Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

This page has an administrative backlog that requires the attention of willing administrators.
This notice will automatically hide itself when the backlog is cleared.

Skip to table of contents · Skip to current discussions · Purge this page · Archives

Shortcuts

XFD backlog
V	Jun	Jul	Total
CfD	0	50	50
TfD	1	7	8
MfD	4	1	5
FfD	1	5	6
RfD	3	23	26
AfD	0	0	0

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

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

Wikipedia:Redirect – what redirects are, why they exist, and how they are used.
Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion – which pages can be deleted without discussion; in particular the "General" and "Redirects" sections.
Wikipedia:Deletion policy – how we delete things by consensus.
Wikipedia:Guide to deletion – guidelines on discussion format and shorthand.

The guiding principles of RfD

Shortcut

WP:RGUIDEWP:RGUIDE

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

This page is transcluded from Wikipedia:Redirect/Deletion reasons. (edit | history)

Shortcuts

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

Shortcut

WP:RFD#DELETEWP:RFD#DELETE

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

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

Shortcut

WP:RFD#KEEPWP:RFD#KEEP

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

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

Neutrality of redirects

Shortcut

WP:RNEUTRALWP:RNEUTRAL

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

Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:

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

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

Shortcut

WP:RFDHOWTOWP:RFDHOWTO

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.

Does this look too complicated?
Try this semi-automated process instead: (note only confirmed users can use this)

Enable Twinkle in the Gadgets tab of your preferences.
Go back to the redirect page, and choose "XFD" from the new Twinkle menu.
Fill in the form and submit it.

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.

This version of the page may not reflect the most current changes.
Please purge this page to view the most recent changes.

Current list

Shortcuts

July 14

Gender stereotypes

American gender stereotypes → Sexism#American gender stereotypes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Stereotypes of women → Gender role#Gender stereotypes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Stereotypes of men → Gender role#Gender stereotypes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

delete american, keep the other two. --Altenmann >talk 13:44, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Only American gender stereotypes had to be nominated here, as it is a Delete nomination. The #2 and #3 redirects already have the same target. Can American gender stereotypes be retargeted to Gender inequality in the United States § Social attitudes, although stereotypes have been talked about throughout the article? Jay 💬 06:33, 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) 21:54, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete 'American' and keep the others. Social attitudes regrading gender inequality in the US is a distinct topic from gender(ed) stereotypes in America/about Americans. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:00, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spanking pyramid

Spanking pyramid → Pyramid#human pyramid (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Paddling pyramid → Pyramid#human pyramid (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Paddle pyramid → Pyramid#real pyramids - See also (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Retarget all three to Spanking paddle#Other play and traditions. This would likely be what the reader is looking for. Katiedevi (talk) 21:46, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The above suggested target mentions it once in passing, but it's unsourced and provides no explanation of what it actually is, so is of no use to a reader. God, I'm glad we have that information there about who's been spanked on Howard Stern's show 🙄 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:36, 23 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]

That sounds good to me. Retarget to Human pyramid. Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:13, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 21:54, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. There is only a passing reference of to spanking pyramid at Human pyramid#United States and it is also not sourced. None of these are used in articles and pageviews shows they each get on average ≈0 views per day/1–3 per month over the last 2 years. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:08, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marriage rights

Marriage rights → Same-sex marriage (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Too ambiguous; could refer to Rights and responsibilities of marriages in the United States for example. Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:39, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marriage law looks to be a better target. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:56, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LGBTQ rights in Corsica

LGBTQ rights in Corsica → LGBTQ rights in France (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
LGBT rights in Corsica → LGBTQ rights in France (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Same-sex marriage in Corsica → Same-sex marriage in France (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Corsica isn’t mentioned in the pages. Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:13, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same-sex marriage in SA

Same-sex marriage in SA → Same-sex marriage in South Africa (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Same rationale as this discussion. It’s too ambiguous and could refer to many different places. Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:48, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is some difference from the "LGBT rights in..." series given that same-sex marriage is a more specific and limited topic. There aren't articles on Same-sex marriage in South Australia, Same-sex marriage in Saudi Arabia, or Same-sex marriage in San Antonio that this could potentially be confused with. However I don't feel particularly strongly about this since it's not a particularly useful redirect. - htonl (talk) 21:57, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete redirect to People's history and make a new redirect to Social history. The phrase "history from below" came from British social history and French social history, it is historiographically inaccurate to link it in the first instance to People's history, which is a type of social history that emerged in the United States in the early 1980s. The River Bytham (talk) 18:16, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I notified the target of this RFD Thepharoah17 (talk) 18:47, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Eastern Denmark

Eastern Denmark → Denmark (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unclear what this is supposed to refer to. Thepharoah17 (talk) 17:49, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Too ambiguous, could refer to several regions in Denmark or Skåne. Haj (talk) 21:22, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Continental Denmark

Continental Denmark → Jutland (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Inaccurate since Jutland includes parts of Germany. Thepharoah17 (talk) 17:44, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Denmark where the term is explained in the lede. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:13, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

LGBT rights in Guiana

LGBT rights in Guiana → LGBTQ rights in France#Overseas departments and territories (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Same-sex marriage in Guiana → Same-sex marriage in France (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

That could refer either to French Guiana, Guyana, or Dutch Guiana, or Guiana (The Guianas), making it too ambiguous. Thepharoah17 (talk) 16:54, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – per nom Roast (talk) 19:19, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sedevacantist Antipope

Sedevacantist Antipope → Conclavism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Sedevacantist Antipopes → Conclavism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Sedevacantist antipope → Conclavism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Sedevacantist antipopes → Conclavism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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)— Preceding undated comment added 14:26, 5 July 2025 (UTC)

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]
But they stop being Sedevacantist by declaring themselves to be the Pope. Olek Novy (talk) 21:27, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:58, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1966–67 Divizia C

1966–67 Divizia C → Liga III (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect currently points to the Liga III article, but I propose restoring a standalone article about the 1966–67 season because it contains verifiable historical information and fits well within a series of season articles.

The article cited at least three reliable sources, including Sportul, the national sports newspaper of the time, which is widely recognized as a dependable reference for historical football data.

In line with policies such as WP:PRESERVE and WP:ATD, I believe the article should be restored, as it presents verifiable, factual information that is useful to readers, even if it doesn't meet GNG strictly in terms of broad media coverage.

Thanks in advance for any thoughts or guidance. --Florin (talk) 09:59, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I’ve fixed the nomination and notified the target. Thepharoah17 (talk) 10:20, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Restore without prejudice to AfD and/or merge discussions as an explicitly contested BLAR. Thryduulf (talk) 13:02, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Israeli Iran Command

Israeli Iran Command → Israel Defense Forces (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Was its own page 17 years ago. Now a useless redirect. Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cocycle condition

Cocycle condition → Čech cohomology (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Very vague; could refer to conditions for cochains to be cocycles in all sorts of cohomology theories (see also the on-wiki search results for this term). 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 01:53, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague. Used in all sorts of different contexts besides this. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:45, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Walmart Opioids Scandal

Walmart Opioids Scandal → Walmart Inc. v. DEA-DOJ (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Somewhat biased of old me to label a court settlement as a "scandal". Roast (talk) 00:57, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 13

Five-by-five

Five-by-five → Double-double (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Five by five → Signal strength and readability report (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Both these redirects should target the same article - the form with the hyphens isn't unique to basketball. My initial suggestion is to Retarget both to Five by Five (disambiguation), although the signal strength meaning may turn out to be primary. Note that there are several other "Five by Five" redirects which are currently split between the "signal strength" page and the DAB page; I'm not including them here to avoid a WP:TRAINWRECK -if there's a clear consesus on this discussion that the term is ambiguous, we can address them later. Tevildo (talk) 23:19, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

retarget to Five by Five (disambiguation) per nom. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ _{choose only one...} 03:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

retarget I believe that the basketball one should have its own article, but even that subjugated to a disambig.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:01, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Five-by-five (basketball) is available for a full article on the topic. Tevildo (talk) 17:28, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Five by Five (disambiguation) per nom. --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:33, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget both to disambig per nom. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 06:44, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Signal strength and readability report to match Five by Five, and which the dab page (by location and content) clearly regards as primary and has a hatnote to the dab. This matches my searches. Thryduulf (talk) 12:15, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Men & Motors / ITV5

Men & Motors / ITV5 → Men & Motors (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 20:38, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

European primitive cave lion

European primitive cave lion → Panthera gombaszogensis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

It's unclear to me what this redirect even refers to and an unlikely search term. It has zero results on scholar [1] and only four google search results each with an unclear context [2] Hemiauchenia (talk) 20:26, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete in all my research, I've never seen the term. SilverTiger12 (talk) 18:33, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michelle Ezarik

Michelle Ezarik → IJustine (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Redirect for non-notable individual, basically leading to her daughter, iJustine. Brandmeister^talk 19:53, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do not "fix" links that are not broken

Do not "fix" links that are not broken → Wikipedia:Redirect#Do not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unnecessary cross namespace redirect Schützenpanzer (Talk) 19:48, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not only is it an unnecessary WP:XNR, the section heading is Do not "fix" links to redirects that are not broken, not the redirect's title. -insert valid name here- (talk) 20:09, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup I

Ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup I → Work It (Missy Elliott song) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Implausible. One would have to write "I put my thing down flip it and reverse it" and then reverse that, and I put my thing down flip it and reverse it was not a redirect at the time of this RFD's creation. -insert valid name here- (talk) 18:44, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've just created the I put my thing down flip it and reverse it redirect, which makes this one more unnecessary. -insert valid name here- (talk) 18:49, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ _{choose only one...} 03:35, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The backwards line in the song is "ti esrever dna ti pilf ,nwod gniht ym tup", not "ti esrever dna ti pilf ,nwod gniht ym tup I", so this is implausible. I wouldn't necessarily be opposed to ti esrever dna ti pilf ,nwod gniht ym tup or ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup existing as an {{R from lyric}}. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 14:22, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.mon rep eteleD 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:38, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stereotypes of Canadians

Stereotypes of Canadians → Culture of Canada (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 08:14, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ludobot

Ludobot → Entertainment robot (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

keep Searchable term; add something to entertainment robot from the internets. --Altenmann >talk 17:42, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn't find any sources that would support the term being mentioned in entertainment robot, just a few primary sources for specific products and project names. Belbury (talk) 14:24, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete. This appears to be a particularly notable brand name, which should not be added to the article as that would elevate this particular brand above other, equally (non)notable ones. Rusalkii (talk) 17:35, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 08:12, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flashing light of death

Flashing light of death → PlayStation (console)#Flashing light of death (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 08:11, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fish or fishes

Fish or fishes → Fish#"Fish" or "fishes" (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Fish versus fishes → Fish#"Fish" or "fishes" (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Fishes versus fish → Fish#"Fish" or "fishes" (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Fishes or fish → Fish#"Fish" or "fishes" (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Fish vs fishes → Fish#"Fish" or "fishes" (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Restore mention at Fish and turn the old section link into an anchor. The first two sentences of special:permalink/1133745051 § "Fish" or "fishes" seem like they'd do the trick, to be added to the etymology section. Else delete. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 19:26, 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 08:10, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Mention now restored per Tamzin above, and anchor set, so these redirects all now point to relevant material. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:14, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hounds of Shadow

Hounds of Shadow → Malazan Book of the Fallen#Cards and Tiles (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

This was a redirect to the #Hounds section of High House Shadow before that was BLARd, and is also at RfD. Wait for its RfD to close. Jay 💬 08:57, 4 July 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 08:09, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HODL

HODL → Bitcoin#Use for investment and status as an economic bubble (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Hodl → Bitcoin#Use for investment and status as an economic bubble (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Now that all the mentions of this are gone from the target (although I don't know if they've ever been there?), how about redirect to wiktionary? Stumbling9655 (talk) 07:41, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Hodl now bundled here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:28, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete HODL and Retarget Hodl to Hödl. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:30, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect A popular crypto variant of the Buy and hold investment strategy. Selfstudier (talk) 17:17, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There are enough sources to create a dedicated article for this term. Meanwhile, it should be redirected to its Wiktionary entry. Vgbyp (talk) 17:38, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish genocide (19th–20th century)

