Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

"WP:RFD" redirects here. For other requests for deletion, see Wikipedia:Deletion venues. For requests for discussion, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment. For the reference desk, see Wikipedia:Reference desk.
Deletion discussions
Articles
Templates and modules
Files
Categories
Redirects
Miscellany
Speedy deletion
Proposed deletion
XFD backlog
V Apr May Jun Jul Total
CfD 0 0 3 40 43
TfD 0 1 10 11 22
MfD 0 0 6 0 6
FfD 0 0 1 1 2
RfD 0 0 21 14 35
AfD 0 0 0 14 14

Redirects for discussion (RfD) is the place where potentially problematic redirects are discussed. Items usually stay listed for a week or so, after which they are deleted, kept, or retargeted.

  • If you want to replace an unprotected redirect with an article, do not list it here. Turning redirects into articles is wholly encouraged. Be bold!
  • If you want to move a page but a redirect is in the way, do not list it here. For non-controversial cases, place a technical request; if a discussion is required, then start a requested move.
  • If you think a redirect points to the wrong target article, this is a good place to discuss the proper target.
  • Redirects should not be deleted just because they have no incoming links. Please do not use this as the only reason to delete a redirect. However, redirects that do have incoming links are sometimes deleted, so that is not a sufficient condition for keeping. (See § When to delete a redirect for more information.)

Please do not unilaterally rename or change the target of a redirect while it is under discussion. This adds unnecessary complication to the discussion for participants and closers.

Before listing a redirect for discussion

[edit]

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

The guiding principles of RfD

[edit]
Shortcut
  • 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 to delete a redirect

[edit]

Shortcuts

Further information: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Common outcomes and Wikipedia:Moving a page § Moving over a redirect

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]
Shortcut
See also: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § Redirects

You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met (but note also the exceptions listed below this list):

  1. The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. For example, if the user searches for "New Articles", and is redirected to a disambiguation page for "Articles" (itself a redirect to "Article"), it would take much longer to get to the newly added articles on Wikipedia.
  2. The redirect might cause confusion. For example, if "Adam B. Smith" was redirected to "Andrew B. Smith", because Andrew was accidentally called Adam in one source, this could cause confusion with the article on Adam Smith, so the redirect should be deleted.
  3. The redirect is offensive or abusive, such as redirecting "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs" (unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is legitimately discussed in the article), or "Joe Bloggs" to "Loser". (Speedy deletion criterion G10 and G3 may apply.) See also § Neutrality of redirects.
  4. The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam. (Speedy deletion criterion G11 may apply.)
  5. The redirect makes no sense, such as redirecting "Apple" to "Orange". (Speedy deletion criterion G1 may apply.)
  6. It is a cross-namespace redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. The major exception to this rule are the pseudo-namespace shortcut redirects, which technically are in the main article space. Some long-standing cross-namespace redirects are also kept because of their long-standing history and potential usefulness. "MOS:" redirects, for example, were an exception to this rule until they became their own namespace in 2024. (Note also the existence of namespace aliases such as WP:. Speedy deletion criterion R2 may apply if the target namespace is something other than Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help:, or Portal:.)
  7. If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to an article that does not exist, it can be immediately deleted under speedy deletion criterion G8. You should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first and that it has not become broken through vandalism.
  8. If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects in a language other than English to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created. (Implausible typos or misnomers are candidates for speedy deletion criterion R3, if recently created.)
  9. If the target article needs to be moved to the redirect title, but the redirect has been edited before and has a history of its own, then the title needs to be freed up to make way for the move. If the move is uncontroversial, tag the redirect for G6 speedy deletion, or alternatively (with the suppressredirect user right; available to page movers and admins), perform a round-robin move. If not, take the article to Requested moves.
  10. Shortcut
    If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.
  11. If the redirect ends in "(disambiguation)" but does not target a disambiguation page or a page performing a disambiguation-like function (such as a set index of articles). Speedy deletion criterion G14 may apply.

Reasons for not deleting

[edit]
Shortcut

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

  1. They have a potentially useful page history, or an edit history that should be kept to comply with the licensing requirements for a merge (see Wikipedia:Merge and delete). On the other hand, if the redirect was created by renaming a page with that name, and the page history just mentions the renaming, and for one of the reasons above you want to delete the page, copy the page history to the Talk page of the article it redirects to. The act of renaming is useful page history, and even more so if there has been discussion on the page name.
  2. They would aid accidental linking and make the creation of duplicate articles less likely, whether by redirecting a plural to a singular, by redirecting a frequent misspelling to a correct spelling, by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term, by redirecting to a synonym, etc. In other words, redirects with no incoming links are not candidates for deletion on those grounds because they are of benefit to the browsing user. Some extra vigilance by editors will be required to minimize the occurrence of those frequent misspellings in article text because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links; consider tagging the redirect with the {{R from misspelling}} template to assist editors in monitoring these misspellings.
  3. They aid searches on certain terms. For example, users who might see the "Keystone State" mentioned somewhere but do not know what that refers to will be able to find out at the Pennsylvania (target) article.
  4. Deleting redirects runs the risk of breaking incoming or internal links. For example, redirects resulting from page moves should not normally be deleted without good reason. Links that have existed for a significant length of time, including CamelCase links (e.g. WolVes) and old subpage links, should be left alone in case there are any existing links on external pages pointing to them. Please tag these with {{R from old history}}. See also Wikipedia:Link rot § Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites.
  5. Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways. Evidence of usage can be gauged by using the wikishark or pageviews tool on the redirect to see the number of views it gets.
  6. The redirect is to a closely related word form, such as a plural form to a singular form.

Neutrality of redirects

[edit]
Shortcut

Just as article titles using non-neutral language are permitted in some circumstances, so are such redirects. Because redirects are less visible to readers, more latitude is allowed in their names, therefore perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion. In most cases, non-neutral but verifiable redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term. Non-neutral redirects may be tagged with {{R from non-neutral name}}.

Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:

  1. Articles that are created using non-neutral titles are routinely moved to a new neutral title, which leaves behind the old non-neutral title as a working redirect (e.g. ClimategateClimategate → Climatic Research Unit email controversy).
  2. Articles created as POV forks may be deleted and replaced by a redirect pointing towards the article from which the fork originated (e.g. Barack Obama Muslim rumorBarack Obama Muslim rumor → deleted and now redirected to Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories).
  3. The subject matter of articles may be represented by some sources outside Wikipedia in non-neutral terms. Such terms are generally avoided in Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. For instance the non-neutral expression "AttorneygateAttorneygate" is used to redirect to the neutrally titled 2006 dismissal of U.S. attorneys. 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]
Shortcut
STEP I.
Tag the redirect(s).

  Enter {{subst:rfd|content= at the very beginning of the redirect page you are listing for discussion and enter }} at the very end of the page.

  • Please do not mark the edit as minor (m).
  • Please include in the edit summary the phrase:
    Nominated for RfD: see [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]].
  • Save the page ("Publish changes").
  • If you are unable to edit the redirect page because of protection, this step can be omitted, and after step 2 is completed, a request to add the RFD template can be put on the redirect's talk page.
  • If the redirect you are nominating is in template namespace, consider adding |showontransclusion=1 to the RfD tag so that people using the template redirect are aware of the nomination. If it is an inline template, use |showontransclusion=tiny instead.
  • If you are nominating multiple redirects as a group, repeat all the above steps for each redirect being nominated and specify on {{rfd}} the nomination's group heading from Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion
STEP II.
List the entry on RfD.

 Click here to edit the section of RfD for today's entries.

  • Enter this text below the date heading:
{{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName|target=TargetArticle|text=The action you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for that action.}} ~~~~
  • For this template:
    • Put the redirect's name in place of RedirectName, put the target article's name in place of TargetArticle, and include a reason after text=.
    • Note that, for this step, the "target article" is the current target of the redirect (if you have a suggestion for a better target, include this in the text that you insert after text=).
  • Please use an edit summary such as:
    Nominating [[RedirectName]]
    (replacing RedirectName with the name of the redirect you are nominating).
  • To list multiple related redirects for discussion, use the following syntax. Repeat line 2 for N number of redirects:
{{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName1|target=TargetArticle1}}
{{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectName2|target=TargetArticle2}}
{{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectNameN|target=TargetArticleN|text=The actions you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for those actions.}} ~~~~
  • If the redirect has had previous RfDs, you can add {{Oldrfdlist|previous RfD without brackets|result of previous RfD}} directly after the rfd2 template.
  • If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
STEP III.
Notify users.

  It is generally considered good practice to notify the creator and main contributors of the redirect(s) that you nominate.

To find the main contributors, look in the page history of the respective redirect(s). For convenience, the template

{{subst:Rfd notice|RedirectName}} ~~~~

may be placed on the creator/main contributors' user talk page to provide notice of the discussion. Please replace RedirectName with the name of the respective creator/main contributors' redirect and use an edit summary such as:
Notice of redirect discussion at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]]

Notices about the RfD discussion may also be left on relevant talk pages.

  • Please consider using What links here to locate other redirects that may be related to the one you are nominating. After going to the redirect target page and selecting "What links here" in the toolbox on the left side of your computer screen, select both "Hide transclusions" and "Hide links" filters to display the redirects to the redirect target page.

Current list

[edit]
Shortcuts

July 10

[edit]

كييف

[edit]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

I don't think we need an Arabic redirects for Kyiv, since Arabic is not a common language in Ukraine A1Cafel (talk) 02:56, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the IP's argument?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:27, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DVDactive

[edit]

DVDactive is the name of a defunct website similar to DVD Talk or TVShowsOnDVD.com that featured news about upcoming DVD releases. (The current DVDactive.com is not the same site.) The DVD article is about DVD technology and doesn't mention the website DVDactive. Unless a suitable target for DVDactive exists, I propose that this redirect be deleted. — Paper Luigi T • C 03:53, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Latin Spanish

[edit]

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 3#Latin Portuguese closed as disambiguate. Would this be necessary for this? Web-julio (talk) 03:18, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For instance, it could refer to Old Spanish#Orthography, Glosas Emilianenses, or the liturgical aljamiado. Web-julio (talk) 03:25, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Planetballs

[edit]

Not mentioned in target 🇺🇸Thegoofhere🇺🇸 (talk) 03:03, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 9

[edit]

Hunter safety

[edit]

Safety is barely mentioned at target, perhaps best to delete to encourage article creation, in line with the consensus at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_July_2#Hunting_accident Mdewman6 (talk) 23:41, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Typhoon 0801

[edit]

Unlikely to be searched and used A1Cafel (talk) 15:28, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 23:20, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rich Ceraulo Ko

[edit]

Not mentioned in the target article. Non-notable actor with no other instances in any other article. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 23:19, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete per nom. Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:24, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paris Black Friday

[edit]

Google search results do not indicate that this is the correct target. Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:13, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 23:08, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ulfcytel's land

[edit]

"Ulfcytel" is not mentioned at the target and without a mention that's confusing. It might be better to delete to enable Search to highlight Ulfcytel. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:15, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's not inherently confusing for older names to not be mentioned, but in this case, the name is sufficiently different and sufficiently old that it might be best to mention it. Ulfcytel says "Scandinavian sources give him the byname "snilling", meaning bold, and called East Anglia "Ulfkell's Land" after him" in the lead and "The contemporary Scandinavian court poet Sigvatr Þórðarson called East Anglia "Ulfkell's Land" after Ulfcytel, and he gave him the byname snilling, meaning valiant or bold" in the body of the article. There is an inline citation at the end of the second one. Why don't you copy a bit of that information and the source over to East Anglia, and then withdraw this nomination? WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:18, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 22:58, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bottle bomb

[edit]

Google search results do not indicate that this is the correct target. Thepharoah17 (talk) 07:45, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 22:46, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fredarick Jackson

[edit]

Not mentioned in target. "Jackson" is his legal surname, but I can't find any evidence that he's used "Fredarick". Searching for "Frederick Jackson" pulls up different people (Frederick Jackson Turner, Frederick J. Jackson). Rusalkii (talk) 23:12, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak retarget per above drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 15:31, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Eureka Lott, as well as precedence of deleting redirects that are given name and/or surname misspellings. Steel1943 (talk) 16:35, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - recently created redirect which the creator thought is related to 50 Cent. If we cannot find a connection, there is no need for a retarget ATD to try and fit in as a misspelling per Eureka. Jay 💬 16:55, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 22:28, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-China sentiment

[edit]

Retarget to Anti–People's Republic of China sentiment. While the two subjects overlap, China, the country, is a more specific referent, and the People's Republic of China is the primary topic for China. We have two articles to highlight the distinction between antipathy towards the country and its government versus antipathy towards the people and the culture. At the just-closed RM, "Anti-China sentiment" was one of several suggested article titles for Anti–People's Republic of China sentiment that did have some support but was not chosen. Note that Anti-China sentiment was previously moved to Sinophobia, which was then moved to the current title Anti-Chinese sentiment in 2020. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:14, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mixy (TV programming block)

[edit]

An AFD on this title resulted in a merge into its current target indicated about an Australian children's comedy TV series which has no bearing on it whatsoever apart from a few mentions. So, I'm listing it here for a discussion, thoughts? Worth still keeping this? Intrisit (talk) 21:51, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Wagner (director)

[edit]

The article doesn't describe Wagner as "director". I created Jack Wagner (podcaster) to replace this, and suggest it is deleted. Other Jack Wagners exist. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:13, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PKMN B

[edit]

also refers to pokémon black. results gave me a mix of pokémon whose names start with b and miror b., which isn't related to this discussion, but is funny consarn (grave) (obituary) 20:41, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffroy

[edit]

unrelated French surname. Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:26, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GM (company)

[edit]

That could also be General Mills so it’s too ambiguous. Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:21, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep as is. The abbreviation "GM" is very much associated with General Motors, and not very much with General Mills. General Motors have the GM ticker on the New York Stock Exchange, the gm.com domain, the @GM account on X. The New York Times often abbreviates General Motors as GM So does the WSJ. Many more examples. JBchrch talk 21:07, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as is The company has been called "GM" for decades in mainstream press and reporting. What other organization is actually referred to as GM? Springee (talk) 21:41, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

team galaxy

[edit]

insert an edit of the "NOT WHAT I'M CALLED" meme here, as they're actually called "team galactic" consarn (grave) (obituary) 19:37, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Characters & Pokemon

