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 | Apr | May | Jun | Jul | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 40 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 10 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 21 | 0 | 21 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 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 what should be the proper target.
- Redirects should not be deleted just because they have no incoming links. Please do not use this as the only reason to delete a redirect. However, redirects that do have incoming links are sometimes deleted, so that is not a sufficient condition for keeping. (See § When should we delete a redirect? for more information.)
Please do not unilaterally rename or change the target of a redirect while it is under discussion. This adds unnecessary complication to the discussion for participants and closers.
Before listing a redirect for discussion[edit]
Please be aware of these general policies, which apply here as elsewhere:
- Wikipedia:Redirect – what redirects are, why they exist, and how they are used.
- Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion – which pages can be deleted without discussion; in particular the "General" and "Redirects" sections.
- Wikipedia:Deletion policy – how we delete things by consensus.
- Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – guidelines on discussion format and shorthand.
The guiding principles of RfD[edit]
- The purpose of a good redirect is to eliminate the possibility that readers will find themselves staring blankly at "Search results 1–10 out of 378" instead of the article they were looking for. If someone could plausibly enter the redirect's name when searching for the target article, it's a good redirect.
- Redirects are cheap. They take up little storage space and use very little bandwidth. It doesn't really hurt things if there are a few of them scattered around. On the flip side, deleting redirects is also cheap because recording the deletion takes up little storage space and uses very little bandwidth. There is no harm in deleting problematic redirects.
- If a good-faith RfD nomination proposes to delete a redirect and has no discussion after at least 7 days, the default result is delete.
- Redirects nominated in contravention of Wikipedia:Redirect will be speedily kept.
- RfD can also serve as a central discussion forum for debates about which page a redirect should target. In cases where retargeting the redirect could be considered controversial, it is advisable to leave a notice on the talk page of the redirect's current target page or the proposed target page to refer readers to the redirect's nomination to allow input and help form consensus for the redirect's target.
- Requests for deletion of redirects from one page's talk page to another's do not need to be listed here. Anyone can remove the redirect by blanking the page. The G6 criterion for speedy deletion may be appropriate.
- In discussions, always ask yourself whether or not a redirect would be helpful to the reader.
When should we delete a redirect?[edit]
This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Redirect/Deletion reasons. (edit | history) |
The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:
- a redirect may contain non-trivial edit history;
- if a redirect is reasonably old (or is the result of moving a page that has been there for quite some time), then it is possible that its deletion will break incoming links (such links coming from older revisions of Wikipedia pages, from edit summaries, from other Wikimedia projects or from elsewhere on the internet, do not show up in "What links here").
Therefore consider the deletion only of either harmful redirects or of recent ones.
Reasons for deleting[edit]
You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met (but note also the exceptions listed below this list):
- The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. For example, if the user searches for "New Articles", and is redirected to a disambiguation page for "Articles", it would take much longer to get to the newly added articles on Wikipedia.
- The redirect might cause confusion. For example, if "Adam B. Smith" was redirected to "Andrew B. Smith", because Andrew was accidentally called Adam in one source, this could cause confusion with the article on Adam Smith, so the redirect should be deleted.
- The redirect is offensive or abusive, such as redirecting "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs" (unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is legitimately discussed in the article), or "Joe Bloggs" to "Loser". (Speedy deletion criterion G10 and G3 may apply.) See also § Neutrality of redirects.
- The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam. (Speedy deletion criterion G11 may apply.)
- The redirect makes no sense, such as redirecting "Apple" to "Orange". (Speedy deletion criterion G1 may apply.)
- It is a cross-namespace redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. The major exception to this rule are the pseudo-namespace shortcut redirects, which technically are in the main article space. Some long-standing cross-namespace redirects are also kept because of their long-standing history and potential usefulness. "MOS:" redirects, for example, are an exception to this rule. (Note also the existence of namespace aliases such as WP:. Speedy deletion criterion R2 may apply if the target namespace is something other than Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help:, or Portal:.)
- If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to an article that does not exist, it can be immediately deleted under speedy deletion criterion G8. You should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first and that it has not become broken through vandalism.
- If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects in a language other than English to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created. (Implausible typos or misnomers are candidates for speedy deletion criterion R3, if recently created.)
- If the target article needs to be moved to the redirect title, but the redirect has been edited before and has a history of its own, then the title needs to be freed up to make way for the move. If the move is uncontroversial, tag the redirect for G6 speedy deletion, or alternatively (with the
suppressredirect
user right; available to page movers and admins), perform a round-robin move. If not, take the article to Requested moves. - If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.
Reasons for not deleting[edit]
However, avoid deleting such redirects if:
- They have a potentially useful page history, or an edit history that should be kept to comply with the licensing requirements for a merge (see Wikipedia:Merge and delete). On the other hand, if the redirect was created by renaming a page with that name, and the page history just mentions the renaming, and for one of the reasons above you want to delete the page, copy the page history to the Talk page of the article it redirects to. The act of renaming is useful page history, and even more so if there has been discussion on the page name.
- They would aid accidental linking and make the creation of duplicate articles less likely, whether by redirecting a plural to a singular, by redirecting a frequent misspelling to a correct spelling, by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term, by redirecting to a synonym, etc. In other words, redirects with no incoming links are not candidates for deletion on those grounds because they are of benefit to the browsing user. Some extra vigilance by editors will be required to minimize the occurrence of those frequent misspellings in the article texts because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links; consider tagging the redirect with the {{R from misspelling}} template to assist editors in monitoring these misspellings.
- They aid searches on certain terms. For example, users who might see the "Keystone State" mentioned somewhere but do not know what that refers to will be able to find out at the Pennsylvania (target) article.
- Deleting redirects runs the risk of breaking incoming or internal links. For example, redirects resulting from page moves should not normally be deleted without good reason. Links that have existed for a significant length of time, including CamelCase links (e.g. WolVes) and old subpage links, should be left alone in case there are any existing links on external pages pointing to them. See also Wikipedia:Link rot § Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites.
- Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways. Evidence of usage can be gauged by using the wikishark or pageviews tool on the redirect to see the number of views it gets.
- The redirect is to a closely related word form, such as a plural form to a singular form.
Neutrality of redirects[edit]
Just as article titles using non-neutral language are permitted in some circumstances, so are such redirects. Because redirects are less visible to readers, more latitude is allowed in their names, therefore perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion. In most cases, non-neutral but verifiable redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term. Non-neutral redirects may be tagged with {{R from non-neutral name}}
.
Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:
- Articles that are created using non-neutral titles are routinely moved to a new neutral title, which leaves behind the old non-neutral title as a working redirect (e.g. Climategate → Climatic Research Unit email controversy).
- Articles created as POV forks may be deleted and replaced by a redirect pointing towards the article from which the fork originated (e.g. Barack Obama Muslim rumor → deleted and now redirected to Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories).
- The subject matter of articles may be represented by some sources outside Wikipedia in non-neutral terms. Such terms are generally avoided in Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. For instance the non-neutral expression "Attorneygate" is used to redirect to the neutrally titled Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy. The article in question has never used that title, but the redirect was created to provide an alternative means of reaching it because a number of press reports use the term.
The exceptions to this rule would be redirects that are not established terms and are unlikely to be useful, and therefore may be nominated for deletion, perhaps under deletion reason #3. However, if a redirect represents an established term that is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources, it should be kept even if non-neutral, as it will facilitate searches on such terms. Please keep in mind that RfD is not the place to resolve most editorial disputes.
Closing notes[edit]
- Details at Administrator instructions for RfD
Nominations should remain open, per policy, about a week before they are closed, unless they meet the general criteria for speedy deletion, the criteria for speedy deletion of a redirect, or are not valid redirect discussion requests (e.g. are actually move requests).
How to list a redirect for discussion[edit]
STEP I. | Tag the redirect(s).
Enter
| ||
STEP II. | List the entry on RfD.
Click here to edit the section of RfD for today's entries.
| ||
STEP III. | Notify users.
It is generally considered good practice to notify the creator and main contributors of the redirect(s) that you nominate. may be placed on the creator/main contributors' user talk page to provide notice of the discussion. Please replace RedirectName with the name of the respective creator/main contributors' redirect and use an edit summary such as: Notice of redirect discussion at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]]
Notices about the RfD discussion may also be left on relevant talk pages. |
- Please consider using What links here to locate other redirects that may be related to the one you are nominating. After going to the redirect target page and selecting "What links here" in the toolbox on the left side of your computer screen, select both "Hide transclusions" and "Hide links" filters to display the redirects to the redirect target page.
If this page has been recently modified, it may not reflect the most recent changes. Please purge this page to view the most recent changes. |
Current list[edit]
July 8[edit]
Philippe, Charles[edit]
- Philippe, Charles → Charles Philippe (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Charles-Philippe is a compound given name, so this comma format doesn't make any sense and should be deleted. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:12, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- No objection, if this is not an actual sort name it can be speedied. BD2412 T 01:27, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
July 7[edit]
Brohoof[edit]
- Brohoof → My Little Pony: Friendship Is Magic fandom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Useless redirect — the term is not mentioned in the target article at all. (The article i was looking is for is Fist bump — it's a non-neutral name for that, and not mentioned in that article either) 2002:57CF:EE0A:1:E989:4C91:CB45:4CA (talk) 21:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Blagger[edit]
- Blagger → Social engineering (security)#Pretexting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This was flagged up at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Disambiguation#Searching for "Blagger" currently redirects to a page with no mention of the word. by user:Oathed with the comment seems weird that it doesn't link or disambig to Blagger (video game). Not sure how to mark a page for "Disambig page needed".
At the very least this does need a hatnote to the video game, but I'm not acutally sure the video game isn't the primary target. Neither the present target nor Pretexting (linked as the main article) use the term. The only other uses I'm finding (Blaggers ITA (formerly known as The Blaggers) and The Blaggers Guide would be at most see-alsos on a dab page.
The video game article was created at this title but moved in March 2018 by Zxcvbnm with the summary "Merge, in order to disambiguate" but they just changed the redirect target and added a hatnote. The hatnote was removed without explanation by an IP in 2020, but the mention of "blagging" had been removed in July 2018 as part of a cull of unreferenced information by Michaelgt123. None of "blag", "blagging" or "blagger" has ever been included in the Pretext article. Thryduulf (talk) 20:27, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and move Blagger (video game) to it.
- The redirect made at least some sense at the time it was created. The article Pretext, as it appeared at the time, was about the general well-understood meaning of a "pretext"; a reason given in justification of a course of action that is not the real reason. It had only a single paragraph describing the social engineering trick.
- Meanwhile, the article Social engineering (security), as it appeared at the time, in the section Pretexting, said "Pretexting..., also known in the UK as blagging". So that made at least some sense as a target (although even then, I think the video game article would have been a more appropriate target).
- The video game seems pretty clearly to be the primary use for "Blagger"; if the "blagging" text is re-added to the Social engineering (security) article (as it probably should, there seems to be sufficient documentation of that, e.g., [1] at the BBC), it can be dealt with by ordinary disambiguation (hatnote or a Blagger (disambiguation) page, as appropriate). TJRC (talk) 02:39, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
- The page mover / redirect creator Zxcvbnm was notified in the nomination, however I have just notified at the talk page as well. Jay 💬 11:24, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate "Blagging" is another term for social engineering (see here and here). If that isn't the primary topic, then it should be disambiguated between social engineering (security) and the game, not have the game moved back here. That would be the height of folly when it could simply be re-added with a single sentence referenced to a reliable source. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:00, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Should the page Blagger be a disambiguation page?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ca talk to me! 08:46, 30 May 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Is there a primary topic?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:26, 11 June 2024 (UTC)- Delete, move Blagger (video game) to it, then add a hatnote. "Blagging" is an informal term in UK that has similarities to social engineering, but it's not quite the same thing - it's just a phrase that sort of means "bullshitter", someone who can make up lies quickly - social engineers will blag, but not all blaggers are social engineers. For example most improv comedians are good blaggers, but that doesn't mean they are doing anything nefarious. Seeing as Blagger (video game) exists, it should be the primary topic. BugGhost🪲👻 13:53, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's also not exclusively lying per se - it includes things like asking for something you know you aren't entitled to on the off-chance that the person you're asking wont check, presenting truths misleadingly or selectively. It is very significantly broader than social engineering. Thryduulf (talk) 11:51, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and move the video game here, for lack of any other acceptable outcome as the social engineering article does not mention it and nobody has been willing to add a mention in weeks of being at RfD. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Move back the video game to Blagger per others, and hatnote to The Blaggers. Whether or not the current target has a mention, there needs to be mention at Pretexting, for disambiguating or hatnoting, and we don't. Jay 💬 05:35, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per my draft. An important factor here is "blag" at Glossary of British terms not widely used in the United States, and The dictionary definition of Blagger at Wiktionary. A disambiguation page gives the reader access to those. Social engineering (security)#Pretexting can be added only if there's a legitimate mention. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:44, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per Shhhnotsoloud since there is no primary topic. There appears to be 3-4 terms it could refer to: the game, the band, the British slang term (with an entry at Glossary of British terms not widely used in the United States) and the social engineering definition which does appear to be referenced in sources. A disambiguation page also gives the reader access to the Wiktionary definition. C F A 💬 04:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: I have added a referenced mention to blagging at Social engineering (security)#Pretexting. C F A 💬 04:32, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Apologies for relisting this again after being open so long, but I would appreciate additional comments considering CFA's recent addition of the term at the target. So, disambiguate or move the video game article to this title?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:41, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Botswanan[edit]
It should redirect to Motswana. Not sure why this got reverted, the authority is wikitionary or however you spell it. Botswanan is not a proper word. [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] OK I think I’ve made my point. 48JCL 01:54, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- oops wrong place 48JCL 01:55, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- @48JCL: I have reverted your bold retarget and restored the redirect with the RfD tag as nominated to allow for proper consensus to be reached on where to target this. As stated at WP:RFD,
please do not unilaterally rename or change the target of a redirect while it is under discussion
. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 04:27, 18 June 2024 (UTC) - Comment 48JCL I think you maybe need to give a bit more of an argument for why it should be retargeted. Even if Botswanan isn't a "proper" word I think for most readers the main Botswana article is a good target; it also mentions the Tswana people in the lead paragraph for example. Skynxnex (talk) 15:22, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- "Botswanan" not being 'a proper word' isn't really an issue-- the question is if it's *a plausible word*. Adding an -n, -an, or -ian suffix to the name of a place is a typical English way of signifying "from this place" or "people from this place", see American, Mexican, Canadian, Italian, ect, just like "-ish" (English, Spanish, ect) or "-ese" (Japanese, Chinese, Portuguese, ect). I can easily see someone unfamiliar with the term Batswana to invent terms like Botswanese, Botswanish, or, yes, Botswanan.That said, I would
Retargetto the Tswana DAB, simply to match the other 'from this place' words above. The searcher is clearly looking for information on *something* from Botswana- let's both inform them of the correct term, AND offer up the multiple meanings for said word. After all, who's to say they're not looking for the language they speak in Botswana? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 15:46, 18 June 2024 (UTC)- Comment @Lunamann, the proper denonym is at Motswana. 48JCL 13:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- That... definitely presents an issue, given part of the reason I targeted the Tswana DAB was its link to Tswana language; many demonyms also serve as a name for the language that group uses (see English, Chinese, German, ect); and given Botswanan is a made-up and incorrect demonym, there's really nothing stopping someone from also using it as an incorrect name for the language.The only idea I have is, to retarget to the Motswana DAB, and then add a See Also that targets the Tswana DAB? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 14:10, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Lunamann: Yes, that does seem to be a problem; I will ping Lefcentreright and John, who were able to somewhat eradicate the term from the Wikipedia and replace it with proper terms. 48JCL 22:33, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- That... definitely presents an issue, given part of the reason I targeted the Tswana DAB was its link to Tswana language; many demonyms also serve as a name for the language that group uses (see English, Chinese, German, ect); and given Botswanan is a made-up and incorrect demonym, there's really nothing stopping someone from also using it as an incorrect name for the language.The only idea I have is, to retarget to the Motswana DAB, and then add a See Also that targets the Tswana DAB? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 14:10, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment @Lunamann, the proper denonym is at Motswana. 48JCL 13:14, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to the dab per Lunamann. The word appears in dictionaries (Cambridge, Oxford) and is used by reliable sources such as the United States Mission to the United Nations, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, Cardiff University and Florida State University among others as well as lots of other sites I haven't bothered to assess for reliability. Even if it isn't a "proper word" (which seems doubtful given that evidence) it is very much a plausible search term. Thryduulf (talk) 16:53, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment What about creating a disambiguation page that points to Botswana, Tswana people and Tswana language? --Error (talk) 09:48, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I think this is the better solution. The sources that Thryduulf has included in their comment show that "Botswanan" refers just as much to the country itself as it does to the people or language. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 18:30, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I wouldn't be opposed to this. Support. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:39, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I have no objections to this. Thryduulf (talk) 10:36, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support this, sounds like the most helpful solution. BugGhost🪲👻 09:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I have no objections. If this is closed, the result would probably be like merge 2 articles and retarget to disambiguation. 48JCL 01:48, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is leading to agreement on a disambiguation page but it is unclear if the current redirect will be converted to it, or be targeted to a new disambiguation page that needs to be created.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Petapixel[edit]
Aside from the "Petapixel redirects here", not mentioned in page. I can't find any discussion of the concept of a petapixel image to see if it should be mentioned in the page, search results are completely shadowed by PetaPixel. Possibly this should redirect there? Rusalkii (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment peta- is an SI prefix. JoshuaAuble (talk) 19:15, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Fieari JoshuaAuble (talk) 02:21, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - The target doesn't discuss petapixel images by name because, to my knowledge, such a thing does not yet exist... yet if it did/when it does, it's basically the same thing as a gigapixel image except... moreso. As Joshua said above, peta is just an SI prefix after all. So I feel like the current target is a pretty good choice, and probably a better target than PetaPixel, which is a pretty low notability organization (not saying it needs to be AfD'd, just that it wouldn't make good WP:PTOPIC fare). Fieari (talk) 07:32, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Not even mentioned, much less explained or expounded upon, in the target article. Until such time as that occurs, this needs to be deleted as misleading and confusing. Softlavender (talk) 23:52, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Totally implausible search term and pointless redirect. As Rusalkii and Softlavender said, it's nonexistent and confusing. Fieari agrees with that as an equally elaborate rationale for deletion as the nominator's rationale, but with the inexplicably wrong conclusion. It's just another of this user's bunk redirects in a campaign to attempt to coin some pet jargon, so stop making them. — Smuckola(talk) 01:42, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is not me making up new words, as petapixel image has redirected to gigapixel image since 2011. JoshuaAuble (talk) 19:06, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- My conclusion is the opposite of your simply because my criteria for conclusion has only two components: firstly, is it a plausible search? Peta is an SI prefix, two steps up from giga, and while nothing currently goes that far I can see someone using it a speculative fashion, so that checks plausible off for me. Secondly, is the target accurate? The target describes images with a very large number of pixels, which would cover what a petapixel image is. No other criteria for a redirect is really meaningful, and since this one meets both those criteria there's no harm in keeping it. Fieari (talk) 02:43, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- The harm in keeping it is that is worse keeping it than deleting it, because it is not mentioned, much less explained, in the target article. If you want to add the term to the target article and cite it as relating to Gigapixel image, then this discussion would be moot. As it is, encyclopedic integrity demands that it be deleted. Softlavender (talk) 04:14, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or retarget to PetaPixel. Yes, you can probably figure out what this hypothetical term means if you land on the target. But it's not mentioned, and being a redlink or pointing to a different topic would convey it doesn't exist. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:54, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Trial by jury[edit]
- Trial by jury → Jury trial (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Trial by Jury and Trial by jury go to completely different articles (the Gilbert and Sullivan opera and the legal system respectively). It's absolutely insane to have disambiguation by capitalization; clearly, the links from here to Jury trial should be replaced with a piped link. I don't think there's any other redirect where capitalisation makes a difference to which article you go to.