Turkish genocide (19th–20th century) → Persecution of Muslims during the Ottoman contraction (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Turkish genocide (1820–1920) → Persecution of Muslims during the Ottoman contraction (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Genocide of Turkish people → Persecution of Muslims during the Ottoman contraction (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

At Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 June 24#Turkish massacre I recommend disambiguating that term. If that gains consensus then redirecting this to it will probably be the most helpful - this could refer to genocide of Turks or genocide by Turks. Thryduulf (talk) 21:17, 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]
After the Turkish genocide AFD, it was recreated as a redirect, and remained as such for 2 years, having been edited by 7 editors with 4 different targets. It was deleted (I would say incorrectly) by the AfD closer Sandstein as a G4. Another redirect Turkey genocide created in 2017 still stands. Jay 💬 05:07, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts on Thryduulf's suggestion now that Turkish massacre has closed as disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 03:50, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noix

Noix → Walnut (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

WP:FORRED, language is French and the word can refer to any nuts. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 01:02, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment no comment on FORRED but fr:Noix is the French Wikipedia page for walnuts (and wikidata links back to Walnut) so I think it's only a FORRED matter? Skynxnex (talk) 02:11, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In French, Noix does mean 'walnut' but can mean 'nut' in general, and since noix isn't mentioned in the article, that ambiguity isn't resolved, and this redirect could therefore be confusing. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:39, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment would it be useful as a dab for Noix Limestone and Noix Creek? --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:36, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Convert to disambig per Lenticel. Current target is a clear-cut case of FORRED (plus the fact that it often means simply "nut" in French), but disambig would be appropriate. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 06:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the FORRED concerns mentioned, and do not dabify, as there are two (maybe three) WP:PTMs, that shouldn't be listed on one. Deletion is preferable, as it aids searching. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:45, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 12

Rida Wahab

Rida Wahab → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 23:00, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until the discussion at Talk:List of Lebanon women's international footballers#10 caps limit concludes. Thryduulf (talk) 12:29, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cecile Iskandar

Cecile Iskandar → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 23:00, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until the discussion at Talk:List of Lebanon women's international footballers#10 caps limit concludes. Thryduulf (talk) 12:29, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aya El Boukhary

Aya El Boukhary → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:59, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until the discussion at Talk:List of Lebanon women's international footballers#10 caps limit concludes. Thryduulf (talk) 12:29, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Carla Abdel Khalek

Carla Abdel Khalek → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Delete - no good target, she is mentioned in multiple articles. Jay 💬 15:15, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Admins: please do not close this as 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!} 17:14, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:59, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cremastra: My vote is independent of the talk page discussion, and wouldn't change even if mention was added back. So unless you have a good reason to keep or retarget, we should not hold back on the close. Jay 💬 09:51, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until the discussion at Talk:List of Lebanon women's international footballers#10 caps limit concludes. Thryduulf (talk) 12:29, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Lebanon women's international footballers

Karly Harfouche → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cybelle Al Ghoul → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Amal Salha → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Souad Takash → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Assile Toufaily → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Melanie Ghanime → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Yasmin Sardouk → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Saria Al Sayegh → List of Lebanon women's international footballers (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Outside of the scope of the List article (10+ caps for the Lebanon national team). Nehme₁₄₉₉ 11:34, 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!} 17:14, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:59, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wait until the discussion at Talk:List of Lebanon women's international footballers#10 caps limit concludes. Thryduulf (talk) 12:29, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maggie Weinroth

Maggie Weinroth → Colorado State Fair (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:58, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, not mentioned anywhere. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:42, 13 July 2025 (UTC) Although I'm now curious about the Grand champion goat scandal[reply]
Restore without prejudice. The article was sourced and did not meet any speedy deletion criteria so deletion at RfD is completely inappropriate. 12:32, 14 July 2025 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thryduulf (talk • contribs)

Oppose restoration, this is a minor WP:BLP1E with zero hope of notability. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I've restored a blurb about this incident in the history section of the article. I can see why it was previously removed, it was an entire section that took up half the article which is definitely undue weight. Given the coverage the incident received, I can see a few sentences as a good balance. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:42, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Parachute (EP)

Parachute (EP) → Hellogoodbye (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Parachute e.p. → Hellogoodbye (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The Parachute → Hellogoodbye (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:57, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

High House Shadow

High House Shadow → Malazan Book of the Fallen#Cards and Tiles (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Restore and delete at AfD. Jay 💬 08:53, 4 July 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:56, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

C4SS

Center for a Stateless Society → Market anarchism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
C4SS → Market anarchism#The Center for a Stateless Society (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Keep. It's worth a mention in market anarchism based on this source. czar 15:51, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
'Retarget "C4SS" to Metropolitan University Prague, where the 'Center for Security Studies' (C4SS) is mentioned. If a mention for the Center for a Stateless Society returns, it could be turned into a disambiguation page. -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 05:27, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the first and Disambiguate the second. I added a mention of them to the article. lethargilistic (talk) 00:46, 29 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:55, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Islamic State provinces

Islamic State – Hijaz Province → Islamic State – Saudi Arabia Province (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Islamic State – Green Brigade Province → Islamic State – Yemen Province (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Hijaz Wilayah also exists, but is probably not similar enough to bundle. Rusalkii (talk) 22:31, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for reaching out. I readded both the Wilāyat Laḥj (lit. 'Lahij Province') and Wilāyat Liwā’ ʾAkhḍar (lit. 'Green Brigade Province') sub-branches back into the Islamic State – Yemen Province article with references. This is after RowanJ LP removed them for not having a reference. As for Wilāyat al-Ḥijāz (lit. 'Hejaz Province'), I'm planning to add a similar wikitable for the Islamic State – Saudi Arabia Province article in the future.

For the latter redirect, i.e. Hijaz Wilayah, I'm pretty sure either ISIS or Pro-ISIS propaganda uses the term. Buddy731 (talk) 11:18, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:53, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Astro Premier League 2

Astro Premier League 2 → Astro (company) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:52, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Baijiahao

Baijiahao → Baidu (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 21:13, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The best outcome would be to add relevant content at Baidu, rather than deleting the redirect. 162 etc. (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Winnipeg Monarchs (MJHL)

Winnipeg Monarchs (MJHL) → Winnipeg Monarchs (1930-78) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Ambiguous; see Winnipeg Monarchs (2025). Redirect to dab at Winnipeg Monarchs. 162 etc. (talk) 20:44, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget as a {{R from incomplete disambiguation}} per nom. Thryduulf (talk) 21:40, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Frontier Park

Frontier Park → St. Charles, Missouri (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri) → St. Charles, Missouri (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Instead of trying to figure out how to best handle a title that could refer to several non-notable places, it may be best to undo the BLARing of Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri) and nominate it for deletion. If that proposal succeeds, Frontier Park can also be safely deleted. - Eureka Lott 00:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What are grounds for undoing the BLAR, unless you wish to enhance the article? If taken to AfD, it would most probably result in again redirecting to St. Charles, Missouri. Jay 💬 07:29, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The park is mentioned in the target article, but it's a mere passing mention. We wouldn't be in this situation if the article had been deleted (or draftified) instead of being BLARed and moved. A WP:PROD nomination probably would've handled it. - Eureka Lott 14:15, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  What you are saying is you don't find "Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri)" to be a good redirect. If nominated at RfD, that will be a separate discussion, but it cannot be bundled here because this nomination is about ambiguity. Jay 💬 17:07, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just delete and let Search handle queries without interruption. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:41, 22 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]

Comment: I don't know why Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri) should have been bundled here when Jay already specifically pointed out above that it would need to be a separate discussion. --Paul_012 (talk) 21:06, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed, bundling was a mistake here. Keep Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri) as both unambiguous and mentioned at the target (although that mention could be expanded). Delete or disambig Frontier Park, there a many parks with this name mentioned on en.wp, including at List of city parks of Erie, Pennsylvania, Grant-Frontier Park, Cheyenne Frontier Days, Hays, Kansas, North Ridgeville, Ohio, Aintree, Victoria and Simi Valley, California. The Cheyenne park is the only one with a claim on being primary but it doesn't rise to that level imo. Thryduulf (talk) 09:25, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Disagree. If Frontier Park is deleted and Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri) remains, it creates a "Title (disambiguation) exists when Title does not exist" problem, which is essentially an offshoot of violating WP:PRECISE. (I may vote later ... but at the minimum, I'm a "do not delete Frontier Park if Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri) is not deleted".) Steel1943 (talk) 17:38, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  There is no issue at all with a "Title (disambiguation) exists when Title does not exist" situation (it's not a "problem", let alone one that justifies deleting something). It would be a problem for an article to be located at "Title (disambiguation)" when "Title" doesn't exist, but that problem is very easily solved by either moving the article to the undisambiguated title or creating a disambiguation page at the latter. However if "Title" is too ambiguous to be useful as a dab page, but "Title (disambiguation)" is unambiguous, then it actively harms the encyclopaedia to delete the latter (by making it unnecessarily harder for readers to find the content they are looking for). Consider that nobody would regard a naturally disambiguated title an issue in this circumstance - even if that were not how we would title our article. Thryduulf (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Regarding "There is no issue at all with a "Title (disambiguation) exists when Title does not exist" situation (it's not a "problem"...": WP:PRECISE seems to disagree with that since if we have a disambiguated term but it's the only term, then it doesn't need to be disambiguated. (In all actuality though, the root problem is that the redirect should have never been moved from Frontier Park to Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri). If the nominator had just nominated Frontier Park and never created Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri), we would not be disputing this. In other words, the nominator created the mess that we never should have had any reason to discuss or dispute.) Also, Thryduulf, to one of your points: My vote is satisfied/resolved if Frontier Park is converted to a disambiguation page (though I should have specifically stated that before now); in other words, most of your vote (except "delete Frontier Park") matches up with my stance. Steel1943 (talk) 23:47, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  WP:PRECISE is about article titles and not relevant to redirects. if we have a disambiguated term but it's the only term, then it doesn't need to be disambiguated. indeed, but that doesn't mean that the disambiguated term must not exit, see Category:Redirects from unnecessary disambiguation. There is no mess here, just two normal redirects - one ambiguous, one unambiguous. Thryduulf (talk) 00:11, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  WP:PRECISE is about titles on the article namespace. Not sure who said "if we have a disambiguated term but it's the only term, then it doesn't need to be disambiguated." because that was not my stance, and I'm arguing something different. Either way, I don't think I have anything to add anymore since I don't know how to respond to "There is no mess here, just two normal redirects - one ambiguous, one unambiguous." since there have been stance(s) to delete the ambiguous redirect without deleting the unambiguous redirect, so I'm getting a bit lost what are points are now and can really only state "my stance remains". Steel1943 (talk) 00:30, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  WP:PRECISE is part of the article titles policy, which applies to articles. Disambiguation pages, redirects, etc. have their own titling conventions that are separate from the article titles policy - see WP:RNEUTRAL for a good example of why. Thryduulf (talk) 21:42, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd just like to note that I oppose converting Frontier Park into a disambiguation page, because there's no indication that any of the identified parks are notable. I still think we'd be best served by deleting both redirects. - Eureka Lott 03:00, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both Regardless of any metaprocedural disputes above there simply isn't enough substance at the target to warrant a redirect. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:04, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate Frontier Park. I've drafted a disambiguation under the redirect. Keep Frontier Park (St. Charles, Missouri). There is a mention there which is enough for me. -- Tavix ^(talk) 14:32, 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) 19:05, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brent Díaz

Brent Díaz → Milwaukee Brewers minor league players#Brent Díaz (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:00, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just tagged the redirect as an {{R from merge}}. I don't have an answer to nom's question of should attribution be kept since it was the author who performed the merge. Jay 💬 08:03, 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) 17:46, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:RESULT