[edit]

hopelessly vague about what "characters" could mean that is distinct from pokémon without outright saying it refers to humans, which is partially because it doesn't? or maybe it does, it was originally an extremely crufty and confusing table. not worth restoring consarn (grave) (obituary) 19:28, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

comment: adding to that, the title also doesn't really define what kind of characters it's listing, regardless of species and series, so it could just be a discriminate list of pretty much everyone ever (swimmer santiago fans rise up), plus a list of pokémon, so even on a fundamental level, this seems to violate wp:xy consarn (grave) (obituary) 19:47, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mexican tortilla

[edit]

Both the target and Flour tortilla originated from Mexico (though the current target was invented first) and the redirect does not seem to be an alternative name for the target. With that being said, delete or weak retarget to Tortilla. (I'm "weak" since I do not see this phrase being a common search term for Tortilla either, given the reader can read these articles to understand their origins; it's almost like saying "Philadelphia Philly cheesesteak sandwich", unnecessary word fluff and/or redundancy.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:20, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Retarget to Tortilla. It doesn't seem harmful or obviously redundant. Unlike Philly cheesesteak sandwiches, only people who already know about tortillas would clearly know they originated in Mexico, and the word has an entirely different meaning in Spain. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:09, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pascal Robinson-Foster

[edit]

Name of lead singer, not currently included in the article until consensus is reached on Talk:Bob Vylan about whether WP:BLPNAME and WP:BLPPRIVACY apply. Taffer😊💬(she/they) 17:18, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Horsemen of the Apocalypse (disambiguation)

[edit]

Since the target is a disambiguation page and "Horsemen of the Apocalypse" ≠ "Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse", this redirect is a WP:PTM for its target. In addition, the redirect "Horsemen of the ApocalypseHorsemen of the Apocalypse" seems to be the only title match for the nominated redirect, but it's a redirect towards Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse, the de facto primary topic of the nominated redirect's target page. The only other potential title match is Horseman of Apocalypse, but that can be resolved with a hatnote on Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. So ... delete. Steel1943 (talk) 16:04, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

EMS –(pharmaceuticals)

[edit]

Not sure if this is undoubtedly a WP:X3 candidate, but either way, the dash immediately followed by the parentheses makes this a highly unlikely search term. Steel1943 (talk) 14:49, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SWEET JAMAICA (2CD SET)

[edit]

As a redirect, the search term is highly unlikely due to the odd disambiguation and the all caps. Steel1943 (talk) 14:43, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Goran and Zoran Damjanović

[edit]

No idea why these redirect there, the original creator didn't leave any hints. Joy (talk) 14:27, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaTek Camera Application

[edit]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Nothing to do with cameras is mentioned on the target page. Rusalkii (talk) 05:03, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:25, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

N-(2-Hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide, N-(2-Hydroxypropyl) methacrylamide, HPMA, HPMA polymer, HPMA copolymer, polyHPMA, poly(HPMA), PHPMA, pHPMA, poly(N-(2-hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide)

[edit]

Not sure how likely of a search term this redirect is, considering it includes what seems to be almost 10 alternative names for the target all in one redirect instead of having them all listed individually as separate redirects. Steel1943 (talk) 14:22, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the stats link since the title broke the {{Rfd2}} template somehow. Steel1943 (talk) 14:26, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iran–United States war

[edit]

Retarget to Iran–United States relations as ambiguous. It could refer to Operation Praying Mantis, 1953 Iranian coup d'état, or Iran hostage crisis. Also, one of them is misspelled/has a typo. LIrala (talk) 18:41, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Untied Sates" manages to have two typos in the first two words, delete this one as implausible. Weak keep for the others as this is (as far as I know) the largest direct armed confrontation between the two nations, although recentism might come into play in my assessment and I wouldn't be strongly against retargeting them to the more general article. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:41, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Damn I put a type in one of those, my bad. Delete that and the other with spelling error. As for the other two, I think disambiguation could be useful here based on other examples, it's not quite accurate for relations, nor ideal for current target. CNC (talk) 21:07, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Untied shoelaces and Satay lest this ends up as some recurring Trout on Wikipedia. Borgenland (talk) 07:14, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the two with correct spelling Iran–United States war and Iran-United States war but delete the other two. Lova Falk (talk) 10:22, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete we don’t call Afghanistan war the Afghan-United Sates war, same with the Korean, Iraq, Vietnam. It’s about the region and where the conflict is fought. Doremon764 (talk) 01:30, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nomination. Achmad Rachmani (talk) 07:45, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is United States strikes on Iranian nuclear sites now. LIrala (talk) 06:54, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The two misspelled redirects have deleted. How about the remaining two now with United States strikes on Iranian nuclear sites to consider?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:39, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
retarget 1 and 3, delete 2 and 4. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 07:06, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
2 and 4 were already deleted. 1isall (talk/contribs) 14:18, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the creator and the current and proposed target pages.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:54, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 1 and 3 as well. The redirection to Iran–United States relations would be confusing per WP:RFD#DELETE#2—I expect that no editor linking Iran–United States war would be happy to be linking to Iran–United States relations, and no one clicking Iran–United States war would be happy being redirected to Iran–United States relations. I also oppose a disambiguation page: to the best of my knowledge, none of the possible pages that could be mentioned on such a disamb amount to an actual war, so I don't think it would be helpful. JBchrch talk 15:29, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Teucer (statue

[edit]

Unlikely redirect due to the missing parenthesis. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:14, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ choose only one... 06:11, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Star Wars (radio series

[edit]

Unlikely redirect due to the missing parenthesis. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:09, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ choose only one... 06:10, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

K-pop (Travis Scott, Bad Bunny, and the Weeknd song

[edit]

Unlikely redirect due to the missing parenthesis. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:07, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ choose only one... 06:10, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dagger (mark

[edit]

Missing closing parenthesis makes this an unlikely redirect and sets a false expectation that we have similar redirects. Our software recommends the correct title anyway when typing everything but the last parenthesis. Utopes (talk / cont) 01:05, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ choose only one... 06:10, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

South Korean invasion of Vietnam

[edit]

Factually incorrect redirect. Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:23, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom grapesurgeon (seefooddiet) (talk) 15:39, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 8

[edit]

Blue licorice

[edit]

Vernacular name not mentioned at the target. There's also literal blue liquorice, but I was actually looking for the ice cream flavour. The only mention of "blue licorice" of any type is a Simpsons episode, which is not a good target. Cremastra (talk) 21:04, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I created the lowercase one; I was trying to create redirects conforming to Wikipedia's preferred capitalization form when corresponding redirects with other capitalizations already existed. I think 'Blue Licorice' is a cultivar; there are plenty of Google results for nurseries selling seeds when I search for "blue licorice"+Agastache, but some of them say the species is Agastache foeniculum rather than A. rugosum. Delete as cultivars do not have the presumption of notability that species do. Plantdrew (talk) 21:48, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clavin (supplement)

[edit]

No longer mentioned at target. Cremastra (talk) 22:14, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 19:26, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Myke

[edit]

The name Myke dosn't only refer to "Myke Towers" and I think it should be replaced with a name list. Best wishes, Macaw*! 19:04, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then be WP:BOLD and do it. Thepharoah17 (talk) 19:14, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will do that tomorrow. Sorry I'm not logged in. My email and wikipedia have locked me out from being on a public wifi location. 70.97.238.124 (talk) 00:46, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli strikes on Iran

[edit]

dabify or move both target pages here, including June 2025 Israeli strikes on Iran or June 2025 Iranian strikes on Israel, accordingly. Ninixed (talk) 22:17, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:23, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 18:33, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The only articles we have on Israeli strikes on Iran are listed at the 2024 Israeli strikes on Iran DAB page. Ditto for the Iranian strikes. What the nom *seems* to be suggesting is that we move those two DAB pages to these titles; Adumbrativus seems to endorse this action. If this is what is being suggested, I don't see why we're at RfD. WP:RM would appear to be the correct venue to suggest such an action. We also don't really need a DAB draft I think, so I'll mark the template as "done" to remove it from the category. Cremastra (talk) 21:12, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zitti e buoni (song)

[edit]

While unnecessary disambiguation redirects are common, these were created just for the sole purpose of being an unnecessary disambiguator. I don't believe they serve any real purpose per WP:RFD#DELETE, since there is no real page history to protect and there are no links to these redirects. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 16:50, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan in the Eurovision Song Contest

[edit]

Bundle nomination for a bunch of redirects created for various countries/territories and "in the Eurovision Song Contest". In all cases it links to a section within a list article where said countries are listed in a table of broadcasts by non-participating countries. None of these countries are eligible to compete in the Eurovision Song Contest and all are located outside of the European Broadcasting Area (a key prerequisite to participation). There is no real use to continuing to host these redirects, as they do not constitute a useful search term given the lack of any participation history of the contest within these countries, there is no sizeable information on these countries at the target article bar brief mentions of possible previous broadcasts, and in the grand scheme of things at the present moment it makes no sense to consider that any of these countries could participate in a future edition of the contest. Requesting deletion of all redirects. Linked to related discussion Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 1#India in the Eurovision Song Contest Sims2aholic8 (talk) 16:38, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. These are extremely unlikely search terms for countries that cannot actually do what their descriptive titles say. It appears that many of these were created just because the show played on tv a handful of times in the respective countries. Grk1011 (talk) 23:54, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Starmer's leadership

[edit]

This would seem to want to target an article or section of Starmer's leadership of the Labour party, not just as leader of the Opposition. Cremastra (talk) 15:56, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2005 Brussels NATO summit

[edit]

Per Wikipedia:RETURNTORED, the only article namespace incoming link is also the target Dajasj (talk) 21:12, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:26, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Second Saudi–Yemeni War

[edit]

no source calls it that 𐩣𐩫𐩧𐩨 Abo Yemen (𓃵) 08:08, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per above. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 12:48, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • This redirect was left over from a page move back in 2020. It's possible that it would break links on other websites if we delete the redirect. (t · c) buidhe 12:51, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battles involving the Jat people

[edit]

Deleted here Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of battles involving Jats (a WP:CASTE milhist cruft listicle). This target then adduced has nothing to do with the present article which is a modern regiment of the Indian Army. Gotitbro (talk) 07:08, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Westlake, Washington

[edit]

No mention in article Isla🏳️‍⚧ 00:27, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  1. ^ Phillips, James W. (1971). Washington State Place Names. Seattle: University of Washington Press. p. 157.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2025 June 28 following a previous closure of "retarget to Westlake, Seattle".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:32, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP as first choice. It is the only location actually called "Westlake, Washington" and is the only usage currently in article space. Second choice is retarget to Westlake#United States but absolutely not to the neighborhood in Seattle, which isn't even the best-known "Westlake" in Seattle!. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:03, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Westlake, Seattle which is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for places called Westlake in the state. Westlake, Washington seems like a reasonable search term for the neighborhood. Add a hatnote link to Moses Lake to assist readers looking for the town annexed by Moses Lake. Frank Anchor 14:34, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Changed to keep per the discussion cited below, which I was unaware (thank you Myceteaet for bringing this to my attention). A hatnote should be added for the neighborhood in Seattle as Westlake, Washington is a reasonable search term for that as well. Frank Anchor 03:24, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not so sure of this. I've started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Seattle#Is Westlake, Seattle the primary topic for "Westlake, Seattle"? regarding this and whether the neighborhood is even the primary topic for Westlake, Seattle. This may require further disambiguation. There are several locations in Seattle named "Westlake", mostly located downtown and not in the neighborhood that shares the name. The prior format for the Washington entries at Westlake#United States was incomplete and the Seattle entries, in particular, were misleading. I have edited the DAB page to correct this. The former town that has been annexed by Moses Lake, Washington is the only place that would normally be called Westlake, Washington—the form Neighborhood, State is unheard of—and that is the only referent used currently in article space. Folks reading about municipalities and unincorporated communities in Washington would be astonished to land at an article about a neighborhood in the state's largest city. It should either be kept or retargeted to the DAB. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:49, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as a redirect to Moses Lake, Washington. The only incorporated place in Washington is now part of Moses Lake. A person searching for the Seattle neighborhood would more likely omit the state than the city, and it is not the primary use in historical references (which usually point to the incorporated place by default). SounderBruce 17:13, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget to Westlake#United States. The locations in Seattle would be more well-known over an obscure former municipality. That said, Westlake in Seattle may have various meanings depending on context. As they're all listed at the disambiguation, that'd be the most helpful target for searchers of any Westlakes in Washington. -- Tavix (talk) 03:47, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

These ideally should have the same target but which one is better, I can’t decide. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:54, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:R semi-protected

[edit]

Delete, as the target page is not supposed to be called directly, either {{redirect category shell}} or {{r protected}} should be used. Retargeting to {{r protected}} doesn't make sense either as that rcat automatically determines the protection level, and this implies otherwise. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 19:51, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:45, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and fix the calls. The titles are not interchangeable and thus instead the redirects using this template should be fixed rather than this template redirect retargeted. Aasim (話す（はなす）) 02:57, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 03:50, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1930 BD

[edit]

This is a retroactive provisional designation, but it's not the correct one; MPC and JPL both state 1930 BM is Pluto's provisional designation. -insert valid name here- (talk) 02:32, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Child feeding

[edit]

No mentions of "feeding" in the target article. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:CD12:8E54:A5EE:3740 (talk) 00:02, 8 July 2025 (UTC) 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:CD12:8E54:A5EE:3740 (talk) 00:02, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per above. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 14:14, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 7

[edit]

Avant Prarie, Texas

[edit]

Its misspelled. Even if spelled correctly, it probably wouldn’t receive views. Roast (talk) 23:38, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator comment: “any views” is hyperbolic, but it still gets next to nothing (2 in past 90 days). Roast (talk) 23:40, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ChartDisplay

[edit]