Trial by Jury has 581 uses, Trial by jury about 100. It would be far less disruptive to simply redirect to Trial by Jury. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 11:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:DIFFCAPS. You may feel that the policy is insane, but it's actually standard practice. Jury trial and Trial by Jury both have appropriate hatnotes, so there's little chance of confusion. - Eureka Lott 13:18, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: per Eureka Lott rationale. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 16:41, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Voi.id[edit]
Wrong target, and there isn't a right one: Voi.id is an entirely different entity from Voice of Indonesia (which uses voinews.id). Herostratus (talk) 06:39, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete/Retarget. Voice of Indonesia is a public new channels under Radio Republik Indonesia, while Voi.id is a private news channels. Despite their similar names, they are unrelated entities. Ckfasdf (talk) 15:33, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:21, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 16:43, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
2025 FIVB Men's Volleyball Nations League[edit]
- 2025 FIVB Men's Volleyball Nations League → FIVB Men's Volleyball Nations League (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
No mentioned at the target page and per WP:FUTURE. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 04:56, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Better be recreated as an future article if reliable sources exist. Ahri Boy (talk) 05:50, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
2025 FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League[edit]
- 2025 FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League → FIVB Women's Volleyball Nations League (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
No mentioned at the target page and per WP:FUTURE. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 04:52, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Nabbit[edit]
- Nabbit → New Super Mario Bros. U#Gameplay (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The most recent RfD was closed as retarget based on Nabbit not being mentioned in List of Mario franchise characters. However, a section List of Mario franchise characters#Nabbit was added in September 2023. Should this redirect be changed to List of Mario franchise characters or should it remain at the current target which only mentions Nabbit twice in passing? Mia Mahey (talk) 02:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think it's controversial to redirect to List of Mario franchise characters#Nabbit. In the (likely) event that the section is removed again, it would make sense to restore the New Super Mario Bros. U#Gameplay target, where the character is mentioned. czar 03:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Harry Patterson[edit]
- Harry Patterson → Jack Higgins (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I propose to move the new disambiguation page, Harry Patterson (disambiguation), over this title. The current redirect subject, Jack Higgins, may well be a popular author, but his real name was "Henry Patterson" (not Harry), and he apparently only ever made limited use of the name "Harry Patterson", finally switching to "Jack Higgins" before he became famous; I therefore do not think there is a primary topic for the actual name, "Harry Patterson". BD2412 T 01:02, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
July 6[edit]
QTPOC[edit]
- QTPOC → LGBT (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- QTIPOC → QTPOC (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned at the target page, or at List of LGBT-related acronyms. Un assiolo (talk) 22:25, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- I believe this should point to Person of color. But since it's not mentioned there, Wiktionary could solve the problem. It should be noted that this abbreviation is mentioned here, here Web-julio (talk) 01:04, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- and here, here, and here. many others Web-julio (talk) 01:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- QTIPOC also exists. Web-julio (talk) 01:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Which I added to the nomination. Dsuke1998AEOS (talk) 19:33, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Santjordia[edit]
- Santjordia → Jellyfish (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Santjordia pagesi → Jellyfish (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Monotypic genus and species has no mention in the article. Better off as a redlink.
Also should blocked users be notified if their page/redirect is up for deletion? 115.188.142.52 (talk) 20:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:REDLINK --Lenticel (talk) 12:38, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per REDLINK. Plantdrew (talk) 20:48, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Kemosabe (Kesha album)[edit]
- Kemosabe (Kesha album) → Warrior (Kesha album) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This currently redirects to Warrior (Kesha album). Kemosabe is the name of a record label that put out the album, but the album article does not mention anything about it being a name for the album itself. The article history also raises concerns about WP:HOAX as shown here. I do not see any value in keeping this redirect as it does not seem like a plausible search term and per the above reasons, it is confusing and unclear. Aoba47 (talk) 20:29, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. --Un assiolo (talk) 22:37, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 05:05, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.--NØ 07:24, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 12:39, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:VN[edit]
- Wikipedia:VN → Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Visual novels (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Retarget to either Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard or Wikipedia:WikiProject Vietnam. I would lean towards retargeting to RSN, considering WP:V/N links to it, but I can see an argument to link to WPVietnam. I don't see how an inactive task force should be the ideal target for this redirect. OzzyOlly (talk) 03:57, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Most of the incoming links are intended to go to the Visual novels task force. Breaking all of those links wouldn't be optimal. It has almost no utility, so a disambig page would not be useful compared to its maintance burden. Ca talk to me! 13:56, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, per Ca. I don't know the etymology of the WP:V/N → RSN redirect, but going by the stats it's far far less used than WP:RSN (~10 monthly hits vs ~1500), so it doesn't look like a common source of confusion. Can't see a reason to change it, so keep. BugGhost🪲👻 07:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I believe it means "verifiability noticeboard". OzzyOlly (talk) 17:19, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Oh yeah of course - thanks BugGhost🪲👻 17:44, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- I believe it means "verifiability noticeboard". OzzyOlly (talk) 17:19, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate create a new redirect for Visual Novels WP:VG/VN -- the task force is inactive, so it is not a productive use of this redirect, for such a common abbreviation for Vietnam. The WP:SURPRISE of landing at an inactive TF, instead of the country WPP or a dab page is overwhelming. Replace all existing incoming links with the new redirect. -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 13:55, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Similar disambiguation pages in WP-space include WP:PT (with WP:PT (disambiguation) redirect) and WP:1st (disambiguation), etc -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 20:57, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:26, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, I'm not convinced that going back to change all the incoming links is worth it. The hatnote already takes care of people looking for WP:V/N or WP:VIET. I did create WP:VG/VN per the IP's suggestion though. Nickps (talk) 11:00, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's also not possible for links in edit summaries. Those will be broken no matter what. Nickps (talk) 11:19, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 19:27, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Crows in popular culture[edit]
- Crows in popular culture → Cultural depictions of ravens (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Redirect leads to Ravens. Which is a different bird. Questions? four Olifanofmrtennant (she/her) 16:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Corvus#Cultural depictions, which covers this topic. - Eureka Lott 18:17, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Corvus#Cultural depictions per EurekaLott --Lenticel (talk) 00:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Corvus#Cultural depictions 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 05:07, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Stavros Kremos[edit]
non-sense redirect InterComMan (talk) 11:21, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Presumably Stavros Kremos is a person somehow connected to the company, but as he is not mentioned at the target article, the redirect should be deleted. --Un assiolo (talk) 22:28, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 05:11, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Albumoftheyear.org[edit]
- Albumoftheyear.org → Album of the Year (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I am not sure the website url redirecting to a disambiguation page which does not list anything related to the website is useful. There is nothing at the target page for people seeking information about the site, and it does not appear to be notable. NØ 09:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. The website was mentioned at the disambiguation page, but it was (appropriately) removed in April. - Eureka Lott 13:41, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Not mentioned at the target. --Un assiolo (talk) 22:35, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per above --Lenticel (talk) 00:25, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 05:13, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Siddiqui[edit]
Current target Muslim Kayastha is very specifically referring to a community in a region in India. Meanwhile this name found all over Pakistan and Bangladesh as well among unrelated communities. (e.g the name is listed here as a Sindhi name as well List of Sindhi tribes (in the "others" section) Kowtis (talk) 09:05, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not very knowledgeable in the subject, but I would suggest converting to disamb page here, unless there's a clear primary topic that someone can explain.
Note: this is an RfD nomination that I've helped out with on behalf of User:Kowtis who had trouble doing it themselves, they have explained to me on their talk page that this redirect should be retargeted to Siddiqui (name). — AP 499D25 (talk) 10:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)- Would it be better to move Siddiqui (name) to Siddiqui? --Un assiolo (talk) 22:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Rajeshwari Vilas Coffee Club[edit]
- Rajeshwari Vilas Coffee Club → Zee Telugu (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in target. Is a series aired on that channel, may belong at List of programmes broadcast by Zee Telugu but that page is up for deletion. Rusalkii (talk) 21:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Likewise Seethe Ramudi Katnam Rusalkii (talk) 22:35, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- ...and very very many others, all of which created by an editor blocked for paid editing User talk:RahulBodke. Propose to delete the lot. Rusalkii (talk) 22:40, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- If it belongs there, someone needs to add an entry. (And maybe add some sources, that list article is rather light on those.) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:39, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: List of programmes broadcast by Zee Telugu is not, nor was up for deletion. Jay 💬 15:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:23, 6 July 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)
Wikipedia:PDP[edit]
- Wikipedia:PDP → Wikipedia:Protection policy#Creation protection (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hasn't been used in over a decade, and it's much more likely someone coming here may be looking for proposed deletion patrol. I recommend converting to disamb page.
P.S. I tried adding a 'redirect' hatnote over at the protection policy page pointing over to the PROD patrol Wikiproject page, but this was rejected by someone else, who suggested in the edit summary to "convert to disamb page" as it apparently hasn't been used since 2007. — AP 499D25 (talk) 05:52, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support. Everyone uses WP:SALT nowadays instead. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 14:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
July 5[edit]
SportAccord[edit]
- SportAccord → Global Association of International Sports Federations (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Removal/deletion of current redirect as it creates misleading impression. The redirect page reflects the name of a separate organization with its own initiatives whereas the target page reflects another organization that is now dissolved. In the current target page there's even a proposal on the Talk page from someone addressing this confusion. There should be a separate page and information about the redirect page of SportAccord JennyAnderson 2 (talk) 14:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hard to say, maybe we can just rename that GAISF article again to be SportAccord? Notified both WP:SPORTS and WP:Switzerland. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- It is hard, indeed. But I feel there would be value to having a separate SportAccord page as these are entirely different entities and it's tricky to combine them into one article efficiently as they have different structures, activities, missions. JennyAnderson 2 (talk) 09:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, that's why that SportAccord has its own Wikidata item just because of entirely different entities, but then it meets own notability for separating? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:46, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- It is hard, indeed. But I feel there would be value to having a separate SportAccord page as these are entirely different entities and it's tricky to combine them into one article efficiently as they have different structures, activities, missions. JennyAnderson 2 (talk) 09:27, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep since it is mentioned at the target, so I honestly see no reason for deletion. This is clearly a plausible redirect, and a valid {{R from move}}. CycloneYoris talk! 21:33, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 02:57, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Garage Band (TV series)[edit]
- Garage Band (TV series) → Grojband (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Garage band (TV series) → Grojband (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- GarageBand (TV series) → Grojband (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Garageband (TV series) → Grojband (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This TV series is not called "Garage Band". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:04, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - it's not called "Garage Band" but it's meant to be pronounced like "garage band", and it is the only TV show listed on Garage band (disambiguation). It's a plausible misspelling if someone has only heard the name of the show said vocally. BugGhost🪲👻 10:28, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: as per BugGhost rationale. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 05:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Yellow plant[edit]
- Yellow plant → Heavy equipment (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
...because they're referred to as "plants" and are sometimes yellow? i don't get it. i'm not entirely sure if disambiguating or retargeting to a pre-existing disambiguation about something about things that are yellow and known as plants would be a better option than keeping or deleting, but will lean towards dabifying cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as vague --Lenticel (talk) 02:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Common term in UK and Ireland. Could be retargeted to Yellow goods (construction and agriculture). Stifle (talk) 07:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:41, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Yellow goods (construction and agriculture) per Stifle. Tevildo (talk) 12:44, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Rodentolepis[edit]
The target is a much-too-high-level taxon. I suggest deleting in order to avoid giving the impresion that we already have an article about this genus. Lophotrochozoa (talk) 21:23, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete so Rodentoleptis, the existing, but misspelled, article for the genus can be moved to the correct name.—Ketil Trout (<><!) 03:59, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Ketil Trout. Plantdrew (talk) 20:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Furiosa Road[edit]
- Furiosa Road → Mad Max: Fury Road (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not sure how plausible this search term is but if kept, would Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga be a more appropriate target? मल्ल (talk) 22:39, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as is I take you you didn't watch "Furiosa: A Mad Max Saga", since that isn't a road movie. "Mad Max: Fury Road" is a road movie. "Furiosa Road" was a common nickname for the film when it was released. [11][12][13][14][15] -- so is a good search term. -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 04:08, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:51, 25 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
metal age[edit]
- The Metal Age → Thief II (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Metal Age → Three-age system (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
different targets, and there's an article for the metal ages... which is itself divided into 3 ages, the last of which seems to be referred to as "the" metal age, even though they're grouped together because they're different metals. i'll vote for retargeting both of those to metal ages, unless someone actually knows their stuff cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate at Metal Age, then retarget The Metal Age there. I guess I know some stuff, and it looks like "Metal Age" or "The Metal Age" (both singular) could refer to:
- The Metal Ages (Copper, Bronze, Iron) in the traditional three age system, collectively – but this is more of a turn of phrase than a formal period [16][17][18]
- The Metal Age in the prehistory of Southeast Asia – a specific, formal period (presumably because bronze and iron arrived there simultaneously) [19][20][21][22][23][24]
- Hesiod's metallic ages (Gold, Silver, Bronze, Iron) [25][26][27]
- Thief II
- I don't see a primary topic amongst them and I'm also not sure about Metal Ages as standalone article, there's not much to say about them collectively other than that they all involved metal. @Iskandar323: What do you think? – Joe (talk) 07:54, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping Joe. I think they should both redirect to Metal Ages (though this should possibly move to the singular, both as best practice stylistically and apparently as the most common form in scholarship (Ngrams)). While the page as is stubby, it's for lack of attention, not for lack of material. The scholarly literature using the conceptual period grouping is considerable. The Metal Age in Southeast Asia might have a slightly different progression, but it is conceptually the same thing. Hesiod's idea within an idea mercifully has a quite different form. The Thief II title name is not something I think we need to be concerned with, any more than we need to disambiguate "resurrection" to account for the fourth installment of the Aliens franchise when directing to that topic. If a disambiguation page feels warranted, I would suggest linking to it with a hatnote from the Metal Ages page. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not too sure about combining the Metal Age of Southeast Asia and the "metal ages" of the rest of the world. In most of the Old World the Copper, Bronze, and Iron Ages are firmly distinct periods (the latter two being two of the original three ages) and referring to them together as either "the metal age" or "the metal ages" is honestly something I'd never come across until today (though Google Scholar tells me it happens). By contrast archaeologists of Southeast Asia consistently use it as a distinct, top-level period with the subdivisions early, developed, and proto-historic rather than copper, bronze, and iron. So we could write Metal Age Southeast Asia but not Metal Age Europe or Metal Age Southwest Asia because nobody really talks about that (instead we have Bronze Age Europe, Iron Age Europe). – Joe (talk) 10:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps. But it's somewhat academic at this point when a Metal Age of Southeast Asia page doesn't exist yet. I think the reason why the Metal Ages are emerging more and more as a reference point is because the three-age system is a bit dated and broken and underappreciates the major technology step of metallurgy. The stone age is also, in of itself, massive – comprising the paleolithic, mesolithic and neolithic, so it's generally pretty useless and unhelpful to group that with the bronze and iron ages, which are very distinct from the former. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:22, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not too sure about combining the Metal Age of Southeast Asia and the "metal ages" of the rest of the world. In most of the Old World the Copper, Bronze, and Iron Ages are firmly distinct periods (the latter two being two of the original three ages) and referring to them together as either "the metal age" or "the metal ages" is honestly something I'd never come across until today (though Google Scholar tells me it happens). By contrast archaeologists of Southeast Asia consistently use it as a distinct, top-level period with the subdivisions early, developed, and proto-historic rather than copper, bronze, and iron. So we could write Metal Age Southeast Asia but not Metal Age Europe or Metal Age Southwest Asia because nobody really talks about that (instead we have Bronze Age Europe, Iron Age Europe). – Joe (talk) 10:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping Joe. I think they should both redirect to Metal Ages (though this should possibly move to the singular, both as best practice stylistically and apparently as the most common form in scholarship (Ngrams)). While the page as is stubby, it's for lack of attention, not for lack of material. The scholarly literature using the conceptual period grouping is considerable. The Metal Age in Southeast Asia might have a slightly different progression, but it is conceptually the same thing. Hesiod's idea within an idea mercifully has a quite different form. The Thief II title name is not something I think we need to be concerned with, any more than we need to disambiguate "resurrection" to account for the fourth installment of the Aliens franchise when directing to that topic. If a disambiguation page feels warranted, I would suggest linking to it with a hatnote from the Metal Ages page. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:56, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Tristan Tate[edit]
- Tristan Tate → Andrew Tate (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Delete as misleading. This redirect was created a minute after the second deletion discussion closed, first pointing to the whole article and then to a subsection concerning the Romanian case(s), on what seems to me to be the very good reason that they are different people. During the GA drive this change was reverted. As it stands, the references to Tristan are sprinkled throughout the article, so it's hard to pick a single place to point the redirect at; but they are different people, and the current outcome suggests that to the unwary they aren't. Given the AfD outcome, I would suggest that deletion of the redirect and reliance on how search engines actually work is the best resolution of this so that those looking will get a succinct and accurate answer; failing that, the AfD could be reconsidered, or Andrew Tate's article could be so structured as to give a redirect some place to point to. The current arrangement, though, treats him like Zaphod Beeblebrox's second head. Mangoe (talk) 00:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment New RfD's go below the header, not above it. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Re-target to Andrew Tate#In Romania: 2022–present per WP:BLP1E, where is he referenced under "Tate brothers" (that can be amended to "Tate and his brother Tristan" for first usage). 1E was the strong argument for deletion of the article second time around, despite not being mentioned in the closing summary, so redirecting to any other part of the article doesn't make sense based on his notability. Additionally, a redirect that is used 20 times a day does appear useful, but being pointed at Andrew Tate directly can be confusing for readers, even if he is mentioned from the lead onwards. I'm not sure why TheMainLogan changed the redirect back in March. I'm otherwise convinced that this redirect existed long before March and that the page history is missing after the 2nd AfD, but could be wrong. Maybe an admin could clarify. CNC (talk) 01:52, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- I won't even lie, I pointed the redirect at Andrew directly because they're basically the same guy. —theMainLogan (t•c) 15:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- @TheMainLogan yeah but in my opinion, they are not. Tristan Tate is almost equally as well known as his brother, and is a different human being with his own life and internet personality. Sure, they live together, own the same cars, but they are still entirely different. Mr Vili talk 00:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- "Tristan Tate is almost equally as well known as his brother, and is a different human being with his own life and internet personality. Sure, they live together, own the same cars, but they are still entirely different." Then why shouldn't he have his own article? —theMainLogan (t•c) 03:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- @TheMainLogan yeah but in my opinion, they are not. Tristan Tate is almost equally as well known as his brother, and is a different human being with his own life and internet personality. Sure, they live together, own the same cars, but they are still entirely different. Mr Vili talk 00:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- I won't even lie, I pointed the redirect at Andrew directly because they're basically the same guy. —theMainLogan (t•c) 15:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete and Restore Tristan Tate Draft I believe the redirect should be deleted, and Tristan Tate is notable enough to have his own page, I suggest the original page be undeleted, and converted into a Draft where further editing can be done to the original page in order to move it into mainspace Mr Vili talk 08:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- While this isn't the place to debate notability (the talk page would be better) the source assessment in the 2nd AfD demonstrated only one article with WP:SIGCOV, hence notability was not proven beyond BLP1E. Since this AfD he is now accused in a second investigation in the UK, but per the closing summary of that AfD, WP:PERP is still an issue here. Even if another draft is worked on, the mainspace article still requires a decision on either deleting, keeping or redirecting. CNC (talk) 12:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Refine to the section per CommunityNotesContributor. This is without prejudice to the former article content being worked on in draft, but unless and until an article is accepted (and such an article would need to demonstrate notability unrelated to the single incident) readers are better served by the redirect pointing to the content in his brother's article. Thryduulf (talk) 10:58, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or Refine? Also, in response to CNC's queries, the page history is missing after the 2nd AfD because the article was deleted at the AfD, and the page created fresh as a redirect. Prior to deletion, the article was turned to a redirect to Andrew Tate for a short time per WP:TNT, and reverted within 3 hours.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Gallophone[edit]
- Gallophone → Geographical distribution of French speakers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in target. In the weird position of having a whole lot of online dictionaries claiming it means "French-speaking", starting with wikt:Gallophone, but I can't find a single such usage. Actual usage is rare but seems to be related to Gaul, not France or the French, e.g. Gallocentrism (thought I can't find a single one of its sources to check if they use the word that way). Rusalkii (talk) 22:47, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Have you tried asking wikt:WT:RFV about the Wiktionary entry? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 00:59, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, but it does look like the original creator @Thryduulf is an RfD regular, tagging them in to see if they have thoughts. (Sorry for dragging out decades-old pages!) Rusalkii (talk) 07:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- There are five quotations on the Wiktionary entry, all giving examples of use. I don't remember creating that (it was 2010) but the quotes have been there since start. A couple of minutes has found another three uses [28] [29][30] on Google books and it can also be found in our Gallocentrism article . I also came across [31] and [32] which use the word with different meanings (the first possibly related to Galilee, the second is in the context of Welsh so I'd guess from Gaelic).