Wikipedia:RESULT → Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Military history#Primary infoboxes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Comment: Saying "MOS:RESULT was deleted" without explaining the context is somewhat misleading. What happened with it was its creator, SMcCandlish, created MOS:RESULT and then about a minute later, moved it without redirect to MOS:MILRESULTMOS:MILRESULT. In addition, if anything, in the "Wikipedia:" and "MOS:" namespaces, "ambiguous" is better served with a disambiguation page (provided the redirect is not too old and frequently linked). Steel1943 (talk) 15:34, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RESULT is definitely too ambiguous, and we should not be redirecting unclear WP:-namespace shortcuts to MoS sections. It would be better to make an internal disambiguation page, including MOS:MILRESULT and various other pages that have "result[s]" in their name or which tally the results of processes or catalogue common results of recurrent debates, and whatever else someone might be looking for when they take a stab at "WP:RESULT". Send WP:RESULTS to same place. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 20:22, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Help:Searching#Search results page to match WP:RESULTS. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:07, 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]

Disambiguate per SMcCandlish. Duckmather (talk) 02:08, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation draft requested Rusalkii (talk) 21:00, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
First choice - delete as vague. Second choice as an WP:ATD - retarget to search results per Tavix as an {{R from singular}}. Disambiguating or hatnoting RESULT to military results would be confusing. Jay 💬 03:22, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 17:46, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wifiskeleton

Wifiskeleton → List of 2025 deaths in popular music (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Subject removed from target article due to not meeting notability requirements (individual article has been deleted twice for this reason), so a redirect doesn't make sense. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 16:13, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note the redirect was not tagged for RfD, I have fixed this and will notify relevant people if this has also not been done. Thryduulf (talk) 17:29, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for fixing it. My first time ever nomming a redirect. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 03:12, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. The article was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/WifiSkeleton (uppercase S) on 15 May 2025 and this title was deleted under G8 as a redirect to that article. The article was recreated here on 21 May and deleted under G4 the following day. On 24 May it was re-created as a redirect to Nope Your Too Late I Already Died (a song by WifiSkeleton), that article was deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nope Your Too Late I Already Died on 23 June. On 22 June the redirect at this title was replaced by an article that was in turn deleted on 11 July following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wifiskeleton (lowercase S; from a skimread the previous AfD doesn't appear to have been mentioned in this one and it was not evaluated for G4). Consensus was that there was insufficient coverage in independent reliable sources for an article, the list this redirect currently targets requires a standalone article for inclusion. Thryduulf (talk) 17:47, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. He isn't even listed on that page so I don't understand why there's a redirect. At this point it just seems like certain fans of him really want him to be mentioned on here for some reason. Just let it go bruh... it's over Sosumiw (talk) 13:47, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sosumiw He was already there prior to the AfD but I removed him and other non-notable musicians from that article shortly after Liz delinked him when the discussion closed. Someone re-added him yesterday but I just deleted it. 💥Casualty ^{• Hop along. •} 17:21, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. --Lenticel ^(talk) 08:55, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inscriptional

Inscriptional → Vox-ATypI classification#The Inscriptionals (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The target of Inscription is Epigraphy.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:52, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

retarget to Epigraphy per nom drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ _{choose only one...} 15:01, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Epigraphy. Most uses seem to be related to that. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:51, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Epigraphy per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 08:56, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inscript

Inscript → InScript keyboard (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that Inscription is a redirect to Epigraphy.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:41, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would keep the redirect. Inscript as a word meaning inscription is rare. Adumbrativus (talk) 22:09, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep {{R from modification}}. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:52, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Adumbrativus. A hatnote pointing to Epigraphy (the target for Inscription) might be useful. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 11:13, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2020–21 Punjab, Pakistan budget

2020–21 Punjab, Pakistan budget → Punjab, Pakistan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete redirect, not useful. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2019–20 Punjab, Pakistan budget. No content was merged in the BLAR so no history attribution required. Bobby Cohn 🍁 (talk) 13:38, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mali wedding airstrike attack

Mali wedding airstrike attack → Mali wedding airstrike (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This should probably just be a speedy deletion because it was the page title for 9 minutes and is obviously redundant. Thepharoah17 (talk) 13:16, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I mean, it's accurate, and many titles are formatted this way. Given it was titled this that is another reason to keep. PARAKANYAA (talk) 02:22, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

many titles are formatted this way: as far as I can tell zero other titles contain the phrase "airstrike attack". Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 11:17, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, it's accurate and umabiguous so there isn't any benefit to deletion, that it's a {{R from move}} is also a positive reason to keep. Thryduulf (talk) 12:36, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gunter glieben glauchen globen.

Gunter glieben glauchen globen. → Pretty Fly (For a White Guy) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete. Contain a period at the end, and is not consistent with Gunter glieben glauchen globen which targets Rock of Ages (Def Leppard song). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:04, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; failing that, retarget to Rock of Ages (Def Leppard song). WP:RTYPO indicates that extra punctuation at the end of a search should be kept; however, this is inconsistent with its own examples, with the very first one being the conspicuously missing Wikipedia. redirect; links to the three RFD discussions that led to Wikipedia. being deleted can be found at WP:RTYPO itself.

If it's determined that the redirect should be kept, it should NOT be left to redirect to Pretty Fly (For a White Guy)-- Pretty Fly (For a White Guy) and Rock of Ages do both start with the "Gunter glieben glauchen globen" phrase, but Pretty Fly is explicitly sampling it from Rock of Ages, the song that the phrase was originally recorded for.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have a lot of Def Leppard to listen to. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:18, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Rock of Ages (Def Leppard song) as a Template:R from lyrics. I don't think Lunamann's WP:RTYPO argument holds, because this is a sentence, which should end with a punctuation mark, as opposed to "Wikipedia", which isn't a complete sentence. See also other lyrical redirects like Hello, hello, hello, how low?. -insert valid name here- (talk) 22:34, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Uno dos tres cuatro cinco cinco seis

Uno dos tres cuatro cinco cinco seis → Pretty Fly (For a White Guy) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

It is unclear why this redirects here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:00, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's a prominent line from the song. Any precedent for keeping these? I often search Google and Spotify for lyrics when I can't remember the name of a song. It's plausible but with only 28 lifetime views (daly average ≈ 0) and no links, can probably delete safely. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:04, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'd only really support an R from Lyrics redirect if it's probable that a given person would remember the lyric but not the title of the song-- in which case, the lyric stands in for the title. Pretty Fly (for a White Guy) is nnnnnot the sort of song where this is necessary, the title of the song is prominent enough in the lyrics that anyone who listens to the song can probably guess that "Pretty fly for a white guy" is probably the title of the song.
Notwithstanding the fact that this lyric is literally just the numbers "one" through "six" in Spanish, said in order, with the five repeated. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:22, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, this is just a random lyric from the song that isn't mentioned in the target article. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 18:16, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Long term relationship

Long term relationship → Intimate relationship (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Long-term relationship → Committed relationship (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These should have the same target but which one I can’t decide. Maybe they should just be deleted. Thepharoah17 (talk) 12:25, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

delete per nom drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ _{choose only one...} 15:02, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:
From 2005-2008 Long term relationship was an article, it was deleted as an expired PROD (the concern was that it was badly written and only "borderline neutrality"). In 2010 it was recreated as a redirect by user:Soap, originally targetting Interpersonal relationship to match the redirect at Long-term relationship. The version without the hyphen was retargetted without any explanation in the edit summary in 2021 by Jim Michael who was later blocked for socking.

Long-term relationship was created in 2005 as a stub that was basically just a dictionary definition and was marked for transfer to Wiktionary. It was redirected to Interpersonal relationship in 2006 by an editor later blocked as a sock of Wonderfool. In 2016 Jim Michael changed the target to Intimate relationship without explanation. In June this year HudecEmil retargetted it to Committed relationship with the rationale "more relevant".

Long relationship (a redirect to Intimate relationship) was deleted at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 June 29#Long relationship. Thryduulf (talk) 18:06, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as far too ambiguous to be a useful search term for any one thing. In addition to all the above targets, long-distance relationship and business relationships were brought up at the related June RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 18:06, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:55, 13 July 2025 (UTC) I have a long-term relationship with my bank which is neither intimate nor particularly committed.[reply]
Retarget to Committed relationship. I think the suggestion at the previous RfD that "long relationship" might be intended to mean "long-distance relationship" is implausible enough; suggesting that "long term relationship" might be interpreted as "long-distance relationship" is wildly implausible. A business relationship could be described as a long-term relationship, but the phrase "long term relationship" without further context in English specifically refers to a committed sexual and/or romantic relationship and that's what anyone searching for this phrase is likely to be looking for. Just because we could creatively (mis)interpret the set phrase "long term relationship" to mean something other than the normal English meaning of the term does not mean that we should. Having just googled "long term relationship" and gone through the first five pages of results, I cannot find a single one using the phrase with any other meaning than committed relationship. Example uses: [3], [4], [5]. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 11:36, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Info wars

Info wars → Info Wars (film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Should redirect to the "news" website, which is the clear primary topic. Plus the film was named after the website. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 11:47, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are a couple of things here that are worth documenting - firstly, the film title is stylised "info wars". Secondly there is a history of page moves: The article was originally created at Info Wars in August 2004, moved to Info wars (by AlistairMcMillan) in October 2005 without obvious discussion. It was moved back by Anthony Appleyard in October 2009 with the edit summary "asked" (I don't know where, but it wasn't the film article's talk page or Anthony's talk page). It was moved to the disambiguated title following Talk:Info Wars (film)#Requested move 11 March 2019, the website was regarded as the primary topic and so the resulting redirect (Info Wars) was retargetted to the website. This redirect was automatically retargetted to the (film) title by a bot after the page move, it wasn't considered in the RM. Thryduulf (talk) 12:18, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per nom. Even though the lowercase stylisation matches the film and not the website, the evidence suggests that the website is the primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 12:18, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Infowars as {{R from modification}}. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:57, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Infowars per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 08:58, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gag names

Dixie Normus → Gag name (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
P Niss → Gag name (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Will E → Gag name (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

This kind of thing really isn't my bag, baby, but a shag-a-listic redirect would be to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Austin_Powers_characters#Dixie_Normous BBQboffin^{grill me} 04:25, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget Dixie Normus to List of Austin Powers characters#Dixie Normous per BBQboffin. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:26, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:36, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget Dixie Normus per above, delete the rest per consensus established at [[6]] — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 05:21, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yong Yea

Yong Yea → List of actors who have played Sherlock Holmes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Very confusing, bordering on nonsensical, redirect to stumble upon in the wild, given that the actor has been in multiple productions and the List of actors who have played Sherlock Holmes gives him little more than a passing mention. GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 10:15, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

restore to article; I agree completely with the nominator on this one. If there was an issue with the article it should have been taken to AfD if anything, where additional eyes would be on it. Tduk (talk) 12:53, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prurience

Prurience → Miller test (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Prurient → Dominick Fernow (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

There's also prurient interest, which currently redirects to obscenity. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 11:22, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget Prurience → Obscenity and Keep Prurient. All three instances of prurience in articles used that term in a a general sense or, to the extent it refers to legal considerations, it is not specific to the Miller test. Thus, obscenity is a more appropriate target and does discuss legal aspects in the US and many other countries. Prurient has dozens of links in article space and while I did not check them all, every one I spot-checked appeared to refer to the musician, whose stage name Prurient is listed as a bolded name in the article lead. Given that there is no apparent competition for this title and it is otherwise a dictionary word, the primary redirect Prurient appears well placed. The musician article was previously titled Prurient and was moved in 2016 (Special:Diff/722684294) apparently without controversy. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:15, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:14, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fel8me

Fel8me → Fellatio (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Suggesting delete: substituting "8" for "ate" and adding "me" makes this an unlikely search term. Jruderman (talk) 09:04, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fel8 is a somewhat plausible redirect, if someone heard the word "fellate" but didn't know how it was pronounced, but the addition of "me" without spaces makes it unlikely. -insert valid name here- (talk) 18:47, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leash (BDSM)

Leash (BDSM) → BDSM (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

leashes are only mentioned once at the target article, in an image caption. i.e, there's not enough information for this redirect to make sense targeting anywhere.

