Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 September 2#Spongebob Schwammkopf

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was disambiguate. Interested editors can feel free to add/adjust hatnotes on related pages as needed. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 22:26, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Brain worm → Dicrocoelium dendriticum  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It's not immediately clear to me why this redirect goes to the current target but I think Neurocysticercosis is where it should lead instead. Clovermoss🍀 (talk) 22:59, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: Brainworm without the space points to Parelaphostrongylus tenuis. BD2412 T 03:44, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Probably too vague to point to a specific page. Received over 700 page views in the past 12 months so clearly a common search term. A DAB or set index article seems like the best option here. Traumnovelle (talk) 07:31, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Second DAB. Many articles in the Google search results use the term "Brain worm" to refer to worm infections of the brain in general, not only by a specific species. Worms infecting non-humans are also sometimes referred to as brain worms, for example here Iluzalsipal (talk) 11:02, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note Brain Worms redirects to RVG (band) (it's the title of their third album). If dab page is created, then we'll want to update the hatnote there to point to it. Thryduulf (talk) 18:31, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• I agree with the dab/set index suggestion. It seems this is quite a common concept in fiction, search results find hits related to Star Wars and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles among others. None of them immediately screamed notability, but I haven't looked in any depth at all. Thryduulf (talk) 18:31, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Note: It's also common slang term, often pluralized and written as a closed compound (brainworms).[1][2][3] This probably drives some of the search traffic. Include a link to wikt:Brainworm if a DAB page is created, and possibly {{canned search}} as these show up in a number of articles but they may not all be suitable entries on the DAB. Also, Earworm lists "brainworm" as a synonym, which is news to me. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:12, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• DABify. A cursory look at Google Scholar shows Dicrocoelium dendriticum and Parelaphostrongylus tenuis are reasonable targets, along with other parasites. Ngram indicates that brain worm is more commonly used than brainworm but I don't yet know if usage differs by context. More dictionaries have entries at brainworm. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:26, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• DABIFY. It's a term that can refer to multiple types of parasites, media titles (such as the album mentioned by Thryduulf above), and it's a slang term. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 11:54, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Dabify to the different types of parasites mentioned in this RfD --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:00, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I've added a proposed dab in the redirect --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for taking the initiative. I've added Elaphostrongylus, Earworm, and {{Wiktionary}}. Wiktionary covers the slang usage. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:14, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 07:18, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Facism- meaning → Fascism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not a common misspelling with the dash and "meaning", the redirect from Facism already exists. Iluzalsipal (talk) 22:35, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The misspelling is fine, but the dash location and the word "meaning" is unlikely. Steel1943 (talk) 22:45, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete due to issue with the dash --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:55, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete (apparently I had this on my watchlist). Nothing worth keeping in the page history, which seems to consist of a copyvio. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:30, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was speedy keep. Procedural close as nomination is about turning an redirect into an article, which can be done without process and is outside the remit of RfD. (non-admin closure) Casablanca 🪨^(T) 17:30, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Victor Lord, Jr. → List of One Life to Live characters introduced in the 2000s#Victor Lord, Jr.  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I would like to remove the redirect so that I can create a new article, which I believe is warranted, about an important character on the American soap opera, One Life to Live. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:13, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Figureskatingfan: See WP:RTOA. No discussion necessary. Steel1943 (talk) 23:28, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 07:23, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Seems a highly unlikely misnomer. –DMartin 21:35, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not a misnomer, but rather a offshoot of the [sexist?] "artists who can sing vs artists who can't sing" meme. Delete User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 08:29, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Coastal state. WP:SNOW close; unanimous support for nominator's proposal. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 04:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Coastal statesCoastal states → List of U.S. states and territories by coastline  (subject · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Should surely redirect to Coastal state; this is very arbitrary US-centrism. — Anonymous 20:08, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget per above Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:12, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom. Thryduulf (talk) 18:37, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:23, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget, and adjust hatnote there to still point at the correct article. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:00, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:19, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was converted to article by User:Synpath. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:02, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• List of mountain passes in Albania → Category:Geography of Albania  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Would this not be better at Geography of Albania rather than the category? It's not like the category is an exact match for Category:Mountain passes in Albania. --woodensuperman 15:19, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, have just realised that Category:Mountain passes of Albania exists. Not a fan of cross namespace redirects personally, but maybe see what others think. --woodensuperman 15:31, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: What do others think of the possibility of re-targeting to Category:Mountain passes of Albania?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 17:45, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Category:Mountain passes of Albania, as this seems like the best target. I did notice that Geography of Albania#Physiogeographic regions mentions mountain ranges, but it does not mention mountain passes. Duckmather (talk) 22:29, 12 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• See draft. I've converted the category info and article history into a list with accompanying map. It probably doesn't deserve to be a stand-alone list (please tell me how to cite this stuff properly), but it can be merged as a subsection of List of mountain passes#Europe. ⇌ Synpath 14:53, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Synpath has made a draft list but isn't sure.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:33, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The list looks good to me! -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:05, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any additional input on the draft?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:29, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There was also this version back in 2023 that was redirected. --woodensuperman 13:05, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Without prejudice to recreation if any content on these is added to the target or anywhere else; I can restore the content into userspace if someone wants to merge from it instead of starting from scratch. Rusalkii (talk) 03:31, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Blinky (image) → GIF  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not explained at target, and appears to be a rather obscure term. 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:27, 5 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Restore without prejudice to AfD or merge. This was a very short article that was BLARed in 2013, that had a source. A quick google suggests that "Blinkie" is possibly the more common spelling but it's likely that more sources exist on this. Whether the correct amount of detail is a mention at GIF#Animated GIF, a separate section at GIF or a stand-alone article I don't know but those are not questions for RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 13:05, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • This claim isn't correct. The old version didn't have a source. Dan Bloch (talk) 18:58, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Not having an inline source is not the same as not having a source - the external link clearly supports at least some of the text. Thryduulf (talk) 20:22, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete unless someone wants to add a mention somewhere. Whether or not a mention (or section) can be added is absolutely a question for RfD, especially given that there's no scope for a stand-alone article. -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:42, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I don't see evidence that this term was used, certainly not in a reliable source. Dan Bloch (talk) 18:58, 7 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:58, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:28, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Restoring to AFD would probably be a waste of time. That one external link isn't a reliable source, and even then, this was just a pretty banal couple of sentences. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 21:40, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• There are many, although mostly unreliable sources for the term "Blinkies" for a certain type of gifs on geocities-style websites, see for example here, here, here. This article (in Spanish) defines the term as "small moving boxes measuring 150 x 20 pixels with phrases to show a particular interest or simply to make jokes". So, the term does seem to be in use, although research or journalistic material is sadly extremely rare. Iluzalsipal (talk) 12:07, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Obscure term which isn't used in reliable sources. No reason to preserve this if nobody is using it. CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:06, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per IP. Jay 💬 19:23, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Rusalkii (talk) 01:36, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Suck a cock → Fellatio  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not useful, and self promotional for the original editor of the redirect. As per WP:RDEL "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' and "The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam" for the original editor / creator Nayyn (talk) 22:05, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry DrinksOrCoffee reopening this one as well. Same as the above, Keep as a common synonym for target, and would appreciate clarity as to how this got deleted without explanation while under a live deletion discussion. BugGhost 🦗👻 23:13, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Asilvering. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:53, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per BugGhost. "Sucking cock"/"Cock-sucking" is a VERY VERY VERY common colloquial English term for Fellatio, to the point where it's more recognized than the term Fellatio itself. Thus, it fails the "novel/very obscure synonym" check for WP:RDEL. I also fail to see how it would constitute self-promotion (promoting who exactly???) or spam (if it were spam you'd think more than just one redirect would be in this RfD, right?)
