enough to get a redirect. Nickps (talk) 15:37, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:55, 14 August 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk page. This redirect is a {{R from merge}}, hence any opinion on the pre-redirect history in case of deletion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:43, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Deadly embrace
[edit]From the history, it looks like this was in reference something Dijkstra said about deadlocks (the computer science topic), but this phrase isn't actually mentioned in the latter article, nor can I find any other coherent topic to redirect it to, so it doesn't make much sense.
If we delete it, lookups of "deadly embrace" will show something like this, which would probably be better than what is shown now.
-- Joy (talk) 07:30, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to the dab page I've just written at Deadly Embrace, which is more useful than the search results. Thryduulf (talk) 11:27, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, as long as we add some sort of a template that links more general search results in there that should be fine, too. --Joy (talk) 14:42, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to thryduulf's DAB BugGhost🦗👻 13:25, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Newman!
[edit]- Hello, Newman! → Newman (Seinfeld) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Only mentioned once at the target phrase article, claiming to be "Jerry's trademark phrase" for Newman. Is the phrase trademarked? No clue, as there is no reference anywhere in the paragraph where this is stated to be true. Otherwise implausible for people to use this phrase to reach the article about Newman from Seinfeld, before searchers attempt to search for Newman (Seinfeld) (as the character's name is in the phrase in question). Utopes (talk / cont) 17:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - plausible search term, and there is no other plausible target. "target phrase"? Did you mean "target article"? Jay 💬 17:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. I've since removed the mention of the phrase from the target article as well. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oh well, retarget to Jerry Seinfeld (character)#Newman. List of catchphrases in American and British mass media has a FOX website source Most popular sitcom catchphrases of all time, from 'Ayyyy!' to 'Hello, Newman' which gives a Page not found though, and may need to be dug up from the archives. Jay 💬 17:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Also removed the [totally unsourced] mention from Jerry Seinfeld (character)#Newman as well. The only context present there refers to an erroneous claim that it's "Jerry's trademark phrase", with no citation about a trademark. Beyond that, I'm highly doubtful that this list based on a seemingly subjective metric of "most popular" sitcom catchphrases of all time, would be anything of a reliable source to substantiate any mention. Newman's personality can be demonstrated totally well enough without it. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:54, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- "Jerry's trademark phrase" uses the figurative/colloquial meaning of trademark. It is not a legal assertion that Jerry uses the phrase to identify a particular company's product and differentiate it from other companies' products. SilverLocust 💬 05:36, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- I agree. The content should be added back. The archived source link is here. Jay 💬 17:19, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- "Jerry's trademark phrase" uses the figurative/colloquial meaning of trademark. It is not a legal assertion that Jerry uses the phrase to identify a particular company's product and differentiate it from other companies' products. SilverLocust 💬 05:36, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Also removed the [totally unsourced] mention from Jerry Seinfeld (character)#Newman as well. The only context present there refers to an erroneous claim that it's "Jerry's trademark phrase", with no citation about a trademark. Beyond that, I'm highly doubtful that this list based on a seemingly subjective metric of "most popular" sitcom catchphrases of all time, would be anything of a reliable source to substantiate any mention. Newman's personality can be demonstrated totally well enough without it. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:54, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oh well, retarget to Jerry Seinfeld (character)#Newman. List of catchphrases in American and British mass media has a FOX website source Most popular sitcom catchphrases of all time, from 'Ayyyy!' to 'Hello, Newman' which gives a Page not found though, and may need to be dug up from the archives. Jay 💬 17:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. I've since removed the mention of the phrase from the target article as well. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Do we do soft redirects to Wikiquote? (Not sure if a target exists, not sure if we do such soft redirects these days ... just asking based on our Wiktionary soft redirects' existence.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:35, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- We do do soft redirects to Wikiquote when that's the best target. No opinion (at the moment) on whether that's true in this case. Thryduulf (talk) 02:05, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I just looked at Wikiquote for a bit: Seems it's more focused on non-serial media, such as films, instead of reoccurring media, such as TV series. What I mean is if a quote is stated more than once in a media (such as multiple episodes in a series), it seems there is no clear target for the quote on Wiktionary. (There may be character pages ... but I haven't figured that out yet.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:16, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- We do do soft redirects to Wikiquote when that's the best target. No opinion (at the moment) on whether that's true in this case. Thryduulf (talk) 02:05, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:11, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
BFGv3.14
[edit]that's from the 2005 movie that i keep trying to forget exists, but the name is not mentioned there, or in the current target, or anywhere on wikipedia. retarget there, delete and act like it never existed, or take some other option i failed to consider? i'm leaning towards deletion cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:23, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just notified of this discussion at the current and proposed target talk pages. Jay 💬 13:29, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:08, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Hellish invasion of Mars
[edit]- Hellish invasion of Mars → Doom 3 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
that's a plot point since the first game, but there might also be other instances of the evil world known as h*ck deciding to attack mars that i'm forgetting. opinions on retargeting it to anything besides the series' article? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I don't know how vague it is, but it's not a believable search. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:29, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just tagged this with {{R with history}}. Jay 💬 13:33, 20 August 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, CycloneYoris talk! 06:07, 21 August 2024 (UTC)- unsourced fancruft, nothing worth keeping that isn't already in the target cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:07, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Monsoon Revolution
[edit]- Monsoon Revolution → Non-cooperation movement (2024) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Non-cooperation movement (2024) is not known as "Monsoon Revolution". There is no source verify that. In that way, this redirect is WP:OR. Also Monsoon Revolution is the name of a book "Monsoon Revolution: Republicans, Sultans, and Empires in Oman, 1965-1976". Redirect this to the subject creates confusion. It needs to be deleted. Mehedi Abedin 04:49, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I found at least one source that is calling it "Monsoon Revolution". [13] Za-ari-masen (talk) 05:38, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. The above source had been removed from the article. I also found the one I had originally heard this term used in [14] (just after the 4 minute mark in the audio) and added a note about the alternative name back to the intro of Non-cooperation movement (2024). Given that it has also been used for the Dhofar War (which is what the book is apparently about), perhaps this should be made into a disambiguation page between those two? -- Beland (talk) 06:47, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate: There are only three hits for the name that pertain to the NCM in Bangladesh. The name is used for other events as well as mentioned above. PadFoot (talk) 07:01, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate: In that case disambiguation is the better idea considering what Beland and PadFoot2008 said. Mehedi Abedin 07:16, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose: It doesn't seem like this is the name that sticks. I did notice that an article was made entitled July 36 where it is said that that is what Bangladeshis calling the date of Sheikh Hasina's removal. I think we're seeing a scenario akin to the Revolution of Dignity in Ukraine. Image2012 (talk) 11:06, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
They bite, they fight, they bite and bite and fight
[edit]- They bite, they fight, they bite and bite and fight → Itchy & Scratchy & Marge (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
A replica redirect of an unmentioned lyric from the show in question. This lyric, which was not mentioned anywhere in December of last year, is still not mentioned anywhere. Speedy deletion via G12 was tossed as a possibility during the previous RfD: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 30#They fight, and bite. They fight, and bite, and fight. Fight, fight, fight. Bite, bite, bite. The Itchy & Scratchy Show! but the target still provides zero context for this search term. Utopes (talk / cont) 16:33, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment this redirect is definitely not a G12 candidate. Thryduulf (talk) 18:15, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Tossed around for the previous redirect's RfD*; this is a different redirect than what was discussed then. Utopes (talk / cont) 18:21, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as ambiguous. "Itchy & Scratchy & Marge", I'm pretty certain, isn't the only The Simpsons episode to feature the Itchy & Scratchy theme; so does "The Itchy & Scratchy & Poochie Show" (albeit in altered format). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 00:41, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Alternatively, retarget to The Itchy & Scratchy Show, though this may be an implausible
{{R from lyric}}
. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 00:48, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Alternatively, retarget to The Itchy & Scratchy Show, though this may be an implausible
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:18, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Texas A&M University-Riverside, RELLIS Campus
[edit]- Texas A&M University-Riverside → Bryan Air Force Base (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- RELLIS Campus → Bryan Air Force Base (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Re-target to Campus of Texas A&M University#RELLIS Campus and move all A&M related content there. As it stands, the A&M content is awkwardly split between the two articles with no obvious underlying logic. The facility has been part of Texas A&M University for 60+ years and its time as a U.S. Air Force (USAF) base does not overlap its use by A&M. The Bryan Air Force Base article should focus on the facility's use by the the United States Army Air Forces and the USAF. Carguychris (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Roland Burris Burial Site
[edit]- Roland Burris Burial Site → Oak Woods Cemetery#Roland Burris tomb (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The relevant section has since been removed, and the burial site is only linked from Roland Burris and a see-also at Burris. We could logically redirect this to Roland Burris, but we'd then realistically need to remove those incoming links as circular and redundant, respectively. Better, I think, to delete this, and recreate it later if the situation warrants (presumably not before his actual death). BDD (talk) 15:13, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Template:Random motto/day
[edit]- Template:Random motto/day → Template:Random motto (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Template subpage that was turned into a redirect and is no longer used. The function of this subpage was subsumed into the main template. No incoming links now or conceivably in the future. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:06, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Guitar hero 2 hack
[edit]- Guitar hero 2 hack → Guitar Hero II (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
hacking and modding not mentioned in the target. you know when you see something and immediately know that whoever created it is brazilian? this is one of those cases cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:32, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Do your own research
[edit]Phrase is not mentioned in the target article. Not even the word "research" -1ctinus📝🗨 14:22, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- This is similar to but not quite the same as RTFM. It's mentioned and explained at QAnon#Slogans and vocabulary but it's use is broader than that conspiracy theory and its adherents. Possibly soft redirect to wikt:dyor which gives some context for those unfamiliar with the term. Thryduulf (talk) 15:25, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- I would support a re-targeting to QAnon#Slogans and vocabulary. -1ctinus📝🗨 16:21, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
*:: Comment I second this suggestion. QAnon immediately came to mind when I read this RFD, whereas I think the connection to RTFM is tenuous at best. Carguychris (talk) 20:52, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. RTFM is clearly inappropriate, as mentioned. But this phrase is just as often used in any sort of tinfoil hat setting. Flat Earthers use it all the time, e.g., and neither article would be more deserving of the redirect. Unless there's some specific discussion of this exact phrase in its general conspiratorial theory sense, somewhere, only deletion makes sense. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:10, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per this suggestion; the phrase is inadequately WP:CONCISE to redirect to any single article. After scouring the Googles, the phrase is associated with all sorts of conspiracy theories independent of QAnon. @1ctinus, I've rescinded my earlier comment. Carguychris (talk) 23:11, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- That's fair. I would not support a soft redirect to Wiktionary since its literally just the acronym for "do your own research" and nothing else—not helpful. -1ctinus📝🗨 23:14, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per this suggestion; the phrase is inadequately WP:CONCISE to redirect to any single article. After scouring the Googles, the phrase is associated with all sorts of conspiracy theories independent of QAnon. @1ctinus, I've rescinded my earlier comment. Carguychris (talk) 23:11, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but change - I agree RTFM is not close enough in meaning, and wikt:dyor doesn't provide enough information. I was going to add a note about this study about how "doing your own research" can lead people to increase their belief in misinformation. Apparently because doing an online search on misinformation increases exposure to misinformation. QAnon#Slogans and vocabulary seems like a good target for now, though that could probably note that it is also used in other conspiracy theory contexts, and in a general sense of "don't be a lazy researcher". Maybe conspiracy theory could be a better home if it really doesn't fit in QAnon anymore? There doesn't seem to be enough content to make it into its own article yet, though perhaps further, um, research would turn up more. In any case, this does seem to be an important topic in misinformation research. -- Beland (talk) 06:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Midnight Fantasy
[edit]- Midnight Fantasy → Britney Spears products (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Britney Spears products discusses a "Midnight Fantasy" perfume product released in 2005, while Fantasy (Las Vegas show) says that Midnight Fantasy was the show's name between 1999 and 2005. I think Britney Spears products is the primary topic based on a Google search. Should this be disambiguated? If not disambiguated, should Fantasy (Las Vegas show) be mentioned in a hatnote to Britney Spears products? I bring this to the community to ask for guidance. Thank you. Cunard (talk) 09:03, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the Las Vegas show talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:49, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Cecile Shapiro
[edit]- Cecile Shapiro → Bart the Genius (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Very minor character with only a few lines; similar to the other RFD involving the target page. Xeroctic (talk) 07:49, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Mentioned at target and seems to be unambiguous. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:33, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment would List_of_The_Simpsons_cast_members#Main_cast be a better target? --Lenticel (talk) 05:55, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- The character is listed there (as well as a passing mention in the cast of the target page) but because Yeardley Smith voices very few characters, Cecile is probably only listed here as she is one of the only roles by her other than Lisa, and therefore may be too minor to list. Cecile is not listed in the List of recurring characters.
- (Aditionally, this was nominated alongside Ethan Foley, I thought these nominations should be merged into another due to the similar situations, although that was kept as some users only commented on that one) Xeroctic (talk) 13:30, 13 August 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, CycloneYoris talk! 10:11, 13 August 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the proposed target talk page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:45, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Estro
[edit]I'm not convinced a type face is what people really mean when they type this in. Wiktionary says that estro is a clipping of estrogen, and a cursory google search turns up results mostly about a radiation therapy organization and some about estrogen. Based5290 :3 (talk) 04:08, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget or disambiguate? There is also a Saeco (cycling team) which apparently went under the name of "Saeco-Estro" in the past. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:39, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm leaning towards just retargeting to estrogen with an "estro redirects here, for other uses see..." at the top of the estrogen page. I'm not sure if that cycling team was ever called just estro. Based5290 :3 (talk) 05:23, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on retargeting to Estrogen?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:23, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Orsini Polypytch
[edit]- Orsini Polypytch → Orsini Polyptych (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Typo. Ham II (talk) 17:17, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep this seems quite plausible to me. Especially as I had to look at the two words character by character to even spot the difference (the third and fourth last letters of the final word are transposed). Thryduulf (talk) 10:10, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's certainly a plausible mistake, because I made that mistake – the redirect exists because I initially moved the page there in error. As the error doesn't come in until the 13th character, by which time a search bar (etc.) will already have suggested the correct title, why is it a good idea to keep the redirect? If someone makes the same typo when editing, wouldn't it be better for
[[Orsini Polypytch]]
to be a red link, which is more easily spotted and corrected, than a blue link? Ham II (talk) 11:36, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's certainly a plausible mistake, because I made that mistake – the redirect exists because I initially moved the page there in error. As the error doesn't come in until the 13th character, by which time a search bar (etc.) will already have suggested the correct title, why is it a good idea to keep the redirect? If someone makes the same typo when editing, wouldn't it be better for
- Note that Polypytch does not exist (so entering it in the search box right now returns this redirect instead of attempting a typo correction and listing the Polyptych article). 1234qwer1234qwer4 01:43, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:22, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as plausible {{R from misspelling}}. mwwv converse∫edits 21:32, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Photosite
[edit]mentioned exactly once in the article, in the lead, in passing, inside parentheses (can't guarantee citation 3 doesn't mention it because it's paywalled), really doesn't make it clear if a pixel is supposed to be a part of a photosite or vice-versa, though it seems to be the latter, which might make this the equivalent of redirecting "body hair" to beard. what do? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:33, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- My first thought was an image hosting website, but googling shows that actually it refers to (as wikt:photosite puts it) "An individual light-sensitive element in a digital image sensor." and pixel is an alternative term for this. This suggests that image sensor is the correct target for the redirect - however the term is not mentioned there. Where it is mentioned is articles about specific sensors or sensor technologies, which are all too specific a target. A specific image hosting site ("PhotoSite") is mentioned at Homestead Technologies#History but that doesn't appear to be notable (and seems to have been discontinued circa 2006). I'm not completely sure what the best course of action is here, but the status quo definitely isn't it. Perhaps soft redirecting to Wiktionary if the term isn't added at Image sensor? If we do soft redirect we should remove the link to Wikipedia from that page to avoid a circular link. Thryduulf (talk) 10:03, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:22, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Draft:Joe Biden
[edit]Not a {{R from move}}, created last month. Questionable utility ... and I thought our previous consensus about similar redirects was to delete them, but looks like WP:RDRAFT has been updated recently? We are now creating redirects from the "Draft:" namespace to the article namespace? Steel1943 (talk) 16:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - We always create and keep redirects from draft space to article space. One reason is so that an editor who has a link to the draft and wants to view or edit it will find the article after the draft is accepted. When a draft is accepted, a redirect to article space is always created, and is exempt from six-month expiration, and so is kept. There are sometimes good-faith requests to delete drafts because there is already an article. They are instead speedily redirected to the article. So, yes, there are redirects from draft space to article space. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:05, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- "
We always create and keep redirects from draft space to article space.
" No we don't, which is why I nominated this redirect in the first place since pages in the "Draft:" space created as redirects to the article space have traditionally been deleted at WP:RFD. In addition, none of what you said has anything to do with WP:RDRAFT, considering the redirect was created about a month ago, and has always been a redirect. (The redirect is not a {{R from move}}.) Steel1943 (talk) 21:15, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- "
- Delete contra Robert McClenon because this was never a draft. Keeping it would lead to confusion that there has been a draft on the subject, which it seems Robert fell for. -- Tavix (talk) 14:22, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Tavix: For what it's worth, apparently, the section which WP:RDRAFT targets was recently updated in a way (I'm assuming WP:BOLDly) which would have validated a "keep" for this redirect. However, this redirect was created prior to that addition, and ... since I wasn't sure what caused that addition and I do not necessarily agree with it, I reverted the change pending explanation from the editor who wrote/added the wording. (It seemed like a change that was major enough to need consensus for such a change.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- I argue that a redirect created in draftspace is not a draft, thus would not validate a keep either way. -- Tavix (talk) 18:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's fair: Seems the addition to WP:RDRAFT may have been intended for drafts converted to redirects, not pages in the "Draft:" namespace initially created as redirects to mainspace. (I suppose I should ping Godsy at this point so they can better understand why I reverted their addition.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. All of the following types of redirects from draftspace to mainspace should generally be kept imo:
- From drafts moved to mainspace
- From drafts merged with a mainspace article
- From drafts merged with another draft that was later moved or merged to mainspace
- From drafts that duplicate an existing mainspace article
- From the title of a draft that was moved within draftspace before being merged or moved to mainspace
- From titles that were never drafts but at which a draft that duplicates an existing mainspace article might reasonably be created.
- I see this as a completely harmless redirect that is an example of my final bullet. I don't know why someone would expect we don't already have an article on Joe Biden but given this redirect has been created and we definitely don't need a draft at this title, deletion seems both pointy and pointless. Thryduulf (talk) 09:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. All of the following types of redirects from draftspace to mainspace should generally be kept imo:
- That's fair: Seems the addition to WP:RDRAFT may have been intended for drafts converted to redirects, not pages in the "Draft:" namespace initially created as redirects to mainspace. (I suppose I should ping Godsy at this point so they can better understand why I reverted their addition.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- I argue that a redirect created in draftspace is not a draft, thus would not validate a keep either way. -- Tavix (talk) 18:18, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Tavix: For what it's worth, apparently, the section which WP:RDRAFT targets was recently updated in a way (I'm assuming WP:BOLDly) which would have validated a "keep" for this redirect. However, this redirect was created prior to that addition, and ... since I wasn't sure what caused that addition and I do not necessarily agree with it, I reverted the change pending explanation from the editor who wrote/added the wording. (It seemed like a change that was major enough to need consensus for such a change.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:45, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: not sure what the point in deleting this is. If someone tries to create a draft on Joe Biden, however unlikely, they will be redirected to the existing article. Yes, there doesn't need to be a redirect from every draft to the corresponding mainspace article, but there's no reason to delete this one now that is has been created. C F A 💬 20:08, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Strong delete The word "Draft" is making confusion if it is only a Draft content. Besides, it would easily being target of vandalism. You could try to fully protect it but it will make greater confusion - Draft is still Draft, nothing would be changed even you redirect it. KyleRGiggs (talk) 03:45, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- eh? Redirects from draft space to the main namespace are common and don't attract vandalism at a higher rate than any other redirects. Thryduulf (talk) 09:04, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:21, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete What it implies—that there was a draft article about Joe Biden, separate from the accepted one—simply isn't true. --BDD (talk) 15:15, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- That's not the only reason to keep a draft → main redirect though, as explained at length in multiple places now. Thryduulf (talk) 15:19, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- I saw your list above. I hope we can agree that the last bullet point is the only one that could possibly apply here. Now, do I think it likely that we'd want to try to rewrite the Joe Biden article from scratch? No. But would I dismiss out of hand the possibility of someone drafting an alternative, such that I would want to put an otherwise misleading redirect in place as a stumbling block to such an effort? Also no. I would personally need to see repeated vandalism around "Draft:Joe Biden" before I'd agree to such a step. --BDD (talk) 15:25, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- That's not the only reason to keep a draft → main redirect though, as explained at length in multiple places now. Thryduulf (talk) 15:19, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Linden Hill Cemetery
[edit]- Linden Hill Cemetery → List of Jewish cemeteries in New York City (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Delete as an ambiguous redirect. Could also refer to the adjacent United Methodist cemetery. See here. Johnj1995 (talk) 22:39, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Scotchka
[edit]"two parts scotch, two parts vodka", results say. took me longer to find that out and why it was related to the room than i believe it should take to warrant an {{r from meme}}, and it's not mentioned in the target either. it's also apparently the name of some amateur band which may itself be referencing the room, but it's... really not notable cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:49, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oh hai, Mark. Delete of course, not mentioned. I believe this was a joke from the oooold Cinemasins video about this, which makes this kind of silly to boot. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 05:59, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Sokovia Accords
[edit]- Sokovia Accords → Superhero fiction#Discrimination against superheroes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Discrimination against superheroes is no longer an article, and now redirects elsewhere, where the Sokovia Accords are not mentioned. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:45, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Features of the Marvel Cinematic Universe#Sokovia Accords where the most relevant information of this subject is provided. Trailblazer101 (talk) 12:43, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per Trailblazer101. Gonnym (talk) 16:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per Trailblazer101 --Lenticel (talk) 02:51, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
- Withdraw: Thanks guys for ponting this out. Please retarget it once this RfD closes. Kailash29792 (talk) 06:26, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Bīn
[edit]What the! Should redirect to Bin instead, surely. Remsense ‥ 诉 15:10, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- that's apparently a hanyu pinyin reading for... a bunch of old(?) chinese lemmas. i got nothing. delete cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:24, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- I imagine the Been rendering corresponds to another orthography, but it's simply not the best redirect I don't think. Remsense ‥ 诉 15:25, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- i think "been" would rely too much on one accent of one language in certain conditions, so i don't think that one would work either cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:31, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- I imagine the Been rendering corresponds to another orthography, but it's simply not the best redirect I don't think. Remsense ‥ 诉 15:25, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or soft redirect. This is a transcription of multiple different Chinese characters that have meanings including "visitor, guest", "in a hurry", "today", "elegant, refined", "place", "sprinting, quick" and pronunciations including "wǎng", "bin", "bin", "ban", "pîn", "kǔn", "kwan" (both a far from complete lists). I'm not seeing any obvious primary topic in English. Thryduulf (talk) 16:05, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
double bind-shaped dilemmas
[edit]- Damned if you do, damned if you don't → Dilemma (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Stuck between a rock and a hard place → Dilemma (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
not that i'm a professional in the area of dilemmas, but those specific dilemmas sound like double binds. opinions on retargeting to that? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:11, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Don't retarget/Weak delete. The usefulness of these is dubious to begin with, as I'd hope for something talking about the phrases specifically, or maybe even some kind of common linguistic phenomenon. But double bind looks more like technical psychology stuff, while the phrases and dilemma are more just about the everyday sense rather than something technical. I wouldn't even be opposed to deleting, but whatever I guess. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:47, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Doom in other media
[edit]- Doom in other media → Doctor Doom#In other media (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
like with "beast in other media" nominated ages ago, this requires specific definitions of common words and of "other media" relative to those common words. could refer to the video game franchise of the same name and the first game's however many ports for all i know cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:53, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as both ambiguous and vague. I would definitely have expected a target related to the video game franchise but other targets are equally possible. Thryduulf (talk) 14:49, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per above. Besides, Doctor Doom in other media has an article. Trailblazer101 (talk) 14:46, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- correct. on the improbable case of a keep, i'd have retargeted it there anyway cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:00, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per above. I first thought of MF Doom and Doom (franchise), not Doctor Doom. Too ambiguous to keep, too niche to disambig, so delete BugGhost🦗👻 17:48, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as vague --Lenticel (talk) 02:52, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
M-Block
[edit]previously nominated under the grounds that 'm (a glitch similar to missingno.) isn't mentioned in the target article, and kept so that a mention could be added maybe probably. ignoring the part where it wasn't, i forgot one crucial detail in the first discussion... 'm isn't actually referred to as "m-block". the primary topic for every variation of this name seems to be makeblock, which already has mblock as a redirect to it. opinions? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:27, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Medical coding
[edit]- Medical coding → Medical classification (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Clinical coding → Clinical coder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Medical and clinical coding are terms for the same thing. Of note; I boldly changed the medical coding redirect to match that of clinical coding in 2019. It was manually reverted to the previous, and now current, target in Aug 2023. I'm of the opinion that pointing the process (i.e. coding) to the profession (coder) is what a reader would expect rather than the tools used (classification), but they should at least have the same target. Little pob (talk) 21:55, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget clinical coding to medical classification per nom. Keep medical coding as is. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:35, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Regarding the "per nom", what you suggested is the opposite of the nomination. Jay 💬 16:23, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Definitely agree that they should point to the same place. I tend to think that medical classification is basically a synonym, and thus a better target. That article is a bit of a mess though, it seems to be discussing several different things. CapitalSasha ~ talk 23:59, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm... I hadn't recognised that classification has (at least) two definitions here:
- The classifying of medical terms through the system of coding - seemingly the approach of the respondents so far
- The tools used by the coders - my sole interpretation until now
- I don't think either view point is wrong. If closer sees no consensus, perhaps a temporary DAB page with tracking could be considered? (I think such a process exists but not how to set up, nor the proper terminology to even be able to look for help on doing so (assuming non-sysop editors like myself would even be able to set such a thing up).)