I created this as a temporary placeholder before Template:Chart was deleted. Now that that is in use, this should be removed as it is rather clunky and non-standard across wikis (for example the German wikipedia also has de:Template:Chart, but not de:Template:ChartDisplay). GalStar (talk) (contribs) 21:47, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Please see related discussion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 June 7#Template:Chart. Steel1943 (talk) 22:02, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Common tiger beetle (2)" & "Common tiger beetle"

[edit]

It is unclear what "(2)" refers to regarding the target article's subject. However, Common tiger beetle is a redirect towards a different target: Neocicindela tuberculata. Steel1943 (talk) 21:38, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator comment: This nomination originally listed only Common tiger beetle (2) listed, then I added Common tiger beetle afterwards. For what it's worth, the targets of both redirects seems to be a valid target for Common tiger beetle, and I'm not sure which is better. Should a disambiguation page be created? Either way, obviously delete Common tiger beetle (2) as a unclear and unlikely search term. Steel1943 (talk) 21:45, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe '(2)' was a cute way of identifying this as the/another common tiger beetle? --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:02, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I posted notices at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Insects, which appears pretty active, and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Beetles. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:54, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Disambiguate the base term, Delete "(2)" -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 03:26, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete "Common tiger beetle (2)", obviously. The rest doesn't need a !vote here.--Srleffler (talk) 03:52, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • DAB Common tiger beetle and delete (2). --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:58, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Common tiger beetle (2), but no need for a DAB. Point Common tiger beetle → Cicindela instead. Someone can correct me if they do find a decent source, but as far as I could find there aren't any reliable sources saying Neocicindela tuberculata is called the common tiger beetle. It appears to be a WP:CIRCULAR reference in the websites that do use it, which mirror Wikipedia. This has been present in the article unsourced since its start in 2007. Common tiger beetle is not used extensively in sources overall, but since redirects are cheap and there is at least a source, Cincindela is an ok target for now. KoA (talk) 01:14, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The common names for N. tuberculata are listed in the single source that was provided when the article was created: [7]. Plantdrew (talk) 14:56, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah, that makes things a bit more complicated then. When I tried searching for those common names, I couldn't really find other significant sources using those names for that species. If anything, it looks like those names like pennydoctor, etc. are generic for other tiger beetles, but that's no super clear either. I'm kind of iffy on relying on one source in this kind of situation though, so maybe delete both common tiger beetle redirects without wider usage?
    It also looks like the Neocicindela is a subgenus of Cicindela, so being the first tiger beetle described in New Zealand could have meant it was called a type of common tiger beetle in that context rather than the common tiger beetle (same for other common names listed in the source you mention). That's just the sense I get from context though, so hard to use as concrete justification. With the nomenclature though, it still would make more sense to land people at Cicindela first, and if there's support for saying it's definitely a common name used for the species itself and not others, then maybe a hatnote or natural DAB in the Cicindela article linking to the species article? KoA (talk) 17:43, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GRiDi

[edit]

This GRiDi clade was proposed as a sub-clade of CRuMs in a preprint article, but it's not in the final published article. So this redirect should be deleted. Jako96 (talk) 20:13, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Anyone reading such preprints will have no trouble finding CRuMs. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:58, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Arrowroot biscuit

[edit]

there is also an australian biscuit called a "milk arrowroot biscuit" that, based off my research, looks to be different from uraro User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 11:33, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 19:47, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the current and suggested targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:45, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is also a Canadian arrowroot biscuit, made by Christie (Nabisco). Definitely not the same as either the Filipino cookies or the Australian ones, although I suspect the Canadian and Australian ones share a common British heritage. I'm shocked that we don't have an article on them.--Srleffler (talk) 00:04, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • As noted by Srleffler, Uraro is a Filipino traditional cookie and not all Arrowroot biscuits are Uraro - so, I feel it is misleading given that other countries also have "commercial" arrowroot biscuits - might make sense to keep just Arrowroot biscuits (currently a redirect to Arrowroot) and develop it as article to include details such as the ones Srleffler mentioned and delete Arrowroot biscuit. Asteramellus (talk) 01:31, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Psnapps

[edit]

I could not find the redirect term at the target list. I initially thought it is the name of a PlayStation application, but it could be a short form for "PlayStation applications". I could not find anything in external searches. "PSN apps" may be plausible, but I don't understand why this redirect would be created without the space. If this is a WP:NEOLOGISM, delete. Jay 💬 15:35, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seating Arraignment

[edit]

No mention in target article - delete? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:26, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of Judge John Hodgman episodes (2010–2014); its an episode memtioned on that article. Still swayable for deletion, because this is miniscule for inclusion. Roast (talk) 03:53, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:12, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

14 March 2004 Mumbai Bombing

[edit]

Took place a whole year ago in 2003, patently false rd. Gotitbro (talk) 12:49, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ri Hak

[edit]

Ri Hak is not mentioned on the target page, and I cannot find any reference to a club she may be playing for now. I also cannot find sufficient information in reliable sources to begin an article. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 20:50, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the pre-BLAR page content?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:38, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete per above. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 13:35, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Americans

[edit]

Incorrect; even Google search results don’t show anything related to the target. Was originally an original research neologism dab. Thepharoah17 (talk) 08:06, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak retarget to East Coast of the United States#Culture perhaps? Mr slav999 (talk) 16:06, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate or delete — with Mr slav999 suggesting a retarget, it shows the term is ambiguous. It'd be best to disambiguate—Asian Americans, Middle Eastern Americans, slav's retarget. If it won't be disambiguated, then we should delete to stop ambiguity from viewers. Roast (talk) 23:45, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

R-Haine

[edit]

Nickname for the party [8] not mentioned or alluded to in target; would be confusing to readers. Rusalkii (talk) 00:07, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Weak keep It means "right hate" in French and there is an image on the commons with the phrase. Thepharoah17 (talk) 08:25, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a pun on the party's initials "RN", with "Haine" ("hate" in French) being pronounced identically to the letter N. Back when the party was the National Front the equivalent nickname was "F-Haine" (which we also have as a redirect here in Wikipedia). GCarty (talk) 09:08, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    IF someone sould add a criticism of, or opposition to section, and can then add that Commons photo, and the nickname to the article, that would be better -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 21:06, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete. I googled R-Haine and nothing on the first page referred to the party; there were more hits for William R. Haine than anything else but overall it was mixed. The second page did return several results in French that used this. Anyone encountering this in French is unlikely to turn to enwiki for an explanation and English users who know it likely know National Rally. Only 'weak' because it is more plausibly used for NR than someone named Rhaine or William R. Haine. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:56, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep It is a nickname that is obvious to someone understanding French, considering the pun on "N". It would be a creative phonetic spelling as political criticism. Someone might want to add the Commons photo to the article. -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 21:06, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 6

[edit]

K2 Co., Ltd.

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

Primordial God

[edit]

This is a possible translation of the title, but it's a very general term and usage seems to be primarily (though not exclusively) referring to the Greek primordial deities. Rusalkii (talk) 19:38, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate - Didn't even know about Primordial God isn't just Genshin Impact. Ahri Boy (talk) 00:25, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:REDYES for now. It seems that this term transcends cultures and not just exclusive to Greeks and gacha games. Maybe an editor that is knowledgeable with mythologies can create it in the future. --Lenticel (talk) 00:05, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ponni Nadhi

[edit]

Ponni is an alternate name for the river, mentioned in the article, and "Nadhi" just means river. However, all hits up until I got tired of clicking "next" appear to refer to a song by this title, which we cover at Ponniyin Selvan: I (soundtrack). However, I can see the argument that the river is the primary topic due to long-term significance, so bringing this here. My preference would be to target the song with a hatnote to the river. Rusalkii (talk) 19:11, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep, as mentioned, the river is the primary topic since in Tamil the Kaveri is known as Ponni. While ponni nadhi may not bring up hits for the river (and only for the song), it seems that "Ponni river" does, and the song is called ponni nadhi (aka ponni river) because it's referring to the river. Eucalyptusmint (talk) 01:44, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep seems that the river is the primary topic. I've had the song's lyrics translated and it seems to talk about the river itself (and the lovely ladies associated with said river?) --Lenticel (talk) 02:29, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Men & Motors / ITV5

[edit]

This seems to be the remnant of a reverted page move in 2008 - Men & Motors has never had any association with the name "ITV5" (a name which is also the subject of a previous deletion). (This feels like it could be WP:G6 to me really, but not 100% certain, so listing here) Andreworkney (talk) 18:51, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cryptid

[edit]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Retarget both to Cryptozoology. Readers expect to find a full-fledged article rather than a list when they enter a search term or click a link on WP. There is not enough distinct content to sustain a separate article for Cryptid, and Cryptozoology is therefore the main article on this topic. Both are plausible search terms and readers would be better served by landing at the article that gives a full treatment of the topic. The article is better sourced and more stable than the list, which is subject to frequent additions and removals of disputed content. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:27, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

History: This was previously rejected (2018) and there is additional discussion at Talk:Cryptid about the merger history. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:28, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • still Keep - these articles were merged with a redirect so they are directly related in their histories. That is why it was a near unanimous keep when last discussed. Readers are looking for a pseudo animal or list of animals, not the principles behind the research. I'm not sure why you would say that. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:51, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Pinging those in that discussion who are not regulars here. @Paleface Jack:, @Thryduulf:, @Slatersteven:, @Tronvillain:, @Rhododendrites:. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:59, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I appreciate the pings—more participation is better!—but just noting for the record here that I did place notifications on the Talk pages of Slatersteven, Tronvillain, Rhododendrites and several other individual editors based on their history of recent/frequent edits, as well as Talk:List of cryptids, Talk:Cryptozoology, and WP:FTN. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:56, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Thryduulf: You are not a regular here? Steel1943 (talk) 01:19, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, I should have made clear a regular in cryptozoology discussions where this might be noticed. Obviously Thryduulf is more a premium than a regular. ;-) Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:02, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fyunck(click): I'm a "regular in cryptozoology discussions"? Steel1943 (talk) 04:12, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Did I miss you in the previous listed discussion? If so sorry. In checking, yep I missed you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:04, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Readers are looking for a pseudo animal or list of animals, not the principles behind the research. I'm not sure why you would say that. I'll accept the will of the community here, but readers generally expect a more full treatment and not a list with dubious entries. When there's an article for a topic that substantially overlaps with a common search term, we to often redirect there. There has been a lot of discussion about the quality of the list relative to Cryptozoology and the list continues to have problems so I thought the question was ripe for revisiting. That said, I do agree that it's quite easy to find Cryptozoology from the list so a 'keep' result does little harm even though I find it less than ideal. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:53, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I would disagree. There is a big difference between the object "cryptid" or "cryptids" and the pseudoscience of cryptozoology. That's like comparing bee's to Melittology which is the study of bees. Are we going to dump the bee article on the same principles? Do we dump the mollusk article and merge it into malacology? I think this proposed change is a disservice and not helpful to our readers. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:12, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the ping. Probably keep cryptids --> list, and redirect cryptid --> cryptozoology, just based on what people are likely searching for. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:02, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Of the two possible targets, the introduction to the list has more directly relevant information about cryptid(s) - what people using this search term are most likely looking for - than does the introduction to the Cryptozoology article, which rightly focuses on the field of study (the article subject). Thryduulf (talk) 21:46, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Added the link to previous RfD via the {{Old RfD list}} template, though the previous discussion from 2018 was already mentioned and linked in the discussion. (For what it's worth, I may have participated in the previous discussion, but I have no opinion in this one.) Steel1943 (talk) 01:17, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I’m still learning the ropes here. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 13:49, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That changed, I have a stance now. Steel1943 (talk) 17:38, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ITV6

[edit]

Implausible, channel never had this name and it's not mentioned in the target article. Andreworkney (talk) 15:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Horsemen of the Apocalypse (album)

[edit]

Neither this list nor Metallica discography indicate there was an album with this title. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:05, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bomberos

[edit]

No WP:FORRED. Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:24, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Refine the second per Ninixed. Don't refine the first per Thryduulf. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:02, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Refine the second to Geography of firefighting#Chile. Neutral on the first. Ninixed (talk) 22:33, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Retarget both to Geography of firefighting#Chile, where it's mentioned, per Ninixed. 9ninety (talk) 06:49, 15 June 2025 (UTC) self striking, see new comment below 9ninety (talk) 13:58, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Refine the second per Ninixed. Don't refine the first - per that page "Bomberos is the name given to firefighters in most Spanish-speaking countries" so pointing to a Chile-specific section would be inappropriate. Thryduulf (talk) 02:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete the first and refine the second. Indeed, bombero simply means 'firefighter' in Spanish. Since firefighters have no special relevance to Spanish-speaking countries (vs. every where else), and since they have no special relevance to Chile (vs. every other Spanish-speaking country), neither the current redirect nor the refinement is appropriate for bomberos.--MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:31, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both. I was under the impression that the term bombero(s) was Chilean, but as Myceteae points out, it is simply Spanish for firefighter. I don't think it makes sense to delete Bomberos and keep Bomberos (Chilean firefighters), which is disambiguating from the former. I don't see any meaningful links to the latter either, so it's most likely not a useful redirect. 9ninety (talk) 13:58, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:02, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is consensus for Bomberos but not for Bomberos (Chilean firefighters) which seems to be dependent on the former. Notified of this discussion at the suggested target. Also, Bomberos (Chilean firefighters) was merged to Firefighting worldwide in 2007, and I have tagged it as an {{R from merge}}.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree with Pppery that the disambiguated redirect is dependent on the plain one existing. It is inappropriate for an article (or dab page) to be located at a disambiguated title when the base title doesn't exist or is a redirect to it, but that does not imply that a redirect at a disambiguated title requires the base title to be a blue link, nor can I think of a good reason why it should imply that. Thryduulf (talk) 10:00, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both. I'm neutral on Pppery's general statement but I agree with 9ninety that it doesn't make much sense in this case. Bomberos (Chilean firefighters) is an implausible string and anyone who might type this seemingly has the tools to find the information they seek.--MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:04, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete both per WP:FORRED. Bombero is just the Spanish word for firefighter. -- LWG talk 19:33, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scraface