  I'd also like to note that the argument given by Asilvering that Pppery is referring to isn't here???? As far as I can see user:Asilvering hasn't commented on this RfD. Given that, I'd like to ask what user:Pppery's argument for deleting this would be? Nevermind. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:50, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The same argument as Asilvering's comment in the previous discussion, which also applies just as much here. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 21:50, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Right, just saw that other discussion, my apologies. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:59, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Throwing in the prior RfDs for "Suck my cock" that User:VolatileAnomaly added to the Suck a dick RfD above. This redirect is a much closer match to Suck my cock, and I'd also like to point out that by using "a" instead of "my" it avoids the "this is potentially just an insult" that got Suck my cock deleted in January. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:22, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Absolutely useless, and potentially misleading. As a phrase, this is generally used as some sort of retort, and has very little to do with the actual act. Also DNFT and all that per Asilvering. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:26, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete per G3. We should discourage this sort of behavior. voorts (talk/contributions) 18:18, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Bugghost. Someone searching this is either looking for the target article (in which case this redirect helps them) or they aren't looking for encyclopaedic content (in which case they aren't relevant to our considerations). Thryduulf (talk) 21:30, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  This is not a realistic search term for anyone looking for the target. It's more realistic as an insult, which leaves someone searching for this wondering why they're here. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:57, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This phrase is used more commonly as a pejorative to a point where readers searching this term aren't necessarily looking for the current target article. Steel1943 (talk) 20:30, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete consistent with the outcome of the January RfD where it was established that Fellatio is not the appropriate target for the insult/retort. Agree with BugGhost that suck dick, sucking dick and dick sucking (and we have the corresponding suck cock, sucking cock and cock sucking) are valid redirects for the act, but I see the "a" in "Suck a cock" to generalize "my", "his", etc. The other similar terms are sufficient for anyone looking for the act, and this one was troll behaviour or fishing for credit per nom and asilvering. As an WP:ATD, retarget to Cock (slang)#Derived terms where cocksucking is mentioned. Jay 💬 07:09, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 04:30, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Delete Per WP:G3 Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:48, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Cock (slang) as a WP:ATD. BD2412 T 20:50, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Redirects do not enjoy the same level of protection that ATD offers content pages, because there's no content to preserve. A redirect can trivially be recreated. Crying ATD with a bad alternate target doesn't cut it, and this is a bad alternate target, because it's about a different topic. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 00:20, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Not always; sometimes, the history of the page is worth preserving. This isn't relevant to this freshly-created (and also already deleted) redirect, however. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:56, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Problem is that Cock (slang) is not what the redirect is about. And as Lunamann stated, applying WP:ATD here is questionable since this is already a redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 15:38, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  My point was more that there isn't any history here to preserve, not that it being a redirect means that there isn't anything to preserve. But yes. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 16:34, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Steel1943: Cock (slang) contains discussion of the derivation, "Cocksucker", which also mentions Fellatio, and could very easily be expanded to cover "Suck a cock" as a similar derivation. BD2412 T 19:50, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note The page was not tagged until 19:03, 11 August 2025 (UTC), when I added the tag. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 19:04, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for that. I was about to say, someone needs to tag this. I have done the same at Suck a dick Servite et contribuere (talk) 19:46, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:14, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, this is more likely to refer to slang than a description of the action, per Steel1943. Not discussed at the slang article. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:56, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Steel1943, Jay, and others. The phrase is an insult or retort, not a synonym for fellatio. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 02:00, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak retarget to Cock (slang)#Cocksucker or Sexual slang#Pejorative usage as they cover the insult meaning though they don't precisely mention the phrase. The former is the closest semantically, the latter covers how the phrase is used. No objection to deletion, but these redirects should be considered as a way to prevent spam recreation if this comes up again. Maybe salting outright is necessary, but I haven't seen many discussions that result in salting. comment copied from related discussion § Suck a dick ⇌ Synpath 18:04, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:INVOLVED relist to close old log day. Reminder that per WP:RELIST, this discussion can be closed at any time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:26, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Rusalkii (talk) 01:36, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Suck a dick → Fellatio  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not useful, and self promotional for the original editor of the redirect. As per WP:RDEL "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' and "The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam" in this case, for the original editor / creator Nayyn (talk) 22:06, 25 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• close already deleted. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ _{choose only one...} 09:11, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Sorry DrinksOrCoffee I've just reverted your close. Can someone explain what happened here? This redirect looks correct to me, the nom statement is baffling (not sure how it could be seen as self promo or spam or as a very obscure synonym), and the redirect got deleted while it was meant to be under discussion at RFD? What happened? Could anyone with deletion goggles give some insight? Either way, Keep (recreate?) as a harmless redirect from a common phrase to the correct article. (Pinging nom Nayyn) BugGhost 🦗👻 23:01, 26 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment Page was deleted by asilvering-(Mass deletion of pages added by Kjjj6uhhhhh - more disruptive redirect creation). — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 02:30, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks - I completely forgot non-admins could still see deletion logs. Looks like it was nuked about an hour after this RFD was created. Pinging asilvering BugGhost 🦗👻 06:23, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Bugghost, it took me some work to understand what "self promotional" meant here but I think I get it. The context is that the creator, who from behaviour I assume is a middle schooler, has spent most of their time on Wikipedia creating or requesting dozens of redirects on topics that middle schoolers think are edgy and funny, like various sex acts, names for genitalia, and the n-word. See their extensive user talk page for examples and various attempts by admins to tell them to cut it out. If any of you think any of these redirects are genuinely useful, they can be recreated. My personal opinion on the matter is that no one should do that, because we should not feed the trolls and because these redirects are stupid. No one's needed a redirect from "suck a dick" to "fellatio" in 25 years. We don't need it now either. -- asilvering (talk) 12:40, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for the clarity on this one. I appreciate why the redirects made by this user got nuked, but seeing as this one (and Suck a cock below) got listed at RFD I think they should have remained at a deletion discussion rather than deleted outside of it. Regardless of who made the redirects, even if it was a vandal who also made unhelpful redirects, if it was listed at RFD it should stick around until we get a consensus. Maybe wp:nuke should be updated to avoid deleting things that are already listed at deletion discussions? Either way, in my view, the "the website has survived without this for x years so we don't need it now" argument is techincally applicable to all new articles/redirects, so without further reasoning it's not enough to justify deletion. It's worth noting that suck dick, sucking dick and dick sucking are already existing non-controversial redirects to fellatio, and suck a dick is not really an outlier. BugGhost 🦗👻 23:25, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per Asilvering. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:53, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep/recreate as per BugGhost. I now understand why these were considered spam specifically, as prior (on 'Suck a cock') I hadn't seen the other redirects (though as a note for user:Nayyn maybe it'd be a good idea to bundle them together and specify "hey, the reason I'm doing this is because these are spam", so we don't spend energy trying to figure out how these are somehow self promotional, next time?)