- I agree that classification needs work. In fact the whole topic area needs looking at. It had been a long term project of mine, and possibly might still get round to it, but I'm much more of a wikignome than a wikifairy. Little pob (talk) 15:50, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm... I hadn't recognised that classification has (at least) two definitions here:
- When I created the redirect from Clinical coding to Clinical coder I wasn't aware of the Medical coding redirect. That's because most countries have moved their terminology to the broader term and my own country never used the term. (I started as a medical statistics clerk and after a while the position was renamed as a clinical coder.) I agree that the two terms are synonymous and should redirect to the same place. Clinical/Medical coding is what a clinical coder does, while medical classification is a broader topic which includes the clinical classifications used and the tools utilised to implement the classifications in the field as well as the end uses of the data produced. My personal preference would be to see Medical classification rewritten and moved to Clinical classification. The justification for this is that the classifications covered in the article are broader than the "medical" domain and by using the term "clinical" we can encompass nursing, vetinary, severity, pharmacological, and allied health classifications. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 07:26, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Agree that these should both be directed to the same destination. I note above there are plans to do further work on articles about clinical coding. In the meantime I think medical classification is the best currently available destination. Mgp28 (talk) 15:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural relist. I've tagged both redirects since they weren't tagged by the nom.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:11, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Cock destroyers
[edit]Nazi resistance
[edit]I suggest disambiguating between Werwolf and German resistance to Nazism or simply changing the target to the latter. Personally, I have the impression that when most people refer to "Nazi resistance", they are thinking about resistance to the Nazis, not resistance by the Nazis, although perhaps it is not a very clear phrasing. A dispute is evident in the redirect's edit history. — BarrelProof (talk) 00:54, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support retarget to German resistance to Nazism; seems like a more natural redirect target than what it is currently. SmittenGalaxy | talk! 02:34, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete -- not a helpful redirect to either topic. It does read to me as subversive activities by the Nazis, but unclear what they were "resisting" against. Too ambiguous to be useful. --K.e.coffman (talk) 12:32, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Resistance during World War II, which covers the resistance movements mentioned above and many others. - Eureka Lott 15:05, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
WP:SD
[edit]- Wikipedia:SD → Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Wikipedia talk:SD → Wikipedia talk:Short description (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
WT:SD should take you to the talk page of WP:SD, so one of them should be retargetted. I have a preference for both of them targeting the respective pages of Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion – CSD is the more popular page and WT:SD only has four trackable links – but I can live with either outcome. HouseBlaster (talk · he/they) 22:25, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- I created two of those links 30 minutes ago. What a coincidence. -1ctinus📝🗨 22:28, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect Wikipedia talk:SD to Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion. Wikipedia:SD is much older and has more incoming links. CMD (talk) 06:00, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget the talk page to the deletion criteria. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:01, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget Wikipedia talk:SD to speedy deletion talk page - having inconsistent WP and WT links is confusing. BugGhost🦗👻 17:57, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate WP:SD and WT:SD. WP:CSD is by far the most common shortcut for Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion and "WP:SD" is a reasonable shortcut for Wikipedia:Short description, especially considering there are no other initialisms that would work. I have personally made this mistake many times. I would support outright retargeting both to Wikipedia:Short description but there are too many old links for that to make sense. C F A 💬 23:03, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
WP:IRS
[edit]- Wikipedia:IRS → Wikipedia:Reliable sources (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Retarget to Wikipedia:Independent sources. It seems strange and confusing that WP:IRS redirects to a different place than WP:Independent reliable sources does. One is just an abbreviation of the other, and the inclusion of the 'I' seems to emphasise independence – otherwise, it is sufficient to refer to WP:RS / WP:Reliable sources. — BarrelProof (talk) 20:13, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep for years the policy was at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 December 27#Wikipedia:Reliable sources. I don't think the specific independant sources page is more likely than the general one. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:04, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Wikipedia:Independent sources because reliable sources are also discussed there. Sources can be reliable without being independent. C F A 💬 23:07, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Pig cop
[edit]similarly to doom not actually having invented demons or shotguns, duke nukem 3d didn't invent the concept of comparing american police to raw bacon. they're also a recurring enemy in the series, so it would probably be better off retargeted to the series' article anyway cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- wait, found the primary topic, it's in list of police-related slang terms, under p, so i'll vote for retargeting there. shoutouts to the unsourced mention of duki nuki there cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:15, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Redirecting to PRST makes no sense here as the slang term is just "pig". While pig cops are a common enemy in Duke Nukem, they're just one of a multitude of enemies designed based off of the slang (another example being literal pig cops in Pizza Tower) and so the term is too ambiguous to justify a redirect nowadays. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 23:53, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- i thought more as in "that'd be a disambiguator without the parentheses", and it seems at least commonly used enough to warrant not banishing the redirect to brazil, but fair enough
- also the pizza tower enemies are called hamkuffs, can't believe you would overlook such an important plot point smh smh smh my head cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:26, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
- To someone who has never played Pizza Tower they would call them as they sees them, and they sees porcine law enforcement officers. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:21, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:54, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of police-related slang terms per cogsan. मल्ल (talk) 21:47, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- "Pig" and "cop" are slang terms for a police officer. "Pig cop" is not. "Pig cop" is a kind of enemy in Duke Nukem 3D. Google shows that as the primary topic, with secondary usage to refer to various pigs in cop outfits; I'm sure there's some usage as a compound pejorative, but nothing of note. That said, there's still potential ambiguity, so Refine to § Gameplay and hatnote to List of police-related slang terms § Pig (an anchor I've just created). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 03:57, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of this discussion at the talk pages of the current and proposed targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 19:53, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
MC flag
[edit]- MC flag → Flag of Montgomery County, Maryland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Flag of M.C. → Flag of Montgomery County, Maryland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Flag of MC → Flag of Montgomery County, Maryland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- M.C. flag → Flag of Montgomery County, Maryland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I cannot find evidence in reliable sources that this terminology is primarily used to refer to this flag. Hog Farm Talk 16:18, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as unlikely/nonprimary. As a MoCoite, "MC" stands for Montgomery College, not the county. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 12:17, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Flag of Montgomery
[edit]- Flag of Montgomery → Flag of Montgomery County, Maryland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Montgomery flag → Flag of Montgomery County, Maryland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
As likely to refer to the flag of Montgomery, Alabama as this topic; I really don't think this is the primary topic. Hog Farm Talk 16:16, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Undetharaya
[edit]- Undetharaya → Kunchitiga (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
No mention at target page, nor anywhere within Wikipedia for that matter. Unable to find WP:GNG worthy mentions for original page as well. SmittenGalaxy | talk! 06:44, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Mario party switch
[edit]- Mario party switch → Super Mario Party (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not the only Mario Party game for the Nintendo Switch. Mia Mahey (talk) 20:23, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - plausible search term. Feel free to retarget somewhere in the series article Mario Party if you feel compelled. Sergecross73 msg me 22:22, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Dab page. While I don't like it, I think a dab page at the target would be the best solution. There is no one target in Mario Party where a link can go to, as that article is not sorted by console. The nom is right though, that having this link to one specific game is not ideal. Gonnym (talk) 11:24, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Mario Party#Super Mario Party (2018), where Super Mario Party and Jamboree are both discussed in succession. Most people using this search term are looking for the first Mario Party to be released on the Switch, and if not, Jamboree (and Superstars) information is just below. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:19, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:34, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Mario Party (Nintendo 3DS)
[edit]- Mario Party (Nintendo 3DS) → Mario Party: Island Tour (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Mario Party: Island Tour is not the only Mario Party game for the 3DS. Mia Mahey (talk) 20:22, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - plausible search term. Feel free to retarget somewhere in the series article Mario Party if you feel compelled. Sergecross73 msg me 02:53, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Dab page. While I don't like it, I think a dab page at the target would be the best solution. There is no one target in Mario Party where a link can go to, as that article is not sorted by console. The nom is right though, that having this link to one specific game is not ideal. Gonnym (talk) 11:25, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Mario Party#Mario Party: Island Tour (2013), where Island Tour and Star Rush are both discussed in succession. Most people using this search term are looking for the first Mario Party to be released on the 3DS, and if not, Star Rush information (and top 100) is just below. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:17, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:33, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Mario Party 3DS
[edit]- Mario Party 3DS → Mario Party: Island Tour (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Mario Party: Island Tour is not the only Mario Party game for the 3DS. Mia Mahey (talk) 20:21, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - plausible search term. Feel free to retarget somewhere in the series article Mario Party if you feel compelled. Sergecross73 msg me 20:29, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- This redirect does not help readers looking for any other Mario Party game released on the Nintendo 3DS. Three Mario Party games were released on the Nintendo 64, and Mario Party 64 is a disambiguation page. Mia Mahey (talk) 20:35, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's helpful if the reader is looking for Mario Party games on the 3DS. Like I said, retarget if you think it helps, but don't delete. Sergecross73 msg me 22:20, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just want to point out that I think it should fit the logic of the Mario Party 64 page, i.e. a page letting one choose between any of the 3DS Mario Party games. ButterCashier (talk) 22:08, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm fine with that too. Sergecross73 msg me 14:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just want to point out that I think it should fit the logic of the Mario Party 64 page, i.e. a page letting one choose between any of the 3DS Mario Party games. ButterCashier (talk) 22:08, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's helpful if the reader is looking for Mario Party games on the 3DS. Like I said, retarget if you think it helps, but don't delete. Sergecross73 msg me 22:20, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- This redirect does not help readers looking for any other Mario Party game released on the Nintendo 3DS. Three Mario Party games were released on the Nintendo 64, and Mario Party 64 is a disambiguation page. Mia Mahey (talk) 20:35, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Dab page. While I don't like it, I think a dab page at the target would be the best solution. There is no one target in Mario Party where a link can go to, as that article is not sorted by console. The nom is right though, that having this link to one specific game is not ideal. Gonnym (talk) 11:25, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Mario Party#Mario Party: Island Tour (2013), where Island Tour and Star Rush are both discussed in succession. Most people using this search term are looking for the first Mario Party to be released on the 3DS, and if not, Star Rush information (and Top 100 information) is just below. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:17, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:33, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Mario Party Wii
[edit]- Mario Party Wii → Mario Party 8 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Mario Party 8 is not actually known as "Mario Party Wii." Mario Party 9 was also released for the Wii. Mia Mahey (talk) 20:16, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Dab page. While I don't like it, I think a dab page at the target would be the best solution. There is no one target in Mario Party where a link can go to, as that article is not sorted by console. The nom is right though, that having this link to one specific game is not ideal. Gonnym (talk) 11:26, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Mario Party#Mario Party 8 (2007), where 8 and 9 are both discussed in succession. Most people using this search term are looking for the first Mario Party to be released on the Wii, and if not, Mario Party 9 information is just below. Utopes (talk / cont) 00:14, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:33, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per above. Its a plausible search term and suggestions above show ways it can be implemented without being confusing. Sergecross73 msg me 16:56, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Silly mountain
[edit]Hanshan Deqing can be "Silly Mountain" - "Crazy Mountain" is in the article, but "Silly Mountain" can be used to distinguish from Hanshan (poet) ("Cold Mountain"). The other items in the disambiguation page are different Chinese characters and I don't think any can be "Silly". There is also Silly Mountain (Arizona) - not sure if there should be a separate disambiguation page or (if there are only two uses) a redirect to one or the other. Peter James (talk) 11:32, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yep, disambiguate these two meanings because neither seems to be primary for such a niche term. --Joy (talk) 10:17, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Silly Mountain (Arizona), possibly with a hatnote to it being an alternative name for Hanshan Deqing. The fact that "Silly Mountain" didn't even merit inclusion as a possible name at the latter article (which does include "foolish mountain" as well as the above mentioned "Crazy Mountain") seems to indicate to me that the Arizona mountain is what someone would be looking for searching under this, though it's a plausible translation and probably makes sense to hatnote. Dylnuge (Talk • Edits) 23:04, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Dylnuge that could just be happenstance, though. We should probably avoid focusing on editor behavior (what is currently written in Wikipedia), rather on reader behavior (what is actually out there in the real world that should be documented by an encyclopedia; WP:RF). So we should probably answer these kinds of questions:
- Is it likely that the bulk of our readers would associate this term with a single topic as the bulk of sources would do the same?
- Is it an ambiguous name that our readers might encounter in reference to several topics in sources?
- --Joy (talk) 08:32, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I couldn't find any reliable sources that call Hanshan Dequing "Silly Mountain". Googling for it shows a few dozen self-published sites and college papers, but it's not clear to me it's a common translation in literature at all. Searching for "Silly Mountain" on its own pretty exclusively brings up stuff about the Arizona mountain. Did you find sources indicating otherwise? Dylnuge (Talk • Edits) 14:36, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Dylnuge that could just be happenstance, though. We should probably avoid focusing on editor behavior (what is currently written in Wikipedia), rather on reader behavior (what is actually out there in the real world that should be documented by an encyclopedia; WP:RF). So we should probably answer these kinds of questions:
- Retarget and add a hatnote. What matters is whether sources exist and how prevalent they are, not whether they are reliable or not. Less than a minute on google found at least 7 sources that clearly identify this as a name for Hanshan Deqing, so it's clearly something that will be searched for. However, it is also clear that the mountain in Arizona is the primary topic so we should retarget there and add a hatnote. Thryduulf (talk) 18:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:32, 18 August 2024 (UTC)- Comment: Silly Mountain does not exist. Steel1943 (talk) 12:37, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why that's relevant, but obviously it can be created as a redirect to the same target when this is closed. Thryduulf (talk) 19:28, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Silly Mountain (Arizona), a title that is "Silly Mountain ([disambiguator])", and WP:PRECISE. (Didn't know that needed explanation to why it's incredibly relevant; it's de facto an issue since the base title does not exist.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:58, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why that's relevant, but obviously it can be created as a redirect to the same target when this is closed. Thryduulf (talk) 19:28, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Service with a Smile (film)
[edit]- Service with a Smile (film) → Service with a Smile (1937 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Service with a Smile (1937 film) was moved to this title in September 2013, but moved away in December 2013 when Service with a Smile (1934 film) was created (making it ambiguous). WP:PFILM states that this partially-disambiguated title cannot have a primary topic, so it shouldn't redirect to Service with a Smile (1937 film). However, Service with a Smile (disambiguation) does not exist – as Special:PrefixIndex/Service with a Smile shows, this is a WP:TWOOTHER situation, which is adequately handled by the hatnotes on Service with a Smile. Without a good target, I think this redirect should just be deleted, and let the search function handle it. On the other hand, if anyone thinks a disambiguation page would actually be beneficial here, I wouldn't complain about its creation; in that case, the redirect should just be speedily retargeted. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:27, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: hatnotes can take care of it, unless someone thinks Service with a Smile is not the primary topic (it looks to be based on page views). C F A 💬 23:17, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Washington, Maryland
[edit]- Washington, Maryland → Fort Washington, Maryland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This error can plausibly refer to Fort Washington or Washington County, so delete and let the search results take care of it. Queen of Hearts talk 02:24, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Ambiguous. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:39, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Disambiguate per the fact there are multiple topics.Steel1943 (talk) 22:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)- Do not keep, do not delete per Tavix's comments. I have no opinion about disambiguation vs. retargeting anymore, but it's rather apparent that the current target is probably not helpful and that deletion benefits no one. Steel1943 (talk) 18:48, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. There's a general presumption that redirects are useful to at least the creator, and disambiguating is less disruptive than deleting. Jruderman (talk) 06:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- In the dab entry pointing to Fort Washington, Maryland, please include the name of the county it is within. Jruderman (talk) 06:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambig per Steel and Jruderman. Thryduulf (talk) 12:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Deleteper WP:PTM unless there's evidence of the Fort or the County being referred to as simply "Washington". -- Tavix (talk) 13:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)- 1 minute on Google finds plenty of evidence of the county being referred as "Washington, Maryland" (e.g. [15], [16], [17]), hits for Fort Washington are harder to find [18] is ambiguous, but other results are getting swamped by collactions and hits for Mary L. Washington (a Maryland politician). Thryduulf (talk) 13:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what's more impressive, the fact that your search only took one minute(!), or the fact that you thought those fringe database sources would be convincing. The Tweet isn't ambiguous, it's saying that the Governor of Maryland was speaking to reporters in Washington, DC. -- Tavix (talk) 14:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- The nature of the sources is irrelevant - they demonstrate clearly that "Washington County, Maryland" is sometimes referred to as "Washington, Maryland". Thryduulf (talk) 14:05, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- ...and I disagree with that assessment. It's not a referral, it's a database regurgitation. -- Tavix (talk) 14:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- The nature of the sources is irrelevant - they demonstrate clearly that "Washington County, Maryland" is sometimes referred to as "Washington, Maryland". Thryduulf (talk) 14:05, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what's more impressive, the fact that your search only took one minute(!), or the fact that you thought those fringe database sources would be convincing. The Tweet isn't ambiguous, it's saying that the Governor of Maryland was speaking to reporters in Washington, DC. -- Tavix (talk) 14:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- 1 minute on Google finds plenty of evidence of the county being referred as "Washington, Maryland" (e.g. [15], [16], [17]), hits for Fort Washington are harder to find [18] is ambiguous, but other results are getting swamped by collactions and hits for Mary L. Washington (a Maryland politician). Thryduulf (talk) 13:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Washington metropolitan area, which extends into Maryland. I found a use that fits the bill. -- Tavix (talk) 14:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- What? That's just confusing and potentially harmful to readers. Washington, D.C. is not a part of Maryland, and no one would refer to it as such. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- You do seem confused. I did not suggest a target to Washington, D.C. but to Washington metropolitan area. Per the article (my emphasis added):
The Washington metropolitan area...includes all of Washington, D.C. and parts of Maryland...
This redirect would be for the "Maryland part of Washington". -- Tavix (talk) 13:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)- No one calls it "the Maryland part of Washington," though. They are two separate entities. It's the equivalent of calling Newark "the New Jersey part of New York." Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not talking about the separate entities, I'm talking about the single metropolitan region of Washington which is partially located in Maryland. One prominent example is the Washington Commanders, who play in Maryland. Similarly, the New York Giants and New York Jets play in the New Jersey part of New York. -- Tavix (talk) 21:41, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- No one calls it "the Maryland part of Washington," though. They are two separate entities. It's the equivalent of calling Newark "the New Jersey part of New York." Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:31, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- You do seem confused. I did not suggest a target to Washington, D.C. but to Washington metropolitan area. Per the article (my emphasis added):
- What? That's just confusing and potentially harmful to readers. Washington, D.C. is not a part of Maryland, and no one would refer to it as such. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:45, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I oppose retargetting to Washington metropolitan area per Presidentman. It isn't a completely implausible entry on a dab page but it would be very surprising to be redirected there. Thryduulf (talk) 08:15, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- No one refers to Fort Washington (either the CDP or the historic fort) as just "Washington". The county is rarely, but is, referred to by just "Washington" (like many counties in America). Normally only in spoke language but there are cases like [19]:
State Sen. Paul Corderman, R-Washington, sent a letter to the Hagerstown mayor and council
. I guess disambiguate? Between something like: Washington County, Maryland; Washington College (which is in Maryland); maybe History of Washington, D.C. due to the history of Maryland giving up land for Washington, DC; and maybe Washington metropolitan area (but oppose retarget here) (I'd also be fine with Fort Washington, Maryland being on the dab but I think under WP:PARTIAL it technically shouldn't be?). A retarget to Washington County, Maryland would be preferable to no change and deletion. Skynxnex (talk) 03:21, 29 July 2024 (UTC) - Keep Today I see both "Washington, MD" and "Marlboro, MD" listed by the Google Voice app, so "no one refers..." simply isn't correct. There's a redirect for Washington, Maryland - that was really useful. There is no redirect for Marlboro, Maryland - that was a complete PITA. Keep the redirect, add another to Marlboro, Maryland. Retargeting to loosely defined urban space is utterly useless. The redirect takes people who have no idea where these boroughs are to the appropriate WP article. Yappy2bhere (talk) 18:26, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Yappy2bhere: Can you clarify what you think "Washington, MD" is referring to? You do say "Keep", which would imply it refers to Fort Washington, Maryland. But you also make a reference that it's a borough, but Fort Washington, Maryland is not one. Loosely defined urban space is not an article, so retargeting there is not an option (although I don't understand why it would be an option?). You also don't define what you think Marlboro, Maryland refers to. There are quite a few options, among them: Upper Marlboro, Maryland; Lower Marlboro, Maryland; Marlboro Village, Maryland; Marlboro Meadows, Maryland and what looks to be the encompassing Greater Upper Marlboro, Maryland. -- Tavix (talk) 13:29, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes (talk / cont) 00:24, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate: There is not a clear answer as to which page this should point to... which is what disambiguation is for. C F A 💬 23:14, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Khandal
[edit]Not mentioned at target. Should probably be redirected to R.K. Khandal, but maybe someone has a better idea? Paradoctor (talk) 20:55, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to R.K. Khandal per nom --Lenticel (talk) 11:31, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Khandal Vansh (Khandal Lineage)
[edit]- Khandal Vansh (Khandal Lineage) → Lunar dynasty (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
No mention at target, or anywhere. Paradoctor (talk) 20:53, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
HIALS
[edit]No mention anywhere on the English Wikipedia. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:38, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Google tells me this is "High Intensity Approach Lighting System" and I'm surprised it isn't mentioned on the article, so my gut feeling is too add it and keep the redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 20:53, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note that source 6 in the article mentions ALSF-1 and -2 as high-intensity systems. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:28, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Economic totalitarianism
[edit]- Economic totalitarianism → Compulsory cartel#Types of compulsory cartels (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
It was originally an essay, which got turned into a redirect. The redirect target was changed several times until someone finally found an article that actually mentioned "economic totalitarianism", but that mention has since been removed because it was a POV-pushing essay. Hence, there is no plausible target. Un assiolo (talk) 16:28, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Walter Nash. Paradoctor (talk) 23:44, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- It was used as a bit of political rhetoric in a single memorandum. It is absolutely inappropriate to link there just because of that. There are a few other mentions of "economic totalitarianism" in other articles. They are all similar one-off rhetorical accusations. There is no good target. --Un assiolo (talk) 16:47, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Infinifat
[edit]Obscure synonym not at target or on Wikipedia. Delete or wiktionary. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 15:42, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I disagree that it is obscure, since a search on search engines and Google Scholar shows it is a popular classification for fat people, in the same vein as "plus-sized" or "superfat". However, I can't think of a good place to place this redirect; it has associations with the fat-positive movement, but "fat classifications" are not mentioned there. Until a mention is made somewhere, either here or in wikt, it should be deleted to avoid confusion. Ca talk to me! 03:33, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Omnifutuent
[edit]- Omnifutuent → Bisexuality (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Obscure synonym not at target. Only in a Ref text at Menage a trois. Delete or wiktionary. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 15:42, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Menage a trois. I added a mention there. An apparent neologism for "bisexual" coined by Aldous Huxley. It has very limited use outside discussions of Huxley and his relationships. People searching for the term will mostly be referring to Huxley. Ca talk to me! 03:43, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Menage a trois per Ca --Lenticel (talk) 04:47, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Mangonese
[edit]Italian-language demonym for people from a municipality with 1,800 inhabitants. We don't and shouldn't have a redirect for every foreign-language demonym for every obscure tiny settlement.
It was originally a redirect to Manganese; a speedy deletion under R3 was declined and instead the target was changed to this. Un assiolo (talk) 15:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Manganese for which it is a plausible and occasionally used misspelling. Thryduulf (talk) 16:32, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Manganese - I can see "Mangonese" as a plausible misspelling if going by ear. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:27, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Manganese as plausible mishearing --Lenticel (talk) 11:33, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Sturmian morphism
[edit]- Sturmian morphism → Free monoid#Morphisms (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned at target, seems to be related to Sturmian_word#Sturmian_endomorphisms. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:42, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've never heard of them before, but that seems obviously correct. Why discuss this at all? Rp (talk) 16:48, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Because I've never heard of that term before either. :-) 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:30, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
SVRF
[edit]- SVRF → Special visual flight rules (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Is this actually used, or a misspelling of SVFR? There is a mention at Design rule checking with a different meaning, and a web search only gives unrelated results as well. 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:56, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Looking through Google Scholar, the mention at Design rule checking is clearly the primary topic, even if this isn't a simple typo. Ca talk to me! 03:51, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Dirtbag (and other Transformers redirects)
[edit]- Dirtbag (Transformers) → Transformers: Generation 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Electro (Transformers) → Transformers: Generation 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Firecracker (Transformers) → Transformers: Generation 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- High Beam (Transformers) → Transformers: Generation 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Hooligan (Transformers) → Transformers: Generation 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Manta Ray (Transformers) → Transformers: Generation 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Powerdive → Transformers: Generation 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Smokejumper (Transformers) → Transformers: Generation 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
(My first time to nominate a group, so I'm probably doing it wrong. Feel free to edit/fix the nom as appropriate, or tell me what I need to do.) I propose we delete these 8 redirects, all of which redirect to Transformers: Generation 2. These pages appear to refer to Transformers characters/toys, although they are not mentioned at the target page. So not useful for navigation, says I, and ought to be deleted. None of these names are mentioned at Transformers, either, or I would have suggested retargeting. — JohnFromPinckney (talk / edits) 19:22, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history of High Beam (Transformers)?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:12, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
My dick is hard
[edit]Le Clique: Vida Rockstar (X)
[edit]- Le Clique: Vida Rockstar (X) → Jhayco (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Timelezz → Jhayco (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Delete per WP:REDLINK. Le Clique has no incoming links and Timelezz only has one. voorts (talk/contributions) 16:20, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Both are very reasonable search terms as albums released by the artist. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:07, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:03, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as typical {{r from album}} redirects. - Eureka Lott 14:14, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as r from album redirects --Lenticel (talk) 02:12, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Joe Biden's uncle who got eaten by cannibals
[edit]- Joe Biden's uncle who got eaten by cannibals → Family of Joe Biden (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
No mention of his uncle being eaten by cannibals at the target. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- I added a sentence about the coverage of the cannibal business to the family article. pbp 17:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Delete. Amazingly to me this isn't just vandalism - Joe Biden's Uncle (Probably) Wasn't Eaten by Cannibals - but it isn't mentioned, and as far as I can tell, has never been mentioned at the target article or anywhere else on Wikipedia. It is mentioned at q:Joe Biden#April 2024 but I don't think someone using this search term is looking for the quote but rather information about Biden's uncle (Ambrose J. Finnegan Jr.) and they won't find that at Wikiquote, or indeed more than a sentence at Family of Joe Biden#Maternal. Thryduulf (talk) 23:44, 23 July 2024 (UTC)- See new comment below. Thryduulf (talk) 16:36, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Thryduulf. Thought for sure this was an obvious hoax/attack page, but no, it was a real thing. There is no mention of this on Wikipedia, though. C F A 💬 23:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- I added a sentence about the coverage of the cannibal business to the family article. pbp 03:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete both the redirect and the mention. WP:ONEWAY. We don't need to cover every single conspiracy theory. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 05:02, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- I added a sentence about the coverage of the cannibal business to the family article. pbp 03:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep The idea of Joe Biden's uncle being eaten by cannibals (or not) has received significant enough media coverage to justify a redirect. pbp 00:03, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- No amount of coverage justifies misleading people into thinking we have relevant content when we don't. The amount of coverage might justify adding content somewhere relevant, at which point we can consider the redirect, but unless and until that happens the redirect is harmful. Thryduulf (talk) 01:44, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- I added a sentence about the coverage of the cannibal business to the family article. pbp 03:23, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- No amount of coverage justifies misleading people into thinking we have relevant content when we don't. The amount of coverage might justify adding content somewhere relevant, at which point we can consider the redirect, but unless and until that happens the redirect is harmful. Thryduulf (talk) 01:44, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. WP:Patent nonsense. WWGB (talk) 01:55, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- @WWGB although it really does look like nonsense at first glance, it actually isn't. See the links in my and pbp's comments above. Thryduulf (talk) 02:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete for now. I don't think Joe Biden has any uncles. 88.235.215.238 (talk) 11:50, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Ambrose Biden was a real person... pbp 12:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - it sounds ridiculous, it probably is ridiculous, but it was a thing that Biden actually asserted multiple times. If someone has seen a clip of him saying it and wanted to find out more about it, searching "Joe Biden's uncle who got eaten by cannibals" is a pretty reasonable way of trying to find out more information about it. Now that it's included in the target article the redirect seems like a good one to me BugGhost🦗👻 12:39, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as it has significant media coverage. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 14:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per above discussion. Omnis Scientia (talk) 14:48, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but refine to Family of Joe Biden#Maternal. One of the silliest titles for a redirect that is not the result of vandalism (which makes it a good candidate for my list), but the significant amount of media coverage probably justifies Purplebackpack89's short addition. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 14:07, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 21:40, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Clearing the "not just blatant vandalism" bar shouldn't be an argument on its own in favor of keeping a redirect. This is just not a plausible thing someone is searching for an article under. I see this as similar to the JD Vance "couch sex" redirects: that there is some coverage, and that the coverage may even rise to meriting a single-sentence due mention on a page, does not mean we need a bunch of implausible redirects into that single sentence. Dylnuge (Talk • Edits) 16:02, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep (to #Maternal) now that there is content on it. Rusalkii (talk) 19:48, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:02, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Dylnuge. --Un assiolo (talk) 16:03, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and refine. We now have content about this that has stuck in the article. When we have both a plausible search term and relevant content we need a much better reason to delete a redirect than some people not liking it or disagreeing with the evidence people are searching for it. Thryduulf (talk) 16:36, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
2025 UK general election
[edit]- 2025 UK general election → 2024 United Kingdom general election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- 2025 United Kingdom general election → 2024 United Kingdom general election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Implausible Redirect Blethering Scot 22:32, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Made slightly more sense when the date wasn't announced. Doesn't make sense anymore. Eastwood Park and strabane (talk) 22:59, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to List of United Kingdom general elections. Deletion would be fine, too. The only truly bad option is the current situation. On the off chance that there was a general UK election in 2025 (which is possible, if unlikely, as I understand it), this would be even worse! —mako๛ 12:03, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- The most recent general election had to be held in or before January 2025, and there was much media speculation that it would be held at the latest possible date. This people searching for this title is entirely plausible. When to call a general election is (for practical purposes) entirely the prerogative of the prime minister, as long as one is held within 5 years of the most recent one, i.e. 2029 (although there is a minimum notice period, I think its about 25 days, for logistical reasons). This means that we cannot say there will not be a general election in 2025 until in theory 1 December 2025 as UK elections are always held on a Thursday and 25 December is the last Thursday in 2025 - although as there would have to be some truly extraordinary reason to hold an election on Christmas Day in reality the deadlines would be at least 1 week earlier. This does leave a problem of where best to target this redirect, and I think that unless and until a general election is called for 2025 (which currently looks unlikely, but a week is a long time in politics) that retarget to List of general elections in the United Kingdom#21st century is the best we can do. Someone will learn there that the isn't currently one scheduled for that year and find a link to the 2024 election if that is what they looking for. Ideally there would also be a link to Next United Kingdom general election, but there isn't currently. Thryduulf (talk) 15:58, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to List of general elections in the United Kingdom#21st century per thryduulf. (I've bundled 2025 United Kingdom general election into this RFD - this was previously discussed at RFD with a no consensus - but this was discussed before the election took place). BugGhost🦗👻 12:47, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. The current target discusses that the date was potentially to be in 2025. Oppose retarget to List of United Kingdom general elections#21st century, that list does not contain any information about a (potential) 2025 general election. Next United Kingdom general election does not even mention the year 2025. -- Tavix (talk) 14:16, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:01, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:2319
[edit]Wiimake
[edit]Neologism not mentioned in the target. The term is not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia. Mia Mahey (talk) 05:40, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- I can see it (and the alternate "Wii-make") being used in some news coverage, most prominently "The Case for Wiimakes", but not nearly enough that it would demand usage in the target article or anything. Not sure it does any harm, but the use case seems limited as well. I guess I lean toward deletion, but not strongly. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:18, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- i would ALMOST suggest retargeting to the vaguely klonoa-shaped travesty we were cursed with in 2008 as a half-joke, as that seems to be the primary topic for the entire term (not for a good reason, mind you), but that'd be cheap. as is, no idea if it would be better to retarget it to some list of wii games, add a mention there, or delete, but i'll stick with adding a mention for now cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:35, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: term is mentioned in reliable sources (Nintendo Life, Wired, eurogamer.net). No reason to delete. Obviously not notable on its own but a redirect is warranted. I would support a mention at Video game remake or elsewhere, but that is not needed for this to be kept. C F A 💬 20:13, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Nintendo Wii and mention the phenomenon somewhere. It's an actual slang term formerly used for porting games to Wii while adding motion controls. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:36, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:25, 30 July 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:16, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete unless a mention is added. If we don't have it, we don't have it. Don't leave readers scratching their heads trying to figure out why they arrived to any article which does not mention the term. Steel1943 (talk) 18:54, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
JonasDeichmann
[edit]- JonasDeichmann → Jonas Deichmann (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- JONAS DEICHMANN → Jonas Deichmann (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Deichmann, Jonas → Jonas Deichmann (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- John Deichmann → Jonas Deichmann (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Jon Deichman → Jonas Deichmann (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Jonas Deichman → Jonas Deichmann (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Jon Deichmann → Jonas Deichmann (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Jonasdeichmann → Jonas Deichmann (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Deletion, 8 unnecessary and recently created redirects. YannickFran (talk) 20:12, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Deichmann, Jonas, Jonas Deichman, and JonasDeichmann, delete the rest. Keep the first three as {{R from sorting name}} and the others {{R from mispelling}} respectively. The rest are either not related (Jon Deichman, Jon Deichmann, and John Deichmann), implausible typos (Jonasdeichmann), or unneeded capitalization (JONAS DEICHMANN). mwwv converse∫edits 21:40, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure how the spacing in "JonasDeichmann" is not WP:UNNATURAL. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:50, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all except Jon Deichmann, Jon Deichman and John Deichmann. C F A 💬 22:19, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. Since I made the redirects, I will provide my reasoning without casting a vote.