[edit]

Unlikely typo to dab page. Roast (talk) 03:51, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:49, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As noted by the IP editor and Jruderman, single-letter swaps are a very common type of typo, and very easy to do while typing just a little too fast. I don't think this creates ambiguity enough with Sacrifice to point there instead; it's sufficiently closer to Scarface to point us there. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 14:28, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simbolul R4BIA

[edit]

Useless redirect, not mentioned anywhere in the target and was originally a page written in Romanian. Creator also had a similar page deleted. Should have been WP:G1 deleted. Thepharoah17 (talk) 08:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NaMo

[edit]

Re-target to Narendra Modi, most readers typing "NaMo" would be looking for Modi, as in the case of BoJo for Boris Johnson. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 06:12, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the current and proposed targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:21, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per nom - here's a source using that capitalisation to refer to Modi: [10] BugGhost 🦗👻 22:48, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per nom and Bugghost's findings. --Lenticel (talk) 01:18, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NH2CH(CH2CH2SCH3)COOH

[edit]

This is a very awkward notation for an amino acid. It is not mentioned at the target page or the related data page, despite both containing a variety of notations and identifiers. A web search for this ter, doesn't give me any results for the right molecule, instead giving me hits for cysteine and other amino acids. I do not think this is a plausible search term. Aside from the fact that it doesn't seem to be used anywhere else, anyone who knows enough organic chemistry to type out this abomination wouldn't, and probably has the 20 proteinogenic amino acids memorized anyways. Toadspike [Talk] 07:03, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AGONSA

[edit]

Mnemonics for a method of solving math problems, not mentioned in the target article or anywhere else onwiki. May be specific to the Philippines but a quick google search does not confirm this. Rusalkii (talk) 06:45, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Muƹawiya

[edit]

I cannot find this usage anywhere else on the internet, though it's possible google is failing me due to the weird character. I don't believe ƹ and ' are reasonably interchangeable in this manner, though I am not a linguist and will gladly be corrected by someone who knows this area better than me. Rusalkii (talk) 04:03, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment the article on ƹ implies that it was most commonly used in the 1940s-1980s, a period of time underrepresented on the internet so a lack of uses known to Google is not definitive. The Arabic letter (Ayin#Arabic ʿayn) it is/was used to transcribe does appear in the Arabic name for the target given in the infobox ("معاوية"), so it is not impossible this is an old transliteration - however I am not an Arabic speaker or familiar with the target topic area at all, so I'm not really qualified to speak to its plausibility. I'll see if I can find an appropriate WikiProject to alert to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 10:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment/Weak Keep I'm not an expert on Arabic so IDK if this usage is likely to ever get searched for, but from from a linguistic perspective ƹ and ' do seem to both represent the same sound, a voiced pharyngeal fricative. Both are used to transliterate the Arabic ع‎. So the redirect seems plausible. Redirects are cheap, but do we normally redirect phonetic transcriptions to their articles? -- LWG talk 15:36, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

271,000

[edit]

Highly unlikely that this number is only relevent to this topic. Cactus🌵 spiky ouch 03:28, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom. There are lots of instances of this number in lots of contexts on en.wp (people, viewers, subscribers, birds, dollars, euros, pounds (currency and weight), litres, imperial gallons, acres, square metres, square feet, units sold, Minnesota households, tons, miles, square miles, years ago, etc). On the first five pages of internal search results, only this redirect was related to Holocaust denial. Googling, does find Holocaust denial as the top result, but other results on the first two pages pages are product numbers, charity numbers, minor planets, homeless people, Japanese Yen, Ukrainian refugees, and what might be a phone number. Someone looking for information about this number in the context of holocaust denial will add some context to their search term in the same way that someone searching for this number in other contexts will. Thryduulf (talk) 22:01, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete target article doesn't even say anything about this number. -- LWG talk 00:37, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete According to my research, this is a specific claim that the 271,301 death toll counted by the International Committee of the Red Cross is a full count of Holocaust deaths.[1] But by itself, it is just a number. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:57, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 13:37, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ "Red Cross documents do not undermine official Holocaust death toll – Full Fact". fullfact.org. 28 February 2019. Retrieved 7 July 2025.

July 5

[edit]

Ingénieur

[edit]

Per WP:FORRED, it’s not valid. Thepharoah17 (talk) 19:42, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:02, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment following up on @65.93.183.249's comment, I have drafted a dab page for Ingénieur, although I'm not entirely sure if it meets the criteria for a dab page. Any thoughts? 9ninety (talk) 07:27, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've also added an entry about the related term Ingenieur in German (edit: and Dutch) 9ninety (talk) 07:42, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Further comment: If my dab proposal is accepted, Ingenieur (which currently redirects to Engineer's degree#Netherlands) can also be retargeted to the new dab, as I've added four entries related to it. 9ninety (talk) 10:16, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the proposed dab?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 23:40, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, don't DAB. French is spoken in dozens of countries and localities (for example) and if we add German and Dutch, the list only grows longer. It seems wrong to highlight only a few countries on the DAB page and compiling a more complete list of usage in every country and national subdivision is not particularly encyclopedic. Better to send readers to Engineer where they can find a comprehensive treatment of the topic. Content on other countries can be added to Engineer as appropriate. Since this is used as a title in many places, it's plausible readers would encounter this in English-language sources and want to look it up but we shouldn't assume usage is restricted to the locations we have listed at the draft DAB. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:34, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the dab is fine (although I might be biased as its creator), since it lists all uses of the term that are discussed on Wikipedia, and also highlights engineer as the primary meaning. It therefore conveniently presents all relevant coverage of the title on Wikipedia. The engineer article only covers the term's usage in France, so it isn't exactly a comprehensive treatment. But I'm fine with keeping if we expand coverage (perhaps the § Definition by country section could be split into a comprehensive article titled Geography of engineering) and also retarget Ingenieur. 9ninety (talk) 15:21, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I've changed my view after reading this and looking more carefully at usage in articles. The redirect is used in five articles. In 3 instances it is used in a piped link displayed as the abbreviation ir. or Ir., and it doesn't appear these individuals received their degrees nor worked in any of the countries listed at the DAB currently (I only skimmed). At Sapper#Imperial Japanese Army (IJA) it describes how the French system was introduced into Japan and at UniverSud Paris it describes the specific degree granted by this French university. I do think the DAB page content should be expanded and could possibly be more of an article than a DAB but I support making the change now. I would also retarget IngenieurIngenieur to the new DAB since this is used in many countries and the unaccented form could also be considered a variant of the French, especially for English speakers; and would retarget Ir.Ir. (with period) to the new DAB page. Currently Ir. points to the DAB page IR but we should treat the form with the period like Dr., Mr., etc. Keep Ingenieur listed at IR#Other uses but the description there can be updated and it will now point to the new DAB page (this is a suggestion and not something I'm asking you or anyone to do before a decision is made here). Thanks for working on this! --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:47, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Or perhaps just call the DAB page Ingenieur and make the accented form a redirect? Sorry to complicate this! --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:57, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, I did consider that while making the draft, and it probably makes more sense. I've tried to rework it a bit and sort entries by language, but it got a bit messy. Was the earlier version better? (for reference: link to old version) 9ninety (talk) 10:56, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I prefer the updated version and support publishing and retargeting as-is. It's a big improvement over the current redirect situation! --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:20, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Your draft disambiguation page still needs work. It's has far too many links, links to the same page more than once, and has multiple links per entry. It also has entries that don't link to any relevant material. Please review MOS:DAB before proceeding. - Eureka Lott 16:43, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I've removed most of the excess links per WP:DABONE. Is linking to the same page more than once (different sections) explicitly discouraged? 9ninety (talk) 18:07, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't know about explicit guidance for DABs but I think we can extrapolate from general practice and guidance (e.g., MOS:LINK) that repeat linking of, for example, engineer, is best avoided here. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:01, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The abbreviation used in Canada is "Ing." not "Ir." -- that would not be appropriate to redirect to "IR", since "Ing." appears in English in Canada. -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 03:35, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Would you support redirecting Ing. to the DAB and mentioning this there, if this moves forward? --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:17, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It should keep pointing to the disambiguation page Ing, since there is an entry there for engineer's degree, which is different from the professional practice protected title. We need to add the profession practice protected title abbreviation to the disambiguation page at Ing for the use of "Ing." in Canada. The protected title being either Ir. or Ing. in abbreviation would thus appear on both disambiguation pages. -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 20:54, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Astro Premier League 2

[edit]

Astro Premier League is mentioned, but not Astro Premier League 2. Rusalkii (talk) 22:28, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic State provinces

[edit]

I think these are translations of sub-organizations? Neither is mentioned in the target. I am not confident these shouldn't redirect here, but they have been languishing in the back of the queue for months so nominating these to get wider community input. Rusalkii (talk) 22:26, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Big Challenges

[edit]

Not mentioned in target or anywhere else onwiki. Rusalkii (talk) 21:23, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2.725

[edit]

"The CMB has a thermal black body spectrum at a temperature of 2.72548±0.00057 K", but I'm not convinced this enough to redirect from a number to the article. Under which circumstances would this be used? A search for the number gives primarily random bits of arithmetic, product numbers and dimensions, case law, and similar. Rusalkii (talk) 21:11, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is no purpose to this redirect. Johnjbarton (talk) 00:23, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's just a number. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 05:52, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete, no one would type the temperature just to find the article. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 13:39, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Baijiahao

[edit]

Baidu's content creation platform. Not mentioned in target or anywhere onwiki except in citations. May merit a mention, but is confusing as-is. Rusalkii (talk) 21:08, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chlodwig

[edit]

I'm open to keeping the status quo, redirecting to Clovis (given name), or other alternatives. I was at Luigi, followed the link to Chlodwig and was "astonished" to read the opening line of Louis (given name) which contains the very similar name Chlodowig which is a piped link to Clovis (given name), and wondered why these don't point to the same place. Louis may, indeed, be the better target but it's not obvious to me. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:56, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, or Retarget to Chlodwig, Prince of Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst. There is absolutely no reason to have redirects created from every ancient form of every given name; that's just absurd. That's why we have the "Search" function (in addition to the "Go" function) in the search field, to locate all instances of the term, not just the one Neelix happened to turn his obsessive and nonsensical brain to. Softlavender (talk) 22:06, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    My hesitation is that it is used in two articles where it is linked with reference to the name, and none in reference to this or any other individual named Chlodwig. A Google search turns up a variety of references, including to the fellow you linked and to Clovis I aka, apparently, Chlodwig. I take your point about not creating redirects for every variant of a name that has ever been attested, but where a redirect is used in article space in this way, I'm inclined to keep or redirect to a more appropriate given name, but not retarget to a specific individual that no editor has linked mononymously this way. A DAB page would be better than this. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:50, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notified Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anthroponymy. Note that I previously notified Talk:Louis (given name), Talk:Luigi, Talk:Lewis (given name), Talk:Lewis (given name) and several editors who have contributed to Chlodwig. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:54, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ike Lek (talk) 16:51, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep or redirect to Clovis I, as the two most likely targets. A number of Frankish royal names have no standardized spelling, but are found in numerous forms, and this is one of them. It needs to redirect either to Louis or possibly to Clovis, as they are the same name. Presumably the link at Louis goes to "Clovis (given name)" because otherwise it would be a recursive link and uninformative; the same word can certainly link to different places depending on context, and in that case anyone clicking on it would be looking for historical information. Without that distinction, "Louis" makes as much sense—perhaps more, because the redirect is a spelling variation. Strongly oppose redirecting to "Chlodwig, Prince of Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst", as an extremely improbable search target for the bare name. Most English speakers will be familiar with the name "Louis", many with Clovis I, very few with this German prince. That redirect would certainly astonish many readers. P Aculeius (talk) 16:54, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • NOTE: Chlodwig is not mentioned anywhere prominently or in bold in Clovis I. (It's buried deep in the body text and one has to use Control+F to even find it.) Therefore, I struggle to understand why that article is being promoted as a superior retarget. Softlavender (talk) 21:08, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Because most uses of it (under any spelling) encountered by readers are likely to be references to the Frankish king. Though there were other notable persons—including notable Franks—by this name, as well as partial title matches (such as the above-mentioned German noble, and the Clovis culture of North America and their characteristic spearheads), Clovis I sweeps the field among persons whose names are likely to be rendered simply as "Clodowig", "Chlodowig" "Clodwig", "Chlodwig", etc. P Aculeius (talk) 01:35, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    A condition for redirects is that the term be featured prominently, preferably in bold, in the target article, so there is no puzzlement from the reader as to why they ended up on that page when they were searching for something entirely and noticeably different. Since Clovis I still fails in that regard, I continue to oppose redirecting to that article. Softlavender (talk) 01:54, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    There's no such condition. Many thousands of morphological variants lead to the topics they're variants of without being "featured prominently" in the articles they target. In fact it would be absurd if persons (or things) whose names were spelled, though infrequently, in numerous ways had to feature each variation "prominently, preferably in bold". It's more common to have a subsection listing variant names, or simply to place a footnote in the lead. P Aculeius (talk) 13:32, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    P, in my opinion you don't sound very familiar with redirects or the conditions and rationales involved. "Chlodwig" or some variation of it would need to be mentioned in the lead, preferably the lead sentence, for the redirect to make sense to anyone typing in the term and clicking on what comes up. Generally people who type in a term are looking for someone by that very name, hence Chlodwig, Prince of Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst. Most people can't remember the tongue-twisting rest of the name and so would simply type in "Chlodwig".