  That said, I'd like to still point out that this is a common colloquial English term for the act of fellatio ('cock' and 'dick' themselves both being colloquial terms for penis), which means it still fails WP:RDEL's "novel/obscure synonym" test (er, passes??? okay so what it does is evade WP:RDEL). Also, given these are recently created I'm not sure we have data on how much they would be searched, so I don't know if asilvering's "we haven't needed these redirects for 25 years" argument actually holds water? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:06, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The view logs when I submitted them were less than 5 views over the past 30 days, so I didn't think it readers were finding them useful... Nayyn (talk) 22:10, 27 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment adding in some old RfDs for a similar redirect (Suck my cock) which may be potentially relevant. — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 20:56, 28 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Absolutely useless, and potentially misleading. As a phrase, this is generally used as some sort of retort, and has very little to do with the actual act. Also DNFT and all that per Asilvering. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:26, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete per G3. We should discourage this sort of behavior. voorts (talk/contributions) 18:18, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Bugghost and my comments below at #Suck a cock. Thryduulf (talk) 21:31, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This phrase is used more commonly as a pejorative to a point where readers searching this term aren't necessarily looking for the current target article. Steel1943 (talk) 20:30, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete consistent with the outcome of the January RfD where it was established that Fellatio is not the appropriate target for the insult/retort. There is also no useful content at Dick (slang). Agree with BugGhost that suck dick, sucking dick and dick sucking are valid redirects to the act, but I see the "a" in "Suck a dick" to generalize "my", "his", etc. The other similar terms are sufficient for anyone looking for the act, and this one was troll behaviour or fishing for credit per nom and asilvering. Jay 💬 06:56, 6 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 04:29, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy Delete Per WP:G3 Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:48, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Retarget to Dick (slang) as a WP:ATD. BD2412 T 20:51, 10 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Problem is that Dick (slang) is not what the redirect is about. Also, applying WP:ATD here is questionable since this is already a redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 15:39, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Steel1943: as with "Suck a cock" above, Dick (slang) could very easily be expanded to cover "Suck a dick" as a derivation of the slang term (particularly given its generic use as a dismissive insult). BD2412 T 19:51, 11 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:13, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, this is more likely to refer to slang than a description of the action, per Steel1943. Not discussed at the slang article. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:55, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Steel1943 and comments at the suck a cock discussion above. It is used as an insult or retort, it is not a synonym for fellatio nor for penis nor dick (slang). --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 02:03, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak retarget to Cock (slang)#Cocksucker or Sexual slang#Pejorative usage as they cover the insult meaning though they don't precisely mention the phrase. The former is the closest semantically, the latter covers how the phrase is used. No objection to deletion, but these redirects should be considered as a way to prevent spam recreation if this comes up again. Maybe salting outright is necessary, but I haven't seen many discussions that result in salting. ⇌ Synpath 18:00, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:INVOLVED relist to close old log day. Reminder that per WP:RELIST, this discussion can be closed at any time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:26, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Rusalkii (talk) 18:52, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Spongebob Schwammkopf → SpongeBob SquarePants  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete per WP:FORRED ("Direct translations where the native/original form of the title is in English (or a language other than the language of the redirect's title) (such as Non è un paese per vecchi (Italian for No Country for Old Men)"). Also, the creator was later confirmed to be a sockpuppet and was blocked indefinitely. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 16:33, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete as WP:CSD#G5 Thepharoah17 (talk) 17:53, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:20, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. Requisite hatnote appears to have been added during this discussion. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 15:00, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

Hadley Hesus is an individual who has Hesus as a surname, no one else has a page with that surname. The redirect here to Esus is definitely valid to exist, but not sure if it would be better disambiguated or a hatnote added to Esus. Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 15:10, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and hatnote. Hadley is a very minor political figure, with a constituency of 54 people! -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:47, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and hatnote for disambiguation (actually I added the hatnote). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:10, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Shhhnotsoloud's addition of the hatnote to the proposed article --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:01, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was procedural close. An article now exists at the page, so how to handle it is outside the scope of RfD. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 05:15, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 2025 World Athletics Championships – Men's shot put → 2025 World Athletics Championships  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:RFD#DELETE #10, a redirect for a page that will be created serves no purpose for readers. Red links can be better than redirect loops Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 14:52, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The event will happen in ten days and the page will likely be created based on the entries before this RfD ends, so this should probably be procedurally closed. --Habst (talk) 14:25, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep it’s a temporary redirect for a page that will be created within 2 weeks time. We should loose time with discussing this temporary link. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 18:00, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Wikipedia:Write the article first. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:15, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per all. Jay 💬 10:32, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 00:10, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Silk Spinner → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Golden Tiger Claws → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Tangle Web Comb → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Monkey Staff → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Jetbootsu → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Fist of Tebigong → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Third-Arm Sash → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Eye of Dashi → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Two-Ton Tunic → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Mantis Flip Coin → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Xiaolin Showdown Techniques → Xiaolin Showdown  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Reversing Mirror → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Minor Xiaolin Showdown Characters → Xiaolin Showdown  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Wudai Weapons → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Ying-Ying Bird → Xiaolin Showdown#Ying-Ying Bird  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Reversing Mirror effects → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• The Shard of Lightning (Xiaolin Showdown) → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Moby Morpher → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Ying Yang Bird → Xiaolin Showdown  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Chameleon Bot → Xiaolin Showdown  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Heart of Jong → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Star Hanabi → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete all. All originally redirects to the Shen Gong Wu page. All not mentioned or barely mentioned in target. Thepharoah17 (talk) 18:48, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• The rule at WP:RFD#DELETE #8 is to consider deletion if it's not mentioned at the target and it's "a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name". Redirects should not be deleted if the connection to the subject is obvious to most people, or if the redirect is correct but not appropriate for inclusion in the article, such as {{R from brand name}}. There's nothing wrong with an episode name redirecting to the main article about the show. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:42, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  They're not names of episodes, though. Thepharoah17 (talk) 02:59, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete; as Thepharoah17 notes these are not episode names, but rather, the names of individual "Shen Gong Wu", which in the show's canon are the MacGuffin artifacts that are sought after by the heroes and villains (and also used BY the heroes and villains to use their powers). (And even if they WERE episode titles, the correct target would've been List of Xiaolin Showdown episodes.) In situations such as these, I feel like the model is still how we handle Pokemon-related redirects, even after the obsolescence of the WP:Pokemon Test; namely, no matter how relevant a detail of a show may be, if it's not notable enough to show up and be explained in the article itself, it shouldn't have a redirect-- and then, on the flip side, there's a high likelihood that it's not notable enough for article inclusion, either, because we're not Bulbapedia.