- Many high quality Wikipedia pages about people have redirects from many variations of subject's name. I used Bill Gates' redirects as an example. JONAS DEICHMANN is based on BILL GATES. JonasDeichmann on BillGates and so on.
- Bill Gates is not the only one person with various redirects. It is the same in other lengthy, well established and high-quality Wikipedia pages about people. Redirects I created are less misspelled than those of e.g. Kobe Bryant. Kobe Bryant redirects include: Kobe bryant, Kobe Brian, Kobey Bryant, Kobee Bryant, Koby Bryant, Kobie Bryant, Kobi Bryant, Cobie Bryant, Kode bryant and others.
- Besides, each of the redirects has been checked, reviewed and approved, see screenshot
- My intention with redirects to Jonas Deichmann was to improve that page. I understood that more redirects meant "higher completion", based on what is done in other lengthier pages. Småland, Sweden (talk) 04:09, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- So... you're saying you pulled a WP:PANDORA? mwwv converse∫edits 12:42, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:RFZ
[edit]- Wikipedia:RFZ → Wikipedia:Wikibreak#Generic templates (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This is not an intuitive redirect, and contrary to the "speedy keep" at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 June 4#Wikipedia:RFZ, while "Request(s) for Zzz" might be a reading, that doesn't mean it's generally clear or understood. The target is not related to any "requests", and it is possible that the redirect was created as a result of an "Experiment". 1234qwer1234qwer4 19:17, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirects are cheap and I’m unsure what benefit there is from deletion. It seems fine as a quick redirect to its current target. Fish+Karate 20:50, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Almost every shortcut starting with "WP:RF" means "Requests for ...". The biggest exception is "RFD" itself, and even that has a hatnote for "Requests for deletion" (which is where it points at most English sister projects). —Cryptic 21:07, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Do you have any opinion on the redirect? The target of it it is not plausibly a "request for" anything. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:53, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- These templates are requests that people don't bother you on your talk page with the expectation of a prompt response. —Cryptic 00:03, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Do you have any opinion on the redirect? The target of it it is not plausibly a "request for" anything. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:53, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as completely harmless. If something else would benefit from the RFZ shortcut in the future then we can discuss retargetting at that time. Until then deletion would bring absolutely no benefits. Thryduulf (talk) 11:21, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Reasonable and a bit humorous. Harmless. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 19:10, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:PHIL
[edit]- Wikipedia:PHIL → Wikipedia:WikiProject Philately (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Guessing what WP:PHIL points to without knowing, my bet would be the guess would be WP:PHILOSOPHY. Could of course be WP:PHILADELPHIA or WP:PHILIPPINES, but How far down the list would you go before even thinking WP:PHILATELY? Hyperbolick (talk) 18:42, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see any meaning as primary (and in particular no specific order in the "list" that I would have to "go down"), and this has collected less than 100 backlinks over the course of over 15 years, so disambiguation seems to be a viable option. Possibly also include Wikipedia:WikiProject Literature or Wikipedia:WikiProject Linguistics (though there currently also is no Wikipedia:WikiProject Philology redirect or hatnote at the target of WP:PHILO relating to that). 1234qwer1234qwer4 19:26, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- @1234qwer1234qwer4: Tbh not nuts for a disambig here. Would contend the PHIL-101 title here is for the Philosophy project. With a bunch of hatnotes, maybe a secondary disbambig. Hyperbolick (talk) 04:56, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Many shortcuts are ambiguous so that's not a reason to change in and of itself. We should always be very conservative when retargetting shortcuts as I explained at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#Wikipedia:SCIENTOLOGY. In this case the shortcut does appear to be used a spot check of uses seems to indicate that people using it are expecting it to lead to the current target. Disambiguation brings no benefits to shortcuts as nobody gets where they want to do, making it useless. So I'm seeing potential harm and basically no benefit from changing. Thryduulf (talk) 11:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose disambiguation. Perhaps even most projectspace shortcuts are ambiguous by their nature. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 19:02, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and Oppose dab: A dab will not be of any benefit and this works just fine. WP:PHILOSOPHY has its own shortcut WP:PHILO for the last 16 years without complaint and it's also a hatnote on the Philately Project page. However Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy does not give a reciprocal hatnote. ww2censor (talk) 11:08, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, there is no reciprocal hatnote as no shortcut redirecting there is ambiguous with this. That said, I don't have a strong opinion on this one (in case anybody would want to relist this otherwise). 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:34, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Template:Usen
[edit]Template:OURL
[edit]- Template:OURL → Template:Official URL (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
unused and not necessary — GhostInTheMachine talk to me 18:00, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment neither "unused" nor "unnecessary" are reasons for deleting a redirect. You need to explain how the existence of this redirect is harmful. Thryduulf (talk) 11:27, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as confusing. OURL could refer to many things like "outgoing URL", "online URL", etc. I don't see any need for a shortcut to a template only used in infoboxes, which are already complex enough already without cryptic shortcuts. Ca talk to me! 15:41, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Reasonable template shortcut. Shortcuts are often unused, and shortcuts are more often than not ambiguous. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 19:08, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This was created a few months ago. Shortcuts are one thing like ubl for unbulleted list but I haven't seen shortcut for official url because it's usually from a copy and paste of the syntax at its relatable infobox. – The Grid (talk) 02:12, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Beta-casein
[edit]I think readers are more likely to be looking for the Casein article than the article on the gene that encodes this protein in humans. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:15, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Oppose'beta-casein' has no meaning for anything related to casein, in the sense we have for most of that article (uses and products from casein). We might almost be better using A2 milk? Andy Dingley (talk) 19:36, 16 August 2024 (UTC)- Retarget to casein, but hopefully someone can expand so that there's something more there about the protein itself? Andy Dingley (talk) 19:39, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Nakso
[edit]Not mentioned at target. The mention at Tarak-juk#History appears to refer to the intended meaning. Apart from that, there is a passing mention at Rai people#Religion, as well as "Naksŏ", a romanisation of Kim Ja-jeom's art name listed in the infobox. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:13, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Naksu
[edit]Not mentioned at target. Has a meaning that is used in List of Alchemy of Souls characters. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:10, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Casorphin
[edit]Not mentioned anywhere on the English Wikipedia. Not sure if this is related to Casomorphin in any way. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:03, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Ivorine
[edit]- Ivorine → Casein#Plastics and fiber (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
No mention at target; however, Ivory (soap) uses this as a brand of soap, Netsuke#Unusual materials as a material made from ivory, and Celluloid#Uses as a form of celluloid (French ivory). Note that the word can also be used as the adjective relating to ivory, see wikt:ivorine. 1234qwer1234qwer4 16:58, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambig per nom. Multiple uses with no clear primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 17:51, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Niga
[edit]Weather of 1980
[edit]Deer cannon
[edit]- Deer cannon → Bird scarer (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
results are torn between the propane cannons used to give birds a dang ol spook, and actual deer cannon bones. i haven't found any info on where the name for the cannons came from, but it seems used, albeit not enough to warrant a redirect. any ideas? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:53, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Banishing crows from a field
[edit]- Banishing crows from a field → Scarecrow (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
originally an essay written in 1rd person and signed by someone who didn't even write it (no, that's not important here, i just felt like pointing it out), currently not that. as detailed in the target, scarecrows are meant to keep birds away from succulents, as opposed to actively driving them out like other bird scarers. while i think retargeting it there would be the best option, there might be something i'm missing cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:46, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Strawman (literal)
[edit]- Strawman (literal) → Scarecrow (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Straw man (literal) → Scarecrow (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
weird case, this one. results are torn between every possible thing that can be and is referred to as a literal straw man (from scarecrows to straw men to straw man), and also donald trump. straw man (literal) was seemingly accidentally moved by a bot to avoid a double redirect, though its talk page still redirects to the dummy. opinions? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:26, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Straw man (disambiguation) is my first thought, and that does include a link to scarecrow (disambiguation). Treat it as a {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. Thryduulf (talk) 15:27, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- seems good, i support retargeting it to straw man (disambiguation) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:14, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Delete because the disambiguator makes no sense in terms on what available subjects are currently on Wikipedia. Steel1943 (talk) 14:18, 19 August 2024 (UTC)- Eh? It's an entirely plausible disambiguator for multiple topics things that are literally made of straw, including Straw man (dummy) and Scarecrow, that would be used by someone who doesn't want the rhetorical use but doesn't know there is more than one literal usage. Thryduulf (talk) 14:53, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds like an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument to me. That, and the whole concept of "rhetorical" vs. "literal" is incredibly subjective. Steel1943 (talk) 18:51, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry to sound repetitive but this comment again makes me go "eh?" - I don't understand how OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is at all relevant here? We have a plausible search term that people are apparently using but which could refer to multiple different articles. When that happens we disambiguate because multiple articles exist. What is rhetorical and literal is not subjective in this case - either something is a man made that is literally made of straw or it isn't. Someone using this search term knows they don't want the article about the type of argument or other figurative uses but they don't know that we have articles about multiple things that meet that description - and they should not be required to know that before being able to find the article they want. Thryduulf (talk) 19:28, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds like an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument to me. That, and the whole concept of "rhetorical" vs. "literal" is incredibly subjective. Steel1943 (talk) 18:51, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Straw man (dummy) per Tavix's findings. That works. Steel1943 (talk) 00:43, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Eh? It's an entirely plausible disambiguator for multiple topics things that are literally made of straw, including Straw man (dummy) and Scarecrow, that would be used by someone who doesn't want the rhetorical use but doesn't know there is more than one literal usage. Thryduulf (talk) 14:53, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Straw man (dummy), noting that this was the disambiguator used for that article from 2006–2008. -- Tavix (talk) 21:21, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- That's better than deletion, but still inferior to the disambiguation page as there are multiple types of literal straw man and I see no evidence for a primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 10:32, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nah, per the article a scarecrow is a type of strawman. It's better to target the broader article. -- Tavix (talk) 21:36, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- That's better than deletion, but still inferior to the disambiguation page as there are multiple types of literal straw man and I see no evidence for a primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 10:32, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Fire and Ash
[edit]- Fire and Ash → Avatar: Fire and Ash (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
A user created and redirected to the upcoming Avatar franchise film, whose title was revealed in the past week [20]. This, for me, shouldn't be redirected this way because of WP:RECENTISM. Would suggest to convert it back to the DAB page without disambiguator, and wait for a couple years from film's release before having this as WP:PRIMARYTOPIC again. ScarletViolet tc 11:35, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, because the film is the only article we have with this name. The other items on Fire and Ash (disambiguation) are WP:DABMENTION entries. Avatar: Fire and Ash should get a hatnote, though. - Eureka Lott 15:26, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- The hatnote was improperly removed by the nominator. I have reverted the removal. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:12, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Strong keep as creator The disambiguation page, which was created after the redirect, contains three (previously, two) MOS:DABMENTION entries. In other words, the three other uses of "Fire and Ash" are topics deemed not notable for standalone articles. Currently, Avatar: Fire and Ash is the only article whose title includes the phrase "Fire and Ash", so there is no other subject of comparable notability to be disambiguated with, and the film can be safely deemed the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. In any case, it would be unreliastic to claim that an obscure YA novel, comic book, and graphic novel "could" be as notable as an Avatar film — the chances are near zero. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:11, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Oh, I just found out that Fire and Ash (disambiguation) has also a similarly-titled dab page: Fire and Ashes (disambiguation). Maybe having two dab pages merged into one could be better, with more "Fire and Ashes" entries than "Fire and Ash". How does that sound? ScarletViolet tc 09:13, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Best Year Ever
[edit]- Best Year Ever → Best Week Ever (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The page title could also refer to the SpongeBob 20th anniversary celebration known as "Best Year Ever". Retarget to SpongeBob SquarePants#Twentieth anniversary or disambiguate? 1033Forest (talk) 03:44, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambig. Unsurprisingly this is a very common title for references, but in addition to the current target and the SpongeBob Squarepants targets I've found I Love...#Best Year Ever… (More4), Amelia's Best Year Ever (Amelia's Notebooks#Elementary school), and a Doctor Who episode (Doctor Who: The Eighth Doctor Adventures#Series 4 (2022)), none of which seem primary. It wouldn't surprise me if there are more as this is not an easy thing to search for (which also means search results will be extremely unhelpful so we definitely should not delete this). Thryduulf (talk) 13:00, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I really see no use in keeping this. Intrisit (talk) 10:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete We could have a disambiguation cobbled together from a bunch of passing mentions. This is the sort of thing search is typically better at. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:05, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete to allow search results, and since a disambiguation page of mentions and essentially WP:PTMs would be a freaking mess. Steel1943 (talk) 02:13, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Search results are good in theory but are actively unhelpful for such a common phrase as this where the likely search targets are swamped by passing mentions and collocations. Thryduulf (talk) 13:47, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:53, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per above. – The Grid (talk) 16:22, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with Thryduulf, disambiguation seems more helpful, and at least the SpongeBob episode is more than a passing mention, so disambiguation seems like a good solution (not sure whether "Amelia's Best Year Ever" should be included there, but the other three meanings are not WP:PTMs contrary to Steel1943). 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:07, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Rat feces
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 23#Rat feces
Contol
[edit]Joseph Sam Williams
[edit]Template:Des
[edit]- Template:Des → Template:Short description (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Recently created redirect. Per Template:Short_description#Aliases these are actually harmful to the project and require a lot of overhead to make things work. Editors wishing to add short descriptions to articles should take the 1 minute to read this instead of creating new redirects. Gonnym (talk) 23:06, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 July 20#Aliases for Short description template and "Des" being an ambiguous and unintuitive abbreviation of "Short description". Thryduulf (talk) 00:12, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom & Thryduulf. ~ Tom.Reding (talk ⋅dgaf) 10:39, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Overruled
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 23#Overruled
Highway 407
[edit]Samuli Miettinen
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 23#Samuli Miettinen
Gender-neutral games and toys
[edit]- Gender-neutral games and toys → Toy#Gender (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
About a day or so ago, sort of as a temporary measure until I could figure out a better course of action with this redirect, I had refined this redirect to Toy#Gender from Toy due to believing the base title not being adequate for explaining this redirect. However, I just realized that due to the fact the word "games" is in this redirect, the redirect's title seems to be an incorrect connection to its target due to potential WP:XY issues since the target is about toys and not games. At this point, I'm thinking deletion is the best option. Steel1943 (talk) 21:11, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- We ought to have some content about this, given the existence of Boys' toys and games and Girls' toys and games. Gender neutrality#Children's toys is similar to the current target. I'm wondering about a disambig/broad concept article? The existence of Toys and games in ancient Rome also points to "toys" and "games" being highly plausible combined search terms. Let Toys Be Toys is also relevant here. Thryduulf (talk) 11:50, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, C F A 💬 20:47, 28 July 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) 19:08, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
E610
[edit]While E610 is mentioned at the target (it was the serial number of the gas tank that leaked and caused the disaster), this string also shows up in several other articles, such as LG Optimus L5, Orange SPV and South African Class 5E1, Series 2. Neither an internet search nor Google Scholar suggest a primary target, so deletion to allow for internal search results seems most appropriate. signed, Rosguill talk 18:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - this is one for the search engine. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think it would be best to turn it into a disambiguation page that links to those other articles. Luvcraft (talk) 02:19, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. Search finds these uses among other less useful results: lists that mention the LG Optimus, and various pages where references contain the string "E610" in page numbers or URLs. Peter James (talk) 15:26, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC)- Comment: Could also represent a chemical with the E number "E610", but it doesn't seem as though any chemical has been assigned this E number yet. Steel1943 (talk) 14:32, 1 August 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) 19:08, 15 August 2024 (UTC)- Disambig per above. It could also refer to a road in the International E-road network or United Arab Emirates, but E610 doesn't appear (from our article) to have been assigned in either place (although both have E611 roads). Thryduulf (talk) 19:33, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Template:Footer Olympic Champions C-1 Slalom
[edit]- Template:Footer Olympic Champions Men C-1 Slalom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] →
It is unclear why this should redirect to Template:Footer Olympic Champions Men C-1 Slalom and not to Template:Footer Olympic Champions Women C-1 Slalom which is available since 2020. Ymblanter (talk) 14:46, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep - This appears to be the original title of the template it points to. I presume the women's event was started in 2020 or not covered until then. Template shortcuts are very often ambiguous. As they are for editors (not readers), this does little harm. Weak because I am sympathetic to the nominators point. If this were in the mainspace a disambiguation would very much be due; however, such an action is not appropriate for a template redirect and I do not support deletion (because ambiguity is not grounds to delete a shortcut). There is also no benefit of obscuring the page history through deletion. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 05:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:39, 29 July 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) 19:07, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Template:Empty-warn
[edit]- Template:Empty-warn → Template:Db-nocontext-notice (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Confusing. Much like {{db-empty}}, one would expect it to refer to A3 or C1 but not A1 which explicitly does not apply to empty articles. Nickps (talk) 13:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak delete I agree its ambiguous due and I'd argue C1 is more likely as a category would be more likely to be considered to be empty because although its now possible to create an empty page (it never used to be) I wouldn't expect many articles to be created that are completely empty and blanking is often done when G7 ends up being the criteria used to delete. I'd also note that Template:Empty redirects to Template:Db-empty so I'd consider deleting them both. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think {{empty}} is just fine as is. {{db-empty}} wraps both {{db-a3}} and {{db-c1}} and chooses which to serve depending on the namespace so there is no ambiguity there. Nickps (talk) 19:15, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Reading your comment again, I hadn't thought of the G7 point. I guess there is an argument to be made for deletion but considering that {{db-empty}} is probably associated with A3 and C1, I'd be very hesitant to delete. Nickps (talk) 19:24, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think {{empty}} is just fine as is. {{db-empty}} wraps both {{db-a3}} and {{db-c1}} and chooses which to serve depending on the namespace so there is no ambiguity there. Nickps (talk) 19:15, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Template shortcuts are quite often ambiguous. Created in 2006, then redirected here in 2012. It is included as a link in {{User:Fuhghettaboutit/Toolbox}} (which is transcluded to many user pages). No need to take any action. Shortcuts have to be learned before use anyhow, and this only affects our editors (not our readers). Prefer a retarget over deletion (if it comes to that). — Godsy (TALKCONT) 10:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not convenced by this argument. It's alao confusing for editors to have db-empty refer to C1 and A3 but db-empty-notice refer to A1. Every other notice template is named after the CSD template it is used with but this one alone breaks the pattern. That still makes shortcuts more difficult to learn for our editors for no benefit since most of them would know that db-a1-notice is the notice to use along with db-a1. Nickps (talk) 10:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- I've since made {{subst:db-empty-notice}} behave identically to {{db-empty}}, that is, it returns {{subst:db-catempty-notice}} if a category is passed to it and {{subst:db-nocontent-notice}} in all other cases. So, assuming the db-empty-notice RfD closes as "disambiguate" between these two, we should retarget there Nickps (talk) 10:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 16:26, 29 July 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) 19:07, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Neo-newtonian
[edit]- Neo-newtonian → Spacetime (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Neo newtonian → Spacetime (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This isn't explained at the target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 08:44, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: term is not used anywhere else on Wikipedia, and I see too many varied usages in sources for it to be targeted to any specific one. This use case certainly isn't the first I would suggest. If they had to go anywhere, I would think Newtonian would make the most sense, but without the wider usage on site it feels like keeping them for the sake of keeping. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Newtonian as an ambiguous term: seems to be used ([21][22][23][24], etc.). A mention may be warranted somewhere. C F A 💬 20:17, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:25, 30 July 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) 19:02, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Bionic Bunny, et al.
[edit]- Bionic Bunny → List of Arthur characters#TV stars and merchandise (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bionic Bunny – keep (as an article—later redirected)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dark Bunny – redirect to Bionic Bunny
- Dark Bunny → List of Arthur characters#TV stars and merchandise (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Mary Moo-Cow → List of Arthur characters#TV stars and merchandise (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- The Bionic Bunny Show → List of Arthur characters#TV stars and merchandise (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Wilbur Rabbit → List of Arthur characters#TV stars and merchandise (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Left notice about this at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Deletion sorting#Arthur-related redirects for discussion. Couldn't do it the usual way, because that assumes an AFD. If someone else can figure out how to do this better, please do. - dcljr (talk) 04:55, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
The target of all of these related redirects is a section that no longer exists in the target article. (These are all related to fictional characters or works within the fiction of the show itself — hence doubly fictional, which presumably is why the content didn't survive.) There doesn't seem to be anything relevant in the main Arthur (TV series) article, either. Nor in Marc Brown (author), our article for the author of the Arthur books. Propose deleting these unless some other appropriate target can be found. - dcljr (talk) 04:25, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget Bionic Bunny and Dark Bunny to List of fictional rabbits and hares#Animation where they are mentioned. Delete the others as there doesn't appear to be a good target. Thryduulf (talk) 10:28, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- The subject of The Bionic Bunny Show is Bionic Bunny, so maybe also redirect that one to the same target? - dcljr (talk) 00:10, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 02:27, 7 August 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) 19:01, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Template:Chilodontidae-stub
[edit]Support for President Donald Trump by white Americans
[edit]- Support for President Donald Trump by white Americans → Donald Trump 2016 presidential campaign#Supporter demographics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- White support for Donald Trump → Donald Trump 2016 presidential campaign#Supporter demographics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- White support of donald trump → Donald Trump 2016 presidential campaign#White nationalists and white supremacists (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Couple of concerns with these redirects' wordings:
- It's odd that a redirect with this phrasing targets 1 of 4 presidential campaign pages related to Donald Trump running for president. How can there be any guarantee readers searching this phrase are looking for this target?
- Specific to the current target, the first redirect contains the phrase "President Donald Trump"; Donald Trump was not a President until after the 2016 campaign.
Steel1943 (talk) 20:20, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps Racial views of Donald Trump would be a better target? Nightscream (talk) 21:59, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not particularly. The redirects allude to groups of people who support for Donald Trump, not Donald Trump's views that could potentially be racist. Steel1943 (talk) 05:09, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:28, 1 August 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) 18:55, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
MAGA tourist
[edit]- MAGA tourist → January 6 United States Capitol attack#Participants and response (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in target article, leaving the connection between this specific phrase and the target unclear. Though MAGA is a rather known phrase, the use of the phrasing of the redirect on third party engines doesn't return results for "MAGA", but rather returns results for tourism in cities named "Maga". Steel1943 (talk) 19:33, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. This term is used to help categorize people involved in the events of January 6, 2021 at the U.S. Capitol. For example, see Lucas, Ryan. “Where the Jan. 6 insurrection investigation stands, one year later”, NPR (6 Jan 2022): “In the past year, the FBI and the public have learned a lot about who the rioters were and what motivated them, and they fall into three general categories. The first are the so-called MAGA tourists. These are Trump supporters who entered the Capitol but didn't engage in violence or destroy property.” If there are other significant uses of this term, then I’d recommend a disambiguation page. Anythingyouwant (talk) 08:05, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:37, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: The target section "Participants and response" does not exist. It was renamed last year by Feoffer to "Participants, groups, and demographics", and later to "Participants, groups, and criminal charges". Jay 💬 17:00, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- I support directing it to “Participants, groups, and criminal charges” instead of “Participants and response”. Anythingyouwant (talk) 04:51, 19 August 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) 18:54, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Toad Town
[edit]Not mentioned in the target. Mia Mahey (talk) 19:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: appears to be used frequently and is pointed to the appropriate target. C F A 💬 20:19, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirecting terms to articles where the term is not mentioned is confusing to readers. Mia Mahey (talk) 20:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- to my knowledge, it only really ever pops up with this exact name in the rpgs (and the movie), and seems more closely associated with paper mario than mario & luigi. not sure if that warrants keeping, but i'll go with an overwhelmingly strong eh cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:40, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:42, 2 August 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) 18:54, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Biden crisis
[edit]- Biden crisis → Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I feel like there are a lot of sorts of things one might expect to see when they search this term (for example, Mexico–United_States_border_crisis#Biden_administration or 2023 United States banking crisis, or any other "crisis" during the administration might be sought), and I don't suspect that any particular one is the WP:PTOPIC. I think that this should either be disambiguated or deleted, as I don't think the current redirect can be justified absent a primary topic. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:39, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: the current target smacks of WP:RECENTISM and there is no clear alternative. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:40, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Looking at Presidency of Joe Biden there are many things that have been called a crisis during his term in office that could be referred to (especially by political opponents) as "Biden crisis" but this is by far the primary topic. Is that recentism? It's too soon to know! What we do know is that people using this search term now are overwhelmingly going to be looking for the current target. If that changes in the future we can reevaluate the redirect at that point. Thryduulf (talk) 09:02, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete too many storms in a teacup were called the Biden crisis. There's no clear target. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:27, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - reliable sources called it "Biden crisis", eg: NPR: "'We can't catch a break.' How the Biden crisis looks from the inside", Politico: "Pelosi privately fields battleground Dem calls as she works to address Biden crisis", Axios: "Trump rally shooting upends Democrats' Biden crisis", UK Channel 4: Biden crisis: supporters question President’s future as he pledges to continue - all in headlines. If you broaden the search to "Biden's crisis" even more results for the same topic appear. It's also worth noting that Withdrawal of Joe Biden from the 2024 United States presidential election was originally created with the name "Biden crisis" before the withdrawal was actually confirmed by Biden. BugGhost🦗👻 16:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep. I was about to nominate this myself a few days ago, but then changed my mind since apparently, the redirect may be an alternative name for the target per sources. Steel1943 (talk) 19:39, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Not adequately sourced enough, the term "It's Joever" was actually used far more to refer to Biden's diminishing capacity to win the election in the months before his withdraw than "Biden crisis." Biden crisis can refer to a bunch of things. HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 18:21, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- @HadesTTW - Regarding
Not adequately sourced enough
- I have posted several sources above that use the term - could you expand on why these aren't adequate? They're pretty well respected news sources and they use the term in their headlines to describe this event BugGhost🦗👻 19:16, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- @HadesTTW - Regarding
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! 11:11, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, as per CycloneYoris, the term isn't adequately sourced. Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 14:56, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- CycloneYoris has not commented on this, they just relisted it BugGhost🦗👻 19:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't understand the "not adequately sourced" arguments, given that Bugghost presented more than adequate evidence that the term is used by reliable sources? Thryduulf (talk) 17:40, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- delete This is just sealioning a pro-trump phrase in, so that it can be linked as 'accepted'. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:01, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Eh? Redirects exist to take people from search terms they are likely to use to the content they are looking for when using that search term. We do this regardless of why they might be using the term. Deleting a redirect simply because it is used by one politician would be a massive failure of WP:NPOV. Thryduulf (talk) 10:37, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- There was no 'Biden crisis'. To create one could be read as (and will be used as) "Wikipedia describes and confirms Biden's Crisis". Which is definitely not something we should support. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just to double check - you're accusing me of sealioning (with a total of 3 comments) - and saying my motivation for doing this is because you think I'm pro-Trump and want to post "Wikipedia describes and confirms Biden's Crisis" on twitter? Genuine question: huh??? BugGhost🦗👻 07:51, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- There was no 'Biden crisis'. To create one could be read as (and will be used as) "Wikipedia describes and confirms Biden's Crisis". Which is definitely not something we should support. Andy Dingley (talk) 21:25, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: used by reliable sources. Reasonable search term. C F A 💬
- Keep — I concur with Bugghost. "Biden crisis" is a headline term that became a general term in reference to the events leading up to Biden's withdrawal, and it was used by NPR. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 04:27, 14 August 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) 18:54, 15 August 2024 (UTC)- using the same logic as "pokémon incident", this requires defining "crisis" in a way that somehow narrows it down to this specific event and not any of the other crises and controversies he was involved in. i'll support dabifying if possible, or deleting if not cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:00, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- The difference between the two is that there is a clear primary topic for "Biden Crisis" but there isn't for "Pokemon incident". Thryduulf (talk) 15:20, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- i believe that's recentism. the next time he gets tangled up in something, it could very well become the next "biden crisis", just as there were "biden crises" before this one, and this discussion could happen again, and again, and again, until he dies cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:13, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Recentism is about article content. If something else becomes the primary target in the future then we can retarget or disambiguate at that point. We best serve the readers who are looking this up now by taking them to what the primary target is now, not making things harder because we guess that something might happen in the future. Thryduulf (talk) 20:38, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- i believe that's recentism. the next time he gets tangled up in something, it could very well become the next "biden crisis", just as there were "biden crises" before this one, and this discussion could happen again, and again, and again, until he dies cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:13, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- The difference between the two is that there is a clear primary topic for "Biden Crisis" but there isn't for "Pokemon incident". Thryduulf (talk) 15:20, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- using the same logic as "pokémon incident", this requires defining "crisis" in a way that somehow narrows it down to this specific event and not any of the other crises and controversies he was involved in. i'll support dabifying if possible, or deleting if not cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:00, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. No clear target. TarnishedPathtalk 13:01, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Degi dialect
[edit]- Degi dialect → Okinoerabu dialect cluster (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in any capacity at the target. Unclear how/why this redirect would make sense. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:39, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- All of my recent mass redirects of Ryukyuan languages come from the supplementary metadata of UniCog (unicog_meta_v1.xlsx) and Nakamoto (1981:459-463) (図説琉球語辞典). Degi is a subarea of Okinoerabu (though information is very obscure; but see here for a postal code number list of Okinoerabu which includes Degi). Chuterix (talk) 21:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:49, 25 July 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) 18:50, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Ideological neutrality of the state
[edit]- Ideological neutrality of the state → Ideology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The phrase "neutrality of the state" is not mentioned in the target article, leaving it unclear what in the target article the redirect is meant to define. Steel1943 (talk) 20:05, 24 July 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) 18:50, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe retarget to Neutral country, which does sort-of discuss ideological reasons why countries might be neutral? Not sure if I think this is a good target or not, but it deserves consideration. Thryduulf (talk) 19:47, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete the redirect. A quick web search indicates that the term "ideological neutrality of the state" is a Christian conservative euphemism for opposition towards LGBTQ+ education in public schools. Neither of the two proposed articles are a good target. Yue🌙 05:58, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Le Cartel
[edit]- Le Cartel → Mother Russia Bleeds (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Le Cartel Studio → Mother Russia Bleeds (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
These redirects should be deleted. The developer's name and a typo are being redirected to its first notable game; the article itself mentions the developer's history but the redirect is barely used outside of articles for its games as well as game list articles. I do not believe it will be used enough to deserve a redirect of its own, like most other independent developers with notable games with their own articles. MimirIsSmart (talk) 06:05, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: the article itself mentions the developer's history is ample reason to keep the redirect. You could at most argue WP:XY because the studio's other game, Heave Ho, also has an article. A typo is not in sight. IceWelder [✉] 10:10, 1 August 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) 18:49, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Seven Sages (Zelda series)
[edit]- Seven Sages (Zelda series) → List of The Legend of Zelda characters#Sages (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in the target article. This concept is present in multiple titles within the Zelda series, so it is unclear if this redirect should target any specific article or not. Steel1943 (talk) 07:00, 7 August 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) 18:47, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Larry. This is my brother Darryl, and this is my other brother Darryl.