i should note that this used to be a article sourced to an unreliable source before it was was redirected by @Drmies, and that this has history going back as early as 2005 User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:37, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Restore without prejudice. An article with that extensive a history should definitely not be deleted without discussion. Thryduulf (talk) 12:22, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Thryduulf, I think you're confusing "extensive" with "long", and it was a bad article. Drmies (talk) 14:40, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - Your personal opinion of the article quality is completely irrelevant. The article content should be restored and, if you or someone else desires it to be deleted, discussed at the appropriate forum for discussing the deletion of article content (AfD). Thryduulf (talk) 14:59, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - What's highly relevant is the fact that there was no cited content. That matters. Drmies (talk) 15:35, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

restore per Thryduulf. drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ _{choose only one...} 15:04, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

restore per Thruduulf and improve the article. Tduk (talk) 16:32, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WazirX

WazirX → Binance#India (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

It is now being debated whether this article needs to be redirected to 2024 WazirX hack or Binance#India. I believe this subject deserves its own article, while 2024 WazirX hack can be merged to main WazirX. Merging would only be possible only when the article is restored. That said, I would support restoring this article. Koshuri ^(あ!) 07:22, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Distrito Escolar de Filadelfia

Distrito Escolar de Filadelfia → School District of Philadelphia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I don't think Philadelphia's school district has an especially large number of Spanish-speaking people, so delete per WP:FORRED, I think? Duckmather (talk) 05:07, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. president 2020

U.S. president 2020 → 2020 United States presidential election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
U.S. president 2016 → 2016 United States presidential election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
US President 2012 → 2012 United States presidential election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
POTUS 2016 → 2016 United States presidential election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
POTUS 2020 → 2020 United States presidential election (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Seems related to who is being the US President in 2020 rather than the 2020 presidential election A1Cafel (talk) 04:25, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added U.S. president 2016 and US President 2012, hope that's ok with you. Adumbrativus (talk) 05:50, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I added "POTUS 2016" and "POTUS 2020". Jruderman (talk) 08:46, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I didn't notice them, thank you. --A1Cafel (talk) 03:20, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rice gadu

Rice gadu → Rice#Harvesting.2C drying and milling (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Merge to an appropriate article like Rice production in Indonesia, as Agriculture in Indonesia § Rice has very less content and would be UNDUE. Jay 💬 13:20, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 04:16, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JK Tabasalu (women)

JK Tabasalu (women) → JK Tabasalu (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 04:12, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Viimsi JK (women)

Viimsi JK (women) → Viimsi JK (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 04:12, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 11

Bo J

Bo J → Joacim Persson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is the target's middle name followed by first initial. I can't find a source stating he goes by this, and all hits are for other people. Rusalkii (talk) 23:26, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete when I first saw it I expected it to be a redirect to BoJack Horseman. Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:43, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Some places like https://eurovision.tv/participant/chingiz list "Bo J" on the credits of a Eurovision 2019 song, Truth (Chingiz song). Wikipedia currently lists it as Joacim Persson instead, which I didn't see a citation for. https://eurovisionworld.com/eurovision/2019/azerbaijan says Bo J is Joacim Persson. Not sure if that's reliable. Adumbrativus (talk) 06:45, 12 July 2025 (UTC) Addendum: I put a notification at WikiProject Song Contests. Adumbrativus (talk) 06:55, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2026 NRL season

2026 NRL season → National Rugby League (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. And it is honestly just very slightly too soon. Servite et contribuere (talk) 23:17, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now per nom. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 06:46, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete per nom. Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:50, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Philosophy (Wikipedia article)

Philosophy (Wikipedia article) → Wikipedia philosophy phenomenon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete. Target subject is not about a type of article (though the target article is about a subject ... like all articles are). Steel1943 (talk) 17:48, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Fairly harmless. --cheesewhisk3rs (pester) 17:54, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree, considering we have an article titled Philosophy. But even then, my "subject is not about a type of article" concern applies to Philosophy as well. Steel1943 (talk) 19:02, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused. "Philosophy", here, is not being used (rightly or wrongly) to describe a type or genre of article, but rather to denote the single, unique article of that name. Patrick 🐈‍⬛ (talk) 19:25, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
...Huh? That was not clear. Steel1943 (talk) 19:38, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand what you mean by "subject is not about a type of article". Where is anyone suggesting that we're talking about a "type" of article? What we have are two specific articles: one is a self-standing V-1 article about the discipline of philosophy, and the other is about a Wikipedia phenomenon directly related to that article. Patrick 🐈‍⬛ (talk) 19:55, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm referring to the disambiguator of the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 00:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Patrick Welsh my understanding is that Steel is saying that in their view "Philosophy (Wikipedia article)" should lead to an article about something called "philosophy" that has the nature "Wikipedia article" or about class of things called "Philosophy" that are a type of Wikipedia article. For example Togo (dog) is an article about a subject called "Togo" that has the nature "dog", and Newfoundland (dog) leads to an article about a class of things called "Newfoundland" that are a type of dog. In this case, that would mean "Philosophy (Wikipedia article)" should be an article about Wikipedia's "Philosophy" article or about a class of things called "Philosophy" that are a type of Wikipedia article. Thryduulf (talk) 08:39, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I was concerned the !vote might be based on a misunderstanding, but that makes sense. Cheers, Patrick 🐈‍⬛ (talk) 21:25, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are you confused because you don't have the context for the redirect? It is an unusual case. The redirect is from when the page was named "Philosophy (Wikipedia article)". I'm not at all certain but I think you're interpreting it as if the name is talking about articles related to the topic of philosophy, but it isn't. It was an article about the Wikipedia article. (It was moved because the page was more about the unusual first links ending up there than the article itself.) --cheesewhisk3rs (pester) 21:08, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nope, no confusion. My vote stands. Steel1943 (talk) 00:27, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. The target is sort-of about the Wikipedia Philosophy article, and while it's not the most plausible search term it's not an implausible one, and someone desiring the actual philosophy article is only a single click away. Thryduulf (talk) 08:42, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What's next? An article about the article about the article about the article about the article about the article... ? Steel1943 (talk) 16:28, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's an improbable slippery slope argument. An article on the article on the article would need at least 2 reliable sources documenting it to pass GNG - it took years for "Philosophy" to get to this point, so this won't realistically happen for another article, especially such a niche one. If the article(s) are still created, which is unlikely, they would certainly almost immediately be AfD'd for not passing GNG. --cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 19:24, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
...Small text = joke. Steel1943 (talk) 00:26, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, will keep in mind. --cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 07:21, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Steel1943 and others, anyone knows if there's an essay or something on WP-articles about WP-articles, apart from perhaps WP:NAVELGAZING? I know Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Log/2006_October_20#Elephant_(wikipedia_article) existed once. Asian News International vs. Wikimedia Foundation is an interesting case, but not that many WP-articles has been mentioned in a Supreme Court. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:24, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The deletion of "Elephant (wikipedia article)" was caused by it already being covered elsewhere, so I don't think it's a useful example of whether Wikipedia articles should have Wikipedia articles. (The other reason left by the nominator was that it was self-referential, which IMO could've easily been fixed but nobody thought of doing that). --cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 14:03, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If a Wikipedia article meets the GNG then we should have content about it (either a stand-alone article or coverage on a broader article), anything else would be biased. We do have Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident, Wikipedia Star Trek Into Darkness debate and a few similar articles. Thryduulf (talk) 15:05, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have found, on occasion, that if a WP-article is mentioned in media, editors sometimes give such reports main-space room out of WP:PROPORTION. Which isn't that surprising, Wikipedians tend to be a bit passionate about Wikipedia. I note that, for example, the WP-articles Donna Strickland and Recession has had a lot of media-coverage, but this isn't mentioned in the WP-articles, which I think is reasonable. But Strickland is mentioned at Criticism_of_Wikipedia#Notability_of_article_topics, and that's fair. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:18, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"the WP-articles Donna Strickland and Recession has had a lot of media-coverage, but this isn't mentioned in the WP-articles"

If I'm understanding this correctly, it absolutely should not be as that would be a self-reference. If a Wikipedia article has media coverage, this shouldn't be mentioned in the article itself, so mentioning it on a page about Wikipedia or creating a page for it (only if it passes GNG) is reasonable. --cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 19:01, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If I'm understanding this correctly, it absolutely should not be as that would be a self-reference it gets tricky, but if the topic is notable enough for a mention but not a whole article then the subject article might be the best place for it. For example I recall reading an article where there was 1-2 sentences about how the subject reacted to seeing something wrong on their article but beyond it possibly being a radio presenter I can't remember enough to find it again. Thryduulf (talk) 20:17, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We do sometimes mention "WP-kerfuffle" in the articles, it depends on whatever (WP:DUE/WP:PROPORTION hopefully). Clarice Phelps is one example, and Talk:Emily_St._John_Mandel#RFC:_attempt_to_correct_the_Wikipedia_article is an example when editors decided "let's not include this." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:12, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, there's no reason to discriminate against Wikipedia articles just because it would be written on Wikipedia. (Though a lot of the time, due to the changing nature of Wikipedia, making an article on an article would be more complicated than an article on, like in this example, the article's properties. It would be hard to update an article on an article which, if it passes GNG, probably has a lot of edit activity and changes quite frequently. Trying to update the article on the article would be difficult without violating WP:NOR, although even if it's a challenge, that doesn't mean it shouldn't be done - per NPOV.) --cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 18:56, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We do have List of lists of lists. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:59, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per Thryduulf. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:59, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per WP:UNPANDORA and the above. I agree we should focus on the plausibility of the redirect, and as Thryduulf noted its reasonable that someone searching for Philosophy the article is looking for information on the phenomenon. — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 22:19, 2 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 23:15, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jihard Jerry

Jihard Jerry → Gerald Casale (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Pretty useless, originally created as a typo. 72 page views over the last ten years. Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:17, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gummint

Gubmint → Government (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gummint → Government (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Wikipedia is not Urban Dictionary Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:55, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Pages get around 10 monthly page views on average, with lows in the 1-pageview-in-a-month range and peaks as high as 20-30... with Gubmint specifically having a huge spike to 131 pageviews in April 2024 alone. These redirects ARE being used by SOMEONE. Yes, Wikipedia is not Urban Dictionary-- that means that we don't have unsourced definitions of slang words. That does NOT mean that we should avoid making redirects from actively-used slang words to the correct article. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 04:05, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The redirects are in use and the targets are not controversial. —Psychonaut (talk) 06:34, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There is no indication, or indeed any way to prove, that anyone using these redirects actually gets to what they really wanted. They may well have actually wanted the two (each) legitimate mentions of these words that would be better revealed by Search if the redirects didn't obscure them. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:40, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wocky Slush

Wocky Slush → Eternal Atake 2 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Target page does not mention redirected topic. Suspected to be irrelevant. Recommend deletion. MisterAziz (talk) 21:09, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Developea

Developea → Bigyromonada (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This page redirects to Bigyromonada which is an obsolete and paraphyletic taxon that is not used in the automated taxobox system hierarchy. So, this redirect should be deleted, until the page is finally created. Jako96 (talk) 20:34, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Frankfort, Virginia

Frankfort, Virginia → Fort Ashby, West Virginia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Redirects name of a town in Virginia to an article about a town in West Virginia for no plausible reason. Donald Albury 17:34, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment looks like the town of Fort Ashby was named Frankfort when it was created and still part of Virginia (pre-Civil War). Maybe tag with {{R from former name}} but I'm not sure if we have similar redirects for towns in WV that predate the split. Skynxnex (talk) 18:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The name "Frankfort, Virginia" comes from a 1932 source referring to an incident in 1931. The redirect was apparaently created because there does not appear to be a Frankfort, Virginia, and someone assumed the source must have meant Frankfort, West Virginia. I tried to provide more detail here, but was reverted. In any case, I think this redirect is the wrong way to deal with the problem. Donald Albury 19:17, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redwing (comics)