  (Or, in this case, we're not Xiaolinpedia. ...Oh, ew, it's still hosted by Fandom.) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:50, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

it's time for another one of those "piles of votes because a lot of them have different rationales"

• retarget silk spinner to loom. results seemed to treat that as a serviceable alternative name for those. Or for spinnerets, but those were outnumbered by a lot
• delete monkey staff and chameleon bot as vague
• delete all the bird redirects as "make up your mind on a spelling, come on!!" (and per below)
• delete all the others as well as unmentioned

and delete xiaolin showdown (the series, not the article) for the irrepairable damage it did to the brazilian portuguese term "homi" consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 11:07, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sure, I am good with retargeting Silk Spinner to loom. Delete the rest, though. Thepharoah17 (talk) 17:13, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 13:37, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Do not retarget Silk Spinner to Loom. Looms are for weaving, not spinning, and the loom article doesn't even mention spinning. It could conceivebly refer to spinneret or sericulture, but probably not with this capitalization. Deletion seems like the best option here. - Eureka Lott 15:43, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete all Fan of the show when I was younger but these redirects are better off served on its dedicated fandom/ wikia and not here. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:02, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Rusalkii (talk) 18:55, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Gibraltar 300 → Gibraltar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect doesn't make much sense to me. Created in 2006, its original content was a short article about celebrating Gibraltar's 300th anniversary, but was converted a month later to an unneeded redirect, Delete. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 12:49, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, the original text also reads like a news report, and given the pictures were all deleted as copyrighted, I suspect this text is too. CMD (talk) 13:07, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment If the text is a copyright violation, the original is not (or no longer) online anywhere Google knows about - the anniversary event in question happened in August 2004 so the source no longer being available is highly likely. I can't even verify the quotes by Lindsay Hoyle or Simon Hughes, but the latter includes an odd hyphenation, commer-cial, that suggests copying from some other page - but even so that doesn't prove copyright violation on it's own. Earwig gives it a 0% rating, but (if I understand correctly) that just means if it is copied that the source isn't known to Google or Turnitin. The images were deleted for having no source, which doesn't necessarily mean they were copyright violations only that we don't know whether they were or were not. The deletion was so long ago that they were permanently removed, so even as an admin I can't see them to check for duplicates and the Internet Archive didn't save them either. The user who created the page, Gibnews was quite controversial in his time here with regards COI but I don't recall (or see on a quick scan) any indication of copyvio concerns. If the creation was contemporary, I'd say it was equally likely to be original reporting, but the article was created in April 2006 so I'm less sure - it's highly likely the images were their own work however. In conclusion (and tl;dr), I'm not confident enough that this is a copyright violation to speedy delete it, but given the reasonable suspicion and being unable to prove that it isn't I'm not going to recommend restoration. Thryduulf (talk) 14:05, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I had another thought but that's just left me more perplexed - I haven't been able to find any quotes, anywhere by Hoyle or Hughes about the event in question, nor have I been able to verify they were there. It doesn't feel like a hoax - the event certainly happened, and it is very plausible that they were there. My guess is that it only made the local news, and if there are online archives from that period they aren't in a location and/or format that Google has (or maybe can) index. Thryduulf (talk) 03:56, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Help:Introduction. ✗plicit 14:17, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Wikipedia:How to use WikipediaWikipedia:How to use Wikipedia → Wikipedia:Welcoming committee/Welcome to Wikipedia/Finding your way around  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Where should this page target to? I'm not a big fan of the current target and was wondering what a better target is. I'm questioning if this should redirect to a page specifically for our readers or our editors. Maybe Help:Introduction, but that's for people who want to edit Wikipedia. What do you think? Interstellarity (talk) 12:13, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Help:Introduction. Agree that's a better landing page. -- œ^™ 03:55, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Help:Introduction as more useful for our readers per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:23, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to The Dancing Hut of Baba Yaga. Already exists as Baba Yaga (Dungeons & Dragons). -- œ^™ 04:12, 3 September 2025 (UTC) œ^™ 04:12, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Baba Yaga (Dungeons and Dragons)Baba Yaga (Dungeons and Dragons) → List of Greyhawk deities  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Subject is not listed on the page. – ImaginesTigers 10:59, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to existing Baba Yaga (Dungeons & Dragons). -- œ^™ 03:59, 3 September 2025 (UTC)][reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. Per current discussion and previous RfD's consensus to keep that A.*s with the matching number of letters to the titles. Rusalkii (talk) 18:09, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• AaaaaAaaaa → AAAAA Tourist Attractions of China  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• AaaaaaAaaaaa → AaAaAA!!! – A Reckless Disregard for Gravity  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete both as hopelessly ambiguous; these seem much more plausible as general screams or keyboard mashes then references to one specific video game or Chinese tourist classification. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:41, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I find both useful, though take that with a grain of salt as I am a Chinese nerd. I don't see why these redirects should be deleted, as anyone looking for screaming would be searching for "screaming" and anyone just smashing their keyboard are not let down in any way by where they get to. Aaron Liu (talk) 02:15, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: See related discussions Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 29#Aaaaaa, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 March 29#Aaaaaaaaaaaaaa, and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 October 24#Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa. Steel1943 (talk) 03:05, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep both as plausible search terms for their respective targets. We shouldn't reward keyboard mashes and I don't think someone would be looking for Screaming this way. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:41, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For a clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:06, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. Rusalkii (talk) 18:10, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Algebras, Groups and GeometriesAlgebras, Groups and Geometries → Ruggero Santilli  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. The article doesn't mention algebra or geometry, and the two appearances of "group" are in the phrase "a group of Jewish physicists" and "Dutch Astronomer and Skeptics Group Settled". When the redirect was created in 2013, the article mentioned this string — it's the title of a serial edited by the subject — but it's disappeared from the article at some point over the intervening twelve years, so we don't need the redirect anymore. Nyttend (talk) 20:46, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:XY. Steel1943 (talk) 21:32, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  No longer have a stance after Headbomb's addition to the target. Steel1943 (talk) 18:19, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:49, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Lean delete, unless suitable content is added to the target. It's not an XY issue and This is a plausible redirect to this target—Algebras, Groups and Geometries is a real publication that Santilli edited and has published in.[4][5] However, if content about the journal hasn't been deemed appropriate to keep in his article then the redirect is not particularly useful. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:08, 26 August 2025 (UTC) Edited.--MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:50, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Myceteae: What I meant is that without context at the target article, this redirect is ambiguous at best. Steel1943 (talk) 23:58, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Steel1943 I was trying to concisely say more or less the same thing while highlighting that this redirect has the potential to be 'rescued'. I see now that this reads as a correction or disagreement, which was not my intent. I apologize for my sloppiness. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:45, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Myceteae: No worries as I didn't make that particularly clear in my initial comment. Steel1943 (talk) 16:25, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Weak keep per Headcomb's addition. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:56, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete all of these are general mathematics terms, most people searching won't be looking for a specific book by a specific person. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:50, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• I just notified the target and the creator of this discussion. Jay 💬 05:21, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, this is the name of a journal published by Hadronic Press (see https://www.hadronicpress.com/). If it's not mentionned, the solution is to mention it [6]. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 07:15, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:04, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Nyttend, Lenticel, Myceteae, and Joseph2302: Please see Headbomb's vote/addition to the target to determine if it affects your stances since the edit added a mention to the target. Steel1943 (talk) 18:22, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Headbomb's addition. Thank you for the ping Steel1943 --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:04, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. If a mention is added the redirect can be recreated. Rusalkii (talk) 18:59, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Xbox lag → Xbox network  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention at target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:59, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Appears to be just an attempt at an insult, not useful. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:07, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mention the lag and keep if the lag is notable, or delete if not Self explanatory tbh :P User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 08:35, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on adding a mention at the target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:03, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete I'm not sure how useful this is. All I got from my Google Search are videos and posts on how to fix lag --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:23, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. ✗plicit 14:17, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Spaceballs Wright → David Wright  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

If this is a nickname, it is not mentioned at the target. In 2009, Wright wore an oversized helmet for one game, and some people compared it to Dark Helmet's costume in Spaceballs. The helmet is mentioned in the article, but there is no mention of any joke or comparison. The redirect Spaceballs (baseball) (created along with the redirect under discussion) was deleted yesterday at its RfD (from where I have copied content for this nomination) for having no information on enwiki. Delete this as well. Jay 💬 04:59, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Excluding Wikipedia, Google finds exactly one result for this exact phrase and even that is a false positive ("[...]Wright elected to wear a new batting helmet that is reminiscent of Rick Moranis's character, Lord Helmet, from "Spaceballs." Wright, or "The Great Gazoo," as I like to call him[...]").[7] Thryduulf (talk) 10:30, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per related AfD and nom. Rgrds. --BX (talk) 16:06, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per my rationale in the recent related nomination noted above. - Eureka Lott 19:41, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:23, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 07:10, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Jana Agoncillo → Ningning (TV series)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Actress mentioned at several pages including Coming Home (2020 film), Dream Dad, Starla, List of Goin' Bulilit cast members, Incognito (TV series) and Team Yey!. A redirect was created for this person when the outcome of the AfD was delete. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jana Agoncillo when recreated as redirect in October 2020 by a now-permablocked user for sockpuppetry. Delete per WP:RFD#D10 Reason for deleting: "If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject." 49.151.187.185 ^{talk to IP49! contributions to IP49!} 02:51, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for now as potential article per WP:REDLINK --Lenticel ^(talk) 22:49, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Conclave. Uncontested WP:SILENT consensus, especially since the nominator did not indicate a specific preferred outcome. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 03:59, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Pope electPope elect → Pope-elect Stephen  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Pope-electPope-elect → Pope-elect Stephen  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This sounds like it has more to do with the election of a pope, making the current target unsuitable. Thepharoah17 (talk) 02:35, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, he isn't even the only "pope-elect" who didn't become pope. I would be tempted to redirect to Conclave, which discusses the election procedures, as (post-1059) papal elections are the most likely target. However, Stephen got the title of "pope-elect" centuries before the elections were formalized (cf. Papal selection before 1059). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:27, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 03:50, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was retarget to Google Fiber#First city selection process. I see a rough consensus for this target. (non-admin closure) Left guide (talk) 15:03, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Google IslandGoogle Island → Sarasota, Florida  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target and no evidence of any affinity with it either. Thepharoah17 (talk) 02:45, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• It was a rename of City Island to appease Google for Google Fiber back in the day. [8] We could retarget it to History of Sarasota, Florida § 21st century if it seems fit to mention. – The Grid (talk) 12:48, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• It's also mentioned at Google Fiber#First city selection process, which might be a better retarget option because it gives more context. Thepharoah17, I'm having a hard time believing your nomination. What searches did you conduct to conclude that there is no evidence of any affinity between Google Island and Sarasota? A Wikipedia search for this would give you the answer immediately. A Google search for "Google Island" gave me some results pertaining to Welcome to Google Island, but there are plenty of results for Sarasota (and searching including 'Sarasota' would help even more). -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:38, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Most of the results I got were for Doodle Champion Island Games. Maybe that would be a better target? That's where Google Doodle Champion Island Games redirects. Thepharoah17 (talk) 16:28, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Google Fiber § First city selection process per Tavix. A Google search for "Google Island" brings up the Google Doodle, but it looks like it does bring up the Wired article a bit down on the search page. – The Grid (talk) 16:42, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Three potential retarget choices mentioned, and I don't see enough support for any specific one to consider it consensus yet.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 03:49, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Retarget to Google Fiber § First city selection process to with {{redirect}} hatnote to Doodle Champion Island Games. I get more hits on Google and DuckDuckGo for the Games but the Sarasota usage is the only one that appears to be referred to specifically as "Google Island". The Wired article is not notable. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:56, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was keep. No support for adding a hatnote, but anyone can add one if desired. (non-admin closure) CycloneYoris ^talk! 11:29, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• 1967 referendum1967 referendum → 1967 Australian referendum (Aboriginals)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This could plausibly refer to A) the aboriginal part of this referendum, B) the part relating to increasing the amount of members in parliment or C) the entire thing User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 02:35, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep as is. This has been discussed before (don't ask me where), as all incoming redirects targeted the overwhelmingly more well-known part of the referendum, and the consensus was to change the target to where it is now. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:06, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Dabify as this could also refer to any of the 13 other referenda listed at Category:1967 referendums, and there's no indication that the Australian one would be the primary topic. Rosbif73 (talk) 06:43, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  If you look at incoming links or just search on the term, you'll see that the Australian Aboriginal one has by far the most, and also in page views, I very much doubt that any of the others garner as many as that one (peaking at 8-10,000 on a few occasions). If dabified, I would still use this as the primary topic. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 07:23, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and hatnote the category or a newly-created list. Literally every single one of the hits on at least the first 10 pages (I stopped looking at that point) when googling for "1967 referendum" -Wikipedia are about the Australian referendum. Only when I make a search term like "1967 referendum" -wikipedia -Australia -Australian -Aboriginal -indigenous do I get results for other referenda (the first two pages all relate to Gibraltar, I didn't look further). The current target is unquestionably primary. Thryduulf (talk) 10:43, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep because of Thryduulf's research. If I'd run the same search, the results would be suspect because of Google's methodology — since I'm in Australia, the search engine is likely to give me more results about the Aborigines because that's the most relevant result for my IP's location — but since Thryduulf's userpage says he lives on the Isle of Dogs, London, England, probably he ran this search from the UK and won't experience a local bias toward Australia as I would. Nyttend (talk) 20:15, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was withdrawn as noted below. (non-admin closure) Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:38, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Eddie SsemwangaEddie Ssemwanga → Edward Semwanga  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Seems a highly unlikely typo. –DMartin 02:27, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the variants of the name that is used in sources (nft, fufa.co.ug). Mitte27 (talk) 03:01, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, I've added the alternative spelling to the article with a source. Dmartin969, since it's been established that it's not a typo can you please withdraw? -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:05, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  I withdraw my nomination , seems to be a legitimate alternative spelling. –DMartin 20:16, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).

The following is an archived discussion concerning one or more redirects. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the discussion was delete. Jay 💬 07:10, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Demazure crystal → Demazure module  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not described at target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 01:10, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Demazure crystals are a mathematical entity, but enwiki has no content about the subject. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:32, 5 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as potential article per WP:REDLINK --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:11, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on an appropriate discussion page (such as the redirect's talk page or in a deletion review).