- Additionally, I'm seeing a few sources mentioning a Gallophone Records from the 1930s, with one that is probably not a reliable source, stating that it later became Gallo Records, but even if true this would be a partial title match. Thryduulf (talk) 09:21, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Rereading the initial post here, it's not unique in having a meaning related to France while being etymologically related to Gaul - wikt:Gallic being the most obvious. Thryduulf (talk) 09:23, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- No, but it does look like the original creator @Thryduulf is an RfD regular, tagging them in to see if they have thoughts. (Sorry for dragging out decades-old pages!) Rusalkii (talk) 07:01, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - The attestations provided by wiktionary, plus the additional mentioned above, are enough to a) determine that this is a plausible thing to search, and b) determine that the current target is appropriate. Fieari (talk) 04:26, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Disidrose[edit]
Arbitrary non-English redirect (Portugues), subject unrelated to Portuguese or Portugal. —Alalch E. 13:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. This word does not occur anywhere on Wikipedia. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:31, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
JDX[edit]
Doesn't appear to be the primary topic for "JDX"; quick google gives "JDX Performance Golf Apparel", "Job Builder JDX", "Jobs and Employment Data Exchange", a racing company, an instagram artist, guitar amplifier, etc. I can't even find the radio station. Hard to create a disambig page because none of these have wikipedia pages. Rusalkii (talk) 22:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per nom. BD2412 T 19:34, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Never mind primary topic say, I can't find anything worthy of this becoming a DAB page with nothing created anyway in terms of articles yet, after looking at this title's page history. And BD2412, it seems the nominator was suggesting titles of articles of note worthy topics now but not yet created even to be considered for this at the moment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Intrisit (talk • contribs) 17:59, 25 June 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! 02:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate: draft provided. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:30, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
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)
Kirby Wii (tenative title)[edit]
- Kirby Wii (tenative title) → Kirby's Epic Yarn (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
"tenative" is not a word, and this isn't the only kirby game on the wii. it is the first one, though, so i'll give it that cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - per nom BugGhost🪲👻 13:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Kirby Wii[edit]
- Kirby Wii → Kirby's Return to Dream Land (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
not the only (or even first) kirby game on the wii, though it is known in japan as "星のカービィ wii", so my unspoken delete vote is slightly weaker than on kirby ds cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.—Alalch E. 14:04, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Kirby (series) where the Kirby Wii games are discussed. The Wii section is primarily Kirby (series)#2011–2021: Evolution of 2.5D platforming although Kirby's Epic Yarn is (currently) in the previous section. -- Tavix (talk) 14:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Byeol ui Kieby: Dauphin Ildang ui Seupgyeok[edit]
- Byeol ui Kieby: Dauphin Ildang ui Seupgyeok → Kirby: Squeak Squad (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
does wp:rlang apply? truth be told, i have no idea why the korean name is even mentioned in the article. is it disproportionately popular in south korea or something? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:08, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete arbitrary non-English redirect.—Alalch E. 14:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Kirby DS[edit]
there are 3 other kirby games on the ds, and squeak squad isn't even the first one cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.—Alalch E. 14:04, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Kirby (series)#2005–2011: Touch-based gameplay where the Kirby DS games are discussed. -- Tavix (talk) 14:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Amoogus[edit]
either a misspelling of "amogus", in which case fair enough, or of "amoonguss" (ironically usually based on amogus), in which case delete as dabifying between two misspellings used in shitposts would probably be a little unnecessary. this among us meme thing makes my brain go ouch cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:53, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. It's only one letter off from amogus, a well-known meme-spelling of Among Us; meanwhile, it's two letters off from Amoonguss, a mushroom Pokemon that predates Among Us, whose name is a simple reference to the phrase "a Fungus Among Us", and who quickly became associated with Among Us in meme circles just based off the name alone. One is less than two, which solves the WP:XY issue here IMO. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 20:53, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - per Lunamann above. Fieari (talk) 23:26, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as it is a common mispelling of amongus. LegalSmeagolian (talk) 01:01, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom, overly vague. The search function exists for a reason. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 01:48, 30 June 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! 08:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)- Keep Per above. Amogus remains relevant forever. Even search results will redirect you to Among Us itself. Ahri Boy (talk) 10:06, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Not similar enough to "amoonguss" to be vague. Just a misspelling of "amogus".—Alalch E. 14:09, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
CheckUser[edit]
CNR. Should we retarget to Wiki#Security? Ahri Boy (talk) 06:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Wiki#Security has no info on checkusers or equivalent functions. Checkusers are not something which beginner editors, who might not realize the existence of the Wikipedia namespace, would search up. Ca talk to me! 11:14, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: I think the question should be whether this is a potential useful redirect and whether it's unambiguous. I think it is, on both accounts. It being a cross-namespace redirect does not mean it's not useful. Those types of redirects aren't covered under WP:CSD R2, meaning, in certain cases, they're allowed. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:45, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- All Google results appear to be for Wikipedia and I'm not sure if there is much non Wikipedia usage. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note that there is also Checkuser which should also be deleted or retargeted if this is closed as delete or retarget. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:49, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
July 4[edit]
Elio (flim)[edit]
- Elio (flim) → Elio (film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Please delete this redirect. I don't want this anymore because there is a typo and error in disambiguating qualifier, and it has existed under this title for almost two years. 2607:FEA8:761F:4600:BDED:7C72:F1A7:CD7A (talk) 00:22, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Implausible misspelling Ca talk to me! 00:26, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- ignoring the implication that you wanted this before, delete as implasuible tpyo cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 00:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete G7 per nom. Fieari (talk) 05:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:COSTLY as implausible typo in qualifier but not G7 unless the IP is User:Axolotl is a Pokemon who created it in 2022. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as an implausible and rarely-viewed typo, but also trout the nominator for either a flimsy rationale or flimsily-disguised block evasion. jlwoodwa (talk) 05:57, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Kenny Veach[edit]
- Kenny Veach → Horror in the High Desert#Relationship to the Kenny Veach case (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
There is no evidence to connect the case regarding this individual to the events of this film. Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 22:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Where did you come, from where did you go[edit]
- Where did you come, from where did you go → Cotton-Eyed Joe (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
the comma is misplaced, and it doesn't seem like anything links to it besides the redirect with the properly placed comma cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:55, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Redirect provides no substantive improvement to WP. Searching "Where did you come..." automatically completes to 'Where did you come from, where did you go', which rediects appropriately and is gramatically incorrect. This mispalced comma does not seem like a common error which would warrant its own redirect. Bgv. (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I was the one that created this redirect long ago and probably mistyped or something and I didn't go after some admin to delete it, which is something I should have done back then. NullReason (talk) 01:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy Delete G7 - Misplaced comma makes this an implausible redirect, but more to the point, the author is requesting it above, so that's a G7. Fieari (talk) 05:52, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Gegagedigedagedago I've been married a long time ago. Where did you come from where did you go, where did you come from Buckle eye Joe?[edit]
- Gegagedigedagedago I've been married a long time ago. Where did you come from where did you go, where did you come from Buckle eye Joe? → Cotton-Eyed Joe#Modern covers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
too long? maybe just "gedagedigedagedago" and "gegagedigedagedago" would be fine, but this seems a little overkill cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:44, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Redirecting from a misspelling or synonym or lyrics used colloquially as a title (e.g. "Proud to be an American" for "God Bless the USA") is one thing, but this one boarders on patent nonsense. WP:RDELETE #8 applies here as far as I'm concerned. Per nom, this is overkill. Bgv. (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete One long word is enough. Ahri Boy (talk) 00:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I'm usually fine with the first line of a song's lyrics or chorus pointing to the song, but this is both multiple lines, and includes an implausible rendition of a banjo riff as an onomatopoeia. Completely implausible. Fieari (talk) 01:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- eh, i'd say the riff and somehow getting the word "cotton" wrong are actually pretty plausible, as the details of the meme are mentioned in the target. my issue was more so it being 4 entire lines cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
International Networking Working Group[edit]
- International Networking Working Group → International Network Working Group (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This article, which I created, uses an incorrect title. I moved it to the correct title but the redirect is not a name ever used in sources for this topic, so it's not a plausible alternative name that could justify a redirect. No articles link here. Propose deleting it to avoid confusion or it becoming a Wikipedia reflection on the Internet Whizz40 (talk) 18:06, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 12:05, 25 June 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) 17:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)- Delete The redirect might confuse readers into believing this name was ever real, when only mentions of the web are Wikipedia mirrors. If they accidentally put a gerund, Wikipedia's search function handles it well. Ca talk to me! 00:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Support. It is an incorrect title for the topic that is solely due to my own error. It is never used in sources and is not, therefore, a plausible redirect. However, it is showing up in Google searches:
- https://www.google.com/search?q=international+network+working+group&oq=international+network+working+group&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOTIGCAEQRRg8MgYIAhBFGDwyBggDEEUYPNIBCDQ0MjhqMGoxqAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&safe=active&ssui=on
- Thank you. Whizz40 (talk) 06:20, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Pls note: this has been raised as an issue on the talk page by an expert reader/editor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:International_Network_Working_Group#Correct_name. Whizz40 (talk) 06:27, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete The redirect might confuse readers into believing this name was ever real, when only mentions of the web are Wikipedia mirrors. If they accidentally put a gerund, Wikipedia's search function handles it well. Ca talk to me! 00:34, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Sonic Wiild Fire[edit]
- Sonic Wiild Fire → Sonic and the Secret Rings (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
either an implausible misspelling or an implausible pun. i don't know which outcome is worse, but the term doesn't seem to see much (if any) use in the context of sonic, with or without a space cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment/Weak Keep - Article has mention of "Sonic Wild Fire" as the game's original working title, and a single doubling of a character is a potentially plausible typo, so I don't see a need to go out of our way to delete this thing, but I'll grant that searching the original working title to begin with is a rare proposition, so it's not like I feel strongly about this one. (Entirely possible the redirect creator was making a Wii system pun) Fieari (talk) 06:11, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Mystic Ruins[edit]
- Mystic Ruins → Sonic Chronicles: The Dark Brotherhood#Plot (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
either vague, or more closely associated with sonic adventure cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:20, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Hyper Shadow[edit]
- Hyper Shadow → Shadow the Hedgehog (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
apparently a mistake on a guide that some people thought was grounds to adding headcanons here? currently, there are only four sonic characters who have a "hyper" form, and none of them are shadow cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:52, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Ultimate life[edit]
- Ultimate life → Shadow the Hedgehog (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
the ultimate life (missing the word "form") is a movie, apparently. implausible misspelling otherwise cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:34, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to The Ultimate Life, per nom. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:33, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Tail(character)[edit]
- Tail(character) → Tails (Sonic the Hedgehog) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
malformed and misspelled (unless it refers to the pizza tower character) cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:28, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - implausible combination of two typos. Sergecross73 msg me 14:48, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- If kept it should be moved to Tail (character) without redirect per WP:RDAB. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Eggman![edit]
exclamation mark! i have no idea why! cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:22, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- ...huh. the redirect is fully protected. i wonder why cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:37, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - unclear to me why anyone would add an exclamation mark to the end of the name in a search for the subject. Unlikely to serve a purpose. Sergecross73 msg me 14:50, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Per WP:PANDORA. If it gets recreated by trolls for some reason, it can be WP:SALTed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – if anyone's curious, this page was actually created as a "primitive salting", since its first revision was just {{deletedpage}} (see Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2011 October 14 § Template:Deletedpage). When "salting proper" was invented, these pages were presumably deleted en masse, but since Radiant! had already boldly converted this one to a redirect, it survived the mass extinction. That is, until today – when this living fossil goes out with a bang! jlwoodwa (talk) 05:39, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
cross-namespace teahouse redirects[edit]
- Teahouse (Wikipedia) → Wikipedia:Teahouse (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- The Wikipedia Teahouse → Wikipedia:Teahouse (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
are those cross-namespace redirects necessary? they seem to get no views, aside from the few times i considered nominating them before cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:28, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep. They're not "necessary", a redirect seldom is. But they're harmless, and might occasionally be helpful. Maproom (talk) 20:29, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- The redirects do include the title "Wikipedia" so already imply self referencing so I don't think that the normal arguments for deleting as self referencing apply. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Hoitel Mario[edit]
- Hoitel Mario → Hotel Mario (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
that's not a word. doesn't seem like a plausible misspelling either, as the search function automatically corrects it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:20, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - implausible typo. Sergecross73 msg me 14:54, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I don't find the typo implausible, as the "i" and "o" keys are right next to each other. Now, I'll grant that the pageviews are pretty low, but the pageviews for the destination article are likewise pretty low, so that checks out! Fieari (talk) 06:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Not a plausible misspelling, which is distinct from typos. Unless the typo is super common, which I am not seeing in my searches, they are generally not kept. Ca talk to me! 11:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Hostel Mario[edit]
- Hostel Mario → Hotel Mario (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
there are differences between a hotel and a hostel that would only make the hotels hostels if peach was homeless and/or a university student. otherwise, implausible search or misspelling cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - implausible typo. Sergecross73 msg me 14:54, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Jonathan and John[edit]
- Jonathan and John → Phineas and Ferb (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
it's statistically equally likely that i'm missing something and this name is actually mentioned somewhere in the target or a related article, that it's supposed to have a completely different target, or that i'm not missing anything and this is just vandalism or an accident. in case of doubt, leaning towards deleting as vague enough for referring to the protagonist of literally anything as "john" to be a meme, as google gave me nothing of note cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:10, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- I see no relevance to Phineas and Ferb. SatDis (talk) 03:18, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as old WP:Page-move vandalism from 2010. - Eureka Lott 20:26, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Speedy delete per G3. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 23:34, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Talk:SpaceX Starshield[edit]
Vital Articles[edit]
- Vital Articles → Wikipedia:Vital articles (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Vital articles → Wikipedia:Vital articles (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Vital Article → Wikipedia:Vital articles (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Vital article → Wikipedia:Vital articles (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ancient holdovers from the early days of Wikipedia. Interstellarity (talk) 00:22, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete All - CNR. Fieari (talk) 05:48, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep Vital articles, delete others, per WP:R#DELETE #6. Though CNRs have a tendency for deletion, this one is long-standing for over a decade, and has 90 page views per months, showing its benefit to readers who are confused about Wikipedia's vital article classification system. Rest of the redirects have minimal pageviews, and Wikipedia's search function works just fine. Ca talk to me! 11:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak delete not really a Wikipedia specific term and although Google returns WP in the 1st 2 results only 1 other result (Reddit) appears to be for Wikipedia. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:36, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
List of articles all languages should have[edit]
- List of articles all languages should have → Wikipedia:Vital articles (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Per discussion here: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_June_24#List_of_articles_every_Wikipedia_should_have Interstellarity (talk) 00:19, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - CNR. Fieari (talk) 05:47, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Unlikely CNR search term for readers. Ca talk to me! 11:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak delete all but 1 Google result appears to be for Wikipedia but its not a Wikipedia specific term. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:37, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
July 3[edit]
Standoff (draw)[edit]
- Standoff (draw) → Tie (draw) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Is this appropriate? I suppose "standoff" could be used to mean a tie, but it isn't used in this article. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - I don't think it's appropriate, as a standoff really isn't a synonym for a tie. A tie is an ending, a standoff continues indefinitely or until the balance of sides changes, and that difference makes a huge difference in how the words are used. In a game of rock-scissors-paper, if both play rock, you'd never say it's a standoff. When two baseball teams have the same score, it's not a standoff. Basically, I don't think the disambiguator for this redirect exists, is accurate, or is in use anywhere, and thus is not plausible. Fieari (talk) 23:13, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as a harmless {{r from synonym}}. One definition of the word in the OED is:
Chiefly U.S. A contest or competition with no outright winner, or the result of this; a draw.