Redwing (comics) → List of Teen Titans comics#Other comics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect is confusing, as Marvel also has a character called Redwing. If we want a redirect for this character, something like Redwing (DC Comics) would make more sense. 141.166.157.126 (talk) 16:24, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Redwing (disambiguation)#Arts and entertainment. Along with the Marvel and DC characters (incidentally the DC character is not mentioned at all at the current target; our most substantial content on him is at List of Teen Titans members#Team Titans) there was also an entirely different Redwing who appeared in a Marvel/DC crossover event. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:17, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

may from the pokeymans

May (pokemon) → List of Pokémon anime characters#May (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
May (Pokémon) → List of Pokémon anime characters#Protagonists (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
May (pokémon) → List of Pokémon anime characters#May (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Haruka (Pokémon) → List of Pokémon anime characters#May (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

since the list of pokémon anime characters' afd discussion was closed as redirect, something should probably be done regarding those redirects. may is one of the main characters and ash's resident female companion in the seasons of the anime that take place in hoenn (advanced, advanced challenge, advanced battle, battle frontier), where she's mentioned... but she's only actually there because she's the ~~objectively better~~ playable character in the hoenn games (ruby and sapphire, and then their sister game and remakes), so what should be done? consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 16:24, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

incidentally, three notes:

the second redirect has history, but as is customary for those pokémon character redirects, it was just fancruft. not worth worrying about
i'll boldly use the results of this rfd for the other female protags shamelessly reused in the anime who don't have their own articles (dawn, uh... oh wow, it's just dawn)
i want smelly socks mailed to whoever came up with the hoenn seasons' english titles for the sheer amount of people who ended up believing that "gba" stands for "game boy advanced"

consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 16:33, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire#Story, where May is briefly discussed. It's still a valid enough search term I feel that pointing it somewhere would be useful, and a hard dig may provide notability.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:20, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn’t Pokémon (TV series)#Characters be a better target? (And maybe create a WP:ANCHOR). Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:15, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's the rub, as the two characters described in Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire#Story and the third character described at Pokémon (TV series)#Characters are all very different characters; May in the video games could refer to EITHER the silent-protagonist daughter of Gym Leader Norman OR the daughter of Professor Birch who is your rival through the game (with the role she's NOT taking instead taken by Brendan, the male option for both); meanwhile, May in the anime is the deuteragonist of Pokémon the Series: Ruby and Sapphire (taking a backseat to Ash), is NOT silent in any way, and is specifically the daughter of Norman.
Yes, they're all May. They have roughly the same design, with Anime!May having basically the same appearance as GBA-era Protagonist!May and Rival!May, who in turn, share the exact same sprites. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 04:35, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Retarget~~ as per Kung Fu Man. Unlike with the Team Galaxy redirect from earlier, this does have immediate and substantial enough information on the topic in question that I'm satisfied with this being the new home for this redirect. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 04:07, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate as per Arnav, see my comment above replying to Thepharoah17 for details as to why. Perhaps a hatnote at Pokemon (TV series)#Characters would be a good place to do so? 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:31, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate, there exists the game protagonist, covered at Pokémon Ruby and Sapphire#Plot, the game rival, covered at List of Pokémon rivals#Brendan and May, and the anime character at Pokémon (TV series)#Characters, perhaps creating an anchor. The same for Dawn. Arnav Bhate (talk • contribs) 13:45, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dab per Arnav Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:35, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also bundle May (Pokemon) which redirects to List of Pokémon rivals § Brendan and May. Jay 💬 07:40, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lurism

Lurism → Chakma people#Religion (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

not mentioned in target page and no reasonable alternate target. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 13:26, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Google suggested Lurianism as the correct spelling of Lurism. Web-julio (talk) 16:49, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This was created by a now-blocked user with a history of problematic edits. Internal and web searches don't reveal a potential new target for this. - Eureka Lott 18:42, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adamskostuum

Adamskostuum → Nudity#Male nudity (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Dutch terminology not mentioned on page (RFOREIGN), and the target's topic is not specifically associated with Dutch people. Xeroctic (talk) 10:32, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be appropriate to redirect to the Wiktionary definition wikt:adamskostuum? Otherwise I would favor deletion. WriterArtistDC (talk) 13:19, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. We don't soft redirect random foreign words to their Wiktionary entry for most of the same reasons (see WP:FORRED) we don't redirect them to the equivalent English article or soft redirect them to the article on that language's Wikipedia. Thryduulf (talk) 22:35, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree with Thryduulf. Adumbrativus (talk) 06:11, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Free grocery store

Free grocery store → Food bank (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target. Potentially a misnomer. Beeps beeps (talk) 10:11, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I notified the target of this RFD. Thepharoah17 (talk) 10:31, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The Pratt Free Market in Baltimore calls itself a "free grocery store". I'm not certain how a free grocery store is distinct from a food bank. A cursory internet search shows that the term is used elsewhere to describe locations in Nashville, Minnesota, Atlanta, California, Florida, etc. Bohemian Baltimore (talk) 11:27, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are 232,000 results for "free grocery store" on Google (in quotes), 19,400,000 for "food bank" and 12,200,000 for "food pantry". I think that makes it an obscure synonym.

If "free grocery store" is a non-obscure synonym for "food bank", then Food bank should be updated to include the term. Beeps beeps (talk) 12:16, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and add mention. I wouldn't say it's an obscure synonym, given it's in active use by these organizations to describe themselves-- with a very important caveat, in that from my understanding, "free grocery stores" differ from traditional food banks/pantries by allowing those who use their services to pick out their food themselves like in an actual grocery store, rather than getting pre-selected pre-rationed parcels of food i.e. a traditional food bank/food pantry. That sort of thing ABSOLUTELY deserves a mention in the main article on food banks, and heck-- we already have some sources to use, Bohemian Baltimore furnished us with suitable news articles two replies up.
I'd say that a synonym is only obscure enough to NOT warrant a redirect, if there's little to no chance that anyone would actually type it in-- and someone encountering, for example, Pratt Free Market, or The Grocery Spot, or The Store, or any of these other 'free grocery stores' would absolutely want to pop the term into Wikipedia to find out more. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 04:23, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

George Fitcher

George Fitcher → George Ashmore Fitch (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete or Retarget. Agree with Rusalkii. Redirect to George Ashmore Fitch does not make sense here. 'Fitcher' is phonetically similar to 'Fischer' and thus a retarget could be made to the disambiguation page George Fischer. Katiedevi (talk) 22:20, 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For an opinion about the suggested disambig target, or for the Chinese source used in Nanking Safety Zone.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:53, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No point retargetting: George Fischer and George Fisher are homophones of each other, and sound somewhat like "George Fitcher", but I don't believe either are more plausible a mistake than Fitch -> Fitcher. Given the connection between George Ashmore Fitch and "Fitcher" is, if it exists in reliable sources at all, only in Chinese, keeping the redirect in the Latin script seems pointless. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:29, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Schuylkill East Branch Navigation Company

Schuylkill East Branch Navigation Company → Little Schuylkill Navigation, Railroad and Coal Company (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There is no information about this company in the article that this redirects to. Marcocapelle (talk) 06:54, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom Thepharoah17 (talk) 07:42, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. That was the original name of the company, as is trivial to discover, and it would have been more efficient to fix the article rather than start an RfD. Choess (talk) 16:05, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Terrorisme

Terrorisme → Terrorism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Was originally a vandalism page, now not really useful as a redirect except for being the French translation of terrorism. Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:01, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:FORRED drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ _{choose only one...} 06:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per WP:RLANG; unless there's any specific meaning in English for Terrorisme, we don't need to account for people searching French words in the English Wikipedia. French readers will use the French wikipedia and land on fr:Terrorisme. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 08:19, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Terrists

Terrists → Terrorism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Terrist → Eco-terrorism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
TerrismTerrism → Terrorism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Should they have the same target or should they both be deleted? Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:56, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: per below. I’ve added Terrism to the nomination. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:07, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is two letters off from "Terrorists" and "Terrorist" respectively; one letter too many for plausibility in my book. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 08:20, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete. Seems like a pronunciation spelling (used to emphasize that a speaker elided the syllable, perhaps to make them appear ignorant) rather than a likely misspelling (based on only hearing the word pronounced that way). If kept, Terrorism is the better target. Jruderman (talk) 04:38, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the second redirect isn't using it as a misspelling, but rather a fishy protologistic blending of Terra (Earth in Latin) + terrorist. Either way, delete. Not even Urban Dictionary has an entry for this. Web-julio (talk) 04:47, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, there was an AfD: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Terrist, consensus for redirecting. Web-julio (talk) 04:48, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reading through this 2006-era AfD, the votes were quite clearly pointed towards deletion, with like ONE person mentioning the idea of deleting and redirecting to Terrorism-- with the stated reason for it being "so this won't happen again." (So, like... salt it if you don't want people to make an article here???) Closer cited WP:CHEAP (Or, well. Just said "Redirects are cheap") as an explanation for why the final result was to redirect instead of delete. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 21:39, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment there is terrism. Web-julio (talk) 22:00, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That should probably be bundled into this RFD. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 22:15, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just added it. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:08, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revert vandalism

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 May 3 § Revert vandalism → Help:Reverting – retarget

Revert vandalism → Vandalism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The target page doesn't explain "reverting" vandalism very well in terms of cleaning it (as far as I can see in that article). I suggest retargeting to Wiki#Controlling changes or Wiki#Security because this can cover different wikis. Justjourney (talk | contribs) 02:52, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete if appropriate retarget isn't found:The concept of "reverting vandalism" is not unique to wikis, nor is it unique to the online space in general; perhaps the exact phrasing of 'reverting' vandalism instead of 'removing' it would be a hint as to it being specifically vandalism on a website, but that still doesn't specifically point us to wikis-- website defacement is a real thing, and the process of undoing that would in fact be considered "reverting vandalism".

That said, we can't stay here. The 2009 RFD on this redirect mentioned that the Vandalism article briefly discusses the removal of vandalism, and that was sufficient for retargeting there; unfortunately, as Justjourney notes, the 2025 version of the Vandalism article doesn't, or at least does so so briefly that anyone actually looking for specifically the removal of vandalism would be ill-served to be redirected here. (Notwithstanding the fact that this redirect isn't refined in any way, so instead of being taken to a section specifically about removal of vandalism, the reader is instead taken to the very top of a long article that, at first blush, isn't what they asked for.) 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:26, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak retarget to Vandalism on Wikipedia#Counter-vandalism measures, although vandalism is not unique to Wikipedia, so it's not a perfect target. Duckmather (talk) 05:36, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Wiki#Security per nom. --cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 22:46, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Trollpasta

Trollpasta → Creepypasta#Trollpasta (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No mention yet, and the talk page discussion about adding a mention has stalled too.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 02:01, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Are we assuming that this exists because we expect that anyone searching for this wants to what it means, or how to do it on Wikipedia? (I suppose either are possible...) If we can't redirect into the Help namespace, is there a way to elucidate in the Cyber vandalism section something like blah blah apps such as wikis often have specific tools for reverting vandalized text back to its original form without having to look up and retype the original material. (ok too wordy, but...?)

I don't know how we'd address the person who responds Yes but HOW DO I DO IT? Not sure this is helpful. Elf | Talk 01:28, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

??? Dude I think you replied to the wrong comment 🇺🇸Thegoofhere🇺🇸 (talk) 02:07, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Elf did you mean to leave this comment in the #Revert vandalism discussion above? Thryduulf (talk) 11:47, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Butch/Femme

Butch gay → Butch (slang) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Butch Lesbian → Butch (slang) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Butch lesbian → Butch (slang) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Butch Lesbians → Butch and femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Butch lesbians → Butch (slang) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Butch Lesbianism → Butch and femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Butch lesbianism → Butch and femme#Butch (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Butchness → Butch and femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femmeness → Butch and femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femme lesbian → Femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femme lesbians → Femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femme Lesbian → Femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femme Lesbians → Femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femme lesbianism → Femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femme Lesbianism → Femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femme gay → Femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Butch dyke → butch and femme#Butch (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Butch dykes → Butch and femme#Butch (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Butchdyke → Butch and femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femmedyke → Butch and femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femme dykes → Femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femme Dykes → Butch and femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Femme Dyke → Femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gay femme → Butch and femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gay butch → Butch and femme (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Shouldn't they have the corresponding equivalent target (Butch and femme or Butch (slang)/Femme)? Web-julio (talk) 01:32, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Butch (slang) or Femme as appropriate. Butch and femme is a page talking about BOTH Butch AND Femme, and the differences/link between the two; that's not what a reader typing any of these redirects is looking for, they want one or the other. That said, there should ABSOLUTELY be a link added to the Butch (slang) and Femme pages that links to Butch and femme, SOMEWHERE on the page. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:32, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget (basically per Lunamann—readers looking for butch or femme should be taken to the specific article):
- Butch lesbianism → Butch (slang)
- Butchness → Butch (slang)
- Femmeness → Femme
Delete (unnecessary capitalization):
Keep the rest.

--MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 04:24, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The terminology "butch and femme" -- at least in the lesbian community I am familiar with -- is used when describing a B/F couple. Pyxis Solitary (yak). ⚢ 12:20, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The term, when used outside page titles, sure, but the article is a WP:Broad-concept article. Web-julio (talk) 23:37, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I bundled some more. Web-julio (talk) 16:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard any lesbian use the terms "Gay butch", "Butch gay", "Gay femme", "Femme gay", or seen them used in any periodical, poster, flyer, banner, you name it. Do gay men use these terms? Pyxis Solitary (yak). ⚢ 10:43, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to Draft:Butch (gay slang), yes. There's a mention in LGBTQ slang as well for drag queens. Web-julio (talk) 19:59, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But pretty much the primary description is that gay is referring to a lesbian in this case, in the "gay woman" sense. I know there's some resistance against the use of gay by some lesbians, but a lot of WLW identify themselves as gay, either interchangeably with lesbian or separately (similarly to queer or sapphic), including celebrities that are on Wikipedia. Web-julio (talk) 20:04, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ji Seo-yeon (singer)

Ji Seo-yeon (singer) → TripleS (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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 hard-redirect to TripleS. WP:PRIMARY is Ji Seo-yeon, a {{For}} hatnote could be added to the PRIMARY if appropriate. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 13:51, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because she isn't even mentioned in the TripleS article as Ji Seo-yeon, she is mentioned by her stage name (JiYeon) or by a different romanisation (Ji Suh-yeon). No value in keeping this redirection. orangesclub 🍊 04:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: OP has been blocked for evasion. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 06:12, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
do you mean IP? drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ _{choose only one...} 07:01, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably Paper9oll means both, as the OP (Original Poster) was an IP editor... who got blocked for block evasion. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 08:23, 11 July 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]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Jay's proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 00:01, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 10

Glizzy

Glizzy → Shy Glizzy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 April 20 § Glizzy – no consensus

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]

Disambiguate per Glossary of Generation Z slang that says it is a Glock handgun, and hotdog. At Lee Major shows "Give It Up Ft. 3 Glizzy" indicating 'Glizzy' being short for Shy Glizzy; at Bissonnet Street indicates a local criminal known as "Glizzy". Also indicate wikt:en:gizzy#English ({{wiktionary|glizzy}}) -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 10:59, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No objection to a redirect to Glossary of Generation Z slang#G. 162 etc. (talk) 16:19, 5 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 23:46, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Glossary of Generation Z slang#G per 162 etc. That page mentions both uses of "Glizzy" ("hot dog" and "Glock"). Redirecting to Hot dog would surprise people who aren't familiar with the slang term. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 06:58, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Iranian strikes

2025 Iranian strikes → 2025 Iranian protests (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete as ambiguous; create new redirects 2025 Iranian labor strikes and 2025 Iranian labour strikes to aid in searches. Jruderman (talk) 04:51, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate since it is an ambiguous term per both Thepharoah17 and Jruderman. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:22, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 23:45, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate per above, it could refer to labor strikes, attacks by Iran (e.g. Israel or Qatar), or attacks in Iran (e.g. by Israel or the US). 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 06:55, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

E7 (countries)

E7 (countries) → PwC#Data analysis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No longer mentioned in the target. So retarget to Mass market#Rise and fall of the mass market? --MikutoH ^talk! 23:14, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lionsgate

Lionsgate → Lions Gate (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 June 12 § Lionsgate – keep
Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 1 § Starz Entertainment – renamed

Point to new Lionsgate DAB page (edited). I have drafted one at User:Myceteae/lionsgate. There are several entities currently or formerly called "Lionsgate". This was the subject of an RM at Lionsgate Studios (May 20), an RFD by User:Intrisit closed as 'keep' with no prejudice to revisiting owing to some confusion in the discussion (June 12), and a subsequent RM at Lionsgate Films (July 3). --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:22, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this necessary when there is already an existing disambiguation page at Lions Gate that covers all these entries? All of these are covered at Lions_Gate#Entertainment. Natg 19 (talk) 18:44, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The history of repeated page moves, RMs, and other discussions on the various Talk pages shows editors have differing opinions about which entity should be crowned "Lionsgate". Lionsgate has more pageviews than any of the related article pages and many more than Lions Gate—by a factor of >200:1! Looking at more recent daily pageviews and including redirects, we get a different order but Lionsgate is still more highly viewed than Lions Gate. The WikiNav for Lions Gate confirms very little overall traffic and shows that Lionsgate Studios, Lionsgate Films, and Starz Entertainment are among the top 5 destinations. Maybe there is too little traffic, and too few entries at Lions Gate, to show a true problem. Retarget to Lions_Gate#Entertainment might also save readers a little time. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:00, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Natg 19, Onel5969 and Rodw, two of the most prominent WP:DPL "addressers" apart from you, retargeted the "Lionsgate" link to Lionsgate Studios in the Barbie (media franchise) page over the past fortnight, when in reality, it was supposed to rather be targeted at the pre-2024 Lionsgate (now Starz Entertainment). That's where my grudge is. Also, what, 5 entries for the "Lionsgate" title in the larger "Lions Gate" DAB page? Seriously, the "Lionsgate" title needs its own DAB page. Intrisit (talk) 21:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to ~~Lionsgate Studios~~ Lionsgate Films. The ~~media company~~ film studio is the primary topic of the term "Lionsgate" (without a space between "Lions" and "gate") given that every other entity by the name of "Lionsgate" is either a subsidy or former parent of that company, and navigation to articles for those is adequately dealt with at Lions Gate. I do not see the utility in a separate disambiguation page, but even if one is considered necessary, it would be best placed at Lionsgate (disambiguation). silviaASH (inquire within) 18:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC) Note: Revised my vote per comments below. silviaASH (inquire within) 21:00, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pageviews (see above) shows Lionsgate Films consistently gets more traffic than Lionsgate Studios. Depending on the parameters, the order and magnitude of the difference changes. The original "Lionsgate" has been rebranded Starz Entertainment and that article contains most of the corporate history of what had been "Lionsgate" until recently. While I see the intuitive logic of making the (current) parent company a primary redirect, it's clearly not the primary topic by usage nor long-term significance. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:33, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If that is the case, then retarget it to Lionsgate Films instead. Either way, the film studio is clearly the primary topic of Lionsgate, and we don't need a separate disambiguation page for it. Redirecting to Lions Gate#Entertainment would also be acceptable. silviaASH (inquire within) 20:57, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They really should stop renaming all of their different groups to make it easier for us. One argument in favor of retargeting to Lionsgate Studios is that it almost functions as a disambigation page for all of everything in Lions_Gate#Entertainment while having more immediate information available. So almost in spirit a Wikipedia:Broad-concept article. But my retarget below is pretty weak. Skynxnex (talk) 20:59, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SilviaASH, between 1997 when Lionsgate was founded and acquired Cinépix Film Properties to 1998 when Lionsgate rebranded them as Lionsgate Films, the pageviews and traffic have beeen parallel and similar. Since the Lionsgate Studios formation just over a year ago, the traffic and pageview stats kept doubling and tripling by the week; it's no wonder you'll be stating this. But it's also where I'll wholeheartedly disagree with you! Should it retarget to Lionsgate Films as you wish, it'll be absurd and make nonsense of the fact that that Lionsgate acquired Artisan Home Entertainment and Family Home Entertainment between 2003 and 2005, who were the distributors of the first 4 Barbie films (which I've patrolled and curated since my account creation). Otherwise and other than that, I would've supported and agreed with you. Intrisit (talk) 21:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even the recent pageviews don't support a WP:PT1 designation (much more likely than any other single topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term) for Lionsgate Films. It has 2x the views of Lionsgate Studios and about 38% of total views for the group. Intrisit provides yet more reason why the long-term significance (PT2) case doesn't hold. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:24, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, my ultimate position is retarget it to whichever related entity by the name of Lionsgate is the primary topic. I don't really care which that is. It can be Lionsgate Films or Studios or the entertainment section of the Lions Gate dab or whatever. My main argument is that a separate disambiguation page at Lionsgate is not necessary. silviaASH (inquire within) 22:26, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lions Gate#Entertainment is preferable to the current target, and keeping the current target is preferable to a primary redirect. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:55, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Added additional old RfD for Starz Entertainment; this was renamed (moved) from Starz Entertainment Corp. per February RfD. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 19:30, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
By "[r]etarget to Lionsgate DAB page" do you mean replace this redirect with your proposed new DAB? I don't think there's sufficient number of Lionsgates to justify a separate DAB. And I'm leaning towarad retarget to Lionsgate Studios per SilviaASH. Skynxnex (talk) 19:53, 10 July 2025 (UTC) I'd be fine with Lionsgate Films, if consensus is there, although the studio page is new enough it's hard to tell for sure how it's all going to settle down to. Skynxnex (talk) 21:10, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
By "[r]etarget to Lionsgate DAB page" do you mean replace this redirect with your proposed new DAB? Yes, that was my suggestion, and one that has been raised elsewhere. See response above to silviaASH re: Lionsgate Studios. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 20:37, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
May be nitpicky (may be? it definitely is) but that isn't a retarget and made me have to re-read that a few times. Skynxnex (talk) 20:55, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the feedback. I have made a few edits in hopes of clarifying. Let me know if you think the listing can be improved. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:09, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

True, but that's also the case for Star TV and Star Channel with regards to Disney's own Star Channel used widely since 2023. The traffic and pageview stats of these titles are mirrored here. Intrisit (talk) 21:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, my opinion: as far as entertainment properties related to Lionsgate, have them listed at a separate DAB for "Lionsgate" (no spaces), as that, not "Lions Gate" (with spaces), appears to be the public branding used for the Lionsgate entertainment properties. ClarkKentWannabe (talk) 22:42, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural close. There's no need to go through an RfD to turn a redirect into a dab page. Nardog (talk) 08:00, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, tell that to 204.111.137.20, who reverted similar edits like this with the statement to list such titles here. At least that happened to the Universal Studios title (see its history) To repeat my reply to Natg 19, he/she, Onel5969 and Rodw, the most prominent WP:DPL "addressers" apart from you, retargeted the "Lionsgate" link to Lionsgate Studios in the Barbie (media franchise) page and other pages over the past year, when in reality, it was supposed to rather be targeted at the pre-2024 Lionsgate (now Starz Entertainment). That's where my grudge is. Also, what, 5 entries for the "Lionsgate" title in the larger "Lions Gate" DAB page? Seriously, the "Lionsgate" title needs its own DAB page. Intrisit (talk) 21:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If we did this wrongly, you can let us know. But you don't need to double post this and make a big fuss over it. To be honest, fixing this dab has been a big mess, as it is difficult to decide whether to point to the successor company (Lionsgate Studios), the film studio (Lionsgate Films), or the "historical" brand that spun off Lionsgate (Starz Entertainment); and everyone is just doing their best at deciding the correct link to use. Natg 19 (talk) 23:03, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support, although Myceteae, this is way sooner after my errant nomination just over a month ago. Like I stated already, I was waiting at least 3 months later (around November) Intrisit (talk) 21:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With two RMs and an RFD (closed as no prejudice to re-stating the request) in as less than 2 months, the topic is ripe for a more definitive consensus. That is also why I agree with you, and disagree with Nardog, that discussion is required for what would obviously have been a controversial change. The inherent ambiguity of "Lionsgate" and the number of articles involved obscure the history and I fear we will have endless "Lionsgate" RMs at a half-dozen different pages until this points somewhere more definitive than Lions Gate. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:13, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How is your draft dab page better than just pointing at Lions Gate? It is still just a disambiguation page. I would agree with SilviaASH and Skynxnex to point to one of the articles (Lionsgate Films or Lionsgate Studios), but it seems like there is no clear target that is the PT. Natg 19 (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lionsgate is a specific search term that's narrower than Lions Gate but does not have a single, unique referent. The various Lionsgates are quite popular and are collectively the most common destinations from the current Lions Gate DAB as shown by Pageviews,[7][8] WikiNav,[9] and Massiews.[10] Lionsgate doesn't have a primary topic, as demonstrated by the big mess of multiple move and redirect discussions. If it did have a PT, Lionsgate would be a good candidate for an article title per WP:SMALLDIFFERENCES. Giving it a unique DAB page (or WP:Set index article, even) might answer the recurring question "Why don't we have a page called Lionsgate?" and stop the RMs for a while or at least centralize the discussion and history moving forward, and also save readers a little time. Thus, I see it as a service to both readers and editors. Ultimately, while I think a unique DAB has merit, I'm more invested in trying to settle this and consolidate the discussion than I am in this particular outcome. A firm decision to retain the status quo or point to Lions Gate#Entertainment instead (for now) is fine. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 04:04, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – As I wrote at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 June 12 § Lionsgate, a separate disambiguation page is not necessary per WP:DABCOMBINE, as "Lionsgate" is merely a spelling variant of "Lion's Gate", so the status quo covers it. There is currently no consensus whether Lionsgate Studios or Lionsgate Films is the primary topic, so retargeting is not appropriate absent a new RM. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:17, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as {{R from modification}}. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:56, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Algeria in the Eurovision Song Contest