[edit]- Hi, I'm Larry. This is my brother Darryl, and this is my other brother Darryl. → Newhart (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Fully written two-sentence long catchphrase of secondary characters no longer mentioned in the article. There are hundreds of ways of reaching the topic of Newhart between Google and Wikipedia searches, but this amount of specificity makes this unlikely and unhelpful, with nothing in the article or its references. Utopes (talk / cont) 14:28, 8 August 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) 18:42, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Un assiolo (talk) 15:53, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Now cut that out!
[edit]- Now cut that out! → Jack Benny (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
A catchphrase not mentioned at the target article and provides no context to incoming readers, with the only allusion to this phrase being from one reference. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:55, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: What's the problem and what's your suggestion? I don't see a problem here, and "who said this line" is a helpful service. This was a very famous line for Jack Benny. — BarrelProof (talk) 18:08, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is exactly as I described. This is a redirect from a phrase which is not mentioned at the target article. People who search for this phrase will not receive any content related to their search of "cutting that out", as "cut"-ting is never talked about there. "Who said this line" is a service provided entirely by Google and is the reason that WikiQuote exists, allowing us to avoid baking thousands of WP redirects into concrete, based on anything any person has ever said. Indeed, famous people might have famous quotes. But even among the greatest of these, without a reference to substantiate its famousness at the target biography, there's no reason to keep it as a misleading redirect (misleading in the sense that it indicates to readers we have content when we do not). My suggestion is to delete. Utopes (talk / cont) 18:46, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just because Google might usually win a "who said this line" contest doesn't mean Wikipedia shouldn't try to help people find the subject they're looking for. — BarrelProof (talk) 21:07, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- All material on Wikipedia must be verifiable. There is no content on Wikipedia about this phrase besides a sourceless redirect, and no sources present in the article to back up the assertion of this quote's famousness. There is no evidence that people searching for the phrase "now cut that out" are seeking the article for Jack Benny; it is more plausible that people who search for the phrase "now cut that out" are looking for written material about the phrase "now cut that out". This information is not present at the Jack Benny article, so this redirect disappoints & misleads searchers who expect to find material specific to their Wikipedia search at the target page.
- If these searchers wanted to read about Jack Benny, they wouldn't search "now cut that out", but instead search for the name "Jack Benny". Searching for the name of an individual with a Wikipedia page will give users the page they're searching for with ~99% accuracy. Searching for a quote yet ending up at a page about a person, as opposed to an page dedicated to the quote they are searching for, will work for approximately ~0% of quotes in existence, and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of unreferenced quote-person-associations. Wikiquote is more suitable for connecting people with the quotes they said, although searching for "now cut that out" on Google still recommends the Wikipedia page for Jack Benny anyway. Utopes (talk / cont) 14:14, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just because Google might usually win a "who said this line" contest doesn't mean Wikipedia shouldn't try to help people find the subject they're looking for. — BarrelProof (talk) 21:07, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is exactly as I described. This is a redirect from a phrase which is not mentioned at the target article. People who search for this phrase will not receive any content related to their search of "cutting that out", as "cut"-ting is never talked about there. "Who said this line" is a service provided entirely by Google and is the reason that WikiQuote exists, allowing us to avoid baking thousands of WP redirects into concrete, based on anything any person has ever said. Indeed, famous people might have famous quotes. But even among the greatest of these, without a reference to substantiate its famousness at the target biography, there's no reason to keep it as a misleading redirect (misleading in the sense that it indicates to readers we have content when we do not). My suggestion is to delete. Utopes (talk / cont) 18:46, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- delete as not even unique enough to jack anymore. results mostly gave me paper cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:24, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'll bet you weren't using an exact phrase search. Google Advanced Search gives me only Jack Benny (with a small smattering of other uses that seem mostly derivative and don't start until the second page of search results, like Meet the Parents, The Jetsons and Scooby Doo). — BarrelProof (talk) 20:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- i was, and that didn't really help either cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:39, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'll bet you weren't using an exact phrase search. Google Advanced Search gives me only Jack Benny (with a small smattering of other uses that seem mostly derivative and don't start until the second page of search results, like Meet the Parents, The Jetsons and Scooby Doo). — BarrelProof (talk) 20:06, 8 August 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) 18:42, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Un assiolo (talk) 15:54, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
I can do this all day
[edit]Chinese coins
[edit]- Chinese coins → Ancient Chinese coinage (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Chinese coin → Ancient Chinese coinage (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Is there some reason that Chinese coins are assumed to be ancient? To the contrary, I would personally assume that people looking for information about Chinese coins would be looking for information about modern coins. The same for Chinese coin. — BarrelProof (talk) 18:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Added/bundled Chinese coin into the discussion. (Was checking to see in the singular and plural had different targets, and well ... they do not.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:11, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: What a cluster of existing articles did I run into: Between Chinese currency (a disambiguation page), the fact that the aforementioned page has multiple articles listed related to subjects named "Yuan" (including Renminbi, which is alternative called the "Chinese Yuan"), History of Chinese currency, Chinese cash (currency unit), the nominated redirect's current target and ALL of the potentially ambiguous redirects targeting EACH of the respective aforementioned non-redirect pages ... this whole situation is a mess. Obviously, the current target is wrong; my vote here is weak retarget to Chinese currency as a {{R from ambiguous term}}, but oh my gosh, there seems to be a need for a WP:BROADCONCEPT somewhere ... but does History of Chinese currency already serve that purpose? (Honestly, I'm thinking Chinese currency should be WP:BLARed towards History of Chinese currency, but that's a different discussion for a different day.) Steel1943 (talk) 18:28, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- ...And just found Chinese cash, another disambiguation page ... with more articles including Cash (Chinese coin). Wow... Steel1943 (talk) 19:35, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- As a side note, I ran into this redirect by trying to identify the origin and denomination of a modern coin that I have laying around. It doesn't have English writing on it, so I thought it might be Chinese and looked for info by putting "Chinese coins" into the search box. I suspect that happens a lot. (Unfortunately, even at Renminbi § Coins, I didn't find any pictures, unlike for American coins, Canadian coins, Japanese coins, Korean coins, Russian coins, etc. I eventually had to look outside of Wikipedia to identify it as a Chinese one jiao coin.) — BarrelProof (talk) 19:40, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- The current redirect targets are {{R from move}} results of a long-ago move. "Currency of Foo" and "Foo currency" titles tend to be all over the place. Most redirect to the page on the currently used currency in question, but the Eurozone can get weird (e.g. French currency redirects to French franc, but Currency of France to euro, which is technically correct based on grammar). Countries that have had several currencies or that have had currency substitution tend to have standalone articles, but these differ in scope from disambiguation articles (e.g. the very simple Currency of Greece or Currency of San Marino), to list-type articles (e.g. Currency of Spain, Currency of Germany, Brazilian currency), to full-text/list articles (Currency of Ecuador, Currency of Maldives), to extensive history articles (e.g. Korean currency).
TL;DR It's fine to have Chinese currency as a disambiguation page. Whether Currency of China should direct there might also be considered.
- The current redirect targets are {{R from move}} results of a long-ago move. "Currency of Foo" and "Foo currency" titles tend to be all over the place. Most redirect to the page on the currently used currency in question, but the Eurozone can get weird (e.g. French currency redirects to French franc, but Currency of France to euro, which is technically correct based on grammar). Countries that have had several currencies or that have had currency substitution tend to have standalone articles, but these differ in scope from disambiguation articles (e.g. the very simple Currency of Greece or Currency of San Marino), to list-type articles (e.g. Currency of Spain, Currency of Germany, Brazilian currency), to full-text/list articles (Currency of Ecuador, Currency of Maldives), to extensive history articles (e.g. Korean currency).
- On the nominal topic of this discussion, I support a retarget of both to Chinese currency. — AjaxSmack 20:19, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Renminbi#Coins would be another logical target for "Chinese coins". It's surprising that there is not a more detailed section, or even article, with images, compared to the very detailed coverage of some other countries' coinage. PamD 20:27, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Logic aside, a special consideration for this case is that a) coins are not used much in China now (vis-à-vis banknotes, Alipay and WeChat pay) and b) the copper cash coins seen in strings of cash are still found prominently in the Sinosphere with non-currency uses such as in Chinese numismatic charms, in art, in fengshui, in fortune telling, in graves, in medicine and among overseas Chinese. When I hear "Chinese coin" I think more of these and less of a 5-jiao coin. — AjaxSmack 20:33, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Ah: on looking further, (a) there are detailed articles such as Fifth series of the renminbi, which I found by rummaging around the category tree to get to Category:Coins of China, and (b) there are no articles on French coins or Brazilian coins (picking a couple of countries I expected to be well and poorly covered), although there are articles such as French franc, French euro coins and Brazilian real. It looks as if we don't cater for the reader like the OP who wants to find out about the coins of a country, together, to try to identify the one in their hand, without knowing the names of the units of currency or anything else about the country's coinage. PamD 20:35, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- And I've just spotted that Ancient Chinese coins, to which Chinese coins currently points, has a helpful hatnote pointing to Renminbi#Coins, so all is perhaps well. PamD 20:38, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Or perhaps not, as that route doesn't lead easily to the detailed info in Fifth series of the renminbi etc, which is where the detailed info can be found. Better navigation is needed to help the reader like our OP find the info which exists in the encyclopedia! PamD 05:29, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- And I've just spotted that Ancient Chinese coins, to which Chinese coins currently points, has a helpful hatnote pointing to Renminbi#Coins, so all is perhaps well. PamD 20:38, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Leaning toward a retarget to Renminbi § Coins. It seems like that's what someone looking for "Chinese coins" would be seeking, not Taiwanese or Hong Kong or historical topics, etc., so I don't think the disambiguation currently provided at Chinese currency is helpful. — BarrelProof (talk) 20:45, 8 August 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) 18:40, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:SCIENTOLOGY
[edit]Cn (mathematics)
[edit]Dn (mathematics)
[edit]Objection (law)
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 23#Objection (law)
CheckUser
[edit]Tax cuts for the rich
[edit]- Tax cuts for the rich → Trickle-down economics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Should probably be deleted as non-neutral and poorly matched. While "tax cuts for the rich" are sometimes promoted as a method of trickle-down economics, they really aren't the same concept. Redirecting to tax cut does not make a lot of sense either. Jruderman (talk) 09:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - it's neutral (and even if it wasn't, redirects don't have to be neutral) and summarises the article's lead well:
Trickle-down economics refers to economic policies that disproportionately favor the upper tier of the economic spectrum, comprising wealthy individuals
andMajor examples of what critics have called "trickle-down economics" in the U.S. include the Reagan tax cuts, the Bush tax cuts, and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. Major UK examples include Liz Truss's mini-budget tax cuts of 2022
. The article describes the topic as primarily tax cuts for rich people - it's a good redirect. BugGhost🦗👻 10:45, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Trickle-down economics is not the exact same thing as tax cuts for the wealthy. Should be deleted as forcing readers to follow a redirect to an irrelevant place, WP:SURPRISE applies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:44, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, possibly section link #Usage? This article does say "tax cuts to/for the rich" multiple times. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 00:58, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:39, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. This could point to a number of places (chiefly, tax cut comes to mind), but none of them are a primary topic for this search term, and this doesn't lend itself way to being DABified. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 03:42, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Since this is mentioned at the target and "Trickle-down economics" is a very common descriptor of policies like this. Neutral on whether the redirect should be to the article in general or to the "Usage" section of the article. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 19:08, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I don't think this is a good redirect, basically per zxcvbnm. And since the phrase is used in Trickle-down economics, someone searching for this phrase specifically will be able to find that article if that's where they wanted to go. -- asilvering (talk) 23:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 02:44, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Yevhen Kholoniuk
[edit]Imperial Royalty
[edit]- Imperial Royalty → Imperial Majesty (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This term does not appear in the target article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:58, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- I guess Royalty and Majesty are somewhat synonymous. Josethewikier (talk) 02:59, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per above, since both words are synonymous. CycloneYoris talk! 04:03, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. The words are not exact synonyms, and, more imporatntly, "Imperial Majesty" is a title, but "Imperial Royalty" isn't. Emperors can referred to as "His Imperial Majesty", but no ruler has ever been called "His Imperial Royalty". The redirect as it stands is misleading. If it's to be kept, Emperor would be a better target. Tevildo (talk) 17:57, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Imperial and Royal, Imperial–royal, Imperial and Royal Highness, Imperial and Royal Majesty, are just a small selection of targets where this could reasonably point. Unless it can be established that this term is actually used in this form for one or more topics we cover, this should likely be deleted as vague. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:54, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to King-Emperor. They're not synonymous; in the context of monarchy, "imperial" refers to emperors/empresses, and "royalty" only to kings/queens, a lesser dignity. This article is general, not country-specific like "Imperial-royal" or "Imperial and Royal", and the redirect title is about a concept, not about a title like "Imperial and Royal Highness" or "Imperial and Royal Majesty". Nyttend (talk) 19:54, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per Nyttend. All the other proposed targets are specific to a particular context, whereas King-Emperor is a broad concept article. Rosbif73 (talk) 11:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete it looks like the first Google hit for the term is a Pomerian dog breeder, which wasn't exactly on my bingo card. The other results seem to be mostly the kind of keyword synonym spam people use for SEO. There seems to be the occasional usage in historical contexts, e.g. an old history book or museum listing. I think they're using it to emphasize that these are imperial royals, e.g. emperors and not kings, but it doesn't seem to be a term of art. In any case, serious use of the term is rare and doesn't not appear to be a synonym for Imperial Majesty or King-Emperor. Rusalkii (talk) 20:22, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 02:12, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Teemo
[edit]Not mentioned; delete unless a suitable target can be found. Queen of Hearts talk 17:48, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Before Arcane, one of the main "mascots" of League. Useful if someone wants to know where the naming of Gothus Teemo comes from for an example in wider culture of just last week. (Note that Teemo probably could be mentioned, but as a Featured Article, the League article is maintained pretty strictly, so it might be arguably under-inclusive in the name of keeping the highest level of sourcing.) SnowFire (talk) 22:55, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Turn into disambiguation page now that G. teemo has an article. SnowFire (talk) 20:28, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disagree with this. Per WP:2DABS a redirect/hat note would be preferable. Bensci54 (talk) 12:22, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep Could probably merit a small sentence-long mention based on this article regarding League's impact on popular culture. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep given its use on Gothus teemo. Wouldn't be against it being mentioned on the main article, given that the crab is the first species to be named after a League of Legends character, although that's probably to be discussed on the talk page. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 16:05, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support disambig per SnowFire. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:36, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Chaotic Enby: Why vote twice in favour in the same RFD request?! Intrisit (talk) 10:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry if it wasn't clear, it was to indicate I supported the two options (keeping the redirect, or converting it to a disambiguation page). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 13:41, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Chaotic Enby: Why vote twice in favour in the same RFD request?! Intrisit (talk) 10:11, 3 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:04, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete unless anyone adds a mention themselves, as inherently confusing. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:05, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Gothus teemo where it's explained. -- Tavix (talk) 00:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 02:11, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Raymoo
[edit]- Raymoo → List of Touhou Project characters#Reimu Hakurei (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
raymoo hackery is a name generally only seen in shitposts, and i'd honestly be surprised if anyone not nose deep on every touhou rabbit hole knew about it. fittingly, not mentioned in the target, implausible as an actual search (unless you're me), and google gave me nothing reliable cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:03, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Tentative Keep and tag as meme. It's plausible that someone finds one of said shitposts, doesn't know how the original name is spelled, and searches "raymoo" to find info on Reimu. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Tentative Keep. I personally believe that it is a genuine misspelling or respelling, but you would probably be hard-pressed to find a reliable source that mentions it being a meme or shitpost. Honestly, I don't even remember making this redirect in 2012, but I doubt that "Raymoo Hackery" ever crossed my mind since we would be discussing a "Raymoo Hackery" redirect as well. Regardless, the outcome doesn't really matter to me, so do what you may. — Nameless(?) 13:09, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- in your defense, it's funny cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:18, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Not mentioned at target. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:56, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:20, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. I doubt Wikipedia would be the first place a person searching for info on Reimu would turn to. --Un assiolo (talk) 22:33, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 05:14, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Momentum is swinging towards deletion, but additional opinions are welcome to help clarify if there is a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as a misspelling. It doesn't seem to refer to anything else on Wikipedia. -- Tavix (talk) 00:00, 14 August 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) 02:10, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Too far derivative. People searching for Reimu know her name isn't spelled this way. Utopes (talk / cont) 02:02, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
North West Leicestershire by-election, 2010
[edit]- North West Leicestershire by-election, 2010 → David Taylor (North West Leicestershire MP) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Never happened. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 22:50, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak refine to the "Standing down" section where it gets explained the most. There are a few hits dotted around the web as a by-election was expected. Thryduulf (talk) 23:16, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- In which case it should be renamed Planned North West Leicestershire by-election, 2010, without leaving a redirect. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- If this were an article I could support moving but only retaining a redirect, as a redirect I can only oppose. The current title is the plausible search term, given that's how UK by-election articles are titled. Thryduulf (talk) 08:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's not at all plausible, it's a fictional event. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 04:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not it's not fictional. It was an expected event that ended up not happening because it turned out to be a rare exception to the norm of by-elections happening within ~four months of a vacancy arising. Given that norm and the rarity of exceptions, it is very plausible for someone seeing the MP for North West Leicestershire died in late December 2009 to expect there to have been a by-election in the constituency in the first quarter of 2010. Thryduulf (talk) 10:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it is ultimately fictional, as it never happened and can never happen, as it's no longer 2010. Like I said, the redirect can be moved to serve the same purpose. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 17:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Not it's not fictional. It was an expected event that ended up not happening because it turned out to be a rare exception to the norm of by-elections happening within ~four months of a vacancy arising. Given that norm and the rarity of exceptions, it is very plausible for someone seeing the MP for North West Leicestershire died in late December 2009 to expect there to have been a by-election in the constituency in the first quarter of 2010. Thryduulf (talk) 10:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's not at all plausible, it's a fictional event. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 04:21, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- If this were an article I could support moving but only retaining a redirect, as a redirect I can only oppose. The current title is the plausible search term, given that's how UK by-election articles are titled. Thryduulf (talk) 08:00, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- In which case it should be renamed Planned North West Leicestershire by-election, 2010, without leaving a redirect. ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:41, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Did the preparations for the by-election actually start? The Banner talk 11:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- AIUI formal preparations can only start once the writ for the election has been issued (which it never was), but it is very likely that at least some informal ones were. Given that those same preparations would have just become preparations for the general election when that was called, and most of them wouldn't have been newsworthy I'm not sure how you'd go about ascertaining, especially at this distance. Thryduulf (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- The by-election should have been within four months after vacating the seat, if I read it correct. That would bring the by-election to the end of April 2010 (roughly). That makes it more than likely that the by-election was effectively cancelled due to the upcoming general election. So in my opinion, it makes sense to retarget to 2010 United Kingdom general election The Banner talk 18:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Where is this mentioned at 2010 United Kingdom general election? -- Tavix (talk) 23:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- The by-election should have been within four months after vacating the seat, if I read it correct. That would bring the by-election to the end of April 2010 (roughly). That makes it more than likely that the by-election was effectively cancelled due to the upcoming general election. So in my opinion, it makes sense to retarget to 2010 United Kingdom general election The Banner talk 18:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- AIUI formal preparations can only start once the writ for the election has been issued (which it never was), but it is very likely that at least some informal ones were. Given that those same preparations would have just become preparations for the general election when that was called, and most of them wouldn't have been newsworthy I'm not sure how you'd go about ascertaining, especially at this distance. Thryduulf (talk) 16:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, C F A 💬 17:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to North West Leicestershire (UK Parliament constituency)#History, which is the general article where it's explained. -- Tavix (talk) 23:13, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 01:57, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Abritration Committe
[edit]- Wikipedia:Abritration Committe → Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Both "Arbitration" and "Committee" are misspelled, making this an implausible redirect. 88.97.195.160 (talk) 19:25, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Created 8 years ago purposely as a misspelling, and is in no way ambiguous.
(The forecast is calling for WP:SNOW.)Steel1943 (talk) 19:42, 7 August 2024 (UTC)- Quite a lot, maybe even the majority, of R3s are created on purpose. The only reason this doesn't suffer the same fate is its age, which is only relevant to R3 and nothing else. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 01:01, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- ...Seems the WP:SNOW forecast was canceled... Steel1943 (talk) 18:04, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Unused and implausible. Would have qualified as an R3 had it been caught early. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:22, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Plausible and harmless, especially as it's in project space. Thryduulf (talk) 23:30, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Being in project space is irrelevant. And plausible? Really? Two totally random letter deletions that are horrendously unlikely to ever happen together in that exact way along with no other typing errors, precisely? There's a small but nonzero cost to keeping it as a maintenance burden. There's zero harm in deleting it. Why are you so hell-bent on keeping all these useless redirects? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 01:00, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- The only cost comes from discussions like this one - in the past 8 years this redirect has required no maintenance and caused no harm. Indeed this nomination has resulted in the expending of almost infinitely more editor time and effort than this redirect would have done in at least 20 years had it been left alone. I'm not
hell-bent on keeping all these useless redirects
, I'm simply opposed to the deletion of harmless redirects because deletion is never harmless (for example it hinders navigation) so we should only delete pages when the harm from the existence of the redirect exceeds the harm caused by deletion. In this case there is truly no harm from the redirect's existence - anyone stumbling across it will be taken to where they want to go. It being in project space is relevant, because there is no chance of someone finding this while looking for encyclopaedic content. Thryduulf (talk) 02:05, 8 August 2024 (UTC)- This is what I was I was getting at but in a lot more words: This redirect is in the project/"Wikipedia:" namespace. If someone types this redirect out, they are obviously looking for the current target page. Deletion does more harm than good. Steel1943 (talk) 18:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with Thryduulf on this. There was zero maintenance burden from this redirect until this RFD was created, which has used far more storage space/processing power/brain power than the redirect ever has. The redirect probably isn't that helpful, but that isn't really enough to justify deletion. BugGhost🦗👻 11:03, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- The only cost comes from discussions like this one - in the past 8 years this redirect has required no maintenance and caused no harm. Indeed this nomination has resulted in the expending of almost infinitely more editor time and effort than this redirect would have done in at least 20 years had it been left alone. I'm not
- Being in project space is irrelevant. And plausible? Really? Two totally random letter deletions that are horrendously unlikely to ever happen together in that exact way along with no other typing errors, precisely? There's a small but nonzero cost to keeping it as a maintenance burden. There's zero harm in deleting it. Why are you so hell-bent on keeping all these useless redirects? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 01:00, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:57, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:39, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per previous comments. Redirects are cheap, and despite being an implausible spelling, it's not in mainspace and doesn't do much harm staying as it is. SmittenGalaxy | talk! 06:39, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as harmless {{R from misspelling}}. C F A 💬 18:41, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom as two separate errors -> implausible. Being in project-space makes this even more unlikely to be typed because 99.5% of everyone types "WP:ARBCOM" or "WP:AC" into the search-bar anyway. This might've been harmless before, and I myself wouldn't have nominated it... but we're here now at RfD so lets seal the deal: its existence is a bad precedent that opens the door to an infinite potential redirect mess.
- If every page on Wikipedia had 5-10 typo redirects that generally seen as implausible, but aren't technically hurting anything because redirects are technically cheap, Wikipedia as a whole would be 5x-10x harder to maintain on the backend / pagecount side, because for each of the millions of pages that exist (across all namespaces), there's tens of millions of implausible typo redirects to scroll through. This is an example of one, so delete to save us the headache of having this same conversation over this exact redirect in another 5-10 years. Utopes (talk / cont) 02:18, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Utopes. --Un assiolo (talk) 15:58, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
Za'ura
[edit]The current target was created today. Until then it targetted Zoora, which has a footnote stating that Za'ura is an alternative romanisation. It's not immediately clear to me whether one topic is primary (in which case there should be a hatnote to the other) or whether a disambig should be primary. I've not immediately found any other possible targets but my searching hasn't been as extensive as I'd like (I'm running low on time).