- Eureka Lott 03:15, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Eureka. (draw) makes it unambigous. Ca talk to me! 11:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Starman Deluxe[edit]
- Starman Deluxe → Mother (video game series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
was about to retarget to earthbound, as it's a boss there, but it's such a throwaway one that i'm not sure it shouldn't be deleted cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:26, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, unmentioned in both articles. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 18:24, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Projects[edit]
Puddle thinking[edit]
- Puddle thinking → Fine-tuned universe#In popular culture (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned anymore at the target page. Puddle thinking was merged to Fine-tuned universe in 2010 (diff), and the relevant content was removed in 2020 (diff). Tea2min (talk) 09:22, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment. There's some ancient discussion prior to the merge at Talk:Anthropic principle/Archive 2#Merge of Puddle thinking and Talk:Fine-tuned universe/Archive 5#Merge puddle thinking here?. Tea2min (talk) 09:27, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Crosswiki to Wikiquote - The original content of that page seems to have just been a quote from Douglas Adams, which is still kept at wikiquote: [33]. I wish we could target the quote directly, but it's pretty close to the top of the quotes list, and should provide everything the searcher is looking for on this one. Fieari (talk) 23:39, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, seems harmless and I could plausibly see the quote being discussed at Fine-tuned universe or a child article in the future at some point. SnowFire (talk) 23:05, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:10, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Sdn Bhd[edit]
- Sdn Bhd → Private company limited by shares (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Sendirian Berhad → Private company limited by shares (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
No mention in article Isla🏳️⚧ 00:50, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment added Sendirian Berhad to this nomination (the expansion of the abbreviation sdn bhd, which points to the same target). Best course of action here might be to add a mention at some existing Malaysia-specific article (e.g. Companies Commission of Malaysia) where it could fit as a subtopic, and retarget there temporarily as a {{R with possibilities}}. The current target is extremely UK-specific. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 06:20, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 12:04, 25 June 2024 (UTC)- Retarget Sdn Bhd refers to a malaysian public company. Sendririnan Berhad is not a person but a longer version. I agree with the IP though, the current article is very UK-specific. 48JCL 12:40, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Participants agree that retargeting would be the best outcome, but it is currently unclear where these two redirects should target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - Is this term just a foreign language term for the same thing? In that case we should delete per WP:RFOR. Alternatively, is there a distinction that would make this more like a proper name for the concept, being brought into the English corpus as a loanword? In that case we should delete it to WP:RETURNTORED and encourage a proper article to explain the difference. Fieari (talk) 23:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Portal:Kosovo & Portal:Montenegro[edit]
- Portal:Kosovo → Portal:Europe (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Portal:Montenegro → Portal:Europe (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Same deal as Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_January_15#Portal:Albania including the MfDs (Kosovo and Montenegro). The target does not contain information about their respective countries most of the time so the redirects are potentially confusing. Nickps (talk) 00:48, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, WP:LEAST applies. Fieari (talk) 06:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 18:18, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 07:45, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
July 2[edit]
Super Smash Bros. 6[edit]
- Super Smash Bros. 6 → Super Smash Bros. Ultimate (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not mentioned in the target. No information about a video game named Super Smash Bros. 6 exists in the target article or in Super Smash Bros. Mia Mahey (talk) 22:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- delete as wrong. ultimate is the 5st installment cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Cogsan see below. Some call it the sixth. Not arguing that's correct, but it's plausible at least. Sergecross73 msg me 23:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- that's if you ignore the fact that smash for 3ds and that other console are both commonly referred to as "sm4sh", and clumped together as two different flavors of the same installment by pretty much everyone less pedantic than me. ironically, nintendo considers them to be separate, but even the article reduces that to note c, accompanied by "but who cares about those guys, most sources say they're both smash 4" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- None of that changes that its a plausible search term, with sourcing and notes to clear up confusion. Again, I'm not saying its the sixth title. I'm not arguing anyone should think that. I'm saying its a plausible redirect because some people think that, and some sources outline it. Sergecross73 msg me 13:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- that's if you ignore the fact that smash for 3ds and that other console are both commonly referred to as "sm4sh", and clumped together as two different flavors of the same installment by pretty much everyone less pedantic than me. ironically, nintendo considers them to be separate, but even the article reduces that to note c, accompanied by "but who cares about those guys, most sources say they're both smash 4" cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Cogsan see below. Some call it the sixth. Not arguing that's correct, but it's plausible at least. Sergecross73 msg me 23:04, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep - it is the sixth entry in the Smash Bros if you consider the 3DS and Wii versions separate games, which some developers/sources do. Sergecross73 msg me 23:02, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- The target does not state that it is the sixth entry in the series instead of the fifth. This redirect will be misleading when a sixth Super Smash Bros. game is released. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- A reliably sourced mention of how some consider it the sixth entry could be very easily implemented. Additionally, there's no need to right now future-proof the article for a future game that hasn't even been announced to exist yet. Sergecross73 msg me 23:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- People searching for Super Smash Bros. 6 are most likely looking for information on a successor of Super Smash Bros. Ultimate. No information on such game exists in the target article, or for that matter, anywhere on Wikipedia, so the redirect is harmful and should be deleted per WP:COSTLY. Mia Mahey (talk) 00:57, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- I strongly disagree with that notion. Why would people be searching for an unannounced game that currently isn't know to exist with this search term? And if someone was knowledgeable enough to use a relatively rare search term like "Smash Bros 6" in a search bar, they'd be knowledgeable enough to understand what Smash Bros Ultimate is. So your confusion scenario feels rather far fetched to me, I don't know what sort of person this would apply to. Doubly so since I've maintained the Ultimate page since its inception and thus has not been a common issue. Sergecross73 msg me 02:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Usually only major video games in a series are numbered, and Super Smash Bros. Ultimate is only the fifth major Super Smash Bros. game. If Super Smash Bros. 6 redirects to Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, on the basis of the 3DS and Wii U releases being treated as separate games, I think we should probably also have Mario Kart 9 redirect to Mario Kart 8#Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which we don't and we shouldn't. Mia Mahey (talk) 04:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- by that logic, which one would be 5 anyway? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 13:11, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is irrelevant. There's never been any discussion or consensus that Mario Kart is handling it correctly either, so it's no standard to aspire to. It's just an WP:OSE-violating comparison. Sergecross73 msg me 13:17, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Usually only major video games in a series are numbered, and Super Smash Bros. Ultimate is only the fifth major Super Smash Bros. game. If Super Smash Bros. 6 redirects to Super Smash Bros. Ultimate, on the basis of the 3DS and Wii U releases being treated as separate games, I think we should probably also have Mario Kart 9 redirect to Mario Kart 8#Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, which we don't and we shouldn't. Mia Mahey (talk) 04:51, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- I strongly disagree with that notion. Why would people be searching for an unannounced game that currently isn't know to exist with this search term? And if someone was knowledgeable enough to use a relatively rare search term like "Smash Bros 6" in a search bar, they'd be knowledgeable enough to understand what Smash Bros Ultimate is. So your confusion scenario feels rather far fetched to me, I don't know what sort of person this would apply to. Doubly so since I've maintained the Ultimate page since its inception and thus has not been a common issue. Sergecross73 msg me 02:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- People searching for Super Smash Bros. 6 are most likely looking for information on a successor of Super Smash Bros. Ultimate. No information on such game exists in the target article, or for that matter, anywhere on Wikipedia, so the redirect is harmful and should be deleted per WP:COSTLY. Mia Mahey (talk) 00:57, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- A reliably sourced mention of how some consider it the sixth entry could be very easily implemented. Additionally, there's no need to right now future-proof the article for a future game that hasn't even been announced to exist yet. Sergecross73 msg me 23:51, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- The target does not state that it is the sixth entry in the series instead of the fifth. This redirect will be misleading when a sixth Super Smash Bros. game is released. Mia Mahey (talk) 23:27, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Super Smash Bros for 3DS and Super Smash Bros for Wii U are both Smash 4, and neither are Smash 5. They did release on separate days, with Wii U being released after 3DS, but they were released literally two months apart, were clearly developed together, and they have several methods of transferring data between the two platforms; it's highly probable that they only released separately due to delays. They also share a Wikipedia page, shared advertising space, pretty much everywhere you go they're talked about as one unit instead of two separate games-- much like, for example, Pokémon Mystery Dungeon: Blue Rescue Team and Red Rescue Team, another instance of one game with two names on two different Nintendo consoles with different capabilities. (If you throw out the 'two different consoles' thing, pretty much any first-of-the-gen Pokemon game in the history of ever, from Pokemon Red and Blue all the way to Pokémon Scarlet and Violet are examples of this in action. (Like, what, are you saying that Pokémon Emerald is Pokemon 13 or something???) Because of this, Smash Ultimate is clearly Smash 5, and thus, Smash 6 would logically be the next entry of the series after Smash Ultimate, a game that does not exist. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 18:45, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- no, let's make it worse
- red + green (jp) > blue (jp) > stadium (jp) > yellow > red + blue (not jp) > hey you, pikachu > tcg (game boy) > snap > pinball > "stadium" (actually stadium 2) > gold + silver > dance! pikachu > puzzle challenge > puzzle league > "stadium 2" (actually stadium gold and silver) > crystal > pikachu's great surfing adventure > tcg 2 > crayon kids > party mini > zany cards > pinball mini > puzzle collection > tetris > breeder mini (wait what) > puzzle collection vol. 2 > race mini > catch the numbers > pichu bros. mini > togepi's great adventure > ruby + sapphire > box r&s > channel > pinball r&s > channel > pinball r&s > some hiragana and katakana education game > colosseum > firered + leafgreen > pico for everyone > emerald
- thus, emerald is the 46nd installment in the pokémon franchise, or the 14st mainline installment cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:20, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Is that jan Misali reference I'm seeing? :D Ca talk to me! 01:09, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Daddy Sakurai[edit]
- Daddy Sakurai → Masahiro Sakurai (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
vandalism, though i'm probably getting in trouble for how hard it made me laugh at work cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:59, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:02, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - not really vandalism per se, but also not really something that would ever serve has a helpful search term either. Sergecross73 msg me 02:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 18:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Kirby of the Stars[edit]
- Kirby of the Stars → Kirby: Right Back at Ya! (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
not entirely sure this one should be with the rest as it's a translation of the japanese name for the series, but the same rationale applies cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:55, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
japanese kirby time!![edit]
- 星のカービィ → Kirby: Right Back at Ya! (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Hoshi no Kābī → Kirby's Dream Land (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Hoshi no Kirby → Kirby: Right Back at Ya! (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Hoshi no Kaabii → Kirby: Right Back at Ya! (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
this is also the japanese name for the series. retarget to kirby (series), or leave as is? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:50, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Kirby (series) as this is the name of that series in its country of origin, per WP:RFOR. (I'd also accept a few more alternative transliterations (such as Kabi, Ka-bi, Hosi, etc...), but no pressing need to create them.) Fieari (talk) 07:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Don't Delete - they're plausible search terms. Indifferent on retaining or retargeting. Sergecross73 msg me 16:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Kirby (series) per Fieari; the franchise as a whole would probably be the primary topic here anyhow. TappyTurtle [talk | contribs] 00:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
The Halberd[edit]
- The Halberd → Meta Knight (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
not entirely sure what makes this halberd that's only mentioned in passing in the target "the", as opposed to the weapon cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete not sure if there's a definite target for this redirect. Closest that I think is the The HMS Halberd which was an unlaunched Weapon-class destroyer. --Lenticel (talk) 00:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as those searching for a halberd are unlikely to be adding a "the" prefix. This could potentially be renamed "The Battleship Halberd" or "Battleship Halberd" since the Halberd is a recurring location in the Kirby series that is highly associated with Meta Knight, thus making it a feasible search target. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
List of Kirby magical items[edit]
- List of Kirby magical items → Kirby (character) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
please define "magical" and "item" in the context of kirby. also there's no such list in the target, i guess cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - This redirect is from a merge consensus at AfD back in 2007. Not sure when the merged content was cut from the kirby article... I'd be interested if it was moved somewhere else, in which case we should retarget it there in order to preserve edit history. If the content is really and truly eradicated from any live article... well, maybe we should consider keeping it for historical edit history purposes anyway, since the content was merged (even if later removed)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fieari (talk • contribs) 07:23, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- i thought about that for a second, but that's when the definition thing came up, because without some idea of what's "magical" or "an item", a truck would be just as much of a magical item as the star rod, nova, and using your three nearly dead servants as meat shields cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 12:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I have never been a fan of the assertion that redirects from merges should be kept if the relevant content is long gone. Also, this redirect going to that target makes absolutely zero sense. QuicoleJR (talk) 17:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
World War 5[edit]
- World War 5 → World War III (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- World War V → World War III (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Fifth World War → World War III (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- 5th World War → World War III (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Ww5 → World War III (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Not a helpful search term, no mention at target, and not likely to be a typo for somebody searching for World War III. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- the best argument i can think of is 5 being right over 2 in most pads. still not a typo you'd make without noticing. delete as implausible cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Keep:Delete: The primary reason for keeping these redirects in general would be the quote about World War V mentioned in the discussion linked to later in this comment. However, that quote seems to have since been removed from the article about World War III. Original: I created this redirect because World War V and Fifth World War already existed. If you were to propose deleting all of these redirects, then I would reconsider, but I think that keeping those while deleting World War 5 would be quite inconsistent. For reference, a similar discussion took place around "World War VI": Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 October 26#World War VI. –Gluonz talk contribs 19:21, 2 July 2024 (UTC); edited 14:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC)- I bundled in other redirects you've found. I don't think josh was suggesting that we only delete World War 5, but just haven't found the other similar redirects. Ca talk to me! 13:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- and delete them too, for the same reason cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 14:25, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Ca: I have also found 5th World War (which currently redirects to World war#Potential Third World War) and Ww5 (which currently redirects to World war#Subsequent world wars). –Gluonz talk contribs 21:04, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- I bundled in other redirects you've found. I don't think josh was suggesting that we only delete World War 5, but just haven't found the other similar redirects. Ca talk to me! 13:55, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete No mention of WW5 in the article, and Wikipedia is not a crystal ball Ca talk to me! 13:57, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all as not mentioned at target and misleading. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:03, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Should World War IIII (and similar redirects) be deleted as well?
WW4 isn't mentioned at the WW3 article either. Crouch, Swale (talk) 16:44, 3 July 2024 (UTC)- World War IV is briefly mentioned three times in that article. Also, a film titled The Fourth World War exists, as does a work of the same name by Subcomandante Marcos. –Gluonz talk contribs 18:01, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as no content about a fifth world war is mentioned at the target page and neither WW3 nor WW4 have happened yet. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 21:32, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Olympic trials[edit]
- Olympic trials → United States Olympic trials (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
"Olympic trials" is not unambiguously affiliated with US Olympic trials, other countries and other trials exist. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Today I checked all the links to Olympic trials.(Bryan Leininger, Katie McGregor) They all referred to the United States Olympic trials. Until now there was nobody who used in a different way. IPPON01 (talk) 19:15, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's incorrect. There were a number of other Olympic trials that had already existed, such as the Canadian curling ones. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:01, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is a terrible argument to use for keeping, and violates WP:GLOBAL. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Joseph2302: Are you referring to my comment, or the one I'm replying to? Hey man im josh (talk) 22:59, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- The one you're replying to, sorry if that was unclear. Joseph2302 (talk) 06:45, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- This is a terrible argument to use for keeping, and violates WP:GLOBAL. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- That's incorrect. There were a number of other Olympic trials that had already existed, such as the Canadian curling ones. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:01, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify or delete generic term, just because a few people incorrectly used the link for US events, that doesn't mean American trials are the primary topic for this. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:47, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify. The term being used that way on Wikipedia is irrelevant as it's just a mistake unless there are WP:RS that use just "Olympic trials" to refer to the US Olympic trials. If that were the case, I'd reconsider my !vote but even then would it really be the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC? Nickps (talk) 00:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify per WP:GLOBAL: there are other countries that hold Olympic trials. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:04, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- DABify per above. I'd also like to mention that current usage of a redirect in mainspace articles is not really a good indicator of whether or not a redirect should be kept... linking a redirect in mainspace should probably, in most cases, be changed to a pipe anyway, and it isn't really the main purpose of a redirect. The main purpose would be to catch searches, assist external links, hold edit history from moves, and other such things. Fieari (talk) 07:35, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Rr'd[edit]
vague at best, since there's at least 2 other things "rr" could stand for cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:22, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - Google fails me on a technical level here, as they always ignore punctuation in searches. I'm at a loss for what else "rr'd" could mean... what two other things did you have in mind? Fieari (talk) 07:01, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- among other things i've seen used around places as verbs or verb-adjacent terms accompanied by an apostrophe and a lowercase d, i can name "role reversal", "railroad", some linux debugging thing, "reverse rape", and some fighting game terms i can't remember and won't count as an example cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the partial list. I just want to evaluate each you mentioned in terms of how likely it is to be found in the wild and then searched for. Role reversal sounds like a fanfic jargon term? I guess that's vaguely plausible, but it seems pretty niche. I'm familiar with railroaded as a verb/adjective in a TTRPG context (might also be used when discussing writing stories in general), but don't think I've seen rr'd used for it before. I'll admit it's plausible someone might do so, but I don't think it's common? The linux thing you mentioned is probably rr (debugging), and appending an 'd to it seems pretty natural in context to mean "used the rr tool"... but I'm not sure that would provoke someone to search for the term with the 'd included. I hope reverse rape is another fanfic jargon thing, because if the phrase is appearing often enough in any other community to allow abbreviating it I feel like something is seriously wrong. The only fighting game reference I found to it was a Guilty Gear sequel suffix, and possibly an abbreviation of "round robin", neither of which would get a 'd. My gut reaction comparing these to rickrolling is that rickrolling is much more broadly used and ubiquitous, and thus more likely to be what is being looked for... but it's not a strong enough gut reaction to actually bold a !vote on it. I'd like to see what other people think. Fieari (talk) 07:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- late, but i did some looking and found some instances of "round robin" abbreviated and used as a verb with an apostrophe... on a discussion about sonic the fighters of all games. i don't think it changes my delete vote, but it's really funny that that's the one specific game i happened to find. still, the result was on youtube comments, so eh cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:55, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the partial list. I just want to evaluate each you mentioned in terms of how likely it is to be found in the wild and then searched for. Role reversal sounds like a fanfic jargon term? I guess that's vaguely plausible, but it seems pretty niche. I'm familiar with railroaded as a verb/adjective in a TTRPG context (might also be used when discussing writing stories in general), but don't think I've seen rr'd used for it before. I'll admit it's plausible someone might do so, but I don't think it's common? The linux thing you mentioned is probably rr (debugging), and appending an 'd to it seems pretty natural in context to mean "used the rr tool"... but I'm not sure that would provoke someone to search for the term with the 'd included. I hope reverse rape is another fanfic jargon thing, because if the phrase is appearing often enough in any other community to allow abbreviating it I feel like something is seriously wrong. The only fighting game reference I found to it was a Guilty Gear sequel suffix, and possibly an abbreviation of "round robin", neither of which would get a 'd. My gut reaction comparing these to rickrolling is that rickrolling is much more broadly used and ubiquitous, and thus more likely to be what is being looked for... but it's not a strong enough gut reaction to actually bold a !vote on it. I'd like to see what other people think. Fieari (talk) 07:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- among other things i've seen used around places as verbs or verb-adjacent terms accompanied by an apostrophe and a lowercase d, i can name "role reversal", "railroad", some linux debugging thing, "reverse rape", and some fighting game terms i can't remember and won't count as an example cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:37, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
We're no strangers to love[edit]
- We're no strangers to love → Rickrolling (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
the first line from never gonna give you up, the song used in rickrolls. retarget to its article, or leave as is? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 17:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as the most informative target. Someone searching this probably came across someone making a reference to rickrolling somewhere without explaining it, which is entirely plausible. The current target will explain to the searcher what the source media was referencing far better than targeting the song itself. And if they really do want the song, the target will link them to it quickly enough. Fieari (talk) 02:57, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: The RfD from April closed as retarget to Rickrolling as the only article having mention of the lyric words. Jay 💬 17:30, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
Scared Silly[edit]
- Scared Silly → Ronald McDonald (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
normally a little vague, but as a name, it seems more primarily associated with an open season movie cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:03, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak DABify - This is the title of the first episode of The Wacky Adventures of Ronald McDonald, and also for the movie Open Season: Scared Silly. I'm uncertain if the Open Season movie is the WP:PTOPIC for the phrase "Scared Silly" specifically, and google shows that it's the title of more things as well, such as a children's novel by Elizabeth Eulberg (no wiki-page), a picture book by Marc Brown (author) (very famous author), a stage play by Peter Bloedel (probably not notable), and likely many more... as this is a common English expression as well! Google does show the movie a bit more prominently than the other entries, mind you, so the PTOPIC argument can certainly be made, but that's why my DABify !vote is weak. Although I will say, if a PTOPIC is established, a disambiguation page should probably be made alongside it and hatnoted. Fieari (talk) 06:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
ROnald McDonald[edit]
- ROnald McDonald → Ronald McDonald (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
minor capitalization mistake cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:00, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Does not help readers since typing "ROnald McDonald" automatically sends you to the correct after even without a redirect page. The consensus I see around RfD is that redirects are not for generic typos. Ca talk to me! 14:01, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 18:27, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Ichtyol[edit]
this one, i don't understand. ichtyol seems to be either a type of medicine (or chemical?), a misspelling(?) of "ichthyol", which seems to be a fossil fish oil, or a brand of shampoo. none of those seem to be related to shiitake mushrooms. is there something i'm missing? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:35, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Apparently, this can refer to water extracts of shiitake mushrooms, like here for example. However, that's an off-hand mention and the paper it cites does not refer to its shiitake extracts as ichtyol.[34] Neither does the paper it cites for the extraction methodology. [35] Other mentions of 'ichtyol' referring to Shiitake extracts I found are not reliable sources. My efforts here don't support adding a mention of ichtyol to Shiitake and the redirect should probably be deleted as there is no mention. ― Synpath 21:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- For reference there is an article on Ichthyol: Ammonium bituminosulfonate ― Synpath 21:08, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Ammonium bituminosulfonate as closest potential target. --Lenticel (talk) 00:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Shiitake mashrooms[edit]