    "Chlodwig" and "Clovis" are not even spelling variants of each other, and differ too much to be understood by an unexplained redirect. If there are still people who want "Clovis" to be considered as a target, then in my opinion the only solution is Chlodwig (disambiguation), which would, quite obviously, list Chlodwig, Prince of Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst (and any other wiki titles with "Chlodwig" in them) first, and could then list or mention Clovis and/or various Clovises. Softlavender (talk) 20:37, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    Indeed, "Chlodwig" even shows up in some dictionaries defined as Clovis I.[11][12] I am leaning towards Clovis (given name) as the best redirect. This is consistent with the two uses in articles currently, pointing to the origin of other names, and would lead readers to Clovis I and all the other Chlodwigs and Clovises. Clovis I could be mentioned in the lead or otherwise made more prominent there if there is concern that enough readers are looking for this individual (he is, of course, listed already). A new Chlodwig (disambiguation) page (not that anyone has suggested this) page seems extraneous and would mostly point to and duplicate entries from Clovis (given name). WikiNav[13][14] shows a fair bit of traffic between Clovis (given name), Louis (given name), and the related names. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 03:19, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

C4SS

[edit]

The Center for a Stateless Society is no longer discussed anywhere on Wikipedia, except for being listed in a list of libertarian organizations. I would propose deleting these redirects. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aŭstriano (talk • contribs) 03:03, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 20:43, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

High House Shadow

[edit]

Delete. Not mentioned in the target article or in any other article. Was an unreferenced article that was redirected in 2014. Mika1h (talk) 07:33, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 20:42, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parachute (EP)

[edit]

It's not clear why this redirects here - it isn't mentioned. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:00, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment The history here is a bit complicated. In June 2006 an article about an EP by this name was created at The Parachute by user:Russ is the sex, it was nominated for speedy deletion about two hours later, but that was declined and converted to a prod. That prod was accompanied by (but not replaced by) a suggestion to merge to hellogoodbye from the original author, which the speedy deletion nominator (HarryCane, who hasn't edited since 2011) indicated in an edit summary they had done. In 2007 The Parachute was retargetted to The parachute1 which was later moved to The Parachute (novel), which was speedily deleted in 2008 as a G11 (although it didn't indicate notability it didn't seem overly promotional to me), leading to the redirect being speedily deleted under R1 (today's G8). Meanwhile in April 2007 J r glenn created Parachute e.p. as an article, which was moved to Parachute (EP) by Brianga a few minutes later. The following day, HarryCane redirected it citing the "consensus in the edit history of The Parachute". Thryduulf (talk) 12:57, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note I've added Parachute e.p. to this discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:57, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep if mention is added, otherwise delete. If the content of either former article can be verified (I haven't looked) then it should be added as 1-2 sentences at the target, then both redirects should point to that mention. Otherwise it should be deleted. I'm not advocating a restoration of the article content on this occasion as the first article was prodded without objection and the second didn't add anything new, but if anyone else thinks it should be restored then I will support that and my "delete" recommendation should be regarded as invalid in that cirumstance. Thryduulf (talk) 12:57, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The Parachute (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) should be bundled here. If these are kept, the edit history for the former article that was merged away should be restored as a redirect with history that was merged -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 03:06, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Restored and bundled The Parachute.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:14, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there any reason why The Parachute isn't listed at Hellogoodbye#Extended plays or elsewhere in their discography? It has an entry at Last.fm but I don't find much else online that would establish notability. I'm with Thryduulf, if there's enough to support its inclusion, it should be added to the article and the redirects should be kept but I'm not coming up with much so lean delete otherwise. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inscript

[edit]

Dabify or hatnote with inscription? Ninixed (talk) 02:19, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 17:36, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inscriptional

[edit]

Shouldn't it have the same target of inscription? Ninixed (talk) 02:18, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 17:36, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Influencer Smurf

[edit]

Meme about a smurf from the trailer of this movie, not mentioned in the target page. Possibly merits a mention (see e.g. [15] [16]), in which case the redirect should be kept, but I believe the character was replaced for the actual movie. Rusalkii (talk) 19:06, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 12:38, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 03:24, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we reach consensus between retargeting or deleting?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 17:28, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
retarget per above drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 14:02, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maggie Weinroth

[edit]

Not mentioned at the target, useless. K1 does not apply because this should never have been an article in the first place and it has no useful history. 204.111.137.20 (talk) 03:14, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you mean WP:G1? Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:41, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Thepharoah17 I assume they mean WP:RFD#KEEP. Rusalkii (talk) 06:08, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh ok thanks. Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:12, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 17:27, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Lebanon women's international footballers

[edit]

Outside of the scope of the List article (10+ caps for the Lebanon national team). Nehme1499 11:34, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 17:14, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Carla Abdel Khalek

[edit]

Outside of the scope of the List article (10+ caps for the Lebanon national team). Nehme1499 11:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 17:14, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aya El Boukhary

[edit]

Outside of the scope of the List article (10+ caps for the Lebanon national team). Nehme1499 11:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Admins: please do not close this as soft delete: these discussions should be paused/relisted until the scope of the article is determined by consensus. See my comment here. Cremastra (talk) 17:39, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 17:13, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cecile Iskandar

[edit]

Outside of the scope of the List article (10+ caps for the Lebanon national team). Nehme1499 11:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Admins: please do not close this as soft delete: these discussions should be paused/relisted until the scope of the article is determined by consensus. See my comment here. Cremastra (talk) 17:39, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 17:13, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rida Wahab

[edit]

Outside of the scope of the List article (10+ caps for the Lebanon national team). Nehme1499 11:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Nehme1499 It wasn't outside the scope until you made this summary-less edit without prior talk page discussion or indeed any explanation. This and all discussions on these redirects should be paused until a talk page discussion determines the scope of the article. Cremastra (talk) 17:38, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)Talk to Me! 17:13, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Foot play

[edit]

this can refer to A) footsies (in which case this should be targeting footsies or B) foot fetish (in which case this should be targeting foot fetishism). either way, this current target is just inappropriate for either options User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 08:09, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:03, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
dab per Thryduulf. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 14:03, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Peter Pindar

[edit]

The section that may have mentioned Peter Pindar is now missing. Thomas Chaloner (naturalist) can apparently be confused with his cousin Thomas Chaloner (courtier) (whose article mentions Paul Pindar), both being involved with alum. Without a mention this redirect is confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:28, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sedevacantist Antipope

[edit]

The two contradict eachother, Sedevacantism is the view that since 1958 there hasn't been any True Popes, Conclavists are people who claim to be Catholic who've elected their own Popes, beleiving that they're successors to Saint Peter. The only similarity is that they both hold that all the Claimants to the Papacy since 1958/The Second Vatican Council are Antipopes. But Sedevacantists also hold that the Conclavist claimants to the Papacy are to Antipopes. Reason 5 says that if a Redirect makes no snese it can be deleted, since this redirect makes no snense it needs to be deleted Olek Novy (talk)

  • Keep - from reading these articles, it sounds like the nom statement differs from what's in the articles - eg. the opening from Conclavism states that the method of electing rival popes is used by some schismatic Catholics, often Sedevacantists, and third paragraph of Sedevacantist says Various factions of conclavists among sedevacantists have proceeded to end the perceived vacancy in the Holy See by electing their own pope. Our articles are saying Sedevacantists who elect their own (anti)popes are Conclavists. To me the redirects make sense so should be kept. BugGhost 🦗👻 06:13, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Plain rice

[edit]

Whatever this redirect is meant to represent, I do not believe that the generic article about Rice is the appropriate target. If anything, this phrase most likely refers to Rice as food, but even that is unclear. Maybe be best to delete this thing. Steel1943 (talk) 21:02, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think redirecting to Rice as Food makes more sense -- in that its descriptive of the thing being consumed (it's plain") rather than of the species or the product. Sadads (talk) 22:23, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In British usage, "Plain rice" (white steamed rice) is distinguished from "fried rice" or other "special" (with shrimp, etc) rice dishes. All this should be in Rice as food. Chiswick Chap (talk) 04:28, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Noting that Rice as food doesn't mention "plain rice" (yet).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 02:25, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There are multiple suggested targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:59, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Cooked rice as per Hyphenation. The article actually does talk about the dish in question and is thus the better target, compared with Rice as food. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:48, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elon Musk 2028 presidential campaign

[edit]

WP:CRYSTALBALL, there is no mention that Musk is going for US President in 2028 A1Cafel (talk) 09:10, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 12:48, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep And there doesn't necessarily have to be. The bar for a redirect is very low. If anybody was wondering if Musk was or could run for president, it just redirects to the part of the 2028 United States presidential election article that says he can't. The section mentions HE specifically. I don't see the problem here at all. pbp 13:36, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete — Musk cannot run for president in 2028, full stop. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 15:49, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @ElijahPepe:'s vote doesn't have any deletion rationale and as such should be disregarded by the closing nom. It is based on a (likely-inaccurate) assumption that everybody knows that Elon is ineligible for the presidency and doesn't take into account how low the floor is for redirect creation. Even hoaxes can have articles, let alone redirects. pbp 16:34, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    So hasty to try to win an argument. This redirect does not serve any purpose because the subject doesn't exist and won't exist, even as a hoax. This cannot be used in an article. In addition, it assumes that there is a connection between Musk and the 2028 election that does not exist. Elon Musk 2032 presidential campaign is not an article or a redirect because there is no coverage on the subject, real or not. Pageviews shows only 36 views since March. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 16:43, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Redirects need not have possibilities to be retained. And there IS significant coverage in reliable sources discussing Elon Musk's presidential eligibility. And of course Elon Musk 2032 doesn't exist: election and campaign articles don't exist two cycles out. Pageviews suggest that people ARE looking for a term; pageviews would have to be basically 0 to justify deletion on page views. Again, I'm not seeing much understanding of the relevant policies here. pbp 17:14, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as per pbp. If we have relevant information, let's direct readers to it. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 19:52, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep basically per pbp and 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫. There is some chatter in the ether, the target discusses this, and redirects are cheap. That we already know he's ineligible isn't really the bar here. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:41, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete even if redirects were allow for non existing presidential campaign, Elon is not even from the United States, which would make him ineligible to run anyways. Fad8229 (talk) 00:38, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Extremely unlikely search term. Why would anyone search this and why would they expect to see general information about eligiblity Esolo5002 (talk) 00:58, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Esolo5002: As noted above, people HAVE searched that term... pbp 16:16, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per pbp, Lunamann and Myceteae. People are using this search term and we have the information they are looking for so we would need to have a good reason not to take them to that information. No such reason has been presented here. Thryduulf (talk) 22:10, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. There is relevant content, and we cannot assume that a given reader already knows that foreign-born individuals are unable to run for US presidency; perhaps after following the redirect they might learn that for the first time. Left guide (talk) 19:24, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Correct! And we can't even assume people know that Elon Musk is foreign-born! pbp 22:51, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Yep, context is there. Steel1943 (talk) 16:54, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

EU's

[edit]

Seems ambiguous, as it means anything that is related to EU, not EU itself A1Cafel (talk) 09:09, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tail wing

[edit]

These should point at the same target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 22:36, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are any of these referred to as tail "wing"? Also, aren't canard and delta wing tailless? Jay 💬 10:02, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, they are both technically tailless, but it requires some technical knowledge to realize that "tail" refers to the empennage, and not simply to the rear of the aircraft. I've had someone ask me what to call an airplane "with the big wing at the tail", pointing to a canard. Carguychris (talk) 04:07, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:21, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Main pages

[edit]

I was expecting this to lead to Main page (disambiguation) (which does link to the current target). I would have boldly retargetted there, as home pages are not the only type of main page, but (apart from short-lived vandalism in 2016 and 2024) it has been stable since creation in 2014. Obviously singular and plural usually lead to the same content, but I don't think targetting the Main Page would be helpful here. Thryduulf (talk) 02:35, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:19, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per nom. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 12:49, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

End of Life on Earth

[edit]

I was very surprised to end up at this target where the term is not mentioned. Both Tinchy Stryder videography and List of songs recorded by Tinchy Stryder mention that this is the title of one of his albums and expect an article about it to be at End of Life on Earth (2012 album), although that title has never existed. Where should it target though? End of the world, Mass extinction, Global catastrophic risk and Global catastrophic scenarios are possible targets and I'm not sure which is best. Thryduulf (talk) 11:45, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete, disambiguate, or retarget, and if so where?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:07, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete + Disambig: To start with, it seems that Full Tank and End of Life on Earth were both cancelled as albums. I think that deleting this redirect and creating End of life on earth (or Earth) as a disambig would be for the best. This would allow us to cover the multiple possible links that "End of life" would potentially redirect to while also fixing the problem. --Super Goku V (talk) 07:11, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment End of life is now a disambiguation page. Thryduulf (talk) 09:52, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
retarget to Global catastrophe scenarios per Nyttend. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 14:06, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marnus

[edit]

Not only person named Marnus. Either Disambiguate existing redirect, or in the case that Marnus Labuschagne is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC create a new Disambiguation page either titled Marnus (name) or Marnus (disambiguation) Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:34, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ROH

[edit]

Propose redirect to Ring of Honor as primary topic. It gets the most pageviews out of those topics. Originalchampion (talk) 04:23, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1 — Godsy (TALKCONT) 22:13, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JD Vance 2028 presidential campaign

[edit]

Implausible redirect; subject does not exist. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 02:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, You don't need a redirect if the subject in question doesn't exist. Fad8229 (talk) 04:25, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. Servite et contribuere (talk) 08:44, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 4

[edit]

Wikipod

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

Hounds of Shadow

[edit]

Delete. Not mentioned in target article or in any other article. Was redirected to High House Shadow. Mika1h (talk) 07:38, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:23, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fish or fishes

[edit]

Section is missing from the target article. In addition, there seems to be no explanation of the topic of these redirects, which seems to be the reason why the word "fish" or "fishes" is used for the plural form of the target subject. My first thought was to refine these redirect to Fish#Etymology, but such an explanation of these redirects' subject is not explained in that section either. Unless there are some kind of alternative target explaining the English plural form of the target subject, probably delete these. Steel1943 (talk) 19:17, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator follow-up/related comment: I just found Fishery#The term fish, a section that is obviously located in the wrong article and probably should be removed or moved to Fish. (At this time, I don't consider this a retargeting option.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:22, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:22, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Pan Syndrome (anime)

[edit]

Mayu Sakai did write a manga titled Peter Pan Syndrome (manga) (which redirects to Mayu Sakai) but it was never an anime series, as those are two different mediums. A deletion is preferred. lullabying (talk) 20:18, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as it's not clear what outcome the editors who commented are suggesting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:22, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nien