Courtesy ping to those who've commented at ANI: @Supreme Deliciousness, Primefac, and Selfstudier:. Thryduulf (talk) 21:40, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- If the alternate romanisation is correct, then I would advocate for reversing the retargeting and restore the Zoora link; that subject is well-sourced and likely more notable than a nonexistent historical village in Syria. Primefac (talk) 23:20, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Dab. For the saint, see here. Srnec (talk) 03:00, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Move Za'ura, Syria → Za'ura, as there does not seem to be a need to disambiguate (are there other locations in the world with that same name?). Use WP:hatnotes in the two articles, Za'ura and Zoora. The two articles have similar pronounciations, but not the same. Hence, there is no need for a disambiguation page. The Mountain of Eden (talk) 20:55, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Pronunciation is irrelevant. Both articles could be titled "Za'ura" so disambiguation of some sort is required. The question is whether that should be a hatnote from the primary topic or a primary disambiguation page. To answer that question we need to know whether one or the other is the primary topic for people searching "Za'ura" and from my searches there doesn't appear to be, although Google refusing to distinguish between "Za'ura" and "za ura" is not helpful. Thryduulf (talk) 11:09, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- I created Za'ura, Syria. Dont really have an opinion. There is very little info about the village. Maybe the redirect should go to Zoora. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 22:01, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Libitum
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 22#Libitum
Enjoyment
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 22#Enjoyment
Infantile
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 22#Infantile
Great-children
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 22#Great-children
Ringie
[edit]Slang term not described at target but listed at Longtail (rat) (which is somehow not linked from the Rat article). There appears to be an unrelated meaning at Two-up, though. 1234qwer1234qwer4 19:25, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders
[edit]- Feminist Perspectives on Eating Disorders → Eating disorder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Feminist perspectives on eating disorders → Eating disorder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- A Feminist Perspective → Eating disorder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned at target. Otherwise, only appears to occur in references on the English Wikipedia. 1234qwer1234qwer4 19:19, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Retarget A Feminist Perspective to Jo Freeman - one of her books is entitled Women: A Feminist Perspective, which is the only exact match (including capitalization) for the term we have.Neutral on the other two. Tevildo (talk) 23:24, 14 August 2024 (UTC)- That does not seem to be exactly true, as there is also A Feminist Perspective on Virtue Ethics by Sandrine Bergès, An Introduction to the Old Testament: A Feminist Perspective by Alice L. Laffey, The Pakistan Project: A Feminist Perspective on Nation & Identity by Rubina Saigol, Educating for Peace: A Feminist Perspective by Birgit Brock-Utne (just not mentioned at the article, but could be), and a bunch of articles and essays with this WP:PTM mentioned in articles as well. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:21, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Seems like a disambiguation page filled with WP:SUBTITLEs. (I've always wondered if WP:SUBTITLE is a stronger stance than WP:PTM ... guess we will find out.) Steel1943 (talk) 15:11, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate A Feminist Perspective per the above - or, if we can't disambiguate on subtitles, retargetting it to Feminism or Feminist theory might be an alternative. But we shouldn't preserve the status quo in this case. Tevildo (talk) 07:40, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- That does not seem to be exactly true, as there is also A Feminist Perspective on Virtue Ethics by Sandrine Bergès, An Introduction to the Old Testament: A Feminist Perspective by Alice L. Laffey, The Pakistan Project: A Feminist Perspective on Nation & Identity by Rubina Saigol, Educating for Peace: A Feminist Perspective by Birgit Brock-Utne (just not mentioned at the article, but could be), and a bunch of articles and essays with this WP:PTM mentioned in articles as well. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:21, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Epimys
[edit]Chengdu Airport
[edit]- Chengdu Airport → Chengdu Shuangliu International Airport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I was intending to move the disambiguation page Chengdu airport to this name for proper capitalization. However, the original creator of the redirect states that this is a common name for the target airport. Would need sources to confirm this, and I'm unsure if this is even an appropriate redirect (due to the disambiguation page). Johnj1995 (talk) 19:00, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I feel like this is more appropriate to ask via a WP:RM on the disambiguation page (i.e., whether Chengdu airport should be moved to Chengdu airport (disambiguation) to make it a redirect to the same page as the nominated one). 1234qwer1234qwer4 19:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- @1234qwer1234qwer4:. The disambiguation page should be moved to either Chengdu Airport or Chengdu Airport (disambiguation) for consistency (see Beijing Airport, Shanghai Airport). Also, I don't know if this is even an appropriate target for Chengdu Airport, because non-Chinese users might be looking for Chengdu Tianfu International Airport, which is where all international flights to Chengdu are operated. Johnj1995 (talk) 21:01, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Make "Chengdu Airport" a full disambiguation page because both Chengdu Tianfu International Airport (international) and Chengdu Shuangliu International Airport (now domestic) are equally notable WhisperToMe (talk) 02:24, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- The status quo looks correct to me. Is Chengdu Tianfu International Airport commonly known as "Chengdu Airport"? The article gives "Tianfu Airport" as the shorthand for that one. On the other hand, the article says that the shorthand for Chengdu Shuangliu International Airport is "Chengdu Airport". As for the lowercase variant, one would be looking for an airport in Chengdu, not an airport named "Chengdu Airport". The disambiguation does list the airports in Chengdu, but I would suggest that Chengdu#Air is more helpful. -- Tavix (talk) 14:56, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Chengdu Shuangliu for years was the only Chengdu Airport, so lots of older sources rightfully called it "Chengdu Airport". However all of the international flights went to Tianfu after it opened, and many EN wikipedians may be thinking of Tianfu Airport now when typing in "Chengdu Airport". I would look at the post-Tianfu opening source usage to see if Shuangliu is still called "Chengdu Airport" without disambiguaion WhisperToMe (talk) 04:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support the creation of a disambiguation page as previously stated. The distinction between the two similarly named airports is not obvious to the uninitiated. Carguychris (talk) 17:40, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
- Chengdu Shuangliu for years was the only Chengdu Airport, so lots of older sources rightfully called it "Chengdu Airport". However all of the international flights went to Tianfu after it opened, and many EN wikipedians may be thinking of Tianfu Airport now when typing in "Chengdu Airport". I would look at the post-Tianfu opening source usage to see if Shuangliu is still called "Chengdu Airport" without disambiguaion WhisperToMe (talk) 04:26, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Sproggen
[edit]Baratron
[edit]DuroKon
[edit]Zenport
[edit]AccuZen
[edit]AgriKon
[edit]ZenTek
[edit]OoX
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 22#OoX
2032 Summer Olympics medal table
[edit]United States at the 2028 Summer Olympics
[edit]Reticulum cell sarcoma
[edit]- Reticulum cell sarcoma → Sarcoma (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Reticulum-cell sarcoma → Sarcoma (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Currently not mentioned at the target. More specific articles like Contagious reticulum cell sarcoma mention this, but I'm not sure there is a generic description of this on the English Wikipedia. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to contagious reticulum cell sarcoma – both redirects appear to be good search terms, and sarcoma is linked in the proposed target. I think that would help readers and researchers more. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 21:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think that's the only cancer the term is referring to, so it might lead to confusion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:25, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- CRCS appears to be the only RCS presently covered on Wikipedia, so confusion is unlikely for now. When other types are covered with their own articles, such as intraocular RCS, RCS of the thyroid gland, RCS of the spleen, RCS of the bone, RCS of the lymph node, and so on, then this title, "Reticulum cell sarcoma", can become an overview article or a dab page. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 02:41, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- PS. We should note here that the other redirect would then, of course, be retargeted to the new overview article or dab page as an unprintworthy {{redirect from modification}}. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. put'er there 02:57, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Well, right now another one is mentioned at the Skin sarcoma article (recently created from the discussion below). 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:24, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Sarcoma of skin
[edit]List of characters in The Legend of Zelda: Oracle of Ages and Seasons
[edit]Gradatio
[edit]"Zelda 3" through "Zelda 20"
[edit]Multiplicity of a restricted root
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#Multiplicity of a restricted root
Multiplicities
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#Multiplicities
First try
[edit]Young human
[edit]This woman is my destiny
[edit]Extremal
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#Extremal
Moldorm
[edit]- Moldorm → List of The Legend of Zelda characters#Nightmares (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in the target article. The subject of this redirect is a "boss" enemy in several The Legend of Zelda titles, leaving there potentially no target for this redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 07:48, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect target changed. Apokrif (talk) 09:07, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- I reverted this change, considering this RFD is open. Per the edit I reverted, seems their intent was to "retarget to List of fictional worms#Video games". Steel1943 (talk) 17:09, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Nominator comment: I oppose "retarget to List of fictional worms#Video games" since the subject of this redirect has affinity to the Legend of Zelda series, meaning readers looking up this term probably are not trying to locate an article about fictional worms. Steel1943 (talk) 17:09, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Target can be changed while the RFD is active. As the article about fictional worms is the only place where the meaning of this word is explained, it's an appropriate target. Apokrif (talk) 17:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- The hidden message appears with every transclusion of {{RfD}} while editing the tagged redirect: <!-- End of RFD message. Don't edit anything above here. Feel free to edit below here, but do NOT change the redirect's target. --> You literally were shown that message while you were making your edit: Changing the redirect's target for any reason not considered maintenance during an active RFD discussion is considered disruptive. Steel1943 (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- What's the point of this discussion (to which almost nobody takes part)? We can just change the redirect target like I did and call it a day. Apokrif (talk) 00:58, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Traditionally,
WP:SILENCEWP:NOQUORUM = nominator's proposal ("delete" by default), but that doesn't apply anymore since you have voiced an opinion for a retargeting option, and I don't agree with it. Steel1943 (talk) 04:33, 13 August 2024 (UTC)- Fixed the link I meant. Steel1943 (talk) 13:19, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Traditionally,
- What's the point of this discussion (to which almost nobody takes part)? We can just change the redirect target like I did and call it a day. Apokrif (talk) 00:58, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- The hidden message appears with every transclusion of {{RfD}} while editing the tagged redirect: <!-- End of RFD message. Don't edit anything above here. Feel free to edit below here, but do NOT change the redirect's target. --> You literally were shown that message while you were making your edit: Changing the redirect's target for any reason not considered maintenance during an active RFD discussion is considered disruptive. Steel1943 (talk) 17:29, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
- Target can be changed while the RFD is active. As the article about fictional worms is the only place where the meaning of this word is explained, it's an appropriate target. Apokrif (talk) 17:17, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:12, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as the Moldorm boss does not originate from Link's Awakening; it first appeared in the game immediately before this one and so people looking for it are equally likely to be looking up the ALttP incarnation as the LA one. I'm not willing to Pokemon Test random LoZ bosses. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:01, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or Retarget per Apokrif, no strong feelings either way. I don't see what the issue with the retarget is, except that its a one-liner and not very useful. The list entry does say
Moldorm, from The Legend of Zelda and its sequels.
Jay 💬 10:30, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Postman (The Legend of Zelda series)
[edit]Magik (film)
[edit]- Magik (film) → Benedict Cumberbatch (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Magik (2015 film) → Benedict Cumberbatch (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Situation I haven't run into here: This was a BLAR to an article that does not currently mention the subject, but restoring the article would go against WP:NFF, which means there isn't a snowball's chance in Hell that the article would survive AfD. I think the best approach is restore article but draftify, which is the better way to incubate something in development hell anyways. (Normally I wouldn't take something to RfD just to !vote restore, since anyone can do that, but if I were to unilaterally restore and draftify I feel like that would be backdoor deletion of the redirect.) -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 00:56, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Restore/Draftify per nom. You make a good case for it, and I appreciate the reasoning for going through the RfD process. Fieari (talk) 01:22, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Although back in 2018 and 2019 it was restored twice so I think it probably should be restored and sent to AFD per WP:BLA and if it is desired to disambiguate (if the 2024 one is different) then the edit history should be moved to Magik (2018 film) and redirected to Magik (disambiguation) per WP:INCDAB. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:21, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Bundling the related redirect Magik (2015 film). Hyphenation Expert (talk) 04:09, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Draftify or AfD after restoration?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:05, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Well, this is really two separate issues. The draft(s) can be restored and draftified, if desired. What needs to be determined here is: Are these appropriate titles to point (i.e redirect) to targets in the mainspace? — Godsy (TALKCONT) 18:13, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete both per WP:NFF as the nom points out. This looks like a film that was shelved a long time ago. Unless there has been any recent updates there is no point in draftifying it because it'll just be deleted six months down the road. -- Tavix (talk) 20:12, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Well we can't predict now whether there will be updates in the next six months. But even if there aren't, having deleted history be at a draftspace title is helpful for if the film does get made years from now, letting a future editor know that they can have it undeleted. And if that doesn't happen and it does just get G13'd and never undeleted, then we're no worse off. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 06:03, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Given how long ago we're talking, I feel rather confident that there will be no updates in the next six months. Even if I'm wrong, I would rather deleted history be in mainspace rather than draftspace. The edit history would be less 'hidden' there because casual editors aren't as familiar with draftspace. -- Tavix (talk) 14:17, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Well we can't predict now whether there will be updates in the next six months. But even if there aren't, having deleted history be at a draftspace title is helpful for if the film does get made years from now, letting a future editor know that they can have it undeleted. And if that doesn't happen and it does just get G13'd and never undeleted, then we're no worse off. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 06:03, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or draftify?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:24, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Magik (2015 film) at least – it has no meaningful page history and the year disambiguator doesn't apply anymore. Probably delete Magik (film) as well since there is very little chance the film will ever be made or be notable enough as an unmade film to have its own article. I don't see the point in draftifying it. Also, the current target is confusing. Mclay1 (talk) 01:02, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Restore and send to AfD as a disputed BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 11:14, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Onox
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#Onox
Four Giants
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#Four Giants
Lord Jabu-Jabu
[edit]- Lord Jabu-Jabu → List of The Legend of Zelda characters#Jabu-Jabu (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Lord Jabu Jabu → List of The Legend of Zelda characters#Jabu-Jabu (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Jabu-Jabu → List of The Legend of Zelda characters#Jabu-Jabu (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Jabu Jabu → List of The Legend of Zelda characters#Jabu-Jabu (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Character/dungeon of the Legend of Zelda universe that is not mentioned in the target article, Characters of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, or The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. The only mention of this character on Wikipedia seems to be at List of monarchs of fictional countries#Zora Tribe, but I'm pretty sure that target is not the target readers trying to information about this character are intending to go, meaning deletion is probably preferred over retargeting there. Steel1943 (talk) 17:39, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. If there were a lot of page views I'd contend that it should just be changed to mention Jabu-Jabu on the characters or OoT article, but none of them are even double digits, suggesting no one is really using these redirects anyway. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 17:48, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Cukie Gherkin: Just FYI, I apparently had an edit conflict with you when I updated my rationale to include finding a mention at List of monarchs of fictional countries#Zora Tribe, in case that changes your stance. Steel1943 (talk) 17:50, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Page views aren't necessarily a concern regarding readers finding this information; what's more important is that the information exists if any reader is trying to find that information. Meaning ... should this character be added to an article, probably Characters of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time? (I'm assuming that the content was previously at its current target, considering the target is coded in these redirects, and you are the creator of Characters of The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time [assuming my requested history merge has not occurred yet].) Steel1943 (talk) 17:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think my stance remains the same, as I don't think people would expect to be taken there if they do search for it. As far as page views, they were just offered as an example of an incentive for perhaps mentioning Jabu-Jabu somewhere if he was someone people were searching. As far as the characters page, I think the most that could be done would be to mention Jabu Jabu under Ruto's page, but I'm not sure that would really be enough to warrant redirects. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:10, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for a stronger consensus. Would it be feasible to add a mention somewhere or is deletion preferable?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Category:Dionysus in Greek mythology
[edit]- Category:Dionysus in Greek mythology → Category:Mythology of Dionysus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Unneeded soft redirect from an unlikely search term. What other mythology would Dionysus appear in? This redirect was created shortly before its target (which used to be Category:Dionysus in mythology). Mclay1 (talk) 11:21, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- keep. osiris isn't really a recurring character in shinto lore, but people will still specify that he's from egyptian mythology. same goes for dionysus in greek mythology, give or take the roman dub changing everyone's names (except his, apparently), so i think it's a pretty plausible case of "just in case" or alternative spelling cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- You would specify Osiris is from Egyptian mythology when explaining what Osiris is, but you wouldn't need a subcat of Category:Osiris called Category:Osiris in Egyptian mythology because that's what the main category is already for. This redirect is very unlikely to aid navigation. (See Wikipedia:Category redirects that should be kept.) Mclay1 (talk) 15:34, 7 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:09, 14 August 2024 (UTC)- Delete. There are rare situations where a soft redirect is needed, this isn't one of them. Gonnym (talk) 11:19, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Dionysus is technically a Latin/Latinised name of the god (Dionysos), but we don't have a category or separate article for the Roman Bacchus, so this is essentially a redirect from a more restrictive name, which I don't think is needed. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:29, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. It seems a bit of a stretch to redirect Dionysus in Greek mythology to Mythology of Dionysus, and (1) these are categories, where there's much less need for redirects, and (2) since neither one of them exists as a mainspace title, it seems even more unnecessary to have them in categoryspace. Nyttend (talk) 07:57, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Game deck
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#Game deck
Electronic entertainment
[edit]Home computer game
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 22#Home computer game
Gay cake
[edit]- Gay cake → Masterpiece Cakeshop v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Gay cake case → Lee v Ashers Baking Company Ltd and others (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
At the moment, the two target articles are connected by hatnotes, which might end up being the best solution, but I believe it's less than ideal for the two redirects to have different targets. My main suggestion is to Disambiguate (that is, turn gay cake case into a DAB page), especially as it's possible that another lawsuit could arise from a similar situation. However, "gay cake case" is explicitly cited in the Lee v Ashers article but not in Masterpiece Cakeshop, and "gay cake" on its own doesn't immediately suggest that the article is about a lawsuit. My secondary suggestion is therefore to Delete gay cake only. Tevildo (talk) 23:17, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget/Convert Gay cake case to a disambiguation page, Delete Gay cake - Even with context "Gay cake" is a mite ambiguous; "Gay cake case" is a lot more obvious but the fact there's multiple cases like this is an argument for dabbing. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 00:31, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment For context, at the time I redirected Gay cake case to the eponymous subsection: LGBT rights in Northern Ireland#Gay cake case. Abcmaxx (talk) 10:10, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Gay cake case, all results on the first two pages of Google for "Gay cake case" are Lee v Ashers, making it the primary topic, Masterpiece Cakeshop v Colorado Civil Rights Commission is the WP:ONEOTHER topic and should be a hatnote on Lee v Ashers. AlexandraAVX (talk) 16:54, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just to clarify, should gay cake be deleted, retargetted to Lee v Ashers, or kept as a redirect to Masterpiece Cakeshop? Tevildo (talk) 17:48, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm undecided, but the results seem similar to Gay cake case, in which case it should also be a redirect to Lee v Ashers. AlexandraAVX (talk) 17:56, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Just to clarify, should gay cake be deleted, retargetted to Lee v Ashers, or kept as a redirect to Masterpiece Cakeshop? Tevildo (talk) 17:48, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Make Gay cake case into a disambig page, redirect Gay cake to that page. --Bensin (talk) 22:40, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Gay cake case. Masterpiece is not commonly nicknamed "the gay cake case", unlike Ashers. Lean delete Gay cake per nom. SilverLocust 💬 05:13, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Misty Williams
[edit]Brock Harrison
[edit]Everyone around the world, c'mon - Yahoo! - It's a celebration!
[edit]Well you can tell by the way I use my walk, I'm a woman's man, no time to talk
[edit]Not a problem
[edit]Lager, lager, lager, mega-mega-white thing
[edit]How's the world treating you, Norm?
[edit]Hello, Newman!
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#Hello, Newman!
Well, now, I wouldn't say that
[edit]I'll be all around in the dark. I'll be everywhere. Wherever you can look - wherever there's a fight, so hungry people can eat, I'll be there.
[edit]Brotherhood of Shadow
[edit]- Brotherhood of Shadow → Mortal Kombat (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Brothers of the Shadow → Mortal Kombat (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Brotherhood of the Shadow → Mortal Kombat (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in the target article, leaving readers attempting to find information about this topic with no information at this target. However, there are mentions of the phrase "Brotherhood of Shadow" in multiple articles about subtopics of the target, but since it is mentioned in "multiple", it's not clear why any alternative target is preferred over another. Also, Brotherhood of Shadow is a {{R with history}} due to being subject to a WP:BLAR in 2007. Steel1943 (talk) 20:05, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- that's an apparently recurring name for a cult that... honestly, the only real pattern i can see in it is being led by quan chi. it's also the name of an unrelated game series that doesn't seem to have an article. i'd say delete, as pretty much no one cares about this name, and i doubt the games will have their own articles. not even sure ed cared about the cult at the time, since killing reptile took priority
- as for which spelling is right? the list of mortal kombat characters directly mentions and uses... two of them. in passing. and the cult isn't mentioned on quan chi's section at all. i suppose killing reptile took priority over deciding on a name as well cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For an opinion on the pre-redirect page history.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:05, 13 August 2024 (UTC)- killing reptile apparently took priority over adding sources to... anything there, so i'm not feeling it either cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:29, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm only three and a half years old.
[edit]Hello, I'm the Nostalgia Critic. I remember it, so you don't have to.
[edit]And awaaay we go! (catchphrase)
[edit]Train leaving on Track Five for Anaheim, Azusa and Cuc-amonga!
[edit]Ay-thang-jaw!
[edit]You're a haa-aa-aa-aard man, McGee!
[edit]They bite, they fight, they bite and bite and fight
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#They bite, they fight, they bite and bite and fight
Henry-y-y-y! Hen-ry Al-drich!
[edit]Kallipateira
[edit]Empire of Death (Doctor Who novel)
[edit]- Empire of Death (Doctor Who novel) → Past Doctor Adventures#List of Past Doctor Adventures (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Move history to correct disambiguation at Empire of Death (Bishop novel). Per WP:BOOKDAB we disambiguate by author not series. See Category:Novels by Peter Darvill-Evans as one example of many. --woodensuperman 08:27, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. This is a perfectly normal {{R from other disambiguation}}. We don't require readers to know our naming conventions before being able to find the article they want. In this case even if they do know that books are generally disambiguated by author they could use this search term if they don't know who wrote it. Thryduulf (talk) 12:13, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- So why do you actually object? Currently, the redirect Empire of Death (Doctor Who novel) is sitting in multiple categories, but really it should be the correctly disambiguated Empire of Death (Bishop novel) in these categories per WP:CONSISTENT. As there is a page history behind the redirected article, it would make sense for the article to be moved, rather than just de-populating the categories from one redirect and re-populating from another. --woodensuperman 12:40, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- What I am objecting to is deletion of a redirect that is useful to readers. If you actually just want to swap the redirects then that's OK, but I admit to not understanding the point. Thryduulf (talk) 13:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not advocating removal of either redirect, both are valid. Just need to move the history to the correctly disambiguated one, and make sure the correctly disambiguated one is the one populating the categories. Should have been simple maintenance, but another editor objected for no apparent reason. --woodensuperman 13:35, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- What I am objecting to is deletion of a redirect that is useful to readers. If you actually just want to swap the redirects then that's OK, but I admit to not understanding the point. Thryduulf (talk) 13:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- So why do you actually object? Currently, the redirect Empire of Death (Doctor Who novel) is sitting in multiple categories, but really it should be the correctly disambiguated Empire of Death (Bishop novel) in these categories per WP:CONSISTENT. As there is a page history behind the redirected article, it would make sense for the article to be moved, rather than just de-populating the categories from one redirect and re-populating from another. --woodensuperman 12:40, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep the history at the current location. This is a book that originates from a television series, and thus conforms across multiple naming conventions. Per WP:NCEPISODE, which primarily focuses on episode and character articles,
Where the title is the same as an episode, character, or other element from the show, disambiguate further using Article title (Show Title episode/character/element).
As per the example given, this covers all other elements; i.e. just how Serenity (Firefly episode) and Serenity (Firefly vessel) are disambiguated from each other using the same programme name, as are Empire of Death (Doctor Who episode) and Empire of Death (Doctor Who novel). Given that the article also doesn't actually exist due to the AFD related to it, note that the AFD related to the Doctor Who disambiguation, and thus the relevant history should remain at the Doctor Who disambiguation.
-- Alex_21 TALK 07:54, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is a book, not a TV episode, therefore we follow the naming conventions at WP:NCBOOKS. Simple as that. --woodensuperman 10:32, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is media from and related to a television series, thus it crosses multiple naming conventions; per the lead of NCTV, it covers the
article title for any topic related to television
. Ta. -- Alex_21 TALK 22:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC)- So where is the specific part of that guideline that covers naming conventions for TV related books? I think you'll find it's still WP:NCBOOKS. --woodensuperman 18:41, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have argued my position, and will not go in our textbook circular discussions. We'll await the consensus of this discussion. Cheers. -- Alex_21 TALK 23:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- So where is the specific part of that guideline that covers naming conventions for TV related books? I think you'll find it's still WP:NCBOOKS. --woodensuperman 18:41, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is media from and related to a television series, thus it crosses multiple naming conventions; per the lead of NCTV, it covers the
- Move per nom. This appears to be much ado... why was the original page move halted? Yes, "Bishop novel" is the canonical name where we'd expect an article and where the history should live, as stated by the nom, but also the current title is totally fine so we should keep the redirect. Unless I'm missing a conversation somewhere, this seems uncontroversial. So move it to the proposed title and keep all redirects as valid. Easy. czar 19:33, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as is, I guess, so we don't reward wasting the community's time by starting a weekslong discussion over frivolities. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:00, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Ironically, without your non-!vote above, an admin might have been minded to close this as a move, so you've actually ended up wasting more of the community's time on what should have been a straightforward move in line with our guidelines. --woodensuperman 11:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Attacking another editor on their !vote is the poorest faith move I've seen yet. They have every right to voice their opinion; your saltiness that it wasn't closed your way needs to be taken elsewhere. -- Alex_21 TALK 11:23, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Ironically, without your non-!vote above, an admin might have been minded to close this as a move, so you've actually ended up wasting more of the community's time on what should have been a straightforward move in line with our guidelines. --woodensuperman 11:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 14:35, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. After all that, I have just realised that there isn't actually another novel called Empire of Death, so I assume it would be non-controversial to move the page history to Empire of Death (novel) instead, as additional disambiguators no longer seem necessary per WP:BOOKDAB. --woodensuperman 11:08, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as an {{R from other disambiguation}}. C F A 💬 21:17, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Keep / Procedural close as wrong forum. They are fine as redirect titles. For the page history, this is a controversial move request and may be listed at WP:RM#CM. Jay 💬 14:00, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
List of Strogg in Quake 4
[edit]Quackifier
[edit]- Quackifier → Quake III Arena (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
not that i'm the biggest and oldest quake fan out there, but i haven't found any info on anything in the history ever actually existing with this name. results gave me nothing reliable cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:37, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Revert and send to AfD. This was an article about a bit of software that "modified the OpenGL driver for ATI video cards, to change all references of "quake" to "quack"" to hack some code in the videocard drivers. I can't verify that (the reference is a dead link and google finds only usernames and ChatGPT output, after I insist I don't mean "qualifier"). Even though it's almost certainly not notable I can't find any evidence of the content being discussed and it's not speedy deletable so AfD is the correct venue. Thryduulf (talk) 14:43, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per
it's almost certainly not notable
, and I agree with that assessment. There's no need to take a bureaucratic extra step for something this obvious. -- Tavix (talk) 18:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC) - Delete. The article was redirected in 2008. If the subject is not mentioned anywhere, then this thing should be deleted, considering the existence of an article about the subject of this redirect is a clear WP:NOTGUIDE violation. Steel1943 (talk) 18:30, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- I suspect that an article about this subject that is not a guide could be written quite easily (focus on the technology, the impact of it, reactions to it, any legacy, etc). Whether such an article would meet the GNG is a different question and one that can policy says can only be answered at AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 02:10, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- the answer already seems to be "no", considering how even you found nothing reliable, so what would be the point of this extra step? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:39, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Policy says that articles which don't meet the speedy deletion criteria are discussed at AfD. Ignoring that policy will not benefit the encyclopaedia so IAR doesn't apply (IAR is rarely a good match when it comes to deletion anyway), because AfD gives a full chance for people who evaluate article content to evaluate article content and maximum visibility to those who know the topic area and can find sources. Such people do not tend to watch RfD because it's nearly always not relevant - because RfD discusses redirects not the deletion of article content. Thryduulf (talk) 17:55, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- to be honest, i don't really see how that justifies it. the stub before had one (1) source that doesn't even seem to be primarily about quackifier (couldn't get it to load /_ \), so there's no real point in interrupting the deletion of a pretty unambiguously not very notable redirect in one place so it can be deleted as a pretty unambiguously not notable article. also, where did the "speedy" part come from? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:07, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- This is a redirect, not an article, so the "policy" that Thryduulf made a vague wave to, if it were to exist, wouldn't apply here. -- Tavix (talk) 23:02, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- This is a disputed BLAR. Disputed BLARs are reverted and sent to AfD for discussion of the article content, as the article content is what is being deleted. Thryduulf (talk) 13:46, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- No it's not. No one is advocating for keeping the article content. Even if there were, WP:BLAR says that if there is a disagreement that
other methods of dispute resolution should be used
. RfD is a method of dispute resolution. -- Tavix (talk) 13:52, 15 August 2024 (UTC)- The redirection is disputed. I am arguing that the content should be restored and discussed as article content according to the policies for deletion of article content. In what way is that not a disputed BLAR? Thryduulf (talk) 14:08, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- In BLAR, the disagreement is between someone who wants to keep the page as an article and someone who wants to blank-and-redirect the article. In order for you to take that position, you must be in favor of keeping the article. You have not taken that position, your argument is purely jurisdictional. Please cite the policy you are appealing to. -- Tavix (talk) 14:18, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- The disagreement is over the status as a redirect. The policy is Wikipedia:Deletion policy:
Pages that do not fall in the above three categories [copyvio, speedy deletion, prod] may be deleted after community discussion at one of the deletion discussion venues
. Deletion venues is linked to: Wikipedia:Deletion processes which states that AfD is for articles and RfD is for redirects. We're dealing with article content hidden by an undiscussed redirect that has been objected to: i.e. a WP:BLAR which statesIf other editors disagree with this blanking, [...] the content issues should be discussed at the relevant talk page, and other methods of dispute resolution should be used, such as restoring the article and nominating the article for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion.