implausible misspelling of "mushroom"? at the very best, i think someone could potentially mishear the "u" depending on the speaker's accent, but that doesn't seem very likely, and u and a are almost on opposite sides of the keyboard cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 15:29, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep - I'm calling this a potentially plausible search based on the fact that the Japanese pronunciation of "mushroom" is マシュルム, which would be transliterated "mashurūmu" but when spoken aloud sounds like "mashroom" (two of the "u"s are nigh-unvoiced). This is only relevant because "shiitake" is Japanese to begin with. The thing that makes it a stretch is that マシュルム, in Japanese, does not refer to shiitake, but only to (western style) button mushrooms... so I'll leave this as a weak !vote. Eh, redirects are WP:CHEAP anyway. Fieari (talk) 03:06, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Mashroom doesn't exist. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:08, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Wicked Ways Garbage song[edit]
- Wicked Ways Garbage song → Wicked Ways (Garbage song) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Was missing parentheses. Seems unnecessary now that it has been moved to the correct Wicked Ways (Garbage song). Jameboy (talk) 12:08, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: Per nom. 98𝚃𝙸𝙶𝙴𝚁𝙸𝚄𝚂 • [𝚃𝙰𝙻𝙺] 18:28, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: the correct version exists. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep plausible search term. Also, why on earth did the nominator move a redirect, when it's valid to have redirects from more than one place to the same target article? Joseph2302 (talk) 08:06, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Dumb Garbage song[edit]
- Dumb Garbage song → Dumb (Garbage song) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Was missing parentheses. Not needed now that Dumb (Garbage song) has been created. Jameboy (talk) 11:40, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Possible search term and redirects are cheap. I don't see how deleting it would be an improvement to Wikipedia. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete: the correct version exists. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep plausible search term, and so WP:CHEAP applies. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:07, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Hammering In My Head[edit]
- Hammering In My Head → Hammering in My Head (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Seems like an unnecessary capitalisation variant now that it has been moved to the correct "Hammering in My Head" (lower case "in") Jameboy (talk) 11:35, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as a plausible {{R from miscapitalization}}. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: Plausible miscapitalization. I don't see how deleting it would be an improvement to Wikipedia. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per above. Fieari (talk) 03:07, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
1987 European Judo Championships[edit]
- 1987 European Judo Championships → European Judo Championships#Combined Competitions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Deletion. The redirect is misleading, giving the notion that an article exists in templates such as those in Category:European Judo Championships navigational boxes. the redirect also creates a MOS:CIRCULAR loop at the European Judo Championships § Combined Competitions. In addition, in most cases articles linking to the 1987 European Judo Championships missing article also link to the European Judo Championships article, which makes the redirect create an unhelpful MOS:DUPLICATELINK. I suggest we delete the redirect in order to encourage page creation. CLalgo (talk) 08:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Note a stub article has now been created at 1987 European Judo Championships, though that article doesn't demonstrate it passes WP:GNG. Thus, the redirect in question doesn't exist anymore. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:08, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
Line 4 (Singapore MRT)[edit]
- Line 4 (Singapore MRT) → North–South MRT line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Line 5 (Singapore MRT) → North–South MRT line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Line 7 (Singapore MRT) → North East MRT line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Line 8 (Singapore MRT) → Circle MRT line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Line 9 (Singapore MRT) → Circle MRT line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Line 10 (Singapore MRT) → Circle MRT line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Line 11 (Singapore MRT) → Downtown MRT line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Line 12 (Singapore MRT) → Downtown MRT line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Line 13 (Singapore MRT) → Thomson–East Coast MRT line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Line 14 (Singapore MRT) → Thomson–East Coast MRT line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Line 6 (Singapore MRT) → North East MRT line (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Proposing to Delete. Reiterating my rationale at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 15#Line 1 (Singapore MRT). These lines have never been referred to as Line 4, Line 5, etc, but rather directly by their names (Circle MRT line, Downtown MRT line etc). A quick Google search brings up the line numbers in order of their opening (For example, when I search for "Line 5 Singapore MRT", Google brings up Downtown MRT line, which was the fifth line to open in SG, as the first result). Given this, I find it to be an inaccurate search term at best, and if I were to go further, an invalid search term. S5A-0043Talk 07:53, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
SearXNG[edit]
The original Searx is no longer supported, and SearXNG is different enough to warrant its own article. I've started a draft here: Draft:SearXNG Benpiano800 (talk) 18:40, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:24, 2 July 2024 (UTC)- Keep The target has information about SearXNG. Until the draft is accepted, the redirects provides info, albeit lacking detail. The AfC reviewers will request speedy deletion for the redirect once they accept it. Ca talk to me! 14:04, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Ca. Skynxnex (talk) 02:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
July 1[edit]
Mass graves in the United Kingdom[edit]
- Mass graves in the United Kingdom → Plague pit (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ambiguous term that should not be redirected to a specific target. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete There are plenty other reasons why people are buried in a mass grave outside a plague. The Banner talk 08:16, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as vague --Lenticel (talk) 09:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Mass graves in Mandatory Palestine[edit]
- Mass graves in Mandatory Palestine → Tantura massacre (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ambiguous term that should not be redirected to a specific target. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:56, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- There's a new article at List of mass graves in the Middle East that may be an appropriate target for this. - Eureka Lott 00:30, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Misleading. There will be far more mass graves then just this one. The Banner talk 08:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Mass graves in the State of Palestine[edit]
- Mass graves in the State of Palestine → Tantura massacre (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ambiguous term that should not be redirected to a specific target. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:55, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Misleading. There will be far more mass graves then just this one. The Banner talk 08:48, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- delete - This one was just an error. A better example is Gaza Strip mass graves? But that's still a specific target for a general term, so not an appropriate redirect either? MWQs (talk) 06:24, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
The North Caucasus[edit]
- The North Caucasus → North Caucasus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Unnecessary redirect, recently created. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:54, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Harmless {{R from modification}}. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:33, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Government of the Middle East[edit]
- Government of the Middle East → Middle East (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Unnecessary and misleading redirect. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Misleading link to a non-existent entity. The Banner talk 08:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as misleading --Lenticel (talk) 09:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Government of the Arab World[edit]
- Government of the Arab World → Arab League (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Unnecessary and misleading redirect. Walsh90210 (talk) 23:52, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete there is no such thing as "government of the Arab World". M.Bitton (talk) 00:49, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Misleading link to a non-existent entity. The Banner talk 08:45, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as misleading --Lenticel (talk) 09:31, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, misleading. CMD (talk) 07:12, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Triambus[edit]
- Triambus → Equilateral polygon#Triambi (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Target section was removed in Special:Diff/996642726, so the redirect is no longer valid. GTrang (talk) 23:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Mexican Avocado Dispute[edit]
- Mexican Avocado Dispute → Avocado#Avocado-related international trade issues (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
there isn't anything in the article about a dispute and the section to which this links no longer exists. Marcocapelle (talk) 08:37, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment if this deleted, the link at Dispute settlement in the World Trade Organization#See also should be removed. Thryduulf (talk) 10:40, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The relevant portion of the target was removed in this February 2021 edit by Zefr with the rationale "trim outdated trade issues section", but the follow-up sections (including all the citations) that were present at the time of the redirect creation (this version) had been removed sometime previously. Thryduulf (talk) 10:55, 21 June 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) 22:49, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Moscow City[edit]
- Moscow City → Moscow International Business Center (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Are we sure that Moscow International Business Center is the primary topic for "Moscow City" (not hyphenated, but capitalised), as opposed to Moscow? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:01, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Known as such in reliable sources [36] [37]. There's a hatnote in place for those who may have somehow typed "Moscow City" to look for Moscow. 162 etc. (talk) 21:12, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- "X City" or other similar noun prefixes generally doesn't refer to a settlement unless there is a country or state with the same name such as Mexico City or New York City. Look at Manchester City and Ipswich Town for example. However there is Mezhdunarodnaya (Moscow Metro) so I'd probably suggest
disambiguate, either a separate DAB page or redirecting to Mexico (disambiguation). Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:24, 1 July 2024 (UTC)- Moscow City should be the primary topic ahead of the metro station named for it. The existing hatnote is fine. See Empower Field at Mile High / Empower Field at Mile High station, Powell Street / Powell Street station, etc... 162 etc. (talk) 16:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- OK keep then. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:34, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Moscow City should be the primary topic ahead of the metro station named for it. The existing hatnote is fine. See Empower Field at Mile High / Empower Field at Mile High station, Powell Street / Powell Street station, etc... 162 etc. (talk) 16:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
2024–25 Latvian-Estonian Basketball League[edit]
- 2024–25 Latvian-Estonian Basketball League → 2023–24 Latvian–Estonian Basketball League (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
invalid redirect: different years. Should be a red link Estopedist1 (talk) 12:11, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Also bundle 2024-25 Latvian-Estonian Basketball League * Pppery * it has begun... 18:19, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- speedy close It was started as a stub article, but I think @Hey man im josh: confused something and made it a redirect into a wrong place. This kind of Rfd shouldn't have started. I'm reverting it into a stub article and we should continue there. Pelmeen10 (talk) 18:16, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
Porch monkey[edit]
- Porch monkey → List of ethnic slurs#P (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Porch Monkey → List of ethnic slurs#P (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
No longer mentioned at target. The second redirect is fully protected, so I cannot tag it. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:33, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- It is mentioned at List of ethnic slurs and epithets by ethnicity, although that article does seem like a WP:CFORK to me. 162 etc. (talk) 02:45, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that List of ethnic slurs and epithets by ethnicity and List of ethnic slurs have a CFORK problem; the only difference scope-wise is sorting order, with the original target being alphabetically sorted by the slurs and the other list being sorted by target ethnicity. This issue should probably be resolved (and the two pages possibly re-merged) before we figure out where this should target. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 13:04, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note I've added the RfD tag to the second redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 12:01, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Porch sitting#In popular culture where it is mentioned and expounded upon. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 07:20, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
The lockdowns[edit]
- The lockdowns → COVID-19 lockdowns (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
While the COVID-19 measures are probably the freshest in people's memories, I think that "the lockdowns" is too broad to use as a redirect to that topic and therefore propose retargeting to the general topic of lockdown. Sdrqaz (talk) 02:11, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Regerget as {{R from plural}}. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:42, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Rererget per above. If the readers were looking for the covid lockdown in particular, they can scroll down to the section covering it easily. Ca talk to me! 13:49, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per The pandemic and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 April 9#The pandemic; while there may be some WP:RECENTISM, most who will use the term "the lockdowns" (emphasis on the), will likely be referring to the COVID lockdowns, especially with the established precedent of "the pandemic." — Knightoftheswords 23:10, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
RehergetI mean keep - agreeing with Knight, the lockdowns is likely intended to be the covid lockdowns BugGhost🪲👻 08:05, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep literally 100% of the results on the first five pages (when I stopped looking) of a Google search for "The lockdowns" -Wikipedia refer to the Covid-19 lockdowns - you can't get a clearer example of a primary topic. Usually for something like this I'd expect to find mentions of one or more non-notable bands, esports teams, instagram users or something like that, but I'm just not. Thryduulf (talk) 09:48, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Retargegper LaundryPizza, Ca, and Nom. I find the idea that "The lockdowns" is specifically primary to COVID-19 lockdowns to be a severe case of WP:RECENTISM; the Covid-19 pandemic was a massive global event, yes, but so was, say, World War 1. Four years after WW1, it was probably extremely easy to say "The War" and people knew you were talking about WW1; ten or twenty years after WW1, not so much. If people really are looking for the Covid-19 lockdowns, the proposed retarget-- Lockdown-- has a hatnote to it right at the top of the page. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 13:12, 24 June 2024 (UTC)- What matters for the purposes of redirects is what people are looking for now. What people might be looking for in 10 or 20 years (or even 2 years) is irrelevant WP:CRYSTALBALL-gazing. If the primary topic changes then we can and should change the target of the redirect, but we do readers a disservice by not taking them to what they want to read directly now because they might (or might not) be looking for something different later. Thryduulf (talk) 23:30, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- ...I suppose that's fair. Withdrawing vote. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 00:17, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- What matters for the purposes of redirects is what people are looking for now. What people might be looking for in 10 or 20 years (or even 2 years) is irrelevant WP:CRYSTALBALL-gazing. If the primary topic changes then we can and should change the target of the redirect, but we do readers a disservice by not taking them to what they want to read directly now because they might (or might not) be looking for something different later. Thryduulf (talk) 23:30, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Lockdown doesn't really list specific lockdowns, if List of lockdowns existed this would be a better target but otherwise I'd probably suggest to keep as is. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:46, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- List of lockdowns should be linked in a hatnote from the present target if it is created, but it should not be the target itself due to the present target being the overwhelming primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 09:02, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus appears to be leaning towards keep. Relisting for further input...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:10, 1 July 2024 (UTC)- Retarget too general of a term to apply to a specific event. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:33, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Kerp per Thryduulf's findings. mwwv converse∫edits 13:38, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget Redirecting to a specific set of lockdowns creates a risk that more and more pages will link to an inherently unstable redirect. All of those pages will become subtly incorrect when the redirect is changed after the next major lockdown event. Presentism might make sense for a term that is frequently typed into the search bar, but I don't think that's the case here. Jruderman (talk) 21:55, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
City of Auckland[edit]
- City of Auckland → Auckland City (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The City of Auckland is a distinct entity from Auckland City. It is not discussed in proper detail in the Auckland article nor the Auckland City article. I do believe it has the merits to meet notability on it's own: e.g. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/46925/46925-h/46925-h.htm Deletion would be the best option as it doesn't mislead readers into a different entity and might encourage someone to create an article on it. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:25, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep All that's needed is to tag it with Template:R with possibilities. I've done so. Schwede66 08:39, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I still don't believe it's a good redirect. Auckland City is completely different to the City of Auckland. It'd be like having New York County redirect to New York City. It is only a partial continuation in area and most of Auckland City's area is from the County of Eden. The term being redirected serves to confuse the reader into thinking City of Auckland (note the important capitalisation as a proper noun) is just another name for Auckland or Auckland City. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:14, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Write content seems to be the obvious answer here. It needn't be more than a short paragraph detailing the status, extent, etc. on whichever of Auckland or Auckland City is the broader. This redirect can then be targetted there. Thryduulf (talk) 09:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Maybe there should be an article on the district that has existed since 2010 just like City of York deals with the district that was created in 1996 even though there was one that existed from 1835 to 1996. Crouch, Swale (talk) 18:43, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- I agree there should be content but in the absence of it I do not believe the current redirect is appropriate as it is misleading. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:RETURNTORED. The current target is misleading, there's potential for an article, redlinking it can encourage article creation. Fieari (talk) 06:56, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Tone (color)[edit]
- Tone (color) → Lightness (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Tone (color theory) → Tint, shade and tone (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
These two redirects should point to the same article. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 04:40, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- Tone is an ambiguous term? There are separate articles about color and color theory – and color science! – and colorimetry and color appearance model! In English, "tone" has many meanings; the applicable meaning here is " The shade or quality of a colour." (disambiguation of an ambiguous term by a definition which uses more ambiguous terms). Is there really such a thing as color quality (quality (color)?? – wbm1058 (talk) 10:02, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 04:07, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Lepidosauria Varanus[edit]
- Lepidosauria Varanus → Bengal monitor (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
just two of the higher taxa that happen to include the Bengal monitor; not entirely dissimilar to this other since-deleted redirect Spizaetus (talk) 02:58, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Is this combination of taxa even a thing? If this is just an original term then Delete. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:31, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
June 30[edit]
Red Flag (nuclear weapon)[edit]
- Red Flag (nuclear weapon) → WE.177 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
There is no mention of "red flag" in the article making this redirect confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:04, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- So fix the article. This originally belonged in Category:Rainbow Codes, but that was stupidly deleted. It might still be mentioned at List of Rainbow Codes. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:14, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:47, 30 June 2024 (UTC)- I'd fix it if I thought it was legit, but I'm not sure I do. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:09, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Jimmy Dimly[edit]
- Jimmy Dimly → James Cleverly (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Potential disparagement of a living person UltrasonicMadness (talk) 22:32, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Redirects are not obliged to be neutral per WP:RNEUTRAL.--Launchballer 07:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep Redirects do not need to be neutral, but it still needs to show common use, espiecially since this is a WP:BLP case. A prominent British newspaper The Guardian uses this nickname on two occasions [38] [39], but I couldn't find any other reputable sources discussing/using this nickname other than [this blog https://www.eclecticblue.org.uk/who-do-you-think-you-are-kidding-mr-sunak]. Ca talk to me! 13:40, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- The nickname is part of John Crace's politics sketch in The Guardian. The linked blog also gives these sketches as the source for its use of the name. UltrasonicMadness (talk) 17:33, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
Joyce brothers[edit]
- Joyce brothers → Joyce Brothers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Joyce brothers (disambiguation) → Joyce Brothers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Joyce brothers was a disambiguation page, blanked and redirected by @162 etc.: with summary "These are indeed brothers named Joyce, but I'm not seeing any evidence from sources that they are specifically referred to as "Joyce brothers"." I agree wholeheartedly with this rationale but the redirect is inappropriate: capitalisation matters (WP:DIFFCAPS). So delete this redirect and rthe associated WP:INTDAB link. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:25, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Restore disambiguation. Here is the evidence you seek. jnestorius(talk) 20:47, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete both. There are no incoming links to Joyce brothers. We already have articles for James Joyce and Stanislaus Joyce. This disambiguation page is the answer to a question nobody asked; we lose nothing by deleting it. 162 etc. (talk) 22:02, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
a question nobody asked
the question I asked which prompted me to create the dab was in the article Irish Literary Revival which refers to "the Joyce brothers". Which Joyce brothers? Turns out it was not James and Stanislaus that was meant, but the other pair. Two pairs of brothers were involved in Irish literary life around the same time. Potential for confusion. Let's preemptively prevent readers from assuming the wrong pair.There are no incoming links
it was a disambiguation page, they're not supposed to have incoming links. jnestorius(talk) 23:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC)- I've clarified the text of the article in question. I remain convinced that this dabpage is unnecessary. 162 etc. (talk) 23:38, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Restore based on the sources provided by Jnestorius. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:35, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Kid Rock/Grits Sandwiches for Breakfast[edit]
Voi.id[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 7#Voi.id
June 29[edit]
Kansas City shooting[edit]
- Kansas City shooting → 2024 Kansas City parade shooting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
This should be disambiguated. By now, this redirect no longer passes WP:PTOPIC, because according to page view statistics, this only accounts for around 40% of the views of Kansas City shootings, and PTOPIC says it should be more then all other applicable articles (Kansas City massacre, Overland Park Jewish Community Center shooting, Shooting of Ralph Yarl) combined 69.118.230.235 (talk) 20:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep Based on pageviews since the last RfD closed, the target still accounts for 50% of the views of the articles mentioned by the nominator. It has twice as many views as the next-most-viewed article, Shooting of Ralph Yarl. Thus, I believe it is still the primary topic. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:48, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thats a very broad range. Over the past month (6/6 to 7/5), I checked and the 2024 Kansas City shooting receives 43.6% of the views - which is certainly more then the others but not enough per WP:PTOPIC. 69.118.230.235 (talk) 21:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- I would be more convinced to disambiguate if the views were relatively equal. 43.6% of views in the last month is still a significant amount. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:51, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Its significant, but PTOPIC says more then the others combined, and 43.6% is less then 56.4%.69.118.230.235 (talk) 23:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- I would be more convinced to disambiguate if the views were relatively equal. 43.6% of views in the last month is still a significant amount. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:51, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thats a very broad range. Over the past month (6/6 to 7/5), I checked and the 2024 Kansas City shooting receives 43.6% of the views - which is certainly more then the others but not enough per WP:PTOPIC. 69.118.230.235 (talk) 21:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per nomination. There are notable shootings in Kansas City. Ahri Boy (talk) 02:33, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify per nom. There no longer appears to be a singular primary topic, and thus this should be a dab page. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 22:42, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
The insurrection[edit]
Teri Chhaon Mein[edit]
Raisi[edit]
- Raisi → Ebrahim Raisi (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Raisi (disambiguation) → Ebrahim Raisi (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
A quick explainer on the history of this redirect: Initially, Raisi had been a redirect to Raisi, Razavi Khorasan (an article about a tiny village). Later on, I moved the article to its present title, intending to disambiguate the base title. However, I then noticed that Raisi (disambiguation) already existed, so I made a request at WP:RM/TR, which was promptly fulfilled. Thus, Raisi became a dab page, with Raisi (disambiguation) a redirect to it. In the last chapter of this saga, IP user 2601:646:8003:6B20:894E:7841:319C:88CA redirected the page to Ebrahim Raisi, so the page Raisi (disambiguation) was automatically retargeted as well. However, since it has (disambiguation)
in the title, it's eligible for deletion under G14 if kept as is.
I see two (or maybe three) options out of this strange pickle:
- Firstly (and what I advocate), we could restore the dab page at Raisi, and retarget Raisi (disambiguation) to Raisi. This restores the previous status quo.
- Secondly, we could have Raisi as a redirect to Ebrahim Raisi, and Raisi (disambiguation) be the dab page. I have at least two issues with this: firstly, that Ebrahim Raisi might not pass ten year test, despite his newfound fame due to his death. Plus, here's also the technical history of attribution when dabbing Raisi (disambiguation). However, if there's enough support for it, I could see this work.
- Thirdly, and the option I'd oppose the most, we keep Raisi, speedy delete Raisi (disambiguation), and handle disambiguation via some sort of massive hatnote(s) on the article Ebrahim Raisi. The reason I'd oppose this so much is because the hatnote(s) would have to be enormous - the previous dab page had ten entries, plus one see also.
Anyways, yeah, this is complicated.