Algeria in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Canada in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
China in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Egypt in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Jordan in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Japan in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kazakhstan in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kyrgyzstan in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Libya in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
New Zealand in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Puerto Rico in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Qatar in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Vatican City in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/Libya in the Eurovision Song Contest

Articles for deletion/Qatar in the Eurovision Song Contest

Bundled nomination for a bunch of redirects created for various countries/territories and "in the Eurovision Song Contest". In all cases these countries have never taken part in the Eurovision Song Contest, but have at one time or another been talked about as potential new competing countries in purely hypothetical situations, or have had broadcasters in these countries air the contest. In some cases these countries are eligible to compete due to having public broadcasters as members of the European Broadcasting Union, however beyond hypotheticals there has been no serious attempt by these countries to compete. There is no useful page history to protect by keeping these redirects, and keeping these redirects does not serve any useful purpose as a search term. Related to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 1#India in the Eurovision Song Contest and Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 8#Afghanistan in the Eurovision Song Contest. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 16:45, 10 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) 20:11, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and Grk1011. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:55, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ _{choose only one...} 07:02, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Use Commonwealth English spelling

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy delete.

Heimdallarchaeia

Heimdallarchaeia → Candidatus Heimdallarchaeum (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This taxon and "Candidatus Heimdallarchaeum" are not synonyms. This taxon is NOT monotypic. It should be deleted. Jako96 (talk) 15:56, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Can be removed, if you like.--Ernsts (talk) 16:22, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Heimdallarchaeota

Heimdallarchaeota → Candidatus Heimdallarchaeum (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This taxon and "Candidatus Heimdallarchaeum" are not synonyms. This taxon is NOT monotypic. It should be deleted. Jako96 (talk) 15:56, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Deepak Punia (rugby union)

Deepak Punia (rugby union) → India men's national rugby sevens team (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Retarget to Delhi Redz. Deepak Punia currently plays for the Delhi Redz and his name appears in the article. Katiedevi (talk) 20:26, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete people change or leave teams all the time, so redirecting to the team will become meaningless if/when he leaves that team, as he'll no longer be mentioned there. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:30, 26 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]

Retarget to 2025 Rugby Premier League#Squads where his mention should remain longer than at Delhi Redz. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 07:47, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Another target suggestion has come up.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 07:03, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete to encourage article creation WP:RETURNTORED. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:59, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

كييف

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 June 24 § كييف – Keep

كييف → Kyiv (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Comment didn't the Crimean Khanate use Arabic script, and thus, the Tatars of Ukraine would have a historical link to the script... -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 03:43, 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]

Delete: The Crimean Khanate didn't control Kyiv and I doubt it's relevant here. Unnecessary language redirect 🇺🇸Thegoofhere🇺🇸 (talk) 15:55, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Gothic language was once used in the past in a region there. Would we have redirects using Gothic runic inscriptions? --MikutoH ^talk! 23:17, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per User:Thegoofhere. Also note that per the History of Kyiv, article none of the states/countries that have ever controlled Kyiv, as listed in the "Historical affiliations" box, have ever been Arabic-speaking. Duckmather (talk) 05:41, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DVDactive

DVDactive → DVD (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

delete per nom drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ _{choose only one...} 12:24, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Use in articles appears to be entirely in references, no other mentions or links suggesting better target. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:01, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:44, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Latin Spanish

Latin Spanish → Spanish language in the Americas (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Any evidence of these being called "Latin Spanish"? --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:07, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Planetballs

Planetballs → Countryballs#Other countries (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Comment there was a mention at the time of the redirect's creation [11]. The problem is that the sourcing needed to justify restoring the mention is probably not there. 204.111.137.20 (talk) 17:01, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per WP:RETURNTORED. Unless sourcing enough to justify adding it back to the article is found... we won't have the information someone searching for this redirect would be looking for. And it's not our job to FIND said sourcing, either. This is exactly the job of a redlink-- to flag to the reader that we don't- possibly shouldn't, but definitely don't-- have the information they seek, and if THEY know of enough sourcing to justify adding information, they know that they can, and should, add it. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:36, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 9

Hunter safety

Hunter safety → Hunting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Weak delete per nom Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:44, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:REDYES. Cursory google search shows that hunter safety courses are mandatory for getting a hunter's license. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:15, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above reasons. I do think this redirect could turn into an article in the future; although someone could theoretically add a small mention of safety into the existing article Justjourney (talk | contribs) 00:30, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per WP:RETURNTORED and prior comments. There's an argument to be made for retargeting to Gun safety, but I'm not happy with it-- it's specifically guns (and not any other type of hunting-- say, bow and arrow, or trapping), and also has nothing in the article about safety in a hunting environment. Best solution IMO is to make this a redlink. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:41, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and comments above. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:03, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, no suitable target. Hunting is not suitable because there's no in-depth discussion of safety there, while Gun safety isn't suitable either because hunting doesn't always involve guns. 🦬 Beefaloe 🦬 (talk) 06:50, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Typhoon 0801

Typhoon 0801 → Typhoon Neoguri (2008) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Typhoon 0806 → Typhoon Fengshen (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

delete, only 1 page view shows that redirect is unlikely to be used drinks or coffee ᶻ 𝗓 𐰁 ₍ᐢ. .ᐢ₎ _{choose only one...} 12:28, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rich Ceraulo Ko

Rich Ceraulo Ko → Tenet (film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Paris Black Friday → November 2015 Paris attacks (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete. No mention of "[Paris] black Friday" as a term for these attacks in the article; google search for "Paris black friday" brings up results related to Black Friday (shopping) in Paris. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 10:49, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ulfcytel's land

Ulfcytel's land → East Anglia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

"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

Bottle bomb → Molotov cocktail (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Weak keep. My google results show that molotov cocktails and similar improvised weapons is one of the correct targets, the other being some sort of fishing weight that I can't find any relevant content on, making this unambiguous in practice. Thryduulf (talk) 10:23, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. The wording of the redirect makes it seem like it also could refer to Bottle rocket. Steel1943 (talk) 16:06, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete the dry ice pool bomb in a plastic bottle is not a Molotov -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 03:28, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and hatnote Dry ice bomb. Jay 💬 10:49, 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!} 22:46, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and hatnote per Jay or DAB. Bottle bomb is listed at Molotov cocktail § Etymology § Synonyms and nicknames. The lead mentions that there are several other names and points to § Etymology, rather than list all the bolded synonyms, which may satisfy concerns about prominent mention. Britannica also lists this as a synonym. However, I did also find pretty mixed usage online, with more references to other types of homemade bombs, including dry ice bombs but not exclusively. If DAB'd we should also look at homemade chemical bomb which currently redirects to Improvised explosive device, which doesn't seem quite right. (If not DABing, would look at that in a separate RfD.) --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:09, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fredarick Jackson

Fredarick Jackson → 50 Cent (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Retarget to Frederick Jackson as a mispelling maybe. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 05:44, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom as unverified. Since Fredarick doesn't currently exist, a retargeting probably isn't justified. - Eureka Lott 20:33, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak retarget per MPGuy2824 -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 05:29, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Frederick Jackson; it's a plausible misspelling, as people sometimes mix up unstressed vowels like that. No objection to outright deletion, however. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 18:23, 28 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]

Delete. Don't know what the creator is up to, they changed the rapper's first name to "Fredarick" in the main article (reverted) [12] and did the same on the Simple English Wikipedia [13] (just reverted myself). All in all an implausible misspelling as far as I can see. JBchrch talk 20:14, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete For some reason, this user has had lots of their redirects deleted including many variations of Frederick. Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:36, 9 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]

Delete per Eureka Lott and Steel1943. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 23:47, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-China sentiment

Anti-China sentiment → Anti-Chinese sentiment (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Anti–People's Republic of China sentiment (edit 14:46, 10 July 2025: or DAB). 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]

Retarget (edit 17:33, 10 July 2025 (UTC): or DAB) per nom. I don't think this really needed an RFD. Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:21, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seems obvious to me but given the move history and hatnotes on both articles I figured a lot of editors had blessed the status quo. That and the RM landing on "PRC" were enough to give me pause. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:38, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate: Anti-China sentiment has existed for thousands of years. The PRC has only existed since 1949. If we want to assume that "Anti-China sentiment" is simply Anti-PRC sentiment, we should just rename the Anti–People's Republic of China sentiment article to the more WP:CONCISE name "Anti-China sentiment", and we just reached a consensus not to do that. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 00:54, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is that anti-China sentiment and anti-Chinese sentiment are often not mutually exclusive, in fact historically it was the other way around where antipathy towards China and Chinese people were intertwined. I'm personally ambivalent towards the move since I can see an argument for both sides. Qiushufang (talk) 01:45, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate: Per above I think equating China to the PRC is historically too broad. China existed before the PRC and the Qing dynasty and ROC were certainly both China and antipathy towards those polities also existed. Qiushufang (talk) 01:48, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Would it be a DAB or a SIA? Web-julio (talk) 06:41, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation draft requested Thepharoah17 (talk) 02:02, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Anti-China sentiment may refer to either of the following:
- Anti-Chinese sentiment, a dislike, hatred, hostility, or discrimination against Chinese people or Chinese culture
- Anti–People's Republic of China sentiment, a dislike of the People's Republic of China (PRC) as a nation, or opposition to its government, its social system, the ideology of the Chinese Communist Party, or the people of the nation under the PRC regime of 1949–present
{{disambiguation}}

—⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 05:24, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I support the DAB as a viable alternative. It's an improvement over the current target. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed that a DAB is the best course of action here. - Amigao (talk) 17:48, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this could easily be a broad-concept article; if this ends up being dabbed I will tag the dab accordingly Duckmather (talk) 05:42, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mixy (TV programming block)

Mixy (TV programming block) → The Ferals#After the Ferals (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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)

Jack Wagner (director) → Yeah, But Still (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

PKMN B → Pokémon Red, Blue, and Yellow (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete per nom. Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:44, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as vague at best --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:10, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jeffroy

Jeffroy → Jeffrey (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete to facilitate uninhibited Search (for limited results). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:03, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GM (company)