. - Please quote the policy that allows for deletion of articles at RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 18:29, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- The policy is Wikipedia:Deletion policy:
Pages that do not fall in the above three categories [copyvio, speedy deletion, prod] may be deleted after community discussion at one of the deletion discussion venues
. Deletion venues is linked to: Wikipedia:Deletion processes which states that AfD is for articles and RfD is for redirects. This is a redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 18:44, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- The policy is Wikipedia:Deletion policy:
- The disagreement is over the status as a redirect. The policy is Wikipedia:Deletion policy:
- In BLAR, the disagreement is between someone who wants to keep the page as an article and someone who wants to blank-and-redirect the article. In order for you to take that position, you must be in favor of keeping the article. You have not taken that position, your argument is purely jurisdictional. Please cite the policy you are appealing to. -- Tavix (talk) 14:18, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- The redirection is disputed. I am arguing that the content should be restored and discussed as article content according to the policies for deletion of article content. In what way is that not a disputed BLAR? Thryduulf (talk) 14:08, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- No it's not. No one is advocating for keeping the article content. Even if there were, WP:BLAR says that if there is a disagreement that
- This is a disputed BLAR. Disputed BLARs are reverted and sent to AfD for discussion of the article content, as the article content is what is being deleted. Thryduulf (talk) 13:46, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Policy says that articles which don't meet the speedy deletion criteria are discussed at AfD. Ignoring that policy will not benefit the encyclopaedia so IAR doesn't apply (IAR is rarely a good match when it comes to deletion anyway), because AfD gives a full chance for people who evaluate article content to evaluate article content and maximum visibility to those who know the topic area and can find sources. Such people do not tend to watch RfD because it's nearly always not relevant - because RfD discusses redirects not the deletion of article content. Thryduulf (talk) 17:55, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- the answer already seems to be "no", considering how even you found nothing reliable, so what would be the point of this extra step? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:39, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- I suspect that an article about this subject that is not a guide could be written quite easily (focus on the technology, the impact of it, reactions to it, any legacy, etc). Whether such an article would meet the GNG is a different question and one that can policy says can only be answered at AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 02:10, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
List of Strogg in Quake II
[edit]- List of Strogg in Quake II → Quake II (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
not present in the target cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:31, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Revert without prejudice to AfD or merge per WP:BLAR. The only discussion I've found is from 2006 where one editor suggested a merge and a second editor disagreed. That's very obviously not consensus. Thryduulf (talk) 14:45, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per my comments at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 13#List of Strogg in Quake 4. -- Tavix (talk) 18:22, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. The article was redirected in 2007 and then again in 2009. If the subject is not mentioned anywhere, then this thing should be deleted, considering the existence of an article about the subject of this redirect is a clear WP:NOTGUIDE violation. Steel1943 (talk) 18:31, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- One person redirected it both times, without discussion. The only discussion (if you can call exactly two comments a discussion) that has been had (as far as I've found) came to no consensus. That's not close to consensus to delete - especially as the suggested action was merging not deletion. Lists of elements from notable works are frequently notable and don't violate NOTGUIDE. Whether this list is notable is a question for AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 02:16, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Back then, Wikipedia was flooded with WP:NOTGUIDE and WP:NOTFANDOM violations related to video games. Since then, Wikipedia has evolved to not include or encourage the creation of articles that are against such policies. Restoring this article for any reason would be regression. Steel1943 (talk) 13:33, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- on top of what steel said, i haven't found anything specifying that this has to be done in afd, as opposed to here. buuuut chances are i haven't looked hard enough, so eh. the point still stands that doing this would only result in something being discussed and found worthy of deletion twice in a row, and go against previously established consensus that those kinds of redirects are usually deleted right away cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:46, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- By definition, any redirect (which this is) can be deleted at RfD. Thryduulf's understanding is incorrect. -- Tavix (talk) 22:56, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- That would allow anybody to delete an article by unilaterally redirecting it to a random target and then nominating it here, which is why disputed BLARs are reverted and sent to AfD for discussion. This is a disputed BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 13:44, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- ...and every time someone unilaterally redirects something to a random target and subsequently nominates it here, they get reverted. That's not the case here, this page has long been stable as a redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 13:55, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- There is no recency requirement for any of this. We don't speedy delete article content just because it's old, if someone thinks it should be deleted it gets discussed at AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 14:07, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- For pages that are redirects, if someone thinks it should be deleted it gets discussed at RfD. If you want this to be discussed at AfD, you should make a compelling argument that the content may be notable. -- Tavix (talk) 14:11, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- again, where did the "speedy" part come from? if i wanted speedy deletion because i thought it applied to one or more of the criteria, i would have tagged it as such, as opposed to taking it to rfd cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:20, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- The only justifications for deleting article content at a venue other than AfD are if it meets a speedy deletion criterion or if it has previously been discussed with a consensus that it shouldn't be an article. Deleting at RfD is equivalent to reversing the redirect and then speedy deleting the article - which would obviously be out of process. Doing it in single step is just as out of process. Thryduulf (talk) 18:23, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- i hate to disagree with an admin, but from reading wp:rdel and wp:del, i don't believe that's how any of this works. if a redirect refers to something that isn't mentioned in the target, and it's found that there's no reliable coverage of it, i think it falls within reason 2 to delete as stated in rdel, as it would leave readers to wonder where the list of strogg or info on quackifier are. if every blar'd redirect had to be reverted to an undercooked, effectively unsourced article and taken to afd to be discussed for the same reason as if it were still a redirect, a lot of rfd nominations would have been done out of process for ages now, with no admins happening to pick up on it
- and also rfd isn't solely for speedy deletion i guess cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 21:00, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- Those are reasons to delete a redirect, yes, but they aren't reasons to delete articles. Every undiscussed BLAR that doesn't meet the speedy deletion criteria should be reverted to the article (and optionally taken to AfD) if there is no appropriate target for the redirect (including the current target) and no consensus for new content (e.g. a dab page) at the title. That not every such redirect is spotted is not a reason to harm the encyclopaedia (which every out of process deletion does) when it is spotted. Thryduulf (talk) 23:58, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- i really must be missing something, because i haven't found the policy that states that undiscussed blars should be reverted and taken to afd, even despite pre-existing consensus that they'd get deleted for not being notable at all. do you happen to know where it is? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:20, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Those are reasons to delete a redirect, yes, but they aren't reasons to delete articles. Every undiscussed BLAR that doesn't meet the speedy deletion criteria should be reverted to the article (and optionally taken to AfD) if there is no appropriate target for the redirect (including the current target) and no consensus for new content (e.g. a dab page) at the title. That not every such redirect is spotted is not a reason to harm the encyclopaedia (which every out of process deletion does) when it is spotted. Thryduulf (talk) 23:58, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- The only justifications for deleting article content at a venue other than AfD are if it meets a speedy deletion criterion or if it has previously been discussed with a consensus that it shouldn't be an article. Deleting at RfD is equivalent to reversing the redirect and then speedy deleting the article - which would obviously be out of process. Doing it in single step is just as out of process. Thryduulf (talk) 18:23, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- There is no recency requirement for any of this. We don't speedy delete article content just because it's old, if someone thinks it should be deleted it gets discussed at AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 14:07, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- ...and every time someone unilaterally redirects something to a random target and subsequently nominates it here, they get reverted. That's not the case here, this page has long been stable as a redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 13:55, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- That would allow anybody to delete an article by unilaterally redirecting it to a random target and then nominating it here, which is why disputed BLARs are reverted and sent to AfD for discussion. This is a disputed BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 13:44, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
- By definition, any redirect (which this is) can be deleted at RfD. Thryduulf's understanding is incorrect. -- Tavix (talk) 22:56, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- One person redirected it both times, without discussion. The only discussion (if you can call exactly two comments a discussion) that has been had (as far as I've found) came to no consensus. That's not close to consensus to delete - especially as the suggested action was merging not deletion. Lists of elements from notable works are frequently notable and don't violate NOTGUIDE. Whether this list is notable is a question for AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 02:16, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
BFGv3.14
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#BFGv3.14
Hellish invasion of Mars
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#Hellish invasion of Mars
"Children's games", "Children's Games" & friends
[edit]- Children's games → List of children's games (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Children's Games → List of children's games (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Childrens' games → List of children's games (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Childrens Games → List of children's games (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I was originally considering WP:BOLDly retargeting these redirects to disambiguation page Children's toys and games to allow readers to determine which page they were intending to find if they searched these terms (the current target is listed at Children's toys and games), but ... the existence of Children's Games (Bruegel) complicates that due to WP:DIFFCAPS. I'm still believing that these redirects should be retargeted to Children's toys and games, but I'm not sure if Children's Games (Bruegel) should be moved to Children's Games per both WP:DIFFCAPS and since ... retargeting Children's Games to Children's toys and games and then listing Children's Games (Bruegel) in the "See also" section seems to both be odd and have no precedence. Steel1943 (talk) 19:22, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:17, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Move Children's Games (Bruegel) to Children's Games, then retarget all to Children's Games, and then add hatnote to List of children's games. I think the painting here should be the primary topic here as it has this specific name, while "List of children's games" is more general and has a few different aliases that mean the same thing (eg. Playground games, Folk games, etc). BugGhost🦗👻 13:20, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think it's okay to handle the upper-case and lower-case versions differently, per WP:DIFFCAPS. Retarget the lower-case versions to Children's toys and games per nom as ambiguous. Disambiguate Children's Games between Children's toys and games, Children's Games (Bruegel), and International Children's Games. Retarget Childrens Games to the new disambiguation page. - Eureka Lott 17:36, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Couch sex
[edit]- Couch sex → JD Vance#Public perception (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Although one of the references includes "couch sex", it's not discussed in the actual article, and I'm curious if something like this will blow over... Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 22:55, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete under G10. It's not plausible that someone is looking for Vance under the term "Couch sex"; this is purely about disparaging the subject. Dylnuge (Talk • Edits) 23:20, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- There's a number of similar redirects pointing here: JD Vance's couch, JD Vance couch controversy, JD Vance couch hoax, Did JD Vance have sex with a couch?. —Cryptic 23:30, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- While I'm not convinced all of those should exist either, they all have "JD Vance" in the title, which al least brings them into the realm of plausibility. Dylnuge (Talk • Edits) 23:39, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- G10 definitely doesn't apply to the suggested alternative target Casting couch. I'm not really sure that's a reasonable redirect for Couch sex either, so I tilt towards deletion in either case, but it's only the Vance target that carries serious BLP issues. Dylnuge (Talk • Edits) 20:20, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- While I'm not convinced all of those should exist either, they all have "JD Vance" in the title, which al least brings them into the realm of plausibility. Dylnuge (Talk • Edits) 23:39, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- There's a number of similar redirects pointing here: JD Vance's couch, JD Vance couch controversy, JD Vance couch hoax, Did JD Vance have sex with a couch?. —Cryptic 23:30, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe retarget to Casting couch? —Cryptic 23:26, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- That's more of a "sex couch" than "couch sex"? Jruderman (talk) 00:09, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- erm, someone must have removed it. the info I was trying to direct to was just under "public opinion", and I've also been changing similar redirects to wherever has been the current destination since nobody could figure out where it goes in the article. I think it was also discussed in the talk page. YodaYogaYogurt154 (talk) 23:28, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- nope, the info is there, but yeah. a more helpful redirect would have been "JD Vance couch sex" or something. I can agree with the re-target to the obviously more established "casting couch" 👍 YodaYogaYogurt154 (talk) 23:32, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- retarget to casting couch. like how team fortress 2 isn't the primary topic for the concept of sandwiches, jd vance isn't the primary topic for the concept of having sex in (or with) a couch. i'd say retarget to castng couch, if only because human mating strategies, human sexual activity, sexual intercourse, and sexual arousal don't necessarily mention couches or sofas a whole lot cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 00:54, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Casting couch - That seems the most plausible and least-likely-to-be-G10'd redirect. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 17:47, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- delete Even for Vance, we have to maintain some standards of objectivity. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- 2-dab JD Vance couch controversy & Casting couch. — Jruderman (talk) 00:10, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:14, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Screamingly obvious delete as an attack, and no, I don't think casting couch is an acceptable substitute. Someone may be looking for pointers on how do to it without falling off, after all. Mangoe (talk) 13:04, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Casting couch - title isn't related to JD Vance. Casting couch is the most likely target for a user searching for "Couch sex". The redirects pointed out by Cryptic in an above comment that directly mention JD Vance should be kept unaltered, especially as the hoax is now mentioned in the article - JD Vance#Hillbilly Elegy masturbation hoax BugGhost🦗👻 13:28, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all the first one is an obvious WP:G10. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:47, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This discussion should have all of the JD Vance/couch redirects as a bundle. There are multiple ones (that all point to nonexistent sections of his article) and this discussion is only handling one of them. Liz Read! Talk! 22:25, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- i disagree, as those have the (in)decency of actually mentioning the guy. this one has been nominated specifically because it doesn't do that cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:48, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Mangoe, Casting couch is not an acceptable substitute. This cannot be a dab. Do not bundle other mentioned redirects with this. Jay 💬 13:41, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
Cecile Shapiro
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 20#Cecile Shapiro
Midnight Fantasy
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 20#Midnight Fantasy
Brühl-Vochem–Cologne-Godorf Harbour railway
[edit]Monsoon Revolution
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#Monsoon Revolution
Draft:Joe Biden
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 20#Draft:Joe Biden
F. Fitzgerald
[edit]- F. Fitzgerald → F. Scott Fitzgerald (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Delete. Or redirect to FitzGerald (surname). jnestorius(talk) 02:35, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Someone entering this title is probably looking for F. Scott Fitzgerald, but the omission doesn't seem to have affinity (AFAICT he was never referred to as "F. Fitzgerald"). If you search for "F. Fitzgerald", F. Scott Fitzgerald is the first result, so the redirect doesn't have much navigational value either. jlwoodwa (talk) 06:11, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Kablammo (talk) 09:25, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Very clearly the primary topic, and there are hatnotes to others who might be searched for. Thryduulf (talk) 10:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Very clearly not the primary topic in Ireland, where the name FitzGerald originates. There is currently no hatnote for F. Fitzgerald on the F. Scott Fitzgerald article. One would need to add F. Fitzgerald (disambiguation) as a redirect to Fitzgerald (surname)#F in order to pick up Fern Fitzgerald and Frances FitzGerald (disambiguation). I would oppose any such hatnote as it would clutter the article and invite the inference that "F. Fitzgerald" is a reasonably common way to refer to "F. Scott Fitzgerald" as opposed to a very rare way. jnestorius(talk) 21:58, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Thruduulf. It does not lack affinity, by the way, as excluding a middle name is a reasonable thing to do in many cases. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:41, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm confused. Isn't "this modification could just as well apply to a vast number of other titles" the definition of "lacks affinity"? jlwoodwa (talk) 04:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Jlwoodwa: Affinity applies to things like a period at the end of a title, being in quotes, etc. In other words, an error that could apply to almost absolutely any title. A title without a middle name only applies to names, and furthermore only names including a middle name. It is always reasonable to leave out a middle name for a redirect, as long as there is no ambiguity in what's covered (or there is a primary topic as in this case). I would support that every single time. I would not support every single title having a redirect from that title in quotes or with a full stop at the end and so forth. Affinity is in regard to much broader variants, not specific ones like this. This situation clearly does not apply to every title (or a vastly broad enough swath of titles). Even if it did, it would still be appropriate all the time, rendering affinity double moot. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 09:20, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm confused. Isn't "this modification could just as well apply to a vast number of other titles" the definition of "lacks affinity"? jlwoodwa (talk) 04:42, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Does seem to be occasionally used in product listings and non-RS. If there were usage of the term to refer to anyone else, that low-quality usage wouldn't be weighted very strongly, but the only search results I see are spurious ones about John F. Fitzgerald. (The sources still write out the entirety of "John F. Fitzgerald"; Google just includes them because the substring matches.) Limited usage trumps no usage, so keep. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 22:18, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Autogenerated listings and poorly copyedited self-publishing? I don't think is persuasive evidence that real humans are using the term other than as a slip. The term is too ambiguous to prioritise autocorrecting a slip. jnestorius(talk) 22:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Are there other instances of anyone else being called "F. Fitzgerald"? -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 02:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- "Ms F. Fitzgerald", references to Frances Fitzgerald (politician) in Dáil proceedings jnestorius(talk) 15:58, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Are there other instances of anyone else being called "F. Fitzgerald"? -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 02:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Autogenerated listings and poorly copyedited self-publishing? I don't think is persuasive evidence that real humans are using the term other than as a slip. The term is too ambiguous to prioritise autocorrecting a slip. jnestorius(talk) 22:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have added Fionn Fitzgerald (born 1990), Irish football player, to the surname page. BD2412 T 21:58, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:43, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
Red Caesar
[edit]Assassination of Donald Trump
[edit]Pokémon incident
[edit]Photosite
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 20#Photosite
OpticFilm 7200i
[edit]Orsini Polypytch
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 20#Orsini Polypytch
Хвощ
[edit]Estro
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 20#Estro
Paris Olympics
[edit]- Paris Olympics → 2024 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Paris Olympic Games → 2024 Summer Olympics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The Olympics are over now. Disambiguate. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 23:57, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nomination. Los Angeles Olympics would be the same after the 2028 Games conclude. Ahri Boy (talk) 02:09, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support: per nom. Vestrian24Bio (TALK) 02:38, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support: as per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 04:34, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Paris hosting the Olympic Games. -- Tavix (talk) 14:25, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per Tavix (though that article's lead is somewhat poorly written). 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:35, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support disambiguation per nom. Merge Paris hosting the Olympic Games into its respective articles; there is nothing in common between 1900 & 1924 and 2024 except the city. It doesn't warrant an article. IntGrah (talk) 15:44, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- If so, just revert the recent change of Paris Olympics to Paris hosting the Olympic Games and revert to this version. -- Tavix (talk) 18:23, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support this – IntGrah (talk) 14:30, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- If so, just revert the recent change of Paris Olympics to Paris hosting the Olympic Games and revert to this version. -- Tavix (talk) 18:23, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Support disambiguation of Paris Olympics per the nomination and prior discussion. There is strong precedent with Los Angeles Olympics, Salt Lake City Olympics, Lake Placid Olympics, Beijing Olympics, Innsbruck Olympics, Tokyo Olympics, etc. However, the ambiguous term Paris Olympic Games should not redirect to the 2024 instance, but rather to the Paris Olympics disambiguation, effectively restoring the prior redirect there. (A bot recently "fixed" the double-redirect there that would not have existed in the first place if Paris Olympics had been a proper WP:DAB from the start, in line with precedent.) --Tim Parenti (talk) 17:58, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to disambiguation page - Since Paris has hosted three Olympiads, it should be a dab between the three. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:17, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate by restoring this version and moving it back to Paris Olympics, as suggested by Tavix. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:04, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for finding this old version. I hadn't realized that Paris Olympics had been a proper disambiguation page at some point in the past, so your proposal is now my preferred mechanism for its restoration. --Tim Parenti (talk) 18:25, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Make into a dis-ambiguation page the same way it was done successfully with London Olympics. Georgia guy (talk) 11:14, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Paris hosting the Olympic Games which is a broad-concept article and is the disambiguation page. Disambiguation pages should not duplicate BCAs unless there are additional meanings. C F A 💬 02:16, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- As has been pointed out above, Paris hosting the Olympic Games once was a disambiguation page in this old version, before an attempt was made to convert it into an article. However, nothing that is said in any of its sections is not already said (or could not easily be said) in the corresponding article, typically in the lede. Because it merely duplicates the articles it references, it has gone out-of-date in several places — most obviously the over-detailed 2024 section, but also, e.g., updates to the number of athletes who participated in 1900. As it does nothing to actually cover the "relationship between a wide range of related concepts", it is not a proper WP:BCA and is simply duplicative where a WP:DAB would do. --Tim Parenti (talk) 02:47, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- I think the article just needs to be cleaned up. This is a reasonable topic for a broad-concept article. C F A 💬 16:00, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- As has been pointed out above, Paris hosting the Olympic Games once was a disambiguation page in this old version, before an attempt was made to convert it into an article. However, nothing that is said in any of its sections is not already said (or could not easily be said) in the corresponding article, typically in the lede. Because it merely duplicates the articles it references, it has gone out-of-date in several places — most obviously the over-detailed 2024 section, but also, e.g., updates to the number of athletes who participated in 1900. As it does nothing to actually cover the "relationship between a wide range of related concepts", it is not a proper WP:BCA and is simply duplicative where a WP:DAB would do. --Tim Parenti (talk) 02:47, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
List of countries by Military Strength Index
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 22#List of countries by Military Strength Index
Ibrahim Mohamed
[edit]Debayer
[edit]2028 United States presidential election
[edit]Anti universe
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 22#Anti universe
Kanji draftspace XNRs
[edit]Manalo Cult
[edit]SSFII
[edit]Turbo Edition
[edit]Praamzius
[edit]I kind of doubt that the minor planet is more relevant than the deity here, so this should probably point at the same target as the redirect just below. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:12, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Agree. I originally created the redirect assuming no such article for the deity existed, I endorse changing it with this in mind. exoplanetaryscience (talk) 23:26, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Agree, but not to the refined "List of gods" of the below nomination (assuming this is the target the nom meant). Praamzius is mentioned multiple times in List of Lithuanian gods and mythological figures, so can be retargeted there. Jay 💬 19:08, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Jay, it should point at the same target as the redirect below, whatever that will be. Is your comment a "keep" vote in relation to the nomination below? I've proposed retargeting. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- I misunderstood that the target you wanted was "List of Lithuanian gods and mythological figures#List of gods". Oddly, I find the entry at "List of Lithuanian gods and mythological figures", with the varied spellings, more useful than Dievas itself. So yes, it will be a keep with respect to the nomination below. Dievas may be linked at the list article entry though. Jay 💬 17:35, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Jay, it should point at the same target as the redirect below, whatever that will be. Is your comment a "keep" vote in relation to the nomination below? I've proposed retargeting. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:08, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Praamžius
[edit]- Praamžius → List of Lithuanian gods and mythological figures#List of gods (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Dievas would probably be more specific of a target. A Praamžis redirect should exist (be created later) with the same target as this one. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:11, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Karorius
[edit]- Karorius → List of Lithuanian gods and mythological figures (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Does not seem to be mentioned on the English Wikipedia. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:06, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have tagged it as an {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 19:24, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Bute (mythology)
[edit]- Bute (mythology) → List of Lithuanian gods and mythological figures (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned at target. Correctly diacriticised Butė does not exist, and only mention of that spelling on the English Wikipedia is an unrelated surname at the 2019 Lithuanian presidential election article. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:04, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Bute (Greek mythology) redirects to Butes. Bundle that here, or retarget to Butes. Jay 💬 19:18, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
- I see no reason to bundle a redirect that points at its unambiguous meaning. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:09, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Diedievaite
[edit]- Diedievaite → List of Lithuanian gods and mythological figures (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Does not seem to be mentioned on the English Wikipedia. Correctly diacriticised Diedievaitė does not exist. 1234qwer1234qwer4 23:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have tagged it as an {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 19:23, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Aušlavis
[edit]- Aušlavis → List of Lithuanian gods and mythological figures (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Auslavis → List of Lithuanian gods and mythological figures (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Does not seem to be mentioned in any article on the English Wikipedia, though this is linked from the {{Baltic religion}} navigational template. 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:59, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have tagged Aušlavis as an {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 19:29, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Aušautas
[edit]- Aušautas → List of Lithuanian gods and mythological figures (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Ausautas → List of Lithuanian gods and mythological figures (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Does not seem to be mentioned on the English Wikipedia. 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:56, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- I have tagged Aušautas as an {{R from merge}}. Probably retarget Ausautas to Ausātas. Jay 💬 19:31, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Mario party switch
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 18#Mario party switch
Mario Party (Nintendo 3DS)
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 18#Mario Party (Nintendo 3DS)
Mario Party 3DS
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 18#Mario Party 3DS
Mario party revolution
[edit]- Mario party revolution → Mario Party 8 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I'm not able to locate any references that refer to Mario Party 8 as "Mario Party Revolution" or any variation of that phrase. Mia Mahey (talk) 20:19, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nominator's information Red Director (talk) 21:08, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - The Wii was codenamed "Revolution" prior to its final release, and this game was announced early on, so conceptually, it makes sense, though I'm unsure this term was ever actually used... Sergecross73 msg me 22:19, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
Mario Party Wii
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 18#Mario Party Wii
Mario Bandstand
[edit]Boo's Haunted Bash
[edit]- Boo's Haunted Bash → Mario Party 4 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in the target. Mia Mahey (talk) 20:07, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: The page has history, but is not substantial (and content is unsourced), hence I have not tagged it as such. Jay 💬 19:34, 18 August 2024 (UTC)
Unio personalis
[edit]- Unio personalis → Prosopon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Personal Union of Christ → Christology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Personal union of Christ → Christology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Unio Personalis → Christology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Unio personalia → Christology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Unio Personalia → Christology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The specific terms don't seem to be explicitly mentioned in any article, so it is a bit unclear where these should point. The first redirect was created in 2007, targeting Hypostatic union; this was later changed to Person of Christ (now merged into Christology) along with the creation of the other redirects. Only the first one was rather recently changed to target Prosopon. Apart from these, the discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 March 11#Unipersonalist (and the Nontrinitarianism article which was the target decided on in that RfD) seem pertinent. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:09, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget where necessary to Hypostatic union. – Fayenatic London 20:16, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
Christologistical
[edit]Brahmanical Hinduism
[edit]Silly mountain
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 18#Silly mountain
Perfect victory
[edit]Iasst
[edit]- Iasst → Institute of advanced Study in science and technology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This is intended as an acronym, so it should be capitalized. However, the acronym IASST --> International Association for Safety and Survival Training. The Institute of advanced Study in science and technology page is new, still unreviewed, potentially non-notable. The current target for Iasst has been redirected, given a previous XfD closer. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 22:57, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. It is confusing to have redirects in different cases point to different targets. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:13, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Out of the two "IASST" potential targets (International Association for Safety and Survival Training and Department of Science and Technology (India), which is what encompasses the Institute of Advanced Study in Science and Technology), the latter dwarfs the former in views - see these stats: [25] (but that doesn't necessarily mean viewers are looking for Institute of Advanced Study in Science and Technology when going to Department of Science and Technology (India), so doesn't really help the PTOPIC search). Searching "IASST" in a websearch gives Safety and Survival Training as a first result, but the majority of the ones afterwards point to the Indian science dept. Seeing as a primary topic doesn't appear obvious I suggest disambiguating - ie. delete Iasst and then converting IASST to a minidab which points to both International Association for Safety and Survival Training and Department of Science and Technology (India). BugGhost🦗👻 18:57, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:44, 10 August 2024 (UTC)- No reason to delete, but the different capitalisation should not go to a different target. IASST should probably made into a disambiguation page then Iasst can redirect to it. Redirects with only the first letter capitalised are usually kept (unless consensus has changed recently), and I don't know if these are pronounced as a word but the combination of letters looks like it could be. Peter James (talk) 12:02, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- I turned IASST to a dab. iasst may be retarget to it per Peter. Jay 💬 08:25, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
2025 UK general election
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 17#2025 UK general election
Lee Min-ho (singer)
[edit]Joe Biden's uncle who got eaten by cannibals
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 17#Joe Biden's uncle who got eaten by cannibals
Priestess
[edit]- Priestess → Priest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Female priest → Ordination of women (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Re-target to Ordination of women. This is for consistency with Female priest, as agreed upon at Talk:Priestess_(disambiguation)#Requested_move_25_August_2023. Discussion of the other redirect occurred at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2023_September_15#Female_priest. There are concerns about the appropriateness of the current target to house a section for the target of this redirect. See Talk:Priest#Priestesses. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 19:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose. A priestess is a female priest, therefore the topic is clearly the covered by the article at priest. I've never heard the term used in connection with the origination of women, and would be frankly rather WP:ASTONISHed if the redirect went there. — Amakuru (talk) 20:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's ordination, not origination. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- I nominated the other redirect Female priest in case we want to change it to Priest for consistency.
- @Amakuru: You "never heard the term ... the origination of women, and ... WP:ASTONISHed"?
FYI, I created this RfD while dealing with Draft:Priestess, and related articles' history might be useful. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 21:09, 22 July 2024 (UTC)Keep per Shhhnotsoloud - if someone prepends "female" to this then the topic is most likely to refer to ordination of women
— User:Amakuru 15:08, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I might support a split of Ordination of women, with some of it being split off to Priestess and the rest moved to Ordination of women in Christianity. These appear to be 2 separate notable concepts that don't have to be combined. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:12, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. That is what I've been attempting to accurately do.
- Personal bias disclosed: I use the title. And it is legally valid in my region.
- Whilst I am a minority to use it in my particular faith tradition, I know many other women in ministry of different faiths, who also sincerely use it for official purposes. As well
- As historically. Any woman in many countries, that worked as a ceremony lead in any kind of temple, often was called a Priestess. Priestess Noel Ann (talk) 18:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- In favour of making the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Priestess its own page, linked to Ordination of women.