Duckmather (talk) 22:06, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Option 1: Restore Raisi as a disambiguation page. Ibrahim Raisi was not primarily known by that name, so WP:DABPARTIAL applies. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 23:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- I think option 2 is best. The late president is certainly the primary topic here and most likely was even before his death. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 12:24, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Option 2, even if the president doesn't hold that much power compared to the Supreme Leader, he is still the primary topic here. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 15:15, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- If the hatnote on top of the village article is actually correct, and there is substantial ambiguity about what a toponym of "Raisi" means in Iran, we should keep a disambiguation list. The location of the list, whether at the base name or separately, depends on whether the average English reader strongly associates the term with the person. It looks like we already have articles about Heshmat Raisi and Ahmed Naser Al-Raisi, so this word is not uncommon in anthroponymy. I'd err on the side of caution and put disambiguation at the base name, and observe traffic patterns for a few months afterwards. If we see that the preponderance of readers go for the single person, then we go for the redirect. Because of the recent death of the proposed primary topic, there's obvious WP:Recentism here. --Joy (talk) 11:15, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, I just noticed that old content of the Raisi disambiguation page lists even more people, and has for a couple of years before this recent incident. [40] had no edit summary whatsoever and should have been reverted first. --Joy (talk) 11:20, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:37, 12 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:49, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- restore the disambiguation page whatever else happens, a disambiguation page should exist, either at "Raisi" or at "Raisi (disambiguation)" -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 06:32, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- Restore the dab page and retarget. I doubt if over time Ebrahim would be the primary topic (he';s popularv now because of his recent death). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:42, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia:VN[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Wikipedia:VN
Spirituality & Health Magazine[edit]
Partisan movement[edit]
Skymont (microarchitecture)[edit]
- Skymont (microarchitecture) → Cannon Lake (microprocessor) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Skymont → Cannon Lake (microprocessor) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Delete, deprecated, WP:CBALL, check the talk pages for the complete rationale Artem S. Tashkinov (talk) 13:14, 15 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete – this redirect is definitely 'obsolete' as "Skymont" now officially refers to the E-core architecture used in Lunar Lake, see sources here: [41], [42], which is completely different to the Cannon Lake processor series. The "Skymont (microarchitecture)" redirect is especially misleading, as Cannon Lake is a microprocessor series, not a microarchitecture, which are two highly different things. Though, I should mention that this redirect doesn't need to be deleted per se for someone to create an article about the Skymont E-core architecture; you can just simply overwrite the redirect with an article. — AP 499D25 (talk) 09:36, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and retarget to List of Intel CPU microarchitectures#Atom lines per anandtech and chipsandcheese establishing notability. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 13:11, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Hmm, that would work too, but isn't it better that we delete these redirects so they are redlinks, so article creation is further encouraged? When it's a blue link, people might think there's already an article on that link. — AP 499D25 (talk) 23:49, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:28, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- See also Special:WhatLinksHere/Skymont (2024 microarchitecture). Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:52, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Also notified of the discussion at the talk pages of the current and proposed targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 01:29, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- It's been pretty quiet here for the past 12 days, so I'm going to follow up here by stating that I still stand by my deletion vote, but I'll provide a better, simplified explanation of the reason – "Skymont" is a recycled codename. It used to refer to Subject A, but now it refers to Subject B and no longer Subject A. Pretty much all uses of this codename today now refer to the new subject and not the old subject. The reference to the old subject is considered obsolete (and has been for many, many years in fact) as the codename of Subject A was actually changed a few years after being revealed as "Skymont". Mind you that was in 2011, about 7 years before actual release of the product, so I question just how likely it even is that someone who is looking for Subject A might be typing in "Skymont".
User:Visite fortuitement prolongée mentions that the Skymont (2024 microarchitecture) redlink is linked to from two articles. Well, what I reckon should happen instead, is since Subject B is clearly the primary topic now, an article of Subject B should be created at Skymont (microarchitecture) and not at that title containing "2024", and those two links should be changed to the title without '2024' in it. And then we can have a hatnote on top of the 'Skymont (microarchitecture)' page for if anyone looking for Subject A happens to land on that page. — AP 499D25 (talk) 09:59, 2 July 2024 (UTC)- For the record i support AP 499D25's claims that
- «Pretty much all uses of this codename today now refer to the new subject and not the old subject.»
- «those two links [to Skymont (2024 microarchitecture)] should be changed to the title without '2024' in it.»
- Can i ask you why you oppose retargeting the 2 pages? Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 19:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- What I mean is changing the "Skymont (2024 microarchitecture)" links to "Skymont (microarchitecture)", since basically the 2024 microarchitecture is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC, while the previous use of the codename referring to the old processor series is discontinued since about 2011. If you mean retargeting "Skymont (microarchitecture)" to List of Intel CPU microarchitectures#Atom lines, that works too, since it's mentioned at the target. Except, I believe that making "Skymont (microarchitecture)" a redlink would be better so that people are more likely to create an article. @Artem S. Tashkinov: what do you reckon? Should we delete, or should we retarget as User:Visite fortuitement prolongée suggested? — AP 499D25 (talk) 05:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- For the record i support AP 499D25's claims that
- Delete – as the redirects are 1) deprecated 2) obsolete 3) WP:CBALL (Skymont was never the official name, I don't even understand why these articles exist in the first place) 4) Misleading now that Skymont is the official name for Lunar Lake/Arrow Lake E-cores microarchitecture. Artem S. Tashkinov (talk) 09:38, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
June 28[edit]
Sepersontics[edit]
Raymoo[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Raymoo
Wokepedia[edit]
Redirects to Herzegovina#Medieval period[edit]
Duchy of Saint Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period(talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Duchy of herzegovina → Herzegovina#Medieval period (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Duchy of Herzegovina → Herzegovina#Medieval period (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Dukedom of Saint Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Duchy of St. Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Herzegovina of Saint Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Duchy of St Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Duchess of Saint Sava → Herzegovina#Medieval period (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
These redirect titles are misnomers; it does not exist in scholarship on the subject in this form. ౪ Santa ౪99° 17:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- The redirect Duchy of Saint Sava cannot be deleted. It has a substantial history. Srnec (talk) 20:10, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- This redirect, and other similar redirects that were listed above, should not be deleted since previous actions were result of an improper merge, as was indicated here. The long standing article "Duchy of Saint Sava" should be restored, not deleted, since it was reduced to a redirect without proper discussion or consensus. Sorabino (talk) 00:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- There was absolutely nothing improper about the merge. Indeed, I think it's a borderline WP:ARBMAC violation that you keep pushing this unsubstantiated line after being given literally years to produce evidence for your position, all of which is well documented on the Talk page. --Joy (talk) 19:43, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- "Duchy" article/redirect(s) was no more-no less than unsourced WP:SOAPBOX for the subject matter now finally properly framed and sourced in Humska zemlja article, however, I understand what you mean for that particular redirect so I scraped it from this nom. Thanks @Srnec:! ౪ Santa ౪99° 01:59, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- This redirect, and other similar redirects that were listed above, should not be deleted since previous actions were result of an improper merge, as was indicated here. The long standing article "Duchy of Saint Sava" should be restored, not deleted, since it was reduced to a redirect without proper discussion or consensus. Sorabino (talk) 00:53, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Oh boy, the history dive (or specifically, the talkpage archive dive) was *interesting.*It turns out, that talks of big change at the article for Duchy of Saint Sava have been going on since 2021 at the latest; from renaming to merging. user:Sorabino (who's already here) and user:Santasa99 (listed the redirects here) were two of the biggest voices in those discussions, joined by user:Joy, user:Thhhommmasss, and user:Mhare, among others (there was even drama regarding a sockmaster. Fun!)
- At this point it is quite clear that there's some sort of conflict resolution that needs to happen between Santa and Sorabino; I don't know exactly what needs to be done, but this feud has gone on far longer than is healthy for anyone's sanity. My first instinct is to
restore Duchy of Saint Sava and send to AfD as a contested merge, if that helps anything. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:19, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- (I intruded into a middle of 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 post or she left too much space between rows which I confused as two distinct posts/posters, either way this comment of mine is unintentionally in the middle of Lunamann's post.) It's not fun, it wasn't fun, it was time and energy-wasting endeavor to push (or prevent, depending on which side of the argument one is) something that has no bases in historiography and is tendentious (even very close to discourse flirting with nationalistic point-of-view on history) - as another, one you missed to mention, neutral and uninvolved editor, User:DeCausa, noticed and argued in that long discussion. DeCausa starts with this remark:
Should this article exist? There’s virtually nothing about this Duchy in the text of this article. It seems to be merely a vehicle to acknowledge the existence of the title.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Santasa99 (talk • contribs) 15:24, 29 June 2024 (UTC)It's not fun, it wasn't fun
That was sarcasm. Dealing with socking is never fun. Also, I used "among others" as a catchall for people I neglected to mention, including DeCausa, you silly. Listing EVERYONE would've taken too much time and effort lol
Other than that, I'm gonna bow out of this lol. This has quite quickly reached Above My Pay Grade level, as I've already touched on in my reply to Santa ^^; 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:02, 29 June 2024 (UTC)- I actually thought that this first para of your post (above) was one of the involved editor's stance which would really be inappropriate after everything we went through back then. This also include my remark on DeCause -I was convinced that the first para of your post was one of the involved editors' comment. All is OK. ౪ Santa ౪99° 22:38, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- (I intruded into a middle of 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 post or she left too much space between rows which I confused as two distinct posts/posters, either way this comment of mine is unintentionally in the middle of Lunamann's post.) It's not fun, it wasn't fun, it was time and energy-wasting endeavor to push (or prevent, depending on which side of the argument one is) something that has no bases in historiography and is tendentious (even very close to discourse flirting with nationalistic point-of-view on history) - as another, one you missed to mention, neutral and uninvolved editor, User:DeCausa, noticed and argued in that long discussion. DeCausa starts with this remark:
- Don't mind me, just moving this out from the middle of my post ^^; Hope I got the time right 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:57, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Fortunately, your instinct is utterly wrong since all of the options were exhausted, and conclusion was reached eventually after years of patient waiting, discussing, waiting, presenting arguments, waiting > Talk:Duchy of Saint Sava/Archive 2. We won't run around in circle because someone whishes to restore unrefed soapbox ౪ Santa ౪99° 12:45, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- But I can't help but notice how you correctly concluded how "this feud has gone on far longer than is healthy for anyone's sanity", and then in attempt to help, you nonchalantly (in bold) suggested to go all the way back to beginning of what in essence was the "feud far longer than is healthy for anyone's sanity" and start it all over again (that's years back and against n-bytes long discussion that actually had its conclusion in consensus to merge, which had positive consequence in creation of proper article on the subject matter based on sourced facts). Allow me to say, please don't help us :-) ౪ Santa ౪99° 13:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah, I don't pretend to know what's best here ^^; My wheelhouse is RfD, not conflict resolutionPlease ignore my recommendation up there and do something else ^^; 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 14:03, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Joy would probably explain this more eloquently vis-a-vis policies and guidelines and wikivoice-wise.--౪ Santa ౪99° 13:32, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- But I can't help but notice how you correctly concluded how "this feud has gone on far longer than is healthy for anyone's sanity", and then in attempt to help, you nonchalantly (in bold) suggested to go all the way back to beginning of what in essence was the "feud far longer than is healthy for anyone's sanity" and start it all over again (that's years back and against n-bytes long discussion that actually had its conclusion in consensus to merge, which had positive consequence in creation of proper article on the subject matter based on sourced facts). Allow me to say, please don't help us :-) ౪ Santa ౪99° 13:30, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- I would evaluate this differently - we can keep any of these WP:POVTITLE redirects if there's reasonable likelihood that an average English reader might stumble upon a term described by the redirect somewhere relevant, and the search engine output wouldn't get them to the right place. --Joy (talk) 19:48, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Those redirects should have never been proposed for deletion in the first place, particularly the present redirect "Duchy of Saint Sava" with its important talk page history, nor it was proper to reduce the previously long standing article to a redirect without discussion and consensus. It is quite clear, from the talk page history, that after a long pause (more then a year) discussions were renewed there on 25 April 2024, and a very selective "merge" was conducted already on 26 April 2024, only a day later, thus reducing the long standing article to a redirect. Non of that was done in a proper way, nor it was justified, and community should take into consideration all of those questions. Sorabino (talk) 07:55, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Anyone interested in this should read a short analysis of Sorabino's (not exactly complete) narrative and the history of this issue Here. ౪ Santa ౪99° 13:08, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for reminding the community on the history of these disputes. Administrators of English Wikipedia should also be aware that back in 2021, similar disruptive changes were attempted in relation to the same article on Bosnian Wikipedia, but those unilateral actions were reverted by administrators of that project, who had to protect that article against vandalism (here). It should be also noted that similar articles on the same historical subject, related to feudal polity called the Duchy of Saint Sava (1448-1482), currently exist on 13 (thirteen) Wikipedia projects, with their stable scopes and identical titles. The only proper outcome would be to restore the article here on EW, and reopen the discussion on all relevant subjects. Sorabino (talk) 15:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Now, out of desperation, you simply spreading aspersions - especially by misinforming, to put it mildly, readers about what happened in Bosnian Wiki. I put together that post so that anyone interested can see how it played out regarding article and TP history, who did what and how, who argued what and what was the community stance since 2000's. We are done, you and me. ౪ Santa ౪99° 16:39, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- You are wasting everybody's time for years now, with your continuous attempts to discredit a legitimate historical subject (Duchy of Saint Sava). Please, take a look at a very recent scholarly paper (2019) by dr Luka Špoljarić, a Croatian historian from the History department of the Faculty of Philosophy in Zagreb. Writing on Stjepan Vukčić Kosača (the first duke of Saint Sava), Špoljarić stated (page 156):
In 1449, in order to emphasize his independence from the Bosnian king and cater to the sensibilities of his Orthodox subjects, he took the title of Duke of St Sava, in honour of the Serbian saint whose relics were held in the Mileševa monastery located in the easternmost parts of his duchy. While this large and powerful Duchy thus remained outside of papal influence, the Catholicization in the king’s land continued.
In the same paper, Špoljarić included a historical map (page 158), presenting geopolitical situation in 1460, with theDuchy of St Sava
. That is just one of many possible additions to the long list of scholarly sources on the subject, that were already mentioned in previous discussions on relevant talk pages. Please, inform yourself, reconsider your recent actions, and revert your dubious reduction of that long standing article to a redirect. Sorabino (talk) 00:48, 1 July 2024 (UTC)- This is more of the same scraping Google for phrases and key words - Špoljarić is historian of Catholic Church and Renaissance,and mentioned this phrase literally in passing. I will not revert my "dubious reduction" because it was not some unilateral move but a result of a consensus reached between Joy, Mharre, Mikola, Tezwoo, and DeCausa; it was done after two years of waiting for you to provide reason not to move it, and on the suggestion of Joy ! ౪ Santa ౪99° 17:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
- You are wasting everybody's time for years now, with your continuous attempts to discredit a legitimate historical subject (Duchy of Saint Sava). Please, take a look at a very recent scholarly paper (2019) by dr Luka Špoljarić, a Croatian historian from the History department of the Faculty of Philosophy in Zagreb. Writing on Stjepan Vukčić Kosača (the first duke of Saint Sava), Špoljarić stated (page 156):
- Now, out of desperation, you simply spreading aspersions - especially by misinforming, to put it mildly, readers about what happened in Bosnian Wiki. I put together that post so that anyone interested can see how it played out regarding article and TP history, who did what and how, who argued what and what was the community stance since 2000's. We are done, you and me. ౪ Santa ౪99° 16:39, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for reminding the community on the history of these disputes. Administrators of English Wikipedia should also be aware that back in 2021, similar disruptive changes were attempted in relation to the same article on Bosnian Wikipedia, but those unilateral actions were reverted by administrators of that project, who had to protect that article against vandalism (here). It should be also noted that similar articles on the same historical subject, related to feudal polity called the Duchy of Saint Sava (1448-1482), currently exist on 13 (thirteen) Wikipedia projects, with their stable scopes and identical titles. The only proper outcome would be to restore the article here on EW, and reopen the discussion on all relevant subjects. Sorabino (talk) 15:50, 30 June 2024 (UTC)
Keep redirects The name Duchy of Saint Sava and its variants is attested to in more than half a century of scholarly literature:
- Pitcher, Donald Edgar (1972), An Historical Geography of the Ottoman Empire: From Earliest Times to the End of the Sixteenth Century, Leiden, Netherlands: BRILL, p. 71,
After the death of Tvrtko I in 1391 the Bosnian Empire collapsed, and the land was torn between civil war and encroachment by Hungarians and Serbs, while the south-west gradually became independent as the 'Duchy of St. Sava' or Herzegovina (from 1435, though the title does not appear before 1446).
- Petrovich, Michael Boro (1976), A History of Modern Serbia, 1804-1918, Volume 1., New York City: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, p. xvii,
The Serbs of Hercegovina (the Duchy of Saint Sava), Bosnia, and the Croatian lands of Dalmatia, Croatia Proper, and Slavonia also played a significant role in the rise of the modern Serbian nation.
- M. Th. Houtsma et al. E.J. Brill's First Encyclopaedia of Islam 1913-1936 . Leiden, Netherlands: BRILL, 1993, 755. "The history of Bosnia from 1137 to 1878 may be divided into six periods. I. Bosnia under Bans who ruled the whole land (1137-1251). II. Bosnia under Bans who ruled various parts contemporaneously (1251-1314). III. the period of the two Kotromans (1314-1377). IV. the Bosnian kingdom and the Duchy of St. Sava (1377-1463)."
- Zlatar, Zdenko. Our Kingdom Come: The Counter-Reformation, the Republic of Dubrovnik, and the Liberation of the Balkan Slavs. Boulder, Colorado: East European Monographs, 1992, 414. "...came to see him as "ambassadors of the Patriarch and in the name of the Voivodas and Barons of that province " /i.e . Serbia / "of Bosna , the Duchy of St. Sava" / i.e. Hercegovina..." [43]
- Nicol, Donald M (1997), Theodore Spandounes: On the Origins of the Ottoman Emperors, Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, p. xv,
Another branch of the post-Byzantine ruling families in the Balkans with whom Theodore Spandounes could claim a connection was that of the Duchy of St. Sava in Bosnia.
- Elsie, Robert (2003), Early Albania: A Reader of Historical Texts, 11th-17th Centuries, Wiesbaden, Germany: Otto Harrassowitz Verlag, p. 53,
Lord Ercecho was Lord of the Duchy of Saint Sava which was situated in the Kingdom of Bosnia in the direction of Ragusa (Dubrovnik) and borders on Ragusan territory and Castelnuovo (Hercog-Novi) , which belongs to him.
- Short, Elliot (2022), Building a Multiethnic Military in Post-Yugoslav Bosnia and Herzegovina, New York City: Bloomsbury, p. 18,
The Kindom of Hungary occupied territory in northern Bosnia during the conquest to build a military frontier against the Ottomans, while the herzog managed to preserve the independence of the Duchy of Saint Sava until 1481.
- Djukanovic, Bojka (2023), Historical Dictionary of Montenegro, Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, p. 39,
By the middle of the 15th century, northern parts of the Bay region became incorporated into the Duchy of St. Sava (Vojvodstvo Svetog Save).