[edit]

The member is not that popular and she wouldnt be the primary topic for Nien. Theres also no dab page for Nien. drinks or coffee ~ ♪ 17:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:50, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:20, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Viimsi JK (women)

[edit]

No mention in target page. Pelmeen10 (talk) 21:34, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's the parent club. If not mentioned, than the target page should be improved irrelevant to the redirect --SuperJew (talk) 18:19, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JK Tabasalu (women)

[edit]

No mention in target page. Pelmeen10 (talk) 21:34, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's the parent club. If not mentioned, than the target page should be improved irrelevant to the redirect --SuperJew (talk) 18:19, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roman civiel war of 461

[edit]

Unlikely typo, not navigationally useful. 204.111.137.20 (talk) 16:14, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please delete Geoffrey F (talk) 19:10, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

may (anime character)

[edit]

the target's afd implies this will get deleted anyway, but this is worth asking about anyway. are there other anime characters named "may" that could be worth worrying about? i haven't found any in may (given name), but there's every chance that sia is just really undercooked consarn (grave) (obituary) 11:14, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kyrgyz Republic national beach soccer team

[edit]

Nothing about beach soccer is mentioned in the target pages. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:29, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

University (Scandinavia)

[edit]

This used to target to List of universities and colleges in Sweden, which is too specific. The current target, on the other hand, is uselessly broad and doesn't even discuss Scandinavia. Rusalkii (talk) 23:13, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 06:42, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:20, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 16:57, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is still no clear consensus on whether to delete or retarget. There is consensus against keeping the current target, which persuades me against a "no consensus" close, which would retain the status quo. I considered a soft retarget, but multiple delete voters opposed the retarget. I believe relisting again is appropriate in this case.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 9ninety (talk) 06:44, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2027–2029 ICC World Test Championship

[edit]

Not mentioned at target, and it is honestly just WP:TOOSOON, even for a redirect. The current (As of time of nomination) ICC World Test Championship has just gotten underway. It can be re created when it is not too soon. Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:50, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beanie boo

[edit]

Beanie Boos are NOT Beanie Babies.

Beanie Babies come in many forms, whereas Beanie Boos are specifically big-eyed, small plushies. Beanie Boos are mentioned multiple times by name on ENWP, but none of them (save for probably the company's page as a TM:R with possibilities?) seem like a good fit. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:21, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trollpasta

[edit]

Not mentioned in target. 🇺🇸Thegoofhere🇺🇸 (talk) 00:12, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. Since trollpasta is a notable genre of creepypasta I think it's worth keeping the redirect and adding a mention into the article instead. I've left a note on the talk page too. Happy to make the edit myself, just wanted to get your thoughts first since you nominated the RfD. Katiedevi (talk) 10:01, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 3

[edit]

Mt Iron(Wanaka township)aerodrome

[edit]

May be an WP:X3 candidate, but not sure due to the oddness of a conjugated non-disambiguator attached to the end of the disambiguator. Either way, unlikely search term. Steel1943 (talk) 17:42, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flashing light of death

[edit]

Not mentioned in the target article, leaving the connection between the target article and the redirect unclear. Steel1943 (talk) 17:31, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment this was a stubby article that was prodded with a proposal to merge into the main article, and that merge was carried out in March 2010 (see e.g. this revision) and the article redirected. WikiBlame is just timing out so I haven't found when or why it was removed, but it doesn't seem to have been discussed on the talk page. Thryduulf (talk) 18:12, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete per nom. Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:35, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

St. Thomas More Church, Alakode(Meenmutty),Idukki,Kerala

[edit]

Possibly an WP:X3 candidate, but not sure, given the end of the redirect's title. Either way, as a search term, it is unlikely to be used in this form. Steel1943 (talk) 17:10, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fur cap

[edit]

Ushankas are not the only type of fur caps by a long shot, didn't find anything focused on furry headgear. Paradoctor (talk) 16:45, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy retarget. Good catch. I created List of fur headgear. --Altenmann >talk 17:30, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ludobot

[edit]

Previously a stub (A ludobot is a type of artificial human companion: an entertainment robot, from Latin ludo (play) and bot (robot).) that was redirected to entertainment robot in 2017, the term isn't used in that article, wasn't used in it at the time of the redirect creation, and I can't find any sources that use it. It reads like an original coinage by the user who first created the ludobot article in 2003. Belbury (talk) 14:39, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

European area

[edit]

This is ambiguous. Not all European states are in the EEA so I think it should be deleted. JuniperChill (talk) 10:55, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dabify Per Thryduulf. Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:53, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

EU market

[edit]

The EU and EEA are not interchangeable as the EEA includes all EU states plus Norway and Iceland. I think the first two should be redirected to the European Union and the others to European single market. Otherwise, it can be deleted. JuniperChill (talk) 10:45, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fardu

[edit]

I'm not sure that this is a plausible misspelling (or alternative transliteration) of Fordo. It's only linked from Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/Hotlist of Mythology & Folklore/F, and is also an Arabic word for an Islamic religious obligation (wikt:fardu). Plantdrew (talk) 19:56, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:32, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bhakt

[edit]

The redirect Bhakt was recently created, but the correct English transliteration of the original Sanskrit term is Bhakta, which already exists as a redirect to Bhakti. Deleting this redirect avoids confusion and maintains consistency with other properly transliterated Sanskrit terms used as page titles (e.g. Yoga, Raga, Dharma, Mantra etc.). Asteramellus (talk) 12:15, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts now that Bhakta exists?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:54, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

po(l)ypifer

[edit]

let's try this again!! "polypifer" refers to organisms formed from polyps, which is a list that only happens to include coral. there was a discussion about this before (see here), but it just kind of went nowhere. still no opinion on the plausibility of the second redirect consarn (grave) (obituary) 12:21, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

will add, though, that the term used to be mentioned in the current target... but only in passing as part of an image's caption. it's not mentioned there or in polyp (zoology) anymore ( °Д °;) consarn (grave) (obituary) 12:23, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
let's try this again!! Why do you torture us so?
As I said in last year's discussion, I think Dawkins' usage of the word is most relevant. Coral#Anatomy is still my top pick, followed a retarget to polyp. Cremastra (talk) 17:08, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
admittedly, i kind of oppose retargeting to the dab, as it seems the term only refers to living organisms with that funny shape (y'know, hence polyp (zoology)). that aside, it seems this and other results related to richard dawkins have been recently overcome with slop of ai variety, which isn't related to this discussion, but is a bummer nonetheless :c consarn (grave) (obituary) 17:51, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:52, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inurement

[edit]

Someone searching for the legal term Inurement will end up on the wrong page. Disambiguate? Not sure what the right page would be. Non-profit organization laws in the U.S.#Federal taxes? See https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-organizations/inurement-private-benefit-charitable-organizations Guy Macon Alternate Account (talk) 16:30, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:50, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish massacre

[edit]

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turkish genocide. There's also a relevant entry currently under discussion: Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2025_June_23#Turkish_genocide_(19th–20th_century) Bogazicili (talk) 20:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:46, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambig Per Thryduulf Servite et contribuere (talk) 04:54, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

USFG

[edit]

Too ambiguous a redirect. Googling it turns up something way different. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:17, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:43, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Feral gummint

[edit]

Sadly, this is not the Onion. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:19, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • █████. It's nearly invisible. It was a lapse into mild humor.
I half made up the term. I searched for it here, half-expecting to find it here. It wasn't, so I added it. I Googled today for "feral gummint" and I see 350 hits (only 1 from Wikipedia and no mirrors), most referring to the US, but some referring to other federal governments such as Australia and Canada. Example: "Oh great.. the Feral Gummint has a part to play to play in this.."
I wonder how anyone noticed it. (Maybe browsing "What links here" from [Federal government of the United States], with "Hide links" enabled? Maybe browsing "User contributions for A876" with "Only show edits that are page creations" enabled, clicking "500" and then "Next 500" to reach my very first additions, and then finally noticing this the 30th one from the bottom?).
I wonder how many people noticed it before someone sought to kill it off. (I have nominated even-more-pointless redirects from absurdly improbable misspellings for deletion, and somehow absurdly got turned down.) In 2007, Wikipedia in several ways "was" The Onion. No need to be sad about it. Often Wikipedia seems much better than it was; sometimes it seems hopeless.
(I recall noticing a comical fictitious entry in the index of a college textbook. I think it said "Humor, sick" and it referred indirectly to the stylish new out-of-sequence info boxes that someone had forced the editors to tediously add to many pages.)
==See also==
• Gummint (not "created" by me, but mentioned in my edit comment upon "creating" Feral gummint on 2007-08-17)
• Gubmint (not "created" by me)
Maybe redirect to Federation#Federal governments, copying Federal government?
Maybe move all three to Wiktionary?? They are deliberate semi-fake vernacular uses. -A876 (talk) 22:19, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:43, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Berlin and Leipzig Railway

[edit]

Delete Broken anchor, redirect title is not mentioned in the target article Pieceofmetalwork (talk) 12:38, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:42, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Earl Hilliard Jr.

[edit]

Son of a former representative who was a state representative himself. I think this is better as a red link to encourage creation Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 19:01, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've been following because I am curious about the outcome. Seems a reasonable redirect to me. No one is precluded from starting an entry on the subject (as I did in draftspace). Whether leaving something as a redlink is superior encouragement to create the article rather than linking to an article where the subject is noted is an interesting question. But our goal is to serve our readers as best we can with what info we have. FloridaArmy (talk) 17:50, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 05:41, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Mentioned in the target article. FloridaArmy's actions are proof that deleting a redirect is not required to encourage an editor to create an article. A red link could assist in garnering more attention, but I don't think the sacrifice of a good and helpful redirect is worth it. Katiedevi (talk) 10:17, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flip (geometry)

[edit]

this could easily refer to Flip (mathematics). this should be retargeted or turned into a disambiguation page. ―Howard • 🌽33 17:01, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 9ninety (talk) 05:19, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gender stereotypes

[edit]

These should probably all have the same target. However, American gender stereotypes isn’t mentioned at either target so maybe it should be deleted. Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:18, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aa Bb Cc Dd Ee Ff Gg Hh Ii Jj Kk Ll Mm Nn Oo Pp Qq Rr Ss Tt Uu Vv Ww Xx Yy Zz

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

Kyle Dudek

[edit]

Nominating a newly created redirect whose target is currently at AfD. Safiel (talk) 04:17, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – no reason given for deletion, and this looks like a perfectly reasonable redirect. If and when the target is deleted, the redirect will automatically be deleted with it; there's no need to delete it at RfD in that case. jlwoodwa (talk) 07:54, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 14:03, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jordan Pratt

[edit]

Nominating a newly created redirect whose target is currently at AfD. Safiel (talk) 04:16, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – no reason given for deletion, and this looks like a perfectly reasonable redirect. If and when the target is deleted, the redirect will automatically be deleted with it; there's no need to delete it at RfD in that case. jlwoodwa (talk) 07:55, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ed Artau

[edit]

Nominating a newly created redirect whose target is currently at AfD. Safiel (talk) 04:15, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – no reason given for deletion, and this looks like a perfectly reasonable redirect. If and when the target is deleted, the redirect will automatically be deleted with it; there's no need to delete it at RfD in that case. jlwoodwa (talk) 07:55, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Covid deaths

[edit]

Seems like an incorrect cross namespace redirect. COVID-19 deaths might be a better target but coronavirus isn’t necessarily COVID-19 so maybe deleting it would be better. Thepharoah17 (talk) 03:58, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget Covid redirects to COVID-19, so Covid deaths should redirect to COVID-19 deaths. It seems to get an average of ~30 pageviews per month. 9ninety (talk) 06:10, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stereotypes of homosexuals

[edit]

Current target currently has no mention of redirect so I suggest LGBTQ stereotypes as maybe a better target. Thepharoah17 (talk) 03:52, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

retarget per nom. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ 14:04, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stereotypes of Brazilian Americans

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

Stereotypes of Canadians

[edit]

No mention in target Thepharoah17 (talk) 02:58, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please retain to preserve the page history and talk page; there is potential for recreating as an article. – Reidgreg (talk) 06:29, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If decision is to delete, please ping me so I can move it to my userspace instead. – Reidgreg (talk) 06:34, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just FYI all topics that the article did cover are in the target article with much better sources. To achieve a more neutral text we folded the info into the narrative overall (apparent if anyone actually reads the original and target article) as per WP:INDISCRIMINATE. If working on draft- target page has the better sources. Moxy🍁 07:03, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of never before seen Shen Gong Wu

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

Terrestrial species

[edit]

Could also refer to terrestrial plant. Either delete or create a SIA/DAB of all "terrestrial x" articles (there's terrestrial crab and terrestrial mollusc and probably a few more). Cremastra (talk) 00:07, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 2

[edit]

Definition of is

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

Media personalities

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

Maggie Robertson

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

Te cunosc de undeva!(season 2)

[edit]

Redirect title qualifies for WP:X3 speedy deletion, but the redirect has a bit of edit history in it ... though the history as an article existed for 2 days prior to being subject to a WP:BLAR pointing towards its correctly-spaced title variant, Te cunosc de undeva! (season 2)Te cunosc de undeva! (season 2) (now a redirect). Steel1943 (talk) 18:37, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - If the history needs retaining, it could always be moved without a redirect to the title with proper spacing. However, it still would not be a proper redirect within our house disambiguation style (it is not a cardinal type of 'second season'). Would likely lean delete, but also okay with the aforementioned move to improve it. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 22:03, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leo (Spectrobes)

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

Hunting accident

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

SOIL

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

Typhoon 0801

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 9#Typhoon 0801

Team Rocket Motto

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

unmentioned and mostly minor and/or unnotable pokémon characters (part 1 again somehow)

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

Alex Unknown

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

Germany national kabaddi team

[edit]

The German team is not mentioned anywhere in the target page. It seems to have been at the time the page was created, as TBD, but was removed in this edit when the results came in, I assume because they didn't place? Rusalkii (talk) 05:45, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaTek Camera Application