- Priestess Noel Ann (talk) 14:51, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More discussion may need to occur regarding Draft:Priestess and its article potential to help form consensus here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 21:37, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think RfD is the place to discuss whether Draft:Priestess should be an article since there are already places for that to happen. If there is a "Priestess" article, I agree that Female priest should redirect there. If that article doesn't exist (or until it does), I think the current situation seems ideal: (a) Priestess should redirect to Priest (just like Actress→Actor); (b) I have less strong feelings about "Female Priest"→"Ordination of woman" but I think it makes sense. People might want to describe someone as a "priestess" with a hyperlink and have it redirect to a page explaining what the profession/role means. That seems pretty unlikely with "female priest". —mako๛ 12:18, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, happens quite often. Replace the redirect with an article, and the discussion gets closed. If need be, the "new" article can go to WP:AFD. Steel1943 (talk) 00:50, 11 August 2024 (UTC)
- This is more than replacing the redirect with an article. Priestess Noel Ann had turned the redirect to article twice, and was reverted twice. Procyon117 said while reverting
The edits you've put can just be integrated into the priest article.
. Per Procyon117's advice, Priestess Noel Ann revived a 2006 discussion at Talk:Priest but got no response. The nom advised Priestess Noel Ann to follow a draft process via AfC, however the draft is not currently under AfC. Hence we can maintain the status quo while we wait for AfC / draft process to play out. Jay 💬 09:15, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Unreal engine
[edit]Template:AFC infobox
[edit]Dirtbag (and other Transformers redirects)
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 17#Dirtbag (and other Transformers redirects)
Formula one in schools
[edit]Draft:Jaheim
[edit]Le Clique: Vida Rockstar (X)
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 17#Le Clique: Vida Rockstar (X)
Priyanka Chahar Choudhary
[edit]My cock is hard
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 17#My cock is hard
Movies about pbuh
[edit]Kalki (upcoming film)
[edit]- Noting: the page for Kalki 2898 AD has 3 million monthly pageviews in early to mid August (the time of this RfD), and the "upcoming film" redirect (now deleted) had 5 monthly pageviews, give-or-take, iirc.
- Generously, 0.00002% of the 3 million searchers accidentally clicked on a blatantly inaccurate title, for a movie that released in June 2024 (two months prior). A redlink would not dissuade users from reaching this target, as nobody actually thought this movie was still upcoming in August. The reason these numbers on the redirect are so low for such a popular movie, because there was no article content here for over a year+, as it was moved away from this title 13 months ago. This explains why there were a microscopic / inconsequential number of people trying to get to Kalki 2898 AD from this title, despite it being the third most viewed article on the entire Wikipedia site at the time.
- Nobody was suggesting a speedy deletion (no criteria apply), so I'm not sure why that was specified; it was always going to be a slow deletion here. But gesturing towards an enforced slow delete for the purpose of "catching stragglers" would offer zero benefit here, as its not as if this title was recently moved. There's been nothing here for over a year+, the 5 monthly pageviews to a 3,000,000 viewed target are inconsequential and (imo) totally ignorable, and it's been a misleading title for 2 months -> deletable per the generally agreed-upon WP:UFILM suggestion. Utopes (talk / cont) 17:40, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not sure why the polemic on a closed discussion here, but I explained my reasoning with my !vote. What matters is the absolute number of page views, not the relative number - the readers we inconvenience don't care (and shouldn't care) how many we don't inconvenience. Why people are or are not viewing the redirect does not matter, what matters is only whether they are or are not (and whether they get to their intended target or not). WP:UFILM is nothing more than a begrudging compromise between those who care for strict accuracy above everything else and those who regard getting readers to the content they are looking for as the most important factor, don't attach more weight to it than it deserves (which is little). Thryduulf (talk) 20:46, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
Wonderland (upcoming film)
[edit]Györöd, Romania
[edit]Zelda Games in Development
[edit]Virginia & truckee 11, reno
[edit]Windproof umbrella
[edit]Template:Bruh
[edit]List of storms named Jeana
[edit]Occupied Korea
[edit]All-Star Batman and Robin
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 21#All-Star Batman and Robin
List of Mario Party minigames
[edit]Tonies
[edit]A quick Google suggests that the primary topic is toys made by Tonies (company), sending this to RfD because I'm not sure if it should be retargeted, disambiguated, or kept as is. Rusalkii (talk) 22:46, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Send to WP:RM. The policy-compliant solution would be to move Tonies (company) to Tonies, with a hatnote pointing to Tony (disambiguation), but this is the wrong venue to make that decision. Tevildo (talk) 00:08, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Actually, I think this is the correct venue to discuss whether the redirect is leading to the correct topic or not. But it probably is not, since the Tony Awards are conventionally called the Tonys rather than the Tonies.
Six months ago, BuySomeApples appears to have thought the toy company was not the primary topic for the term, moving the article and establishing the current redirect target.— BarrelProof (talk) 01:20, 9 August 2024 (UTC)- Scratched some of that. That action by BuySomeApples was just a judgment that the toy company article wasn't mature and should be draftified. — BarrelProof (talk) 02:48, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. The awards are usually (and officially) pluralized as the "Tonys", so I'd say the article about the company should sit at the main title with a hatnote to the award show, however it's best to accomplish that. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 04:33, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- I wouldn't say the awards should be directly linked in a hatnote. We also have Tonie, Tonie, Kraków, and the Wilmington Tonies (see List of professional sports teams in Delaware). The dab page is a better target. Tevildo (talk) 16:00, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Tony, and add Tonies (company) (and any "Tonie" entries) to Tony. Prevents the need to have multiple disambiguation pages. Steel1943 (talk) 17:17, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Related move request opened at Talk:Tonie#Requested move 9 August 2024 claiming there is no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for "Tonie". Steel1943 (talk) 17:53, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- Move Tonies (company) to Tonies per Tevildo and 35.139, and add a hatnote to Tony awards. (No need to send to WP:RM - we can figure it out here without making discussions too dispersed.) Due to the spelling the toy company is the clear primary topic - nothing else mentioned here actually goes by the name "Tonies". Oppose retargetting to Tony - that is a different word - user has typed "Tonies" and so likely wants to go to an existing article with that name. BugGhost🦗👻 15:02, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
New Super Mario World
[edit]Super Mario Wii 2: Galaxy Adventure Together
[edit]- Super Mario Wii 2: Galaxy Adventure Together → Super Mario Galaxy 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Super Mario Galaxy 2 is not known by this name. The article has only had this title for 16 minutes before being moved back. Mia Mahey (talk) 16:36, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. No mention of this title in article. Never released as this. Andrzejbanas (talk) 18:18, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - It is a proper title for the game in South Korea based on a few searches. Probably still a delete, though. --Super Goku V (talk) 03:35, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. This is the official Korean name for the game, it is also listed as so on the Mario Wiki. This could be added to the Wikipedia page as well. BigManBigChange (talk) 07:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- wp:rlang applies here. same reason a korean redirect for a kirby game got deleted 10 days ago. if a source is eventually found, it could potentially be added as a piece of info in the development section, but otherwise, nah. the same rationale applies to the nomination just below this one. delete cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The odd title is the result of last-minute changes brought due to the Korean Intelletual Property Office determinination that the original title conflicted with multiple pre-existing products. Strangely I can't find any source that covers this. Ca talk to me! 09:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:07, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I thought about it for a while, and I say we keep for the Korean-English bilinguals who may not have realized this game was published under a different name in Korea. The reasoning behind WP:RLANG is that readers would be unlikely to search up topics with non-English search terms if the topic is unaffined to the language.
- However, the Korean title is a simple English transliteration of
- Super Mario Wii 2: Galaxy Adventure Together. "슈퍼 마리오 Wii 갤럭시 어드벤처" contains no Korean words and simply spells out the English title. This may lead readers to think the name is same in English releases too, just not in Hangul. Ca talk to me! 13:45, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Ca's reasoning; this isn't the sort of foreign language redirect we avoid. It's the English translation of the Korean title of the game, which happened to be different from the name in most other places. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:38, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not sure if I have to keep the DRV tag here ... but anywho, vacated my close, relisting due to possibly unclear consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 21:23, 8 August 2024 (UTC)- i still think rlang applies here. no amount of title-changing will give this a strong enough association with a japanese game. as an example, hoodwinked! is known in brazil (whatever that is) as "deu a louca na chapeuzinho" ("little hood's gone crazy" (no mention of the hood's color or the riding part)), but that likely doesn't warrant the redirect here unless a source is plopped there or the movie is popular enough among brazilian audiences (assuming brazil is real). an example of something like this actually working is chaves (television series), as the target is allegedly heavily associated with brazil
- also, the previous title's redirect was already deleted, so add "for symmetry's sake" to my vote cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:19, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- That isn't really a good application of RLANG though. The information on the game's publication in Korea being under a different name probably is worth inclusion, but even if it isn't, a redirect is. This redirect is unambiguous, is based on an official title, and is theoretically useful. There is no reason to delete. RLANG calls out
Direct translations where the native/original form of the title is in English (or a language other than the language of the redirect's title)
, but this isn't a direct translation of the title, that's the point. It's a different title the game was published under. Elli (talk | contribs) 16:27, 20 August 2024 (UTC)
- That isn't really a good application of RLANG though. The information on the game's publication in Korea being under a different name probably is worth inclusion, but even if it isn't, a redirect is. This redirect is unambiguous, is based on an official title, and is theoretically useful. There is no reason to delete. RLANG calls out
Active worlds in the Solar System
[edit]- Active worlds in the Solar System → Volcano#Volcanoes on other celestial bodies (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
not the biggest volcano nerd out there, so sorry in advance for any uninformed claims, but from reading the target and other related articles, there seem to be no other celestial bodies that meet the criteria of being a "world", currently having volcanic activity, and being in the solar system, though mercury is a strong "maybe". on another note, i'm not entirely sure "active world" is a term used to refer to volcanic activity, and the creator of the redirect (who seems to have made it as an essay) seemed to have also been referring to geysers, and counting moons as "worlds". for results. wikipedia gave me an mmo (shoutouts to hitomi fujiko), google gave me assorted apps and brands, and wiktionary gave me nothing. unless there's a detail i'm missing or this is a scientific term that refers to celestial bodies with volcanic activity, i'll vote for deletion cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:07, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- on this note, i should mention "volcanically active worlds", a redirect that specifies the type of activity it refers to and does not specify the location. jury's still out on the definition of world though, but it's a step in the right direction cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- Is there a better redirect at this time as is this not a redirect with potential.?
- Jury is out on definition of volcano as noted in the article itself and presumably meaning of world. Planet and moon are more accurate terms. Many "worlds" are active in some way as they are above absolute zero and may have internal or external entropy sources that disturb their surface however that is defined. Someone could get a good article out of this so my vote is to retain in hope someone will do the job, unless there is a better redirect. ChaseKiwi (talk) 17:56, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- drifting into personal opinion territory by now, but wouldn't returning to red be better for that? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:05, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think "Active worlds" is too ambiguous to justify keeping "Active worlds in the Solar System" as a redirect to Volcano#Volcanoes on other celestial bodies. I also have not found any other suitable redirect targets because the problem is the lack of meaning in the redirect's title rather than a problem with any targets of the redirect. I recommend delete. GeoWriter (talk) 11:49, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
- drifting into personal opinion territory by now, but wouldn't returning to red be better for that? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:05, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:42, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- The term is despite limited google results not novel, see this graphic which seems to go beyond volcanoes, "volcanically active world in our solar system" is also used. This abstract refers to "active worlds" as anything "geophysically" active. The current redirect does seem to not encompass the full scope, but it's also not the most strictly defined term. Perhaps Lists of geological features of the Solar System may be better, but deleting it may also be an option. CMD (talk) 03:53, 30 July 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, Steel1943 (talk) 20:51, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. This was apparently an aborted draft, which was very quickly BLARed back in 2008. The page has no edit history of value, and the title is implausible at best, and misleading at worst. It's pretty wordy, and "active" can just as easily mean any sort of geological activity, not just volcanic. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 04:26, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
Scared Silly
[edit]Apple reinvents the phone.
[edit]- Apple reinvents the phone. → IPhone (1st generation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Unlikely search term. This appears to be the official slogan of the iPhone. Mia Mahey (talk) 05:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as {{r from slogan}}. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 10:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete for trailing full stop. From Search, the slogan (or rather press release headline) appears to have been "Apple Reinvents the Phone with iPhone". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:23, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
- Strong keep, as this is the product's slogan. Even if "Apple Reinvents the Phone with iPhone" is the full phrase, strictly speaking, "Apple reinvents the phone" is the concise form which became arguably more popular, and which also gets many search hits. As can be seen from the edit summary, the user who requested the deletion has withdrawn the application anyway.--Maxeto0910 (talk) 13:42, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Apple reinvents the phone may be their slogan and therefore a viable redirect, but Apple reinvents the phone. is not. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)- Among the main purposes of a redirect is that users who can't remember something's name exactly can still find it nonetheless when they type something similar in Wikipedia's search bar. That's also why likely or frequent misspellings are allowed as redirects. Therefore, I see no problem in having a period here since users may assume that this slogan ends with a period since it's a complete sentence. Maxeto0910 (talk) 18:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Apple reinvents the phone may be their slogan and therefore a viable redirect, but Apple reinvents the phone. is not. --Ahecht (TALK
- Keep as slogans are valid encyclopedic entries for historically interested people. We usually link to the corresponding product or company, tagging the redirect with
{{R from slogan}}
, unless the slogan became so commonly known that we have a dedicated article about it. (Not an iPhone fan at all, but anyway.) --Matthiaspaul (talk) 17:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Shhhnotsoloud. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 20:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC) - Weak delete The slogan is unnecessarily long and clearly promotional. Instead something like Phones by Apple Inc. might be useful. IgelRM (talk) 13:02, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- It's not the full slogan, there's the malformed period at the end, it includes the company name (so at best only marginally useful for "hey, I remember that slogan, but not what it's about, let's ask Wikipedia"), and it's not targeted at "an article or section of an article about the slogan" like {{R from slogan}} says it is. Too many things wrong here. Search is sufficient; it'll find the mention in IPhone (1st generation)'s infobox without this redirect's help. Delete. —Cryptic 16:21, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- I explained why I don't think it's a problem that the slogan is not the exact official one and includes a period.
- Also, I don't see it as a problem that the redirect includes the name of the company of the product since there are many iPhone models and the slogan could potentially apply to many of them. Maxeto0910 (talk) 18:39, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- This may be a case of WP:CITOGENESIS as a similar term "iPhone Apple reinvents the phone." was added to the target in 2011, and then changed to the redirect term under discussion in 2012 by 66.121.52.2. Later, external websites may have picked it up. Fix the slogan at the Infobox or keep the redirect. Jay 💬 18:56, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Exactly. And since the slogan in the shortened, unofficial form has arguably gained more media coverage and popularity (probably because it is more concise), the redirect should be kept. Nonetheless, the slogan in the infobox should be corrected to the arguably less popular full version and get a redirect as well, simply because it's the official one. Maxeto0910 (talk) 21:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:49, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Sharp Willcom D4
[edit]- Sharp Willcom D4 → Ultra-mobile PC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Article was blanked and redirected, but target does not seem to mention this. 1234qwer1234qwer4 15:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Revert and send to AfD per WP:BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 18:04, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:32, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Create anchor for Sharp or Sharp Wilclcom D4 at Comparison of netbooks#Specifications, unlink and retarget. Jay 💬 15:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on creating an anchor?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:35, 8 August 2024 (UTC)- I created an anchor Comparison of netbooks#SHARP. Jay 💬 13:11, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
MOS: OVERLINKING
[edit]Bolsover (borough)
[edit]Grand Duke of Hum redirects
[edit]- Sandalj Hranić, Grand Duke of Hum → Sandalj Hranić (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Vlatko Vukovic, Grand Duke of Hum → Vlatko Vuković (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Vlatko Vuković, Grand Duke of Hum → Vlatko Vuković (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Extension to bio's name in the article tile is misnomer in form of implausible noble title. ౪ Santa ౪99° 01:59, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - Article leads specify that they are Grand Dukes (of Bosnia), and have holdings in Hum... heck, Vlatko is specified to be a Duke of Hum. Seems plausible to me that someone would mash the two facts together when searching for this person. A redirect doesn't have to be accurate, and mistakes and misunderstandings are perfectly acceptable reasons to have a redirect. The target is also unambiguous here. Doesn't really matter if there actually is a "Grand Duke" title for Hum or not. Fieari (talk) 23:27, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- A cursory Google Books search for "grand duke of hum" and "veliki vojvoda humski" don't turn up these people, but it does turn up some other people, Stjepan Vukčić Kosača, Miroslav, Vojislav. Santasa99 what is the actual significance of this title, if any? --Joy (talk) 23:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, guys! Duke of Hum exists as a title, Grand Duke of Hum does not/did not, and there is very clear record about every known/recorded local nobleman and how he used to title himself - so no mystery there. In case of Vlatko Vuković and Sandalj Hranić they did not use title Duke of Hum either, they always signed themselves or were mentioned in charters as Grand Duke of Bosnia only. Many other local noblemen, even of lesser status than Vuković, Hranić, and later Vukčić (all members of Kosača clan) wore the Duke of Hum title - such as Sankovićs, Nikolićs, Vlatkovićs, etc. - simply there was no such title as Grand Duke of Hum, there was only Grand Duke of Bosnia as a title. Of all Kosača members, only Stjepan Vukčić wore both titles, the Duke of Hum and Grand Duke of Bosnia, and also Knez of Drina and of Primorje, and he almost always used full title. There was also nobility from earlier periods, but as far as I know nobility in pre-Bosnian medieval state era mostly wore title of knez (knyaz/prince) and župan. In short, title Grand Duke of Hum never existed. ౪ Santa ౪99° 00:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I should have said from Early Middle Ages instead of pre-Bosnian state. ౪ Santa ౪99° 00:24, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- You can see every single recorded title in Konkordancijski rjecnik cirilskih povelja srednjovjekovne Bosne. ౪ Santa ౪99° 00:51, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, guys! Duke of Hum exists as a title, Grand Duke of Hum does not/did not, and there is very clear record about every known/recorded local nobleman and how he used to title himself - so no mystery there. In case of Vlatko Vuković and Sandalj Hranić they did not use title Duke of Hum either, they always signed themselves or were mentioned in charters as Grand Duke of Bosnia only. Many other local noblemen, even of lesser status than Vuković, Hranić, and later Vukčić (all members of Kosača clan) wore the Duke of Hum title - such as Sankovićs, Nikolićs, Vlatkovićs, etc. - simply there was no such title as Grand Duke of Hum, there was only Grand Duke of Bosnia as a title. Of all Kosača members, only Stjepan Vukčić wore both titles, the Duke of Hum and Grand Duke of Bosnia, and also Knez of Drina and of Primorje, and he almost always used full title. There was also nobility from earlier periods, but as far as I know nobility in pre-Bosnian medieval state era mostly wore title of knez (knyaz/prince) and župan. In short, title Grand Duke of Hum never existed. ౪ Santa ౪99° 00:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Un assiolo (talk) 14:57, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 13:10, 15 July 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) 20:23, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Double dual
[edit]- Double dual → Dual space#Injection into the double-dual (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Bidual → Strong dual space#Bidual (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
These should probably point at the same target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:20, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- These are similar, but there's an important difference: the double dual is purely algebraic and completely general (basic linear algebra), while the bidual requires a topology and is much more specific, namely in functional analysis. They should reference and linked to each other as related and confusingly similar, but distinct.
- —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 18:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. It seems that "bidual" and "double dual" are used synonymously, although I have never heard of "double dual". However, there are two notions of biduals corresponding to two notions of duals: the algebraic dual formed by the linear forms and the topological dual formed by the continuous linear forms. So, I suggest to transform Bidual into a dab page with two entries and to redirect Double dual there. The entries could be labeled "in linear algebra" (for the present target of bidual) and "of a topological vector space" (for the present target of double dual). D.Lazard (talk) 18:53, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note that these terms can occur in many notions of duality, see e.g. also Dual_cone_and_polar_cone#Properties. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is a further reason fora dab page. D.Lazard (talk) 20:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- A disambiguation page seems in order, given the multiple meanings of "double dual". I've drafted one at [26], linking to Bidual, and added a link from (the target of) Bidual back to Double dual at [27]. WDYT?
- I've heard the term "Double dual" used widely in linear algebra, group theory, etc., but this is the first I've heard of "Bidual", and it seems specific to the Topological Vector Spaces (though used specifically for normed spaces, Locally convex topological vector space, etc.). A quick check of Wikipedia and Google agrees.
- If someone more familiar with biduals wants to expand that to a dab too, no objections, but given the distinct uses, "double dual" and "bidual" aren't generally used synonymously and shouldn't be merged, despite the similar meaning ("dual of dual, in some context"). Notably algebraic duals or Pontryagin duality don't generally use the term "bidual".
- —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 05:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- At the very least "bidual" is still ambiguous between a subset of the meanings of "double dual". 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:41, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is a further reason fora dab page. D.Lazard (talk) 20:19, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- I’ve now drafted a dab at Bidual too, linking to the Topological Vector Space uses.
- —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 21:39, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note that these terms can occur in many notions of duality, see e.g. also Dual_cone_and_polar_cone#Properties. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Instead of a relist, I was looking to close this. @1234qwer1234qwer4 and D.Lazard: what do you think of the two drafted disambiguation pages? Jay 💬 11:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- They seem fine if one takes only into account the links that have been provided before. However, none of the drafts link to Duality (mathematics)#Dual objects, were a general concept is defined, called there bidual, that includes as special instances all examples given in the two drafts. I do not know how to link it in either dab page without increasing confusion. So, I remains convinced that the best solution is to merge the dab pages with a primary meaning linking to Duality (mathematics)#Dual object. Again it seems that this is the best way to solve the terminology problem that the general concept called bidual has its most elementary instances called double dual. D.Lazard (talk) 13:22, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sounds like there are two questions: whether to have a DAB page or a page section, and whether to have separate pages/sections for the two terms. If using DAB, it seems clearer to have separate ones, given different uses. However, given that this is a simple definition, best is probably to link both to a section that says "dual of dual, called bidual/double dual, examples", rather than DABs.
- Some text at Duality (mathematics) seems in order anyways; I'll try drafting something.
- —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 02:05, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- They seem fine if one takes only into account the links that have been provided before. However, none of the drafts link to Duality (mathematics)#Dual objects, were a general concept is defined, called there bidual, that includes as special instances all examples given in the two drafts. I do not know how to link it in either dab page without increasing confusion. So, I remains convinced that the best solution is to merge the dab pages with a primary meaning linking to Duality (mathematics)#Dual object. Again it seems that this is the best way to solve the terminology problem that the general concept called bidual has its most elementary instances called double dual. D.Lazard (talk) 13:22, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Even with the attempt a few weeks ago to prevent a relist, it does not seem consensus has become clear.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:22, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- I've drafted a section at Duality (mathematics) § Bidual in [28], following (with modification) the suggestion of @D.Lazard:; I'd rather have a focused landing discussion (sometimes primal and bidual are identical, something very similar, something different, sometimes this is a theorem), rather than dumping generally at "Dual object", which is quite abstract.
- If this looks ok, how about linking both Bidual and Double dual to this section? (It's now a definition, with examples, not a disambiguation)
- WDYT (also @1234qwer1234qwer4:)?
- —Nils von Barth (nbarth) (talk) 04:47, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
- Awesome, that looks like a great target for these redirects. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:02, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
SurveyMonkey/Axios
[edit]New York Times/Siena College
[edit]Bloomberg/Morning Consult
[edit]Well, excuse me!
[edit]- Well, excuse me! → Steve Martin (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Was originally going to WP:BOLDly retarget this to Let's Get Small as the album from the current target which this phrase is most associated, but then I remembered ... people looking up this phrase could reasonably be trying to find The Super Mario Bros. Super Show!#Premise where a version of the subject of the article Link (The Legend of Zelda) is notable for saying "Well, excuse me, princess!" and since Well excuse me princess redirects there. Seems like a case of "disambiguate" or "retarget" and I'm not sure which, even with the fact that this redirect is a partial match for the Link phrase. Steel1943 (talk) 18:54, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Was thinking about nominating this one too, also while having "well excuse me princess" on my mind.
- As the inclusion of the word "well" is never mentioned in any context preceding the title "Excuse Me" in the album, I'd prefer to delete this, but a retarget is better than a keep. Retargeting brings this title closer to its potential context (moreso than a general pass towards the person that presumably said the phrase), but without any mention of the "well" bit, there's no indication in the article that people would search for this instead of Excuse Me (the song on the album; the song, which does not appear on the Excuse Me disambiguation page). It does not seem necessary to target this title to Excuse Me either. Utopes (talk / cont) 19:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- dabify or add all redirects missing the word "princess" to "excuse me" per 50% of what steel said, but also per "well excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me, princess"
- wait, no, wrong quote, i mean "that's only barely uncommon enough to probably warrant the dab" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:36, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Let's Get Small as originally considered. That seems like a pretty good approach, as it explains the evolution into a catchphrase. — BarrelProof (talk) 21:27, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
We are two wild and crazy guys
[edit]Chinese coins
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#Chinese coins
Sufferin' succotash
[edit]- Sufferin' succotash → Sylvester the Cat (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
A catchphrase not mentioned at the target article. People interested in reading about this character would be more likely to search for the character. There is no content about this phrase here, and Wikipedia is not a search engine for "who said this line". Utopes (talk / cont) 17:59, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
Keep[Changed to retarget below]: What's the problem and what's your suggestion? I don't see a problem here, and "who said this line" is a helpful service. — BarrelProof (talk) 18:06, 8 August 2024 (UTC)- The problem is as described above (i.e. catchphrases not mentioned at target articles are problematic and misleading due to inherent lack of context and confusion caused for readers). My suggestion is to delete, aligning with past precedents that: "phrase, lyric, and quote redirects that point to articles where they are not mentioned are misleading and cause confusion for readers"; such was the result for a sizeable set of RfDs nominated early this year: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 12#It's not personal. It's strictly business. In this situation, there is currently no mention of any "suffering" being undergone by anyone, much less the variation of "sufferin'" used as a search term dropping the "g". "Succotash" is also not mentioned nor alluded to in the article at this time. Utopes (talk / cont) 18:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- I guess your italics indicate a quote from somewhere, and there must've been some prior discussion of this issue that I'm not familiar with. I thought the threshold for a redirect was lower than it would be for a DAB (i.e., WP:DABMENTION). In my personal experience, people sometimes remember a catchphrase but can't remember the name of the person who said it or what show it was in, and just need a little reminder. "To the Moon, Alice!" — BarrelProof (talk) 19:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Apologies for the confusion; the italics was a retelling of my nomination statement, which in turn summarizes some past discussions about unmentioned "r from catchphrases" and "r from lyrics".
- I fully agree that a tool for searching a catchphrase in order to find the source is a great function, but it more suitable for open-ended search engines such as Google or Youtube which aggregate differently. Doing so on Wikipedia would only work for an exact title match of existing content, and nothing will appear in the built-in search engine for those without mentions in the article. To the Moon, Alice! is an example of a suitable r from catchphrase, as it's a phrase that receives a mention in the plot section as well as allusions in the legacy section (that is if this quote is a version of "bang zoom straight to the moon", which is the aspect discussed and referred to here). Utopes (talk / cont) 19:33, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- To push back on that a little, just because Google (or the Youtube site it operates) might usually do a better job of finding a subject doesn't mean a search string is not worth trying to have at all. Wikipedia is less spammy (among other considerations), and its search box sometimes leads to what you're looking for if no one deletes the redirect at (or similar to) the string you type. "Sufferin' succotash" is an extremely famous phrase for this character, and is only two words, so it wouldn't have a lot of variation in what people would type to look for it. — BarrelProof (talk) 20:16, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- I guess your italics indicate a quote from somewhere, and there must've been some prior discussion of this issue that I'm not familiar with. I thought the threshold for a redirect was lower than it would be for a DAB (i.e., WP:DABMENTION). In my personal experience, people sometimes remember a catchphrase but can't remember the name of the person who said it or what show it was in, and just need a little reminder. "To the Moon, Alice!" — BarrelProof (talk) 19:18, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is as described above (i.e. catchphrases not mentioned at target articles are problematic and misleading due to inherent lack of context and confusion caused for readers). My suggestion is to delete, aligning with past precedents that: "phrase, lyric, and quote redirects that point to articles where they are not mentioned are misleading and cause confusion for readers"; such was the result for a sizeable set of RfDs nominated early this year: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 12#It's not personal. It's strictly business. In this situation, there is currently no mention of any "suffering" being undergone by anyone, much less the variation of "sufferin'" used as a search term dropping the "g". "Succotash" is also not mentioned nor alluded to in the article at this time. Utopes (talk / cont) 18:58, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Questions: Would this nomination include suffering succotash? Would a soft redirect of both to wikt:suffering succotash work? — AjaxSmack 20:41, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed that's basically the same. I had forgotten that Daffy Duck also says it. Wiktionary seems to explain it pretty well, although I've never encountered the "suffering savior" assertion before. — BarrelProof (talk) 20:49, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Broadcast Standards and Practices#Press Your Luck, which does a good job of explaining this phrase and who said it, and discusses a notable episode in its history. (This assumes that content is correct and will stay there – the discussion there is unsourced and not clearly relevant to Broadcast Standards and Practices.) BTW, the phrase is also mentioned in Yankee Dood It. The redirect shouldn't be deleted. — BarrelProof (talk) 21:14, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed that's basically the same. I had forgotten that Daffy Duck also says it. Wiktionary seems to explain it pretty well, although I've never encountered the "suffering savior" assertion before. — BarrelProof (talk) 20:49, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
I can do this all day
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#I can do this all day
Now cut that out!