If the name of this polity is bogus , as Santasa claims, then surely all these scholars have been bamboozled. But let's leave it to an anonymous wiki editor like Santasa to tell us the real WP:TRUTH. Yes, the duchy went by different names, so I guess I can see why a good-faith editor might consider a renaming discussion, but trying to have even the redirects deleted (and in such a ham-fisted way, too) is way beyond the pale. This encyclopedia should not be a place for nationalist axe-grinding. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 18:10, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- All these cursory mentions are part of the article Stjepan Vukčić Kosača, not to mention they are somehow missing in domestic sources, written by, say Serbian medievalists, who never use such labeling. I can't predict nor read minds and know what these authors were thinking and why would they utilize such label, unless they explain it thoroughly in their paper(s) - you know, like Sima Ćirković explained every minutia in his biography of "Herceg Stefan Kosača i njegovo doba". Unless you can find why would they use such label, these cursory mentions do not warrant another article on the same subject - maybe this is how they present status of vojvoda, hercegova zemlja, etc to an English reading public. But I can't find in these papers where they call primary sources (contemporary documents) to their aid to justify such labeling. Fortunately, we have WP:DUEWEIGHT. You know, like when medievalist explains properly when, why and what : "Vladić Ratković 1454. godine ipak o njemu govorio kao o bosanskome «duki» (hercegu)" (Ančić M. in "Šta je Bosna bez Hercegovine"), and "Širenje, pak, u dubinu društva najbolje potvrđuje činjenica da su se doseljenici iz Humske zemlje u dalmatinske gradove (Split, Trogir, Šibenik, Zadar) u svim prigodama, bez obzira na status i položaj, tijekom 14. i 15. stoljeća dosljedno identificirali upravo tako – bili su podrijetlom, ili su dolazili iz Humske zemlje (Comsqua semia). S druge se strane samo u jednome slučaju, zabilježenom u Splitu 1454. godine, dogodilo da se osoba identificira na način da dolazi iz «kneštva hercega Stjepana bosanskoga»" (Ančić M. in "Šta je Bosna bez Hercegovine"). ౪ Santa ౪99° 19:09, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all - I've reverted the Duchy of Saint Sava back to an article; it should not have been converted to a redirect without consensus at a proper WP:MERGE discussion or WP:AFD. The argument that these names/titles are not found in scholarship is contradicted by the sources posted on Talk:Duchy of Saint Sava and its archives since 2021 (also by a cursory Google Scholar search). All of the others should be retargeted to Duchy of Saint Sava until/unless there's a proper merge discussion or AFD. Levivich (talk) 01:15, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all - I don't actually care whether they are actually accurate or not, Amanuensis Balkanicus above proved that the terms are attested, and thus are plausible searches, and that the target is accurate for what someone searching these terms would be looking for. That's all we need for a redirect to be kept. Plausible and unambiguous. Fieari (talk) 06:52, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- He provided keys for Duchy of S(ain)t Sava search quarries, not for Duchy of Herzegovina" and double misnomer "Herzegovina of Saint Sava", or complete nonsense "Duchess of Saint Sava". ౪ Santa ౪99° 22:59, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Keep all - Since the original article (Duchy of Saint Sava) has been restored (2 July), and also protectet as a result of a WP:AE process (4 July), it would be best to keep those redirects, and restore their original targets to that article (Duchy of Saint Sava). Sorabino (talk) 09:56, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Because this RFD has become moot by WP:AE admin actions, this RFD needs to be procedurally closed, so that we can open a fresh discussion about whether "Duchy of Saint Sava" content belongs in a standalone article or not. The way this is going, we're opening ourselves to claims that there'd now be consensus about the latter based on this discussion, which could preclude a proper discussion on the merits of that, which in turn would be madness. --Joy (talk) 23:27, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Yellow plant[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 5#Yellow plant
The arm test[edit]
increasingly long redirects to bobobo-bo bo-bobo[edit]
Gaō[edit]
Bo^7[edit]
Garage Band (TV series)[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 5#Garage Band (TV series)
SportAccord[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 5#SportAccord
Tristan Tate[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 5#Tristan Tate
Gallophone[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 5#Gallophone
JDX[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 5#JDX
Grand Duke of Hum redirects[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 5#Grand Duke of Hum redirects
June 27[edit]
LGBT in Brazil[edit]
French-speakers outside of Quebec[edit]
- French-speakers outside of Quebec → Francophone Canadians (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The redirect has a different target than it had during the RFD in 2019, but still has the same problem: The redirect is not exclusive to Canada as there are French speakers around the world, like in ... France and Louisiana, neither part of Canada. Steel1943 (talk) 18:23, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- In Canadian French, "Francophones hors Québec" refers specifically to French speakers that live in a Canadian province or territory that is not Quebec.[44] It does not apply to those living in other countries. That being said, this is en.wiki, and I don't know if English-language sources use "French-speakers outside of Quebec" in this sense. 162 etc. (talk) 19:13, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. While the expression can be found in English-language Canadian publications, where the context makes the "elsewhere in Canada" meaning clear, it does not make much sense without that context, nor does it appear to be a widely used set expression that people might search for or link to. Indeed, there are no incoming links to this redirect. Rosbif73 (talk) 07:03, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment it can be displaced/recreated to French-speakers outside of Quebec in Canada or French-speakers outside of Quebec (Canada) or Canadian French-speakers outside of Quebec -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 08:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Discussion thus far has a consensus to delete, but a relist seems appropriate given the prior discussion and minimal participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 18:38, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Geographical distribution of French speakers. It has been argued in the previous discussion and above that this phrasing is used in Canada. That said, it has also been argued that taken literally it also refers to non-Canadian French speakers. My suggested retarget covers both groups. -- Tavix (talk) 18:49, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep and Refine to Francophone Canadians#Distribution that shows that Quebec French speakers are 85%, and shows the % of every other state. In usefulness, because of the statistics, I find this target better than French Canadians#Elsewhere in Canada which was the overwhelming favourite of the previous RfD. With Quebec part of the search term, I see the context as local to Canada, hence am not in favour of Geographical distribution of French speakers, nor do I support the nomination rationale. Jay 💬 19:27, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:30, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, although I wouldn't mind refining it as well per above. Now, strictly speaking and based on a logical, mathematical approach to language, this search could include French speakers outside Canada as well, such as in Africa, the Caribbean, Louisiana, and even France itself. However, I don't think such a logical and mathematical approach is how people typically use language-- when the scope of a Canadian province is specified, I think it is entirely reasonable for someone to expect to stay within the scope of Canada even without spelling it out, and the fact that this is a translation of a commonly used French-Canadian phrase that does in fact always means "within Canada" pushes me more towards keeping the target of this redirect refined to within Canada as well. Fieari (talk) 23:54, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Upon further review, this redirect has no incoming links. We lose nothing by deleting it. 162 etc. (talk) 05:27, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Incoming internal links are not the only usage of redirects here. Search plausibility is actually the more primary usage, wikipedians can usually be expected not to link to redirects at all. Fieari (talk) 00:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Is it plausible for users to search for a term that doesn't appear to have any kind of widespread usage in reliable sources, or well-established definition? 162 etc. (talk) 16:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Term seems to have widespread usage in Canada, specifically. Google confirms. Fieari (talk) 06:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Is it plausible for users to search for a term that doesn't appear to have any kind of widespread usage in reliable sources, or well-established definition? 162 etc. (talk) 16:38, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Incoming internal links are not the only usage of redirects here. Search plausibility is actually the more primary usage, wikipedians can usually be expected not to link to redirects at all. Fieari (talk) 00:20, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Geographical distribution of French speakers per Tavix. C F A 💬 16:22, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Bible Videos[edit]
The Stand Off[edit]
National Register of Historic Places listings in Metroplex1[edit]
Woodshop and wood shop[edit]
Amoogus[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 5#Amoogus
Aliens guy[edit]
Rods from Gods and Rods from gods[edit]
Death Trap (Star Wars:The Clone Wars (2008 TV series)[edit]
Patrick Patterson[edit]
- Patrick Patterson → Pat Patterson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The Pat Patterson to whom this redirects actually has the given name Pierre, and does not appear to have ever been known as "Patrick"; in fact, most of the people on the disambiguation page, Pat Patterson (disambiguation), have a given first name that is not "Pat" or "Patrick" (though there are a few that do). I propose to disambiguate this title separately, listing only those names of people who were actually named or known as Patrick Patterson. I have drafted this under the current redirect. BD2412 T 00:23, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Redirect to Pat Patterson (disambiguation). Oppose the separate dabpage. See Talk:Pat Patterson#Requested move 1 September 2023. 162 etc. (talk) 01:01, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think the 2023 discussion speaks to the possibility of splitting these, and as outlined in the proposal, most of the names on the page are not Patrick at all. It isn't actually clear that any of the three named "Patrick" are actually ever called "Pat" either. BD2412 T 01:35, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'll point out that when I made this edit, Pat Patterson was the disambiguation page, not the wrestler's article. (That was moved a few weeks later, but the redirect was never updated.) It's clear to me that the wrestler is not the primary topic for "Patrick Patterson". 162 etc. (talk) 01:49, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think the 2023 discussion speaks to the possibility of splitting these, and as outlined in the proposal, most of the names on the page are not Patrick at all. It isn't actually clear that any of the three named "Patrick" are actually ever called "Pat" either. BD2412 T 01:35, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- This disambiguation page needs to be restored to the 6 January 2020 version. That version includes a link to the Pat Paterson redirect. Apparently the wrestler isn't even named Patrick. --rogerd (talk) 02:00, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Support by restoring the 6 January 2020 version (which is same as the nom's drafted version) per rogerd. It's not clear why 162 etc. prefers the Pat Patterson (disambiguation) or opposes the drafted (previous) dab page, but I'm willing to hear the arguments. Jay 💬 14:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
June 26[edit]
Charville Lane Estate[edit]
Rajeshwari Vilas Coffee Club[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 6#Rajeshwari Vilas Coffee Club
MOS:TITLETYPOCON[edit]
Petapixel[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 7#Petapixel
Sydney Powell[edit]
Horse with a horn[edit]
Puddle thinking[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 3#Puddle thinking
Trademark Law Treaty[edit]
Woketard[edit]
- Woketard → Woke (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Woketards → Woke (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
While I am aware that WP:NPOV is less of a concern for redirects as they are less likely to face the general public directly, I do question the rationale for the existence of these redirects.
Surely anyone searching for woketard(s), will already need to type the word woke, and I am sure that any quote in an article that could possibly benefit from bluelinking woketard could surely just pipelink it.
I am not strongly of the mind that "These should not exist on Wikipedia", though I do feel as though they are needlessly inflammatory and likely unnecessary. The article for Woke does not mention Woketards anywhere including in the as a pejorative section.
Primarily, I am leaning towards deletion for these redirects, if consensus aligns with them being valid, I am not opposed to the target being narrowed down to the as a pejorative section. IceBergYYC (talk) 05:18, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to Wiktionary There is an entry in Wiktionary. Ca talk to me! 11:40, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Normally I'm all for keeping pejorative redirects as per WP:RNEUTRAL; however, nom questions the usefulness of this one and I'm inclined to agree. This is nothing more than a simple portmanteau of "Woke" and "-tard"; anyone with half a brain can disassemble the portmanteau, and from there, figure out what this means. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 14:03, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete - per Lunamann. It appears the same user that created these also just created 3 more that similarly are unmentioned at the target - Wokester, Wokie and Wokies - should we include those 3 as well in this RFD? Raladic (talk) 05:42, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I'm a little more of the mind that those three would be fine as redirects if retargeted specifically to the as a pejorative section of the article. Not opposed to their deletion as well, but more interested in the two originals from the nom based on the higher degree of being needlessly inflammatory. IceBergYYC (talk) 20:34, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with IceBergYYC-- those three don't have the -tard suffix and thus have a higher likelihood of refinement as opposed to outright deletion (and are simply minor modifications of the target word with the simple meaning "people who are woke (pejorative)"). If anything, those three should be grouped together; but as a separate listing.
Just because I would vote delete myself, doesn't mean that I see it going the same exact way. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 11:37, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete If not legitimately mentioned in the article, it is simply an insult and should be speedy-deleted. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:37, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Crosswiki to Wiktionary - It's just a word. May as well define it and move on. Fieari (talk) 04:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Participants are split between deleting and soft redirecting. Relisting for further input.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak cross-wiki to wiktionary definition, since we have it, and since not everyone who sees it knows the meaning of "woke". Rusalkii (talk) 20:04, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, not every portmanteau that happens to have a Wiktionary page needs a soft redirect. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 04:05, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete agree with Chaotic Enby et al. that there's no point in redirecting to Wiktionary. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:51, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. A term available on Wiktionary is not the sole justification to create a soft redirect. Jay 💬 14:03, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
2025 Emilia Romagna Grand Prix[edit]
Amanda the Adventurer[edit]
Quinton de Penis[edit]
I Am Fish[edit]
June 25[edit]
Brexit means breakfast[edit]
Furiosa Road[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 5#Furiosa Road
Minor league player redirects[edit]
Peanut butter burger[edit]
Karli Smith[edit]
- Karli Smith → Indianapolis FedEx shooting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Samaria Blackwell → Indianapolis FedEx shooting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- John Weisert → Indianapolis FedEx shooting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Amarjit Sekhon → Indianapolis FedEx shooting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Jasvinder Kaur → Indianapolis FedEx shooting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Amarjeet Johal → Indianapolis FedEx shooting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Victims of a shooting generally do not have articles unless they become notable in their own right. It isn't appropriate to associate a search term of their names with an event which took their life. The individuals would already appear in search results on the event article without the need of an explicit redirect. I am unsure if there is specific policy around this, as WP:VICTIM merely mentions outright articles specifically. Bungle (talk • contribs) 09:12, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- well other victims of shootings typically get redirected to the shooting article. Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting for example. Victims such as Allison Wyatt, Grace McDonnell etc have redirects. Elizzaflanagan221 (talk) 12:28, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- Your argument that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is poor and is not in itself a reason why the aforementioned should be kept as redirects. We have to ask for what benefit and purpose does an article or redirect serve in its existence? I don't see any value in these redirects and as the victims are all deceased, cannot decide themselves if they'd want their identities associated with such an atrocity. I don't see any policy specific to this circumstance, which is probably why there is no agreed precedent. Bungle (talk • contribs) 13:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- well like i said, most articles on mass tragedy events have redirects with the victims names. If you think its morally wrong or u dont agree with it, you should make this a bigger discussion and not just solely on the FedEx shooting. Elizzaflanagan221 (talk) 17:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- I hear what you're saying, but a poor existing precedent (generally speaking) isn't necessary justification to pursue further of a similar nature. That is the reason I brought them to rfd, as it's a community decision, not solely my own view. As for the bigger discussion, maybe it is warranted, but it's quite a minefield and this only concerns these redirects yet to be reviewed. If the consensus is to keep, then it's a moot point anyway, though in such a scenario i'd hope to see a better rationale than "others exist too". Bungle (talk • contribs) 21:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Existing precedent is the primary source of policies and guidelines, assuming that the policies Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not are to be believed. If we have no written rule against it, and it is frequently done, then it probably is the community's normal practice to do this. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:18, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- I hear what you're saying, but a poor existing precedent (generally speaking) isn't necessary justification to pursue further of a similar nature. That is the reason I brought them to rfd, as it's a community decision, not solely my own view. As for the bigger discussion, maybe it is warranted, but it's quite a minefield and this only concerns these redirects yet to be reviewed. If the consensus is to keep, then it's a moot point anyway, though in such a scenario i'd hope to see a better rationale than "others exist too". Bungle (talk • contribs) 21:54, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS does not say "Wikipedia users are forbidden from using logical induction". jp×g🗯️ 17:43, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- well like i said, most articles on mass tragedy events have redirects with the victims names. If you think its morally wrong or u dont agree with it, you should make this a bigger discussion and not just solely on the FedEx shooting. Elizzaflanagan221 (talk) 17:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
- Your argument that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is poor and is not in itself a reason why the aforementioned should be kept as redirects. We have to ask for what benefit and purpose does an article or redirect serve in its existence? I don't see any value in these redirects and as the victims are all deceased, cannot decide themselves if they'd want their identities associated with such an atrocity. I don't see any policy specific to this circumstance, which is probably why there is no agreed precedent. Bungle (talk • contribs) 13:24, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:44, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm surprised there isn't a clear policy on this. We should be guided by WP:RPURPOSE. If the victim's name is widely known enough that "Killing of EXAMPLE" is a plausible article title and existing redirect, then I accept a redirect from "EXAMPLE" as well, because it is a plausible way that a reader might search for the relevant article, eg. Philando Castile, Jeff Doucet. Otherwise, I think we should avoid these redirects. I hold this position even, and maybe even especially, if the person is approaching notability for an article in their own right for reasons unrelated to their death. If there are other relevant articles on their life apart from their death, we don't want to usurp those by redirecting rather than showing search results. Daask (talk) 22:34, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, anyone searching for any of these people will be redirected to the only information Wikipedia has on them. -- Tavix (talk) 18:23, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- I feel like this entirely misses the point I made in the rationale. Besides, the event article doesn't actually hold information on the individuals (besides age). Relying on search results alone would still return this article, plus any unrelated articles mentioning an unrelated individual by the same name (which touches a little on Jay's thoughts below, although I disagree with the suggestion that we keep any). Bungle (talk • contribs) 14:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- As below:
- Karli Smith - Delete in preference to search results as she is also an Australian beauty pageant contestant
- Samaria Blackwell - Keep per Tavix
- John Weisert - Delete in preference to search results as also the name of a tobacco company
- Amarjit Sekhon - Keep, also mentioned wrt the shooting at Indian Americans
- Jasvinder Kaur - Delete in preference to search results - very common name, seen in multiple articles, also spelled as Jaswinder Kaur (with a w)
- Amarjeet Johal - Keep, also mentioned wrt the shooting at Indian Americans
- Jay 💬 06:43, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 15:50, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete all. WP:NOTMEMORIAL. With no mention in the article, a redirect is confusing, surprising, and perhaps upsetting if it's ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:19, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Why do you say there is no mention in the article? Jay 💬 12:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Ruby and Sapphire[edit]
1.7 International Networking Working Group[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 4#International Networking Working Group
Frank Blackmore (Emmerdale)[edit]
Sdn Bhd[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 3#Sdn Bhd
Chhota Bheem 1[edit]
- Chhota Bheem 1 → Chhota Bheem and the Curse of Damyaan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Chhota Bheem 5 → Chhota Bheem and the Curse of Damyaan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The redirects doesn't make any sense. M S Hassan (talk) 07:38, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- @M S Hassan: I made these redirects (when I was going through the list of Indian film series), as a chronological search aid for theatrical films in order of release for the series.
- These, 1 and 5, should be targetted to the relevant articles (for the 2012 and 2024 film) respectively. Cheers. Gotitbro (talk) 08:54, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- @M S Hassan: If you agree, we can close this. Jay 💬 05:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Jay No, I don't agree. If the redirects contained "movie" within them, then I would have agreed. M S Hassan (talk) 05:37, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- @M S Hassan: If you agree, we can close this. Jay 💬 05:23, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 05:42, 25 June 2024 (UTC)- While I'd normally argue that Hassan's incorrect in that the redirects need the word "movie" in order to make sense, there's a bigger issue-- Chhota Bheem 1 and Chhota Bheem 5 are *not* the 2012 and 2024 versions of Curse of Damyaan. From what I can tell, the Chhota Bheem article contains a chronologically-sorted list of all Chhota Bheem films-- and the first and fifth films are Chhota Bheem Aur Krishna and Chhota Bheem: Journey to Petra, respectively, neither of which have articles. Even if that list isn't sorted chronologically, the article for the 2012 version of the film explicitly states that it's the eleventh Chhota Bheem film, not the first.Delete, as we don't have articles or information for the correct targets beyond an entry each in the list of the greater Chhota Bheem article. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:06, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- If we only go by theatrical releases the chronology stands fine. Gotitbro (talk) 21:42, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Factory owner[edit]
- Factory owner → Businessperson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Comparing the current target of this redirect, the former targets Bourgeoisie and Means of production, and Factory which doesn't seem to mention "owner(s)" ... it does not seem that there is a specific article readers may be attempting to locate when searching this phrase. Steel1943 (talk) 23:54, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
- Another potential target is business magnate, which is where industrialist points. - Eureka Lott 00:41, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak retarget to business magnate as a {{R avoided double redirect}} of Industrialist. I wouldn't be opposed to disambiguation though as while I think the other suggests are less likely they aren't completely implausible. Thryduulf (talk) 08:50, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:31, 18 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete I doubt readers are using "factory owner" to search up "business magnate". It is not a set phrase that means something other than the sum of its parts. Business magnate does not have any info about factories. It is too vague to be useful. Ca talk to me! 09:03, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Weak retarget to business magnate - agree with Ca that it is a bit vague - but the lead definition in the magnate article ("a powerful entrepreneur and investor who controls, through personal enterprise ownership or a dominant shareholding position, a firm or industry") does encapsulate factory owners, even though it's a little loose. BugGhost🪲👻 10:57, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- I don't believe all factory owners are business magnates though. Some factory owners run small, un-notable squeaky duck toy factories and I wouldn't call them "business magnates" or "tycoons" Ca talk to me! 14:11, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
- I agree with you on that, which is why I went weak - I wouldn't lose any sleep if this redirect gets deleted because what you're saying makes sense BugGhost🪲👻 13:51, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- I don't believe all factory owners are business magnates though. Some factory owners run small, un-notable squeaky duck toy factories and I wouldn't call them "business magnates" or "tycoons" Ca talk to me! 14:11, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 05:29, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment - I feel that this phrase is significantly more commonly used in leftist discourse than otherwise. To non-leftist discourse, the factory owner is typically not a specific person or a social class but rather a legal entity such as a corporation, and would not generally be referred to as a "factory owner". I'm not sure business magnate is a good target, as while "factory owners" might be included there, said magnates also prominently includes non-factory non-"means of production" types of wealthy investors (such as Bill Gates and Rupert Murdoch), which would be outside the usual discourse brought up when the term factory owner is used. Can anyone really find instances of this term used in a non-leftist-discourse context? Fieari (talk)
- Delete per WP:REDLINK. I think it is likely we will eventually have an appropriate place to point this; however, despite extensive scouring, it appears that we currently do not. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 21:12, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Drake LaRoche[edit]
- Drake LaRoche → Adam LaRoche#Personal life (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Redirects to an article where there is no mention of him. Lost in Quebec (talk) 10:28, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. Doesn't seem to be mentioned anywhere else on Wikipedia either. Steel1943 (talk) 19:46, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- He was mentioned on there, until that was removed. He should be mentioned, considering that he received wide coverage in connection with his father's retirement in 2016. This was not incidental naming, but news articles directly about Drake LaRoche.