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 9#MediaTek Camera Application

Battle off the Lizard

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

Prurience

[edit]

I think this adjective and its noun for refer to a general concept, not specifically a topic in American law and a musician. 96.89.123.89 (talk) 01:54, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of terms associated with the color brown

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

Iran–United States war

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 9#Iran–United States war

List of terms associated with the color green

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

July 1

[edit]

Donald Trump (Wikipedia article)

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

Unlinked redirects in Category:Redirects from statistical redirects

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

Philosophy (Wikipedia article)

[edit]

WP does not host articles about its articles. This article has been moved to reflect its actual topic, and there should not be a redirect suggesting something else. (See Talk:Wikipedia_philosophy_phenomenon#WP:GNG_etc for discussion.) Patrick 🐈‍⬛ (talk) 17:32, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just to add on, there's also an argument to be made based on WP:RFD#KEEP 1: The act of renaming is useful page history, and even more so if there has been discussion on the page name. — 🪫Volatile 📲T | ⌨️C 06:14, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. I agree with Steel1943 that the disambiguator does not describe the target. If a redirect is to be made with a disambiguator, it ought to at least be accurate. --Bsherr (talk) 15:01, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aruba national cricket team & others

[edit]
Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Retarget American Samoa and Guam to Cricket in Oceania, Delete the others

Deepak Punia (rugby union)

[edit]

Not mentioned at target. Unless someone can add a source for it or add this player on the squad list at the squad section, just delete unless the player is actually mentioned. Servite et contribuere (talk) 12:55, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:29, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish genocide (19th–20th century)

[edit]

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Turkish genocide; the concerns there do not appear to have been addressed by adding a timestamp. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:01, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's also Turkish genocide (1820–1920) and Genocide of Turkish people from the same creator, might be worth bundling? 86.23.87.130 (talk) 22:53, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Added those. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:42, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also listed Turkish massacre. Maybe all of these should be considered together. Bogazicili (talk) 20:28, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:27, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There are no reliable sources that will actually claim there was a genocide of Turks happening for over a century. This is fringe historical negationism, generally only claimed by deniers of the Armenian/Greek/Assyrian genocides. Claiming that Turks were the real victims of genocide is a form of Armenian/Greek/Assyrian genocide denial (see Iğdır Genocide Memorial and Museum), as thus doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Therefore, these titles are not appropriate, as they were titled by a Wikipedia user last month, not by credible historians. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 05:59, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sleeping dictionary

[edit]

Per Wiktionary, a sleeping dictionary is "a sexual partner who also serves as a native informant or language teacher for a person visiting the region from outside". That is a general concept that probably could be explored in a Wikipedia article of its own, either of that title or something broad-concept like travel and sex. As such, I think WP:RETURNTORED applies. A redirect to Wiktionary would also be acceptable. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (they|xe|🤷) 14:10, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 19:40, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:19, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disown my draft, per Pppery. Redirect to Wiktionary. Jay 💬 14:29, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mythical and miracle power of pyramids

[edit]

Was originally it’s own page, now doesn’t have much use as a page, unless maybe a redirect to Pyramid power. Thepharoah17 (talk) 17:46, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:19, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spanking pyramid

[edit]

The current target isn’t correct. Maybe Spanking paddle is supposed to be the correct target. But "pyramid" is only mentioned once in the entire article so maybe it isn't. Thepharoah17 (talk) 17:35, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:19, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have added a {{citation needed}} at Spanking paddle. Even the Howard Stern source leads to a cover of Playboy where no spanking is demonstrated. Retarget to Human pyramid. Jay 💬 18:40, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Solgier

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

Wikipedia:Blocklog

[edit]

Redirect to a special page, therefore the redirect doesn't actually work (it's more like a soft redirect). I don't know if converting into a soft redirect using {{Soft redirect}}, or retarget to something like Help:Log, which describes this process. Or even retarget to the historical page Wikipedia:Historical archive/Logs/Block log, to match WP:Block log. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 02:19, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:28, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jay: Why was this relisted? I would have closed is as retarget, which three of the four participants have agreed to. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:39, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Who is the third, after you and Thryduulf? Jay 💬 14:30, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Justjourney, in the first post. Thryduulf (talk) 14:45, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then, won't that be three of the five? Jay 💬 18:43, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was assuming that they (the OP) were included in Jay's count of 4 but Nyttend's "technical comment" not expressing an opinion wasn't. Thryduulf (talk) 18:48, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, when I opened the discussion, I wasn't really sure what target to retarget to (as you see above, I was kind of on the fence with the suggested targets). So I don't know if I would've closed this or not (I don't close XFDs).
Additional comment: WP:Movelog targets Special:Log/move, like this one. In this case, WP:Move log also targets the same page. I may simply convert these into soft redirects, unless someone has a better option for these redirects. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 19:44, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I also couldn't find a historical archive for the move log. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 19:45, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know about that: If I were closing this discussion, I would have interpreted the nominator's statement as a "do not keep" vote since their stance didn't commit on any one option. Steel1943 (talk) 16:41, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Someone searching this would be wanting the current blocklog and not a historical archive. I have no issue with the redirect being a (pseudo-)soft redirect, which also has the benefit of the ability to add a hatnote to the historical archive if desired. -- Tavix (talk) 17:11, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:15, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First fire

[edit]

Exists from a previous PROD but the target is now a DAB - and the phrase doesn't appear in any of the articles Ivey (talk - contribs) 16:29, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. Assuming the PRODed content was accurate (it was unreferenced but plausible, although mostly how-to) then this is a specific term in relation to furnaces (google suggests it isn't limited to any one type). My first thought was "origin of fire", searching that phrase led me to The Origin of Fire, which is a 1902 Finnish cantata and I would be very surprised to land there after using this search term! Control of fire by early humans is closer to what I was thinking of but I'm not certain that's close enough? It wouldn't help people who are looking for the usage in relation to furnaces, but it is linked as "earliest fire" on Template:Human timeline and it is the primary topic when I google "first fire" -Wikipedia when I exclude partial title matches of (probably non-notable) businesses and histories of fire brigades. Thryduulf (talk) 02:18, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Another thought I just had was when earth's atmosphere could first support (sustained) fire (I vaguely recall a PBS Eons or SciShow episode about this). Google results for my vague query string suggest this was the result of the Great Oxidation Event but that article does not include the word "fire" and nor does Neoproterozoic oxygenation event linked in the hatnote. I haven't been able to think what we would title an article about this topic, and my vague searches are just leading me to articles about the (far) future - the exact opposite of what I'm looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 02:38, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Fossil record of fire would be a decent article for that other thought. * Pppery * it has begun... 02:50, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Indeed it would, thank you. Looking at this with (slightly) more awake eyes I'm thinking the best option here is either a set index/disambig or a redirect to Control of fire by early humans with hatnotes to Fossil record of fire and something related to the furnace/kiln sense if we have any relevant content. I'm about to add a hatnote from the former to the latter based on the History of fire redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 10:16, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (Go Oilers!) 15:55, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Reverting my close and relisting this per discussion with Jay at User_talk:Rusalkii#First_fire_RfD, to allow for editors to consider the merge history.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 19:17, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to add First Fire as suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 17:14, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dolores Rogers

[edit]

Dolores Rogers is an actress who happened to voice the character Bowser Jr. in a few different Mario games. She is not mentioned in the target article. She has done a ton of other work. There is no reason that searching her name should bring you to one character that she has voiced on occasion, especially when she is not mentioned at all in the target. Dennis C. Abrams (talk) 16:55, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Scuiside

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

Villalba–Segovia railway

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

Battle of Manupur (1748)

[edit]

I intend to make the page for this, I'd also like to have the "Battle of Manupur" redirect thus also deleted.

This currently redirects to an earlier 1748 battle. Noorullah (talk) 01:20, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled Battle of Manupur.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:23, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Battle of Manupur (1748) is an {{R from move}} to a deleted article. I guess Battle of Manupur can be speedied as a G7, and the parenthesized one deleted as a dependent redirect. The next admin may do this immediately without the 7 day wait. Jay 💬 13:25, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
G7ed the one from the AfD. I'm not sure about the parentheses one so I've left it. Star Mississippi 02:08, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Deleting Battle of Manupur has created a "Title (disambiguator) exists when Title doesn't" problem. If the current status quo remains, Battle of Manupur will need to be recreated to fix WP:PRECISE issues caused by Battle of Manupur (1748) existing without Battle of Manupur existing. Steel1943 (talk) 16:25, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ikkei Watanabe

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

India in the Eurovision Song Contest

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

كييف

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 10#كييف

Gag names

[edit]

Examples of the phenomenon, none of which are mentioned in the target page. Rusalkii (talk) 01:23, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chinaball

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

June 30

[edit]

Somewhere on the Waterloo to Weymouth route

[edit]

The only place on the internet I can find this phrase is at Speed records in rail transport, where the redirect is linked. While the South West Main Line is the Waterloo to Weymouth route this seems very unlikely as a search term. Waterloo to Weymouth route by itself would be a better redirect, though I'd just pipe it. Rusalkii (talk) 23:09, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Waterloo–Weymouth line maybe, but even Waterloo to Weymouth route is a stretch in my opinion. Seems the redirect being discussed is just for one use where Somewhere on the [[Waterloo–Weymouth line]] would be best. JacobTheRox(talk | contributions) 11:44, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did not create any new redirects, but I have piped it to the target at the Speed records page. Jay 💬 08:14, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, I don't think even Waterloo to Weymouth route is a particularly good redirect and was not suggesting creating it, just that it would've been better in this case and I probably wouldn't have RfDed it. Rusalkii (talk) 05:29, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Paris Black Friday

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 9#Paris Black Friday

2005 Brussels NATO summit

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 8#2005 Brussels NATO summit

Fraysexuality (main article)

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

Eternal Liquid (album)

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

The akron hammer

[edit]

Neither of these phrases are mentioned in the target article. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:747C:71B6:4CA5:979 (talk) 23:08, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget to the list, or is "the l-train" ambiguous?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 19:15, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

daisy, lily, and violet

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

Nile Canal

[edit]

This isn’t a correct redirect. Even googling “Nile Canal” brings up something up totally different. The previous edit to this page actually said to bring it to RFD so here I am. Therefore, I say Delete. Thepharoah17 (talk) 08:33, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or convert to a disambiguation page: The Suez Canal is not connected to the Nile, so it's clearly unhelpful to redirect there. The "predecessors", which is to say the ancient/medieval canals between the Nile and the Red Sea, are covered in two articles already: Canal of the Pharaohs and Khalij (Cairo). Neither of them is really known as the "Nile Canal" to my knowledge, which is why I think deleting as too vague is fine, otherwise a DAB that links to both those articles (and any other articles that might be reasonably relevant) is also fine. R Prazeres (talk) 15:56, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:07, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National railway

[edit]

A national railway is an example of something that might be (but isn't always) a state-owned enterprise. Railways are mentioned a couple of times as examples, but never using this exact phrase. National Railway was a railroad planned in the USA in the 1870s and National Railways lists multiple other entities that have similar names so I don't think this is a good redirect as it stands, I'm unsure whether National Railway or National Railways would be the better target (both link to each other, but neither link to the current target). I don't support deletion as (a) this has been around since 2010 and (b) there isn't anything relevant the search engine finds that isn't the current target or listed at National Railways so search results would be unhelpful. Thryduulf (talk) 12:56, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What about redirecting to Railway nationalisation? 135.23.202.10 (talk) 13:56, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've been thinking about this, and while I can see the connection (and have added it as a see also at National Railways) and it is probably better than the status quo, I'm not certain that it's unambiguously the correct target. Thryduulf (talk) 19:14, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
After more thinking, I'm notnow certain that I do not support railway nationalisation as the target, including for the reasons articulated by Mangoe below. Thryduulf (talk) 12:11, 21 June 2025 (UTC) incorrect word fixed Thryduulf (talk) 11:48, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget To Railway nationalisation. A National Railway sounds like it would be organised and owned by a national level government Servite et contribuere (talk) 05:07, 13 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Which target?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 04:22, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:07, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

George Fitcher

[edit]

I cannot find any evidence that he is referred to as "Fitcher" rather than "Fitch". We have one use of it at Nanking Safety Zone, but as the article elsewhere repeatedly uses "Fitch" I strongly suspect this is a mistake that should be corrected, but as I don't read Chinese I don't want to fiddle with the content without checking the source. Rusalkii (talk) 02:28, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:06, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

KineMaster

[edit]