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#Now cut that out!
Stifle!
[edit]Ten thousand thundering typhoons
[edit]Hi, I'm Larry. This is my brother Darryl, and this is my other brother Darryl.
[edit]Interim Government of Waker uz Zaman
[edit]Güija
[edit]Ruvaush
[edit]Veere Ki Wedding
[edit]Eng.wikipedia.org
[edit]Couch sex
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 13#Couch sex
Togey
[edit]Template:+rp
[edit]Template:+C
[edit]Link Link
[edit]Triumph Forks
[edit]Copper pan
[edit]"Children's games", "Children's Games" & friends
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 13#"Children's games", "Children's Games" & friends
Children's games (role play)
[edit]Religious movement
[edit]Miligram
[edit]Saint Boy
[edit]- Saint Boy → Modern pentathlon at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Women's (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
No mention in the target article. Pelmeen10 (talk) 18:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Appears to be the name of a horse used by both Annika Schleu and Gulnaz Gubaydullina. It's mentioned at both of their articles, but I think search results are best as neither article has more info than the other. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:45, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and add that information to the article. If neither has more info than the other, then the appropriate place to link is the event page where both competitors are listed. --Habst (talk) 13:14, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- How can you vote "keep" if such info is not added? Info should come before redirect. Pelmeen10 (talk) 17:50, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- @Pelmeen10, redirect discussions are not votes; see WP:NOTAVOTE. I didn't just vote to keep, I am recommending to both keep and add the info to the article, not one without the other. I don't mind in which order it's done. --Habst (talk) 23:35, 9 August 2024 (UTC)
- How can you vote "keep" if such info is not added? Info should come before redirect. Pelmeen10 (talk) 17:50, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 11:15, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Presidentman, unless useful content is made available at the current target. Jay 💬 15:09, 13 August 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Annika Schleu#2020 Tokyo Olympics, which is where the horse is mentioned. According to the content there, that particular horse's performance and athlete Schleu's treatment of it were the catalyst for the decision to officially drop equestrian from the modern pentathlon. [29][30] The decision to drop equestrian from the sport is mentioned in the article Modern pentathlon, but not the horse itself. The horse will likely continue being mentioned in Annika Schleu because that is when/where/how the incident with the horse happened. If later the horse gets mentioned in Modern pentathlon, then the redirect can be changed. Until then, it should point to Annika Schleu#2020 Tokyo Olympics. The current target (Modern pentathlon at the 2020 Summer Olympics – Women's) is not the appropriate place. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 16:47, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- Better yet, add {{Anchor|Saint Boy}} just under § 2020 Tokyo Olympics, and redirect to Annika Schleu#Saint Boy. That is how I would do it. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 16:51, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
Symplectic action
[edit]Metal Mario
[edit]No mention of "Metal Mario" on the target page. Mia Mahey (talk) 05:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Revert to the article in the page history without prejudice to AfD. Thryduulf (talk) 08:56, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as a plausible search term. It would be very easy to add a sourced mention - it's an alternate name for Mario when he uses a "power up" that makes his body look like metal. Sources like this outline it. An alternate target could be at Super Mario 64#Gameplay, where it's already touched on some there. That's where the concept originated, though it's been used in many games now, so its current target is probably preferable. Sergecross73 msg me 12:09, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as Metal Mario is a significant recurring character in the Mario franchise spin-offs and thus a plausible search term. A mention should be added at the subject, but I am unopposed to a redirect to Super Mario 64 if that is deemed a better solution. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 02:17, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. Fire Mario redirects to Super Mario#Projectiles, Tanooki Mario to Super Mario Bros. 3. Those are about all the 'Marios' I know for sure. Taking a guess at some extra Marios, Ice Mario redirects to Super Mario, and then Hammer Mario and Invincible Mario don't have any pages or redirects. Will readers be expecting to be redirected to wildly disparate pages when they're all effectively variations of the same character? 122141510 (talk) 23:50, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 11:12, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Super Mario 64#Health, lives, and power-ups, akin to Metal Cap, where it's actually discussed. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 04:46, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Biden crisis
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#Biden crisis
Iasst
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 10#Iasst
The OG of the OC
[edit]Chosen Warrior (Mortal Kombat)
[edit]Metallic taste
[edit]Travis Scott (The Sims character)
[edit]Brotherhood of Shadow
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 13#Brotherhood of Shadow
More-is-less paradox
[edit]Less-is-more paradox
[edit]Iconoclasm in the United Kingdom during the George Floyd protests
[edit]Helstinky
[edit]Multiply transitive
[edit]Template:AFC infobox
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 9#Template:AFC infobox
Caine (video game character)
[edit](video game character)
[edit]Turbo HD
[edit]Super Turbo
[edit]SSFII
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 10#SSFII
Turbo Edition
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 10#Turbo Edition
Perfect victory
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 10#Perfect victory
Virginia & truckee 11, reno
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 9#Virginia & truckee 11, reno
Girl Toad
[edit]- Girl Toad → List of Mario franchise characters#Toadette (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in the target. This term is not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia either. Mia Mahey (talk) 19:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep as plausible {{R from incorrect name}}. Steel1943 (talk) 19:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- "Girl Toad" is more likely to refer to a female toad than a fictional Mario character. Mia Mahey (talk) 20:45, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- "Girl" is an anthropomorphic word, so not likely. Steel1943 (talk) 20:50, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- No more likely to refer to the Mario franchise Toads than real toads. Mia Mahey (talk) 21:19, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- The "Toad" characters in the Mario franchise are anthropomorphic; actual toads are not. Steel1943 (talk) 21:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- No more likely to refer to the Mario franchise Toads than real toads. Mia Mahey (talk) 21:19, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- "Girl" is an anthropomorphic word, so not likely. Steel1943 (talk) 20:50, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- "Girl Toad" is more likely to refer to a female toad than a fictional Mario character. Mia Mahey (talk) 20:45, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: reasonable search term. C F A 💬 20:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- The only mentions of "Girl Toad" on Wikipedia are those related to this discussion, suggesting that this is not a reasonable search term. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- That doesn't really matter. It could still be a reasonable search term even if it isn't mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia. Someone could type "Girl Toad" into the search bar. It has received 700 page views throughout its history, suggesting it has been used at least a few times. Regardless, redirects are cheap. No reason this should be deleted. C F A 💬 23:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Unless a mention on the target can be added with a reliable source, this redirect should be deleted, as there is currently no information about "Girl Toad" on Wikipedia. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:31, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is still a reasonable search term, whether or not it is mentioned in the target article. C F A 💬 23:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Please provide a reliable source that uses "Girl Toad" referring to Toadette. Otherwise, this redirect is WP:OR and should be deleted. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, it may be synthesis to a certain extent, but redirects are not required to be "correct" or neutral. If you google "girl toad", the first result is Toadette, indicating it is the correct target and a plausible search term. C F A 💬 23:39, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- The Google Search results for "girl toad" are not from reliable sources. Half of them are unrelated to Toadette. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:51, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- I didn't say they were, but it still shows that it is a plausible search term. If you really think this is an issue, I would also support a disambiguation page with Toadette and Toad (frog). C F A 💬 23:57, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- The Google Search results for "girl toad" are not from reliable sources. Half of them are unrelated to Toadette. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:51, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, it may be synthesis to a certain extent, but redirects are not required to be "correct" or neutral. If you google "girl toad", the first result is Toadette, indicating it is the correct target and a plausible search term. C F A 💬 23:39, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Please provide a reliable source that uses "Girl Toad" referring to Toadette. Otherwise, this redirect is WP:OR and should be deleted. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- It is still a reasonable search term, whether or not it is mentioned in the target article. C F A 💬 23:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- Unless a mention on the target can be added with a reliable source, this redirect should be deleted, as there is currently no information about "Girl Toad" on Wikipedia. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:31, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- That doesn't really matter. It could still be a reasonable search term even if it isn't mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia. Someone could type "Girl Toad" into the search bar. It has received 700 page views throughout its history, suggesting it has been used at least a few times. Regardless, redirects are cheap. No reason this should be deleted. C F A 💬 23:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- The only mentions of "Girl Toad" on Wikipedia are those related to this discussion, suggesting that this is not a reasonable search term. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:03, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- the redirect seems vague. there are other distinctly female toads, mostly in the rpgs. it's like if "female human" redirected to hillary clinton or something. for now, i'd say return to red until zess t. is covered cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep I think it's plausible search term for those who forgot the name Toadette. The title is capitalized (WP:DIFFCAPS), indicating a proper noun, and "girl" is an anthromorphic term. Wikipedia has no article on any fictional female toads. Ca talk to me! 15:12, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:45, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Google results seems split about 50/50 between various real-life female frogs and Toadette. We also don't have any content of female toads in particular, the cloests is Frog#Reproduction. Rusalkii (talk) 19:33, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Toad Town
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#Toad Town
MAGA tourist
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#MAGA tourist
Theoretical high pixel count images
[edit]- Yottapixel image → Gigapixel image (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Yottapixel → Gigapixel image (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Zettapixel image → Gigapixel image (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Zettapixel → Gigapixel image (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Exapixel image → Gigapixel image (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Exapixel → Gigapixel image (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Petapixel image → Gigapixel image (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in target, and contents of the gigapixel article doesn't contain any technical relevance that would be applicable to peta-, exa-, zetta-, or yottapixel images. The size difference between a gigapixel image and a yottapixel image is huge - printed at 300dpi (standard magazine quality print), a gigapixel image would be about the size of a kingsize bed, while a yottapixel image would have about the same surface area as Neptune, and (if stored at 24bits/pixel) would require 6000x the storage capacity of all of AWS to store it as a png.
Note: Petapixel was recently listed at RFD and deleted, but that had different circumstances because of the existence of the unrelated article PetaPixel. BugGhost🦗👻 15:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- These seem like plausible search terms; someone may be curious to see if these higher designations exist or are used for anything. jp×g🗯️ 00:45, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - I still feel the same way I felt about the previous RfD. Basically, if some sci-fi or otherwise speculative writer mentions an absurdly large SI-prefix referring to the size of an image, then the reader should be able to look up the concept of "absurdly large image" on wikipedia, even if the exact level of "absurdly large" is not specifically mentioned. Fieari (talk) 00:13, 19 July 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) 14:52, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. I find Fieari's argument convincing. Thryduulf (talk) 18:46, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per WP:PANDORA and the fact that these aren't common things to exist right now. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:56, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- I implore you to read lunamann's essay. mwwv converse∫edits 16:29, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- WP:PANDORA is misleading nonsense that contradicts WP:OTHERSTUFF and causes far more harm than the redirects it advocates deleting. How common these images are is irrelevant - what matters is that people who want to read about them can find the relevant article. Thryduulf (talk) 20:22, 26 July 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! 04:24, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete (but keep Petapixel) with a potential exception for Petapixel image if well-sourced information about petapixel (e.g. 40M x 25M) images in particular can be found anywhere within the mainspace. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 19:28, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
Tracel
[edit]Zelda Games in Development
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 9#Zelda Games in Development
Cock (slang)
[edit]Windproof umbrella
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 9#Windproof umbrella
Eli Kowaz
[edit]- Eli Kowaz → Israel Policy Forum#Eli Kowaz (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in target. There was a lot (probably too much) content on him earlier, which was removed by User:IPFcomms with the rationale that he was no longer with the org. Unsure if content on him should be in the article, but if it isn't the redirect should be deleted. Rusalkii (talk) 23:26, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. The AfD provided grist to doubt his notability even with the IPF; now that he's no longer there it makes no sense for the redirect to be to IPF. Longhornsg (talk) 23:46, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment @CFA restored the section covering Eli Kowaz, with justification "Restoring section removed by promotional editor". If the section is kept (which I think it shouldn't be, see e.g. LinkedIn confirming he is no longer at the company), the redirect should be too. Rusalkii (talk) 19:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:29, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Support for President Donald Trump by white Americans
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#Support for President Donald Trump by white Americans
Support for Donald Trump
[edit]Brock Harrison
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 13#Brock Harrison
2024 assassination attempt
[edit]- 2024 assassination attempt → Attempted assassination of Donald Trump (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Too general. MSMST1543 (talk) 02:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to List of assassinations or another article. There is no reason to believe that this, only 24ish hours after the news broke, will be the primary topic, and so a redirect should not have been created. I suspect there have also been quite a few attempted assassinations in 2024 that didn't occur in the USA, and so this could also be considered a US centric redirect. Failing a redirect, it should be deleted -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 02:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)- As others have pointed out, there isn't really a good redirect target now, so I'm clarifying my !vote to support a disambiguation page being created at this page to list assassination (attempts) in 2024. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 03:56, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- I am against this redirect. The world doesn't revolve around America and its internal politics. This would perpetuate America-centric systemic bias on the site. JDiala (talk) 02:11, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I suppose this could be redirected to List of people who survived assassination attempts, though there is only one other attempt in 2024 listed on that article (an attempt on a South Korean MP). Attempted assassination of Donald Trump is clearly the primary topic at this point in the year, and we're not supposed to speculate on if that will change in the future. It is also a very plausible search term. C F A 💬 02:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- We aren't supposed to speculate either way. And it's obvious that calling something the primary topic "this point in the year" violates WP:RECENTISM. We don't change, or even create, redirects just because something is what you think is the primary topic right now. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 02:17, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, you could argue it is recentism, but common sense is also useful here. This was an attempted assassination on a former US president, arguably the most powerful person in the world. It was the first time anything like this happened in more than 40 years. This is not a US news story, it's an international news story. Regardless, I'm not opposed to a redirect to the list. C F A 💬 02:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Common sense does not mean US-centric common sense. Your entire argument here is based on a US centric view that the only important assassination (attempt) in 2024 is the one against the former president of the US. And that's why I'm !voting to redirect to another topic or delete. Because that's not a valid argument. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 02:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- As I pointed out, there were only two assassination attempts in 2024 (so far) notable enough to be included in the list above. It's not really a US-centric approach because an assassination attempt against a former world leader (of arguably the most powerful country in the world) will inherently be more significant than the majority of other attempts, both in the country of origin and internationally. This was a story that was reported in local newspapers around the world. If a former president of South Korea and a congressman in the US were both targeted in assassination attempts, the one against the former president would be the primary topic. This doesn't have much to do with local bias. C F A 💬 02:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Common sense does not mean US-centric common sense. Your entire argument here is based on a US centric view that the only important assassination (attempt) in 2024 is the one against the former president of the US. And that's why I'm !voting to redirect to another topic or delete. Because that's not a valid argument. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 02:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Sure, you could argue it is recentism, but common sense is also useful here. This was an attempted assassination on a former US president, arguably the most powerful person in the world. It was the first time anything like this happened in more than 40 years. This is not a US news story, it's an international news story. Regardless, I'm not opposed to a redirect to the list. C F A 💬 02:24, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- We aren't supposed to speculate either way. And it's obvious that calling something the primary topic "this point in the year" violates WP:RECENTISM. We don't change, or even create, redirects just because something is what you think is the primary topic right now. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 02:17, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or dabify. It's not even the only attempt with its own article in 2024 (Robert Fico). Yet another example of Americentrism. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 02:48, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. I knew I had seen another attempted assassination of a head of state/leader of a country in 2024, but I couldn't pinpoint it. For clarity, this fact should be considered part of my argument above. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 02:50, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is valid argument. I missed Robert Fico because he was not in the list of people who survived assassination attempts. There is no clear primary topic so I change my vote to disambiguate. C F A 💬 02:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per Liliana, as Trump is not the only assassination attempt in 2024. Di (they-them) (talk) 03:20, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate: Yes, because there have been other attempts on other people, Trump isn't the center of the universe, and Wikipedia should not be so heavily focused on the US perspective etc. 72.14.126.22 (talk) 03:54, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete Robert Fico, Lee Jae-Myung, probably a dozen Russian businessmen, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Mohammed Deif (for the umpteenth time) all can lay claim to that title. The US isn't special in that regard. Bremps... 05:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Bremps, or dabify at List of assassination attempts in 2024 or similar. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:28, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- This RfD concerns the fate of the page at the exact name of "2024 assassination attempt". A redirect is defined by its name. An RfD isn't needed to create new pages. About your idea for a new page: A page titled "List of assassination attempts in 2024" would be a list, not a dab. —Alalch E. 11:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate: as per above comments Lordseriouspig 10:11, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or disambig per above. This is too general to redirect to a single instance, the attempted assassination of Robert Fico, the prime minister of Slovakia, happened this year too (I've added it to the list article above, no idea why it wasn't there already). Google searches indicate that there have also been (events described as) assassination attempts made on Mohammed Deif and Volodymyr Zelensky at least. Thryduulf (talk) 11:05, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- My addition was reverted because, despite the article title, it isn't a list of people but a list of people who weren't current heads of state or government (the latter having a separate list). See also my proposed merger of the two lists. I oppose retargetting this redirect to either list. Thryduulf (talk) 23:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or retarget to anchor in List of people who survived assassination attempts. I created 2020 assassination attempt to illustrate (I don't think that this redirect and other such redirects are / would be especially good, but this not a WP:POINTed creation, as it is within acceptable bounds from my perspective). Oppose dab. A dab would practically duplicate the list, and WP:NOTDUP does not apply to disambiguation pages when the same content is served in a list (not a different navigation method—the navigation method provided would be essentially the same).—Alalch E. 11:42, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- The issue with a redirect is that there are two separate attempted assassination lists: List of people who survived assassination attempts and List of heads of state and government who survived assassination attempts. "2024 assassination attempt" does not refer to either one specifically so a redirect would be completely arbitrary. Thryduulf has proposed these two lists be merged, which I support, but unless that happens a disambiguation page would be the best option. Nothing is duplicated in this case when there are two separate all-time lists. C F A 💬 17:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I agree its too generic since as noted there have been others. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:12, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:BIAS; search results would handle this fine without needing to manually compile a separate search index, which also would undoubtedly suffer from systemic bias based on several comments here. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:04, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to List of people who survived assassination attempts where there are two relevant cases --Lenticel (talk) 00:14, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- There is a third relevant case at List of heads of state and government who survived assassination attempts, neither is primary over the other. This is why I have (a) proposed merging (please give your input!) and (b) oppose retargetting to either one. Thryduulf (talk) 11:38, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify between the appropriate lists only rather than individuals/specific events. Per nom, the term is to generic to estimate what a person might be searching for, and generally an editor wanting a list of specifics should create, well, such a list with all the relevant requirements fulfilled, but the search term is plausable and spefific enough to have a DAB page to guide them towards locating that specific article. Respublik (talk) 20:54, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - I'm not convinced that the proposed disambiguations or redirections would be consistently helpful to reader, in part due to the vagueness of "attempt". Search results seem safer than compiling an ad hoc set index of assassination attempts in 2024. signed, Rosguill talk 19:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 20:39, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or retarget to a dab page for assassination attempts in 2024. - Worthlessly vague and too US-centric. Just ask any PIA regulars. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v threads critiques 18:35, 2 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Ambiguous and likely to cause confusion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 15:02, 4 August 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, basically per Rosguill. -- asilvering (talk) 01:59, 6 August 2024 (UTC)
Template:Chilodontidae-stub
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#Template:Chilodontidae-stub
German Expressionist
[edit]Skeletor (Marvel Comics)
[edit]Le Cartel
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#Le Cartel
Su85b
[edit]No mention on the target page. The tank does appear to be real though, so maybe a mention could be added to the article? Only source I can find on it though is an article on a website called "Warspot" that doesn't seem to have much fact checking. ― Blaze WolfTalkblaze__wolf 04:19, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- It's definitely a thing, even though most of the many English-language hits relate to its appearance in World of Tanks (most commonly rendered as "SU-85b" the hyphenless version does get plenty of hits) it is not just we have a picture at File:СУ-85Б.webp which led to my discovering the Russian and Ukrainian Wikipedias have articles about it. There is a mention at List of armoured fighting vehicles by country#Soviet Union, but that doesn't say more than that it was based on the SU-76 prototype; SU-76#Variants has a sentence. Draft:SU-85B was deleted under G13 in 2020, but it was just a single sentence "The SU-85B was a prototype Soviet tank destroyer based on the SU-76.". If we decide not to delete this then SU-85B should be created as a redirect to the same target, but what target that would be or whether deletion per WP:REDLINK would be better I don't know. Thryduulf (talk) 10:55, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to SU-76 where it is mentioned as a variant. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 13:52, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Saint John Rivers
[edit]Wikipedia:CURRENTSECTION
[edit]Vada a bordo, cazzo!
[edit]Dara shikoh road,New Delhi.
[edit]The Hollies' Greatest Hits (1968 West German album)
[edit]- The Hollies' Greatest Hits (1968 West German album) → The Hollies (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I can't find anything in Enwiki about a 1968 album, here, or at The Hollies discography (which in any case would be a better target). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:27, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Hollies' Greatest, a 1968 Greatest Hits album by The Hollies that was released in Germany. Thryduulf (talk) 09:51, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per Thryduulf - looks like that's the intended article BugGhost🪲👻 09:07, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Hollies' Greatest is a British album released by Parlophone. Per the edit history, the West German album was released by Hansa Records. The track listings are also different, which all but confirms these are different pressings. -- Tavix (talk) 16:12, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- I can't find any non–user generated sources, but I'm fairly certain that the West German album and Hollies' Greatest are in fact separate (they seem to have separate covers for one), so that is not a good retargeting option. Retargeting to the discography would be a good option if it was on there, but it's not, and I know too little about the area to properly search for sources to add it to the discography. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 21:48, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 18:16, 17 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:35, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with Tavix and Skarmory that there is no target. Restore and tag as unreferenced. Jay 💬 17:58, 5 July 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) 18:21, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Paper Bowser
[edit]Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften
[edit]- Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften → Springer Science+Business Media (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften → Springer Science+Business Media (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
These terms do not appear in the target article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:33, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment It seems to be a sub-publisher of Springer Science+Business Media, that publishes German language sociology works according to this dewiki article. Ca talk to me! 15:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Those titles still do not appear anywhere in the article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:06, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Waiting for someone to add mention to the target article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (Goodbye!) 09:47, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete until content is added, in which case they may be recreated. Jay 💬 15:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep one of numerous Springer imprints (see de:Springer VS). Solution here is to expand the article, not delete the redirect. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 16:08, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Seems we still may need a mention added to form consensus...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 16:28, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Speedy Mouse
[edit]Formicapunk
[edit]- Formicapunk → Cyberpunk derivatives#Cassette futurism/Formicapunk (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Cassette futurism → Cyberpunk derivatives#Cassette futurism/Formicapunk (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
These terms do not appear in the target article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. These terms referred to a section that was removed in April and had been tagged as unreferenced for nearly two years. - Eureka Lott 16:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Cassette futurism returns many results on Google, for example [31], and [32]. And besides, it looks like the target text has been restored, complete with references. The nowardays widely accepted term for this period of retro-futurism is most commonly referred to as Cassette Futurism, but the term Formicapunk has also been used (but it is not as widely used as Cassette Futurism). Formicapunk was used in the webcomic Bouletcorp by John Boulet. The original link is http://web.archive.org/web/20230623104540/https://bouletcorp.com/2011/07/07/formicapunk/ (this is an Internet archive version as the current URL doesn't work), but even so, google still brings up links to other pages that use that term. So I suspect that there are still some people out there who are aware of the term Formicapunk but not the term Cassette Fururism. But even so, I'd definitely keep the redirect for Cassette futurism, but I'm not so sure if Bouletcorp's Formicapunk cartoon is notable enough even though the term Formicapunk has taken a life of it's own. Ae-a (talk) 22:22, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:37, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete both Per WP:NEO. Seems to be an invention of TVTropes editors, and Wikipedia is not TVTropes. 80s-punk is undoubtedly a thing, but it's cited to Wikis and unreliable sources in an attempt to make the section appear merited. Until someone can come up with an actual source, it shouldn't be there. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
- Just noting that I agree with this assessment. The redirects should be deleted and the reintroduction of the material should be reverted due to a lack of WP:RS. - Eureka Lott 21:25, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep but also consider Retarget. In the case these redirects aren't appropriate for their current article, maybe a better destination would be Retrofuturism#Genres and the redirect-category could be changed to "R with possibilities". Also, the text in the Cyberpunk derivatives#Cassette futurism/Formicapunk section could be moved there. Ae-a (talk) 00:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 16:27, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Please note that the section has again been removed from the target article. - Eureka Lott 16:21, 15 August 2024 (UTC)
Template:Empty-warn
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#Template:Empty-warn
All-Star Batman and Robin
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 9#All-Star Batman and Robin
Big G
[edit]Metal Mario
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 5#Metal Mario
Biden crisis
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 5#Biden crisis
Minister for Cities
[edit]- Minister for Cities → Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government#List of ministers for cities (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Minister for cities → Cabinet Office#Ministers and Civil Servants (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not sure if this is the best target as Minister for Cities (Australia) exists - also not sure if that is the best title for that article either. I'm not familiar with the recent political cabinet reshuffling so there might be content forking between the current target and Minister for Cities (Australia). Fork99 (talk) 02:29, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Minister for Cities (Australia) since that article is no longer a redirect in and of itself. Aydoh8 (talk | contribs) 02:35, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- When I created the redirect (Minister for Cities), I wasn't aware that the Minister for Cities (Australia) page existed already. In that case, I am happy for the redirect to be deleted straight up or redirect to Minister for Cities (Australia). Marcnut1996 (talk) 03:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree – if that's the primary topic, it should be moved to the title "Minister for Cities", and if it's not the primary topic then "Minister for Cities" shouldn't redirect there. jlwoodwa (talk) 22:38, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note I've added the lowercase Minister for cities redirect to this discussion as they should both lead to the same place. The target section of that redirect no longer mentions a minister for cities though. Thryduulf (talk) 09:07, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Set index this and similar titles seem to be created regularly in different parts of the world with none obviously primary. In a few minutes searching I found all the following:
- City Minister,
- Regional minister#Developments since 2010
- Minister for Planning (New South Wales)#Cities
- Minister for Cities (Australia)
- Minister for the Environment and Water (Australia)#List of ministers for cities and the built environment
- Angus Taylor (politician)#Assistant Minister for Cities and Digital Transformation
- Minister for Cities and Rural Areas (mentioned at Frederiksen II Cabinet#List of ministers)
- Minister for Cities, Urban Infrastructure and Population (mentioned at First Morrison ministry#Outer ministry
- Minister for cities and urban development (Cote D'Ivoire, mentioned at François Amichia)
- State Secretary for Cities (mentioned at Borne government#State Secretaries)
- Cabinet Secretary for Health, Wellbeing and Cities Strategy and a "Minister for cities" (mentioned at Cabinet Secretary for Health and Social Care (Scotland)
- (some might be duplicates, I've run out of time to sort and sanitise). Thryduulf (talk) 09:21, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. The UK had a Minister from Cities from 2011-15, before the post was merged into other ministries, see Regional_minister#Developments_since_2010. The UK also has the similarly named City Minister (2008-present), which is actually responsible for the City of London financial district not cities, but could easily be confused. Thryduulf has found several other similarly named positions in other countries. So while the Australian post might be the extant position that most closely matches the exact redirect phrasing, it would be better if both capitalisations led to a Minister for Cities (disambiguation) page. Modest Genius talk 10:33, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
- I suggest moving Minister for Cities (Australia) → Minister for Cities and moving Minister for Cities → Minister for Cities (disambiguation). The Australian portfolio (being extant) is the primary topic. --DilatoryRevolution (talk) 08:17, 8 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate/set indexify per Thryduulf and Modest Genius. Term is too generic for a primary topic redirect to a specific position. C F A 💬 21:56, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
- Note: A requested move was made regarding these redirects and procedurally closed + no consensus because this discussion is ongoing; permalink: Special:Permalink/1240763459. Fork99 (talk) 10:16, 17 August 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. There is also a Ministry of Cities in Brazil. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:08, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Sportacus 9
[edit]there are theories that robbie rotten was the previous sportacus and wore the number 9, though they have little to no evidence that could be used here. retarget to his article, keep as is, or delete as fancruft? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:03, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep redirect to sportacus. Robbie rotten and number 9 (sportacus 9) are not the same person. Robbie and number 9 where butting heads (see https://web.archive.org/web/20040108161211/http://www.lazytown.com/pages/about/concept/theoriginsstory.html ). Robbie later became Robbie rotten (see https://web.archive.org/web/20031225235205/http://www.lazytown.com/pages/about/concept/robbierotten.html). Number 9 (sportacus 9) has much more similarities with sportacus 10 (the current sportacus) than Robbie, so that redirect makes sense for now. Snævar (talk) 14:47, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:36, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- The name has been changed from "Sportacus" to "Sportacus 10" in the first sentence of article but there is no explanation and the article title has not been changed. If there is no explanation of "9" or "10" in the article, the redirect is not useful and should be deleted. Peter James (talk) 20:26, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- Fixed. Snævar (talk) 07:32, 5 August 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! 01:54, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
CheckUser
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#CheckUser
metal age
[edit]Nuzlocke
[edit]E610
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#E610
Template:Footer Olympic Champions C-1 Slalom
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#Template:Footer Olympic Champions C-1 Slalom
Tax cuts for the rich
[edit]Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15#Tax cuts for the rich