- See: The Athletic (2021), NBC (on the "Drake LaRoche saga"), Sports Illustrated, Washington Post, CBS Sports, Sports Illustrated, again, etc. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 01:31, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:33, 18 June 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Content has not been added back to the target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 05:18, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
Kristian Taska[edit]
Hendrik Sal-Saller[edit]
Template:WikiProject Open Access/OAFD[edit]
Emigration from North Korea[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)
Tom (programming language)[edit]
Druisk[edit]
June 24[edit]
Wikipedia:FM[edit]
User:Arado Ar 196/Userbox/Userbox Yuri fanatic[edit]
User:Arado Ar 196/Userbox/Global Gay Communist Anime[edit]
SearXNG[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 2#SearXNG
Bird (company)[edit]
List of Pokémon (0)[edit]
redirects to unmanned combat aerial vehicle[edit]
- Military drone → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Combat drone → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Combat drones → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Armed drone → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Weaponized drone → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Attack drone → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Battlefield UAV → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- battlefield unmanned aerial vehicle → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- Non-US battlefield UAVs → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- International Battlefield UAVs (2) → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- International Battlefield UAVs (1) → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- International Battlefield UAVs → unmanned combat aerial vehicle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
These need retargetting, as these are not specific to UCAV. Military drones can be unarmed, such as the Global Hawk, and most target drones (Q-planes) like the QF-4 (retired fighter converted to target drone). Armed drones are not restricted to UCAVs, such as sea drones operated by Ukraine that have sunk many Russian ships. On the Ukrainian battlefield, armed and unarmed land drones (unmanned ground vehicle -- UGV) also are being used, as are armed and unarmed aerial drones (UAV - unmanned aerial vehicle). Both the US and China have demonstrated drone tanks and robot dogs with machine guns. Police have tracked ground drones armed with shotguns, so not just militaries have armed drones. UXOD and landmine clearing also use military ground drones.
-- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 13:36, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment International Battlefield UAVs (1) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and International Battlefield UAVs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) should probably have a round robin swap, since the edit history is located at (1) and no significant history is located at the base name. That would allow deletion of (1) and International Battlefield UAVs (2) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) as useless numbered redirects from old swaps -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 14:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment if there is no better target, they should retarget to drone (disambiguation) page, that lists various types of drones. -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 20:49, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete International Battlefield UAVs and International Battlefield UAVs (2), as they appear to have been created during a botched round robin move. Then move International Battlefield UAVs (1) to International Battlefield UAVs without leaving a redirect, as its revision history is likely worth keeping. At the moment, I'm not sure what to do about the rest, but I agree that their current target is not optimal. - ZLEA T\C 05:50, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- Upon further thought, I believe the best course of action for the others would be to make Military drone a disambiguation page and retarget the rest to it. - ZLEA T\C 17:36, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
List of articles every Wikipedia should have[edit]
Vacuum circuit breaker[edit]
Porch monkey[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 1#Porch monkey
Kart[edit]
June 21[edit]
Ofcommunist[edit]
Motorscooterxxx[edit]
D-ring[edit]
- D-ring → Glossary of underwater diving terminology: A–C (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- D ring → Glossary of underwater diving terminology: A–C (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
- D Ring → Rings of Saturn#D Ring (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
I'm not convinced that either of these targets (or even Glossary of underwater diving terminology: D–G) are the primary topic, nor that they should target different articles. The whatlinkshere for D-ring are mostly unrelated to diving and just expect an article about the generic bit of hardware - there is an unsourced stub in the history of that page about that, but I'm not sure what scope there is for expansion? Thryduulf (talk)
- Note PamD has retargetted D-ring (but not D ring) to Glossary of underwater diving terminology: D–G. Thryduulf (talk) 14:56, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, sorry, I did that on noticing that it was clearly wrongly-targetted, but hadn't noticed the other one also wrong (and it's also hard to spot them in the D-G list as they are filed letter-by-letter where I expected word-by-word!) ... then looked further into D-rings and despaired of a sensible solution. The Wiktionary definition is specific to diving, but it appears from googling that "D-ring" is a very widely-used term for, well, literally a D-shaped ring, used in hanging pictures, anchoring webbing, and many other fields. As we don't have a List of useful miscellaneous bits of hardware, it's hard to see where it should go. I've now retargetted D ring so at least it's consistent and makes some sort of sense ... even if possibly wrong.
- Perhaps we need to edit Wiktionary to remove diving's hijacking of a generic term, then we could have a dab page for diving and Saturn, with a Wiktionary link. PamD 16:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, change to a disambiguation page. — Lentower (talk) 15:07, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: None of these terms are clearly the most prevalent, so none should be singled out at the top of the new disambig page. — Lentower (talk) 15:07, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Comment: Some of these pages, e.g. D ring binder should be on the new page. (I haven't read the guidelines here, so am not feel qualified make the decision).
- All pages with titles containing D ring
- All pages with titles containing D-ring
- All pages with titles beginning with D ring
- All pages with titles beginning with D-ring
- I suggest all six of these templates be in the See also section on the new page. — Lentower (talk) 15:07, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- As the creator of one of these redirects, I should point out that the page I had redirected it to at the time was (unsourced stub or no) much more useful than the current nautical one-liner. We should probably end up with D-ring as a disambiguation page and the other two redirected back to it; but there is a need for a stand-alone article explaining the ingenious contraption. --pmj (talk) 23:58, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- OK, so since 2005 we've had an unsourced article showing the diverse uses of D rings - holding down loads on lorries, BDSM, saddlery, safety harnesses, diving /climbing/ caving gear, etc. It would be more constructive to find a few sources to support some of these uses, rather than convert the article to a redirect to any one of them. I suggest that the reader would be better served if we reverted to that article as last seen and find some sources to add so that we don't go round this loop again. Here are a couple for starters: D rings in clothing and in picture-hanging. PamD 07:03, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify per above --Lenticel (talk) 11:12, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- D Ring is a proper noun, leave it alone. (A hat note is acceptable.) The rest should redirect to an article on the hardware, with a hat-note. There should be no reason for a dab page here, uses should include links to whatever is significant. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 16:53, 22 June 2024 (UTC).
- Dabify per above. I agree that the hardware may not be Primary Topic, and even if it is, shouldn't be the only thing people are given access to- someone searching for "D ring" or "D-ring" could just as easily be looking for Glossary of underwater diving terminology: D–G, Rings of Saturn#D Ring, D ring binder, et cetera.I'd like to note that Rich Farmbrough has already drafted up... I'm actually not sure if that's a dab page or an article, on the D-ring page. Looks like it needs polish, but it's a good start and a sight better than the single sentence on Glossary of underwater diving terminology: D-G. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 18:04, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Given the Rich Farmborough draft currently in place, I suggest we now keep it as an article. — The Anome (talk) 19:02, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- DABify - The proposed article at D-ring can be moved to "D-ring (Hardware)" or similar, but I don't think there is a primary topic between it, the rings of saturn, and binders, so the base term should be disambiguated. Fieari (talk) 00:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Dabify all of them. Aside from Saturn and diving, it is also part of some ejection seats as the activation handle D-ring, and Belt (clothing), and carbiner, and D-ring binder -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 14:00, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep the article drafted by @Rich Farmbrough: at either D-ring or D ring, with a redirect from the other form and a hatnote pointing to D Ring. It's not a dab page we need, but an article about the item of hardware shaped like a D and used for webbing on trucks, straps on clothing, hanging pictures, BDSM, and a multitude of other purposes including diving gear. There are variations with an attached tab for a screw/nail (picture-hanging), variations with a hinged section like a carabiner, and so on. Some are made of plastic. Two D rings together can form a sort of buckle for clothing. All this can go in the article, properly sourced. The entry in the Diving glossary can refer back to this general article. We need refs/examples for the various fields in which D rings are used. Possibly something about when the terminology was first used (doesn't seem to be in the OED, sadly). PamD 14:43, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- Return to freestanding page. I’m not sure how to do this, so please excuse my lack of familiarity with the protocol. But the Original page (as a freestanding page, and not a redirect anywhere) was appropriate. That’s what a D-ring is, foremost. Anybody who’s worked with them knows this. (And by all means their use in underwater work is a minor subset, and this page should not redirect there; rather, vice versa, if anything.) If you want to create a separate disambiguation page, fine, so long as this page remains as it is. Minor uses of the term (like a D-ring binder) should be worked in wherever appropriate. But good intentions should not lead to usurping the existing page and its focus. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:196:180:DC0:71F6:28F0:BC89:B999 (talk) 06:16, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
- ...That "existing page" was written during these discussions lol 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 12:22, 29 June 2024 (UTC)
Mexican Avocado Dispute[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 1#Mexican Avocado Dispute
Spirituality & Health Magazine[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Spirituality & Health Magazine
Tristan Tate[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 28#Tristan Tate
June 20[edit]
Gallophone[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 28#Gallophone
JDX[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 28#JDX
French-speakers outside of Quebec[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 27#French-speakers outside of Quebec
Bible Videos[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 27#Bible Videos
2025 United Kingdom general election[edit]
- 2025 United Kingdom general election → 2024 United Kingdom general election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Redirect was originally set up as a redirect to Next United Kingdom general election at a time when it could have been held in either 2024 or 2025. Now that it has been announced that the next election will be held in 2024 and with the United Kingdom having five year terms, it is very unlikely there will be a 2025 election. Propose deleting. Broanetar (talk) 04:08, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. 2025 is not 2024. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 06:17, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Wikishovel (talk) 08:40, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to List of United Kingdom general elections#21st century. There was much speculation in reliable sources that the election would be in 2025, so it's not an implausible search term. However there isn't any real discussion of this in the article so that isn't a good target. If we take people to the list of elections then they can find whichever one it is that they are looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 09:35, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per Thryduulf. Cremastra (talk) 21:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget agree with Thryduulf, not unreasonable to assume people will search for this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schwinnspeed (talk • contribs) 06:11, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per Thryduulf, deleting it doesn't really make sense, anyone ending up there either made a typo or is looking for the 2024 general election. AlexandraAVX (talk) 17:40, 7 June 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 2025 general election. Is there any actual confusion with another election? The table ends at 2024... -- Tavix (talk) 20:57, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:04, 11 June 2024 (UTC)- Keep, for now - there's been headlines that mention a 2025 UK election, such as: [45], [46], [47], but they are all referencing same topic of the 2024 election, just with a different/questioning date of it arriving. It's reasonable to think there are people who believe it's happening in 2025. After the election has happened, I would fully support deleting the redirect but for now while there's still potential confusion, the redirect should stay. Agreeing with Tavix re: the List of United Kingdom general elections#21st century redirect, it's unlikely the searcher wants information about any other election. BugGhost🪲👻 09:02, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Tavix and Bugghost Keep for such a millennium bug? Unless you both can provide enough reason(s) why the 2025 election has shifted in advance to this year, I think Retarget is more fair than simple keeping. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:41, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- The election hasn't shifted in advance per se, but it was claimed multiple times that the election could be in January 2025. From the 2024 article:
The Electoral Commission confirmed that the 2019 Parliament would, therefore, have to be dissolved, at the latest, by 17 December 2024, and that the next general election had to take place no later than 28 January 2025
. Publications (like the ones I linked above) wrote articles linking this election to the year 2025, and so there's arguably possible confusion, which would warrant this redirect. BugGhost🪲👻 11:15, 22 June 2024 (UTC)- Seeing as this topic is likely going to outlast the election itself, I'll change my vote to Retarget as consensus leans that way. BugGhost🪲👻 15:30, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- The election hasn't shifted in advance per se, but it was claimed multiple times that the election could be in January 2025. From the 2024 article:
- @Tavix and Bugghost Keep for such a millennium bug? Unless you both can provide enough reason(s) why the 2025 election has shifted in advance to this year, I think Retarget is more fair than simple keeping. Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:41, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 18:33, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per Thryduulf. Intrisit (talk) 17:59, 25 June 2024 (UTC)
- Keep per Tavix and the initial vote of BugGhost and refine to #Date_of_the_election. Oppose retargeting to the list as it is bound to confuse the reader more and inform less. Jay 💬 09:26, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
American Evacuation Day[edit]
The Stand Off[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 27#The Stand Off
Hearst Entertainment[edit]
SportAccord[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 28#SportAccord
June 13[edit]
Talk:COVID-19/Current consensus[edit]
Kazakh Guide Association[edit]
Matriotism[edit]
Peanut butter burger[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 25#Peanut butter burger
Fourth mode of transport[edit]
Intruder alert[edit]
Ruby and Sapphire[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 25#Ruby and Sapphire
2024 Dublin Bay North by-election[edit]
Intruder Alert! Intruder Alert![edit]
Technical music[edit]
Bienver metal[edit]
Under the influence of alcohol[edit]
Electric Turbo[edit]
- Electric Turbo → Porsche Taycan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The Porsche Taycan 'Turbo' models don't actually have a turbocharger, it's just a namesake for a higher-performance model of a car. In that sense, it's kinda misleading. I did a google search, and 'electric turbo' doesn't seem to be a common nickname for the Taycan Turbo models either. Now, looking at retarget options, there does exist electric supercharger (I know technically there's no such thing as an "electric turbo" but that's what {{R from incorrect name}} is for), but having a look at that article, there also exists electrically-assisted turbocharger, so I'm not sure where to retarget it to. — AP 499D25 (talk) 06:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Disambig between electrically-assisted turbocharger and electric supercharger. The term seems to be used for both. Thryduulf (talk) 09:25, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to electrically assisted turbocharger - most logical destination for someone searching the term. --Sable232 (talk) 14:44, 9 June 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! 17:18, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
- Disambiguate the term can also refer to electric-motor-assist power boost (ie. hybrid vehicle with electric assist drive mode, to add power to the gasoline engine's power output) as "turbo" can just refer to a power boost. -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 07:55, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
Retarget to electrically assisted turbocharger per Sable.I tried drafting a dab, but could not. Electric supercharger has electrically assisted turbocharger as a section, so I do not know if non-turbocharger superchargers are known as Turbo too. Jay 💬 05:55, 28 June 2024 (UTC)- Struck in favour of the below. I don't know if "Electric Turbo" is used to refer to even electrically-assisted turbocharger. Jay 💬 08:29, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete at this capitalisation, which infers a proper noun. Electric turbo is red. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:09, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per Shhhnotsoloud. * Pppery * it has begun... 23:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Szökés[edit]
Conjunctival pallor[edit]
Anagrams as establishment of priority[edit]
Hurt (Witt Lowry song)[edit]
June 12[edit]
Orange star[edit]
Doug Lawrence[edit]
French-speakers outside of Quebec[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 20#French-speakers outside of Quebec
Ragnarock music[edit]
Untitled Beetlejuice sequel[edit]
Raisi[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 29#Raisi
Roman Catholid Diocese of Down and Connor[edit]
IRC +10414[edit]
- IRC +10414 → IRC −10414 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Procedural listing; a previous RfD was closed with a consensus to retarget, but InTheAstronomy32 has reverted this. SevenSpheres (talk) 18:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Keep as a misspelling. I changed the redirect target because i believe that 'IRC +10414' is a misspelling of IRC -10414 and is the better redirect target so far. An article about this star likely will be never created due to notability issues. InTheAstronomy32 (talk) 18:48, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to Two-Micron Sky Survey per previous RFD. IRC +10414 refers to this star, not IRC -10414, which is this star. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 18:48, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete This was never an article, and it isn't mentioned at either target. No pageviews in the last month. I really don't see how this redirect is helpful. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:18, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Agreed with Presidentman here and Kusma from the prefious RfD, but I'd like to add that the naming scheme of the star is very intentional (from Two-Micron Sky Survey:
index consists of two numbers - declination rounded to multiplier of 10 degrees, with sign, and star ordinal number within declination band
) and if you typo the sign you should expect to be taken to a different star or nowhere. ― Synpath 23:20, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:43, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget per the consensus of arguments in the previous RfD, which I find more compelling than the alternatives. Thryduulf (talk) 11:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete, not mentioned at Two-Micron Sky Survey, and people looking for the other star and making the typo might believe that the star actually doesn't have a standalone article, while a red link can be more indicative of them having made a typo. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:22, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:33, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete it isn't a usable misspelling since it is a different star. That star is not currently in Wikipedia. so either stub up an article, or delete the redirect -- 64.229.90.32 (talk) 08:04, 14 June 2024 (UTC)
- An article about IRC +10414 is likely to be never created, it is just a faint Mira variable that fails WP:NASTRO. Deleting also would not be helpful, it is better to retain this page as a redirect to IRC -10414 since it is a plausible misspelling. 21 Andromedae (talk) 19:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC)
- Note to closers that user 21 Andromedae was formerly called InTheAstronomy32 alluded to in the nomination, and who voted under the former name. Jay 💬 03:15, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete Redirecting to a two-paragraph stub that does not mention the term is far more confusing than helpful. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:29, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Then just redirect with IRC -10414 as i suggested. 21 Andromedae (talk) 21:40, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
Metal (group)[edit]
बालवीर[edit]
Wikipedia:Michael Aarons[edit]
Bible Videos[edit]
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 20#Bible Videos
June 1[edit]
2023-24 Major Clubs Limited Over Tournament[edit]
LATAM[edit]
1930–31 Notre Dame Fighting Irish men's basketball team[edit]
- 1930–31 Notre Dame Fighting Irish men's basketball team → Notre Dame Fighting Irish men's basketball (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Redirect should be deleted so editors know which seasons still need to be made, otherwise every season would be a redirect. poketape (talk) 21:45, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
- Retarget to List of Notre Dame Fighting Irish men's basketball seasons: It's a possibly useful redirect and the fact that redirects for all of the seasons haven't been created doesn't mean that this isn't useful. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:10, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:04, 22 May 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note page history.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J947 ‡ edits 23:38, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Looking at {{Notre Dame Fighting Irish men's basketball navbox}}, blue links are articles, not redirects. 1930–31 is the odd one out, and gives the false impression that we have an article on it. Reywas92's edit summary while making the redirect said
merge to main
, but I don't see that a merge was done. Jay 💬 04:08, 12 June 2024 (UTC) - Restore article. The "merge" (actually just a redirect) by Reywas92 was under the mistaken rationale that it was not an article. It seems like the actual reasoning would be due to a dispute at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1979–80 Notre Dame Fighting Irish men's basketball team, which was kept. Of course this article would need to be expanded, but something is better than nothing. -- Tavix (talk) 18:08, 22 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete or Retarget per Hey man im josh, as the list of seasons was split off after I redirected the page. A merge was in fact already done because there was literally nothing to merge and the main article already had all the information this had (none but the duplicative infobox) but perhaps the summary could have been clearer. No, a single tautologial sentence is not an article and is not better than nothing, it's a disservive to readers. Reywas92Talk 00:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- In order for it to be a merge, some information from the article has to be moved to the new location. There is no evidence of that having been done before your redirection, so
a merge was in fact already done
is also incorrect. (The target at the time of redirection does not show any additional information for the 1930–31 season.) The page was tagged as a WP:STUB, which is explicitly defined as an article in the first sentence of the guideline (and elsewhere). -- Tavix (talk) 12:49, 24 June 2024 (UTC)
- In order for it to be a merge, some information from the article has to be moved to the new location. There is no evidence of that having been done before your redirection, so
- Retarget to the list per above. The dispute about whether this was merged versus BLARed and whether it was or was not an article is irrelevant now. * Pppery * it has begun... 03:20, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
- Delete because it has nothing that is not already on the list and user will easily find the list without the redirect and we better havce a red link just in case someone wants to create a proper article. Restore is a second choice. - Nabla (talk) 23:24, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
- Delete. I don't feel that the previous article is worth restoring to at this point, and having the redirect around could be misleading per Jay. The red link may also encourage creation of another article that can be assessed against the notability guidelines. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 18:49, 7 July 2024 (UTC)