Redirected to a section that doesn't contain text "KineMaster" was removed by MrOllie. OOCJZ (talk) 22:47, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that the page was BLARed a few months ago. The most recent article content is at Special:Permalink/1287035406.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 18:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • delete without opposition to recreation. the extremely few sources across all previous diffs were of debatable everything, not limited to reliability, usability, and existence. the content of the diffs that weren't vandalism was also pretty promotional, so i couldn't see it sticking in mainspace for long. however, i did actually find some sources that seem to be potentially useful, so it can likely be recreated if someone's in the mood consarn (grave) (obituary) 11:38, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore without prejudice to AfD. Where sources exist and need detailed consideration that is far outside the scope of RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 11:38, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Analysis of sources should be something that is encouraged at RfD, not shunned. I would love for someone to present sources here, which could help me decide to restore and/or rescue it and avoid an additional deletion discussion at AfD. -- Tavix (talk) 20:37, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
to this day, i don't know what policies would discourage checking sources here, especially when it's actively beneficial to the discussion consarn (grave) (obituary) 01:41, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
right, it would probably be a good idea to plop some sources here so i can have a look at them later
i can't guarantee they're reliable enough to bypass the deprecated source filter, but that's something i'm going to worry myself with when i'm out of work
again, i'll try to have a look at those later, and i doubt more than two of them will be reliable, but it's better to play it unsafe and at least prove that there's something to consider for anyone willing to recreate
and i should clarify that doesn't change my vote to delete, as the pre-blar content is just Not Good™, so it should be recreated entirely, which i can't guarantee anyone will be willing to do consarn (grave) (obituary) 11:15, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Re investigating sources here and not AfD, this is not explicitly prohibited but really should be to stop these repetitive arguments for bypassing the point of having separate deletion discussion venues for articles and redirects. The substantive content at this title is the article, not the redirect, so discussion about it should happen at the venue all our policies, guidelines and conventions indicate is the place that deletion of articles is discussed: AfD. If we encourage and normalise playing fast and loose with these things (as here) then we have no standing to uphold proper process at other times (e.g. when proper process would be preferential to your POV).
If you want to abolish the AfD/RfD split, then go ahead and propose doing that and if it gains consensus I'll help implement it. However what I won't do is quietly go about implementing it ad hoc by the backdoor because one or two editors dislike the split for some reason. Thryduulf (talk) 14:55, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"not explicitly prohibited" works for me consarn (grave) (obituary) 17:11, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just because something is not explicitly prohibited does not mean that it is recommended, a good idea, or even allowed. After all we don't explicitly prohibit many things that we don't endorse because it has never previously been an issue - which this wasn't until bees found their way into bonnets about doing things at RfD that nobody previously considered relevant to RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 18:58, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
a little late, but this really isn't a reason to prohibit nomming blars (especially when it's been blar'd as spam, unsourced, and vandalism) or checking sources here, and i don't think explicitly saying that they're permitted would require merging rfd and afd. if something goes to afd, we check sources on it while treating it as an article, with the possibility of coverage not being significant or reliable enough to keep it. if it goes to rfd, we check sources on it and its relation to the target while treating it as a redirect, with the possibility of coverage being significant or reliable enough to make it an article. it's not a backdoor procedure, it's not bees taking a page from the wasp scout handbook, and it's absolutely not a matter of competence or lack thereof, it's standard fare for editing wikipedia
hell, it's not even like sources need to be explicitly brought up or presented for people to go check, they'll ideally do that regardless to determine what to do with any given page consarn (grave) (obituary) 23:38, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Striking until I have time to review Consarn's sources. -- Tavix (talk) 14:53, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore the fact that sources have been presented about by consarn suggests that this needs a proper, full discussion to determine notability. Which is the purpose of AFD not RFD- RFD should not be being used for "back door" deletions. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:28, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    i still don't think it's worth restoring. maybe having those sources here will help someone who finds the rationale, but restoring one of however many extremely problematic diffs will do the exact opposite of helping consarn (grave) (obituary) 17:12, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 16:11, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
a little late, but here are my opinions on the sources, with the caveat that i may as well be pulling reliability estimates out of my ass and should not be treated as possessing an authoritative opinion
  • the koreatimes ones seem unambiguously reliable
  • aside from the indecipherable glyphs, the tudocelular review seems... shallow? insubstantial? it's probably usable, but... bleh, i'm not feeling it
  • pr newswire... paragraph about how cool and awesome and worth it kinemaster is... nah, not seeing any advertisement-shaped suspicious details here. probably usable for an uncontroversial statement about numbers and stuff, but not a word more
  • wooper is cute, the main page should honestly just redirect to it
  • the first yahoo one is boring. reliable, sure, but boring
  • the kxan one seems... oh my black goat of the woods with a thousand young, it seems usable
  • same for the techradar ones, i'm honestly willing to call them the best the article could have, and it's likely not even close
  • no opinion on prweb, i think my brain turned off for a few minutes when looking at it...
  • the second yahoo finance one is an ad
  • the creative bloq review isn't a blog, wow. it's probably even also usable
  • second pr newswire source, same verse as first... is what i would say, if it was about kinemaster in the first place. i don't know, maybe it can be used for saying that it's compatible with nexstreaming?
  • the gizbot one seems almost usable for a short claim about kinemaster not being chinese, but why would we even have that?
again, not the slightest bit confident in my overly generous evalutation, but for now, my vote will remain a strong return to red. sources exist and are likely reliable, but i actually fell asleep checking some of those sources, so i'm not exactly expecting other people to be giddy for a chance to work on it consarn (grave) (obituary) 23:53, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kyoto, JP, KY

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

لندن

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

Glizzy

[edit]
Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Retarget to Hot dog. Shy Glizzy is not typically known by the mononym Glizzy, and the use of the term as a synonym for hot dog has considerably increased since this was last nominated in 2021. 162 etc. (talk) 06:46, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per nom 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 19:41, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Iranian strikes

[edit]

This should be deleted because it could refer to the Iranian strikes on Israel and Qatar Thepharoah17 (talk) 03:54, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Family guy catchphrases

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

June 29

[edit]

Mask of Ice

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

B. Clayton Bonnefoy

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

imakuni?

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete * Pppery * it has begun... 04:07, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

painfully minor pokémon anime characters (part 1, probably)

[edit]
Delete Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete Pokelego999's late comment is acknowledged but given the anime list is itself at AfD and leaning toward deletion I don't think it deserves further consideration * Pppery * it has begun... 04:06, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

pokémon trainer (video game)

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

Ri Hak

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 7#Ri Hak

LION

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

Szczecin-Krzekoszow(2)

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

Frontier Park

[edit]

An article at this title created by Burkouri was recently redirected to St. Charles, Missouri by Onel5969. I have moved the page history of the former article to Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri) to avoid confusion. There are a lot of parks with this name, so it doesn't seem appropriate to have a redirect to the city where just one of them is, nor to have a set index article since most of the hits I found on Wikipedia were rather run-of-the-mill. Paul_012 (talk) 14:25, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Added Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri) to the nomination due to its mention in this discussion. Also, bypassed the double redirect of the originally nominated Frontier Park to have it target St. Charles, Missouri ... which the nominator should have done after they moved the redirect ... as well as updated the nomination to reflect this change/update.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:55, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Buppie

[edit]

Deletion. The target is not a synonym. It may be related, but "Buppie" is not mentioned anywhere, and neither is "yuppie", from which "buppie" is derived. GA-RT-22 (talk) 08:54, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:12, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 18:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Long story short, I'm not WP:BOLD enough to do a WP:BARTENDER close here, but either someone else might or maybe consensus will get clearer. Either way, seems there is no consensus for the status quo.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 18:00, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JWG

[edit]

I would recommend either deleting both redirects or converting converting the first one into a disambiguation page and redirecting the second one to the new DAB page. In the article, Gacy is never referred to by his initials. GilaMonster536 (talk) 15:26, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It could include other titles with "Joint Working Group" such as Joint Working Group between the Roman Catholic Church and the World Council of Churches. Thepharoah17 (talk) 18:42, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Watonga Regional Airport per the IP and Thryduulf Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:23, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:55, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:Rewben Aladeen

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

Dance drama

[edit]

There are many types of dance drama, not just wuju. This is misleading. Either delete, retarget, or possibly a DAB? Laterthanyouthink (talk) 03:14, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I see quite a few results for "dance drama" on this site, so I'm inclined to suggest a DAB or something similar. Seems like a reasonable enough search term that I could believe leading to the current target (given it's a direct translation of the name) or a number of other options, so some sort of list would make the most sense. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 04:19, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:33, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 01:51, 14 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try ... delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 17:45, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Ingoe

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

List of piston engines

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

B1454 road

[edit]

non-existent road harrz talk 10:56, 10 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This one does appear to exist [35], but it's not currently mentioned in the target article. I'd say keep and add mention. 2A0E:1D47:9085:D200:FAB8:C00:A757:B61E (talk) 00:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts now that a mention has been added to the target page?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 18:46, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: for consideration of Jay's observation
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 11:35, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Big Steel

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

Blade (2025 upcoming film)

[edit]

Factually incorrect and improper disambiguation that was erroneously created and accepted as a separate draft from Draft:Blade (upcoming film). There is no Blade film set to release this year, and the contents of this redirect's history are not worth keeping when compared to the more developed draft. Should the Blade film eventuate, that is already covered by the appropriately titled Blade (upcoming film) redirect. For reference, Blade (2025 film) no longer exists. — Trailblazer101🔥 (discuss · contribs) 22:54, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 11:32, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cambodia national beach soccer team

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

NaMo

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 6#NaMo

Long relationship

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

June 28

[edit]

SB 4-C

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

Unreserved seat

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

Julie N.

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

Reading town

[edit]

There are lots of towns named "Reading" so this isn’t correct. Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:10, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:06, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gâteau

[edit]

Does this pass WP:FORRED? 🌳 Balsam Cottonwood (talk) ✝ 00:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Restoring original !vote due to misunderstanding of WP:PTM — 🪫Volatile 📲T | ⌨️C 07:36, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 14:26, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like both to redirect to the same place. Looking at some high-quality sources, we see:
  • These days, it's usually a rich, elaborately decorated cake.[36][37]
  • In its original English use (c. Victorian era), it was any kind of cake, and even things that weren't really cake, but had some cake-like qualities.[38] It even included molded rice puddings.[39] Elaborately decorated layer cakes became the more popular use later.[40]
  • In last half-century, it typically uses a boring sponge cake, but this is not inherent; what matters is the cream (and often fruit) filling and decorations.[41]
  • The French word still refers to any kind of cake.[42] Or even non-cakes, such as tarts, pancakes, and Gâteau Pithiviers, Saint-Honoré, and Paris–Brest pastry.[43]
Overall, I think that pointing both at Cake is slightly better, as that encompasses all of the historical, modern, and French meanings, but it is not unreasonable to point them both at Layer cake. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:49, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ulfcytel's land

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 9#Ulfcytel's land

Aerial apparatus

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

Parachute (EP)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 5#Parachute (EP)

Multifunction

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

Brent Díaz

[edit]

Baseball minor league players are grouped by their respective organisation. This player was most recently a member of the Milwaukee Brewers, but never made an appearance for the Major League team, and so did not get his own article. He has since left the team, has not played at all since 2023, and is presumably retired, and the related mini-profile for him was removed from the redirect's target article.

Propose deleting per WP:RFD#DELETE point 2 -- it's confusing to be taken to a page that has no related content.

My only concern is whether it needs to be kept under WP:RFD#KEEP point 1, given the text further back in the edit histor was merged in. (However, it was merged in by the original author, so presumably counts as reaffirming the license..?) Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 11:01, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not inherently confusing to be able to find the name of a redirect in the article. RFD#DELETE #2 gives an example of a redirect to pointing at a less-relevant article. RFD#DELETE #2 has nothing to do with whether the redirect is mentioned.
RFD#DELETE #8 is much more salient, and it is about "a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target". So: Is it a synonym? No; this is a redirect to a broader subject, not to a different name for the same thing. If we pretend that it's a synonym, would it be "a novel or very obscure" one? No. People searching for a person's name, when they end up in a list, are not going to be confused. They're going to say "Ah, this is a list of baseball players, so he must have been a baseball player" or "That's the team he played for, so Dad got something about baseball wrong for the first time in my life!"
The information about Brent Díaz was removed in 2023. At a quick glance, my impression is that the scope of this article is current players only, and there is no place to put former/retired/dead players. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:28, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair points – thanks. Feels a bit like there's a hole in the reasons, given the synonym rule shoudl probably be explicitly for synonyms, but still..! What I would add is that this does generally tend to be the route we take: include non-notable players until they become notable, and delete their redirects once removed and notability is never established. See e.g. a whole swathe of similar articles at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 8, including Tyler Herb for the same specific article. Granted, few-to-no !votes, but also no objections. Buttons to Push Buttons (talk | contribs) 12:41, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Native americancuisie

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

Bottle bomb

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 9#Bottle bomb

US sailor

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

Acceleration, Reconnection, Turbulence and Electrodynamics of the Moon’s Interaction with the Sun

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

North Georgia Finishing, Inc. v. Di-Chem, Inc.

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

Scraface

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 6#Scraface

Seating Arraignment

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 7#Seating Arraignment

Chinese officials

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

Vancouver ramming

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

Rice gadu

[edit]

The word "gadu" is mentioned nowhere in the target article, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target article unclear. (This redirect was formally an article that was subject to a WP:BLAR in 2014 after existing for 2 months.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:44, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 02:25, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Plain rice

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 5#Plain rice

Columbia (Sony)

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

Hong Kong cityscape

[edit]

Pointless redirect unless we were to have cityscape for every city. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:46, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 02:23, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Salt and vinegar

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Retarget to Salt and vinegar chips

FChan

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

Inscript

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 5#Inscript

Inscriptional

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 5#Inscriptional

2030 South Korean presidential election

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

June 26

[edit]

Fredarick Jackson

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 9#Fredarick Jackson

Earl of Inchequin: restoration of honours, manors, lands and tenements in Ireland.

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

Psynapse

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

Earthen Vessel

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

Development of The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim

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

Ji Seo-yeon (singer)

[edit]

Salt evasion of Ji Seo-yeon, it is soft redirect?, TripleS member involved in several page (TripleS#Members metioned it.) after redirect AfD closure. Delete encourage article creation per WP:RETURNTORED. 216.247.95.184 (talk) 23:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Paper9oll. drinks or coffee ~ ♪ 13:20, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 22:25, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Move without redirect to Ji Suh-yeon per Orangesclub. The only Seo-yeon of the group I see from external searches is Yoon Seo-yeon, the first member. The article under the redirect was closed at AfD only two weeks back, RETURNTORED or article creation rationales are not applicable, and if created will be at a different title (see Draft:Ji-yeon (singer)). Jay 💬 09:39, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:RESULT

[edit]

Too ambiguous; same reason MOS:RESULT was deleted   Jalapeño   (u t g) 09:50, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 22:25, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clavin (supplement)

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 8#Clavin (supplement)

United Kingdom and Ireland

[edit]
Retarget Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Retarget to British Isles * Pppery * it has begun... 18:15, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hop (TV series)

[edit]
Split or bespoke decisions Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Retarget Arthur (book series) and Arthur (children's literature) to Arthur (disambiguation); WP:NCRET Arthur (Brown book series) to Arthur Read without prejudice against a new nomination focusing solely on that redirect; WP:SOFTDELETE the rest. * Pppery * it has begun... 18:13, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merde

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

Episode 1.1

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

"Spacing between initial and period" mismatches

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

Josef Rudolf Mengele

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

Main pages

[edit]

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 5#Main pages

A Main Page

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

Cloud First

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