GM (company) → General Motors (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Keep.. The logo has been "GM" since at least 1938, and as noted above, the abbreviation "GM" is very strongly linked to General Motors. --Sable232 (talk) 21:44, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Either keep as is or DAB I agree with JBchrch, only that he/she should've added that a hatnote would/will suffice for this entry. Intrisit (talk) 22:10, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is pretty unambiguous, as the quickly-gathering WP:SNOWBALL we have here is indicating. A hatnote may be helpful but I actually don't think it's super necessary. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:45, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. "GM" isn't even mentioned at General Mills. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:04, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

team galaxy

Team Galaxy (Pokémon) → Pokémon (video game series)#Recurring characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Team Galaxy (Pokemon) → Pokémon (video game series)#Recurring characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete per nom. I was actually confused when I first saw it and didn’t know what it was until I saw your comment. Thepharoah17 (talk) 19:43, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as confusing. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:10, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for a reason I'm surprised hasn't been brought up-- there's uh, there's little-to-no information on Team Galactic in the section indicated, or really anywhere else in this article. There's a weak argument to be made for Pokemon Diamond and Pearl#Plot, but given how little focus is given to Team Galactic there-- and the other issues with these redirects-- I say they're not needed here. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 03:49, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i did consider that, but it doesn't really matter if the name is wrong consarn _{(grave) (obituary)} 12:28, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. They're not called Team Galaxy and they aren't discussed at the target. Team Galactic redirects to Pokémon Diamond and Pearl#Plot, which would be a better target were we to keep a redirect. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 10:53, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Characters & Pokemon

List of Characters & Pokemon → Pokémon (video game series)#Recurring characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Weak delete per nom. Thepharoah17 (talk) 19:31, 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]

Delete per consarn's comment. Arnav Bhate (talk • contribs) 13:50, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mexican tortilla

Mexican tortilla → Corn tortilla (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]
Retarget to tortilla. Plausible as a search term to disambiguate from Spanish tortilla but not to differentiate corn tortillas from flour tortillas. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 10:56, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pascal Robinson-Foster

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy keep

Horsemen of the Apocalypse (disambiguation)

Horsemen of the Apocalypse (disambiguation) → Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete per nom's rationale. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:13, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

EMS –(pharmaceuticals)

EMS –(pharmaceuticals) → EMS (pharmaceuticals) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete: clearly malformed and apparently the result of some article renaming phenomenon. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 01:13, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'll consider this as a malformed dabifier --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:12, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SWEET JAMAICA (2CD SET)

SWEET JAMAICA (2CD SET) → Sweet Jamaica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete due to odd dabifier --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:11, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Goran and Zoran Damjanović

Goran and Zoran Damjanović → Bojnik, Serbia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Zoran Damjanović → Bojnik, Serbia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Goran Damjanović → Bojnik, Serbia (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Keep Retarget to Bojnik, Sarajevo this is why: [14] [15] [16] [17] Thepharoah17 (talk) 17:14, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Thepharoah17 but the destination article doesn't mention that matter at all. I don't know that we should use redirects as to-do lists. --Joy (talk) 09:29, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, I withdraw my !vote. Thepharoah17 (talk) 10:37, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaTek Camera Application

MediaTek Camera Application → MediaTek (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 December 3 § Mediatek Camera Application – Soft delete

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

Comment This was soft deleted in 2021 when the nomination got no comments after being relisted multiple times. Thryduulf (talk) 09:04, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep this is a {{R from file metadata}}, which are difficult to search for uses of but there is at least one file on Commons with this in the metadata - File:Wikimedians who love Africa in 2025 - (VIP).png. Thryduulf (talk) 09:04, 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]

Keep per Thryduulf. This is indeed used in metadata on Commons. See the extended details of File:20221119 121032 resized (1).jpg for an example. - Eureka Lott 15:10, 10 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)

N-(2-Hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide, N-(2-Hydroxypropyl) methacrylamide, HPMA, HPMA polymer, HPMA copolymer, polyHPMA, poly(HPMA), PHPMA, pHPMA, poly(N-(2-hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide) → N-(2-Hydroxypropyl) methacrylamide (talk · links · history · [[:toolforge:pageviews/?start=2025-06-09&end=2025-07-08&project=en.wikipedia.org&pages=N-(2-Hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide,_N-(2-Hydroxypropyl)_methacrylamide,_HPMA,_HPMA_polymer,_HPMA_copolymer,_polyHPMA,_poly(HPMA),_PHPMA,_pHPMA,_poly(N-(2-hydroxypropyl)methacrylamide)|stats]]) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete and send to WP:DAFT Thepharoah17 (talk) 16:43, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Totally implausible, unwieldy string. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:41, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this monstrosity that was created via AfC somehow, likely in error. Perhaps someone meant to request individual redirects for alternative names, and instead we got this? Mdewman6 (talk) 23:49, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unwieldy redirect per above. I can't even make an edit summary properly --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:20, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Iran–United States war

Iran–United States war → Iran–Israel war (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
~~Untied Sates–Iran war → Iran–Israel war (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]~~
Iran-United States war → Iran–Israel war (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
~~United Sates–Iran war → Iran–Israel war (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]~~

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

Teucer (statue → Teucer (statue) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete as malformed dabifier --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:20, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unlikely error, redirects of this kind are almost never helpful. 204.111.137.20 (talk) 16:24, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Question: I know these are forbidden, but aren't they useful for linking URLs outside wikipedia? For example, desktop whatsapp links to <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teucer_(statue> instead of <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teucer_(statue)>. And I guess very old browsers don't recognize the URL either. Web-julio (talk) 04:21, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is that that's a "other websites need to fix themselves" issue instead of a "Wikipedia needs an extra missing-parenthesis redirect for every single page with a dabifier" issue. 𝔏𝔲𝔫𝔞𝔪𝔞𝔫𝔫🌙🌙🌙 𝔗𝔥𝔢 𝔐𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔬𝔫𝔦𝔢𝔰𝔱 (talk) 05:25, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Star Wars (radio series

Star Wars (radio series → Star Wars (radio series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete per nom. Graham87 (talk) 14:11, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as malformed dabifier --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:21, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: the redirect's creator offered an explanation about it on their talk page. We don't usually create redirects due to external websites unless they use a relatively common search term. Graham87 (talk) 03:52, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete one incoming external link is not sufficient reason to maintain a redirect with a malformed dabifier. 204.111.137.20 (talk) 16:24, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete missing parentheses are automatically detected and a link to the correct title is provided. For an example of this, see Star Wars (film. This means that missing parenthesis redirects are completely unnecessary. Warudo (talk) 02:06, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
that's not true. for example, wikt:False indeed redirects to wikt:false, but Thriller (album shows a lamp with Did you mean: Thriller (album)?, which acts like a WP:SOFTREDIRECT technically. Web-julio (talk) 04:35, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I never said it automatically redirects. I only said that the missing parentheses are detected. The did you mean dialogue is what I was referring to. Warudo (talk) 04:44, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete exceedingly unlikely error Metallurgist (talk) 23:44, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

K-pop (Travis Scott, Bad Bunny, and the Weeknd song → K-pop (Travis Scott, Bad Bunny and the Weeknd song) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete as malformed dabifier --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:22, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unlikely error, redirects of this kind are almost never helpful. 204.111.137.20 (talk) 16:21, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dagger (mark

Dagger (mark → Dagger (mark) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete as malformed dabifier --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:23, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unlikely error, redirects of this kind are almost never helpful. 204.111.137.20 (talk) 16:20, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

South Korean invasion of Vietnam

South Korean invasion of Vietnam → South Korea in the Vietnam War (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete not navigationally useful. 204.111.137.20 (talk) 16:18, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:13, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 8

Blue licorice

Blue licorice → Agastache rugosa (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Blue Licorice → Agastache rugosa (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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)

Clavin (supplement) → Devil in the arts and popular culture#Advertising (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Comment the target page has been cut down immensely since this version in January, by a now-blocked user (though I do not believe their block had anything to do with this or similar behaviour) Rusalkii (talk) 05:02, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The subject is encyclopedic as per that version if the Czech parliament had to get involved to pass a legislation. But unlike other European countries, I don't see a Advertising in the Czech Republic article where this could have been added. Jay 💬 09:48, 4 July 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

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Dabify.

Israeli strikes on Iran

Israeli strikes on Iran → 2024 Israeli strikes on Iran (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Iranian strikes against Israel → 2024 Iranian strikes against Israel (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Close discussion. Unclear what the nominator wants due to their nomination reading like a WP:TRAINWRECK. No opposition to this either being renominated or the nomination statement clarified. Steel1943 (talk) 17:06, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ninixed: please could you clarify what your desired action is. Thryduulf (talk) 23:56, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Israeli strikes on Iran should redirect to a disambiguation page. *:إيان (talk) 00:00, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It shouldn't be a redirect. it should be its own disambiguation page, either moved from the target page (page swap) or redirecting the target page to this new disambiguation. Ninixed (talk) 04:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate / support moves. Disambiguation is appropriate. There is no need for separate disambiguation pages with and without the "2024"; there should just be disambiguation pages without the "2024". Adumbrativus (talk) 02:01, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation draft requested(done) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:59, 5 July 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)

Zitti e buoni (song) → Zitti e buoni (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Amar pelos dois (song) → Amar pelos dois (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Rise Like a Phoenix (song) → Rise Like a Phoenix (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Only Teardrops (song) → Only Teardrops (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hard Rock Hallelujah (song) → Hard Rock Hallelujah (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
My Number One (song) → My Number One (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Everyway That I Can (song) → Everyway That I Can (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Fly on the Wings of Love (song) → Fly on the Wings of Love (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete. Agree. These were redirects that appear to have been created due to a misunderstanding of what disambiguators are used for. Grk1011 (talk) 23:56, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all as a valid {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}}. 88.97.192.42 (talk) 18:22, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

While that typically makes sense when we have remnant redirects from pages moves, etc., these were just created recently for the sole purpose of being "unnecessary disambiguations". Grk1011 (talk) 22:32, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Grk1011; if there were any remnants worth protecting – e.g. page history, move history, etc. – then it would be a different situation, but these redirects were created for the sole purpose of having an unnecessary disambiguation and they have no native links within Wikipedia, therefore their validity in continuing to be hosted is unclear. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 08:57, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Afghanistan in the Eurovision Song Contest

Afghanistan in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Argentina in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Aruba in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Brazil in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cape Verde in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Chile in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Colombia in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Costa Rica in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cuba in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Curaçao in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ethiopia in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Guinea-Bissau in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hong Kong in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
India at the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Jamaica in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Kenya in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Malaysia in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Mauritania in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Mauritius in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Mexico in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Mozambique in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Panama in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Peru in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Philippines in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Sierra Leone in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
South Africa in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
South Korea in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Suriname in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Taiwan in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Thailand in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Trinidad and Tobago in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Uganda in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
United Arab Emirates in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Zaire in the Eurovision Song Contest → List of countries in the Eurovision Song Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Starmer's leadership → Keir Starmer#Leader of the Opposition (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

2005 Brussels NATO summit → NATO summit (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Restore. The author wants an article on the subject which we have in the history. Furthermore, the previous summit is a Good Article demonstrating the quality of work that is possible. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:31, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Second Saudi–Yemeni War

Second Saudi–Yemeni War → Houthi–Saudi Arabian conflict (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Delete per nom. Thepharoah17 (talk) 08:28, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree. No source calls it that. Plus it's misleading. OKMG-1200 (talk) 10:51, 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]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 23:58, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Battles involving the Jat people

Battles involving the Jat people → Jat Regiment (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
List of Jat Wars → Jat Regiment (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Westlake, Washington → Moses Lake, Washington (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Retarget to Westlake, Seattle, the only place in Washington listed at the Westlake disambiguation page. Thryduulf (talk) 11:38, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It appears in GNIS as the only Westlake in Washington and it's approximately in the location of Moses Lake, but there isn't a mention of it in the article and I can't find an RS to add a mention. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 14:54, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I came across that as well. I might take a crack at what my uni library has to see if I can find an RS. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:50, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Casablanca Rock: I found a mention of Westlake in a toponymic dictionary.^{[Westlake 1]} The entry is very brief and doesn't indicate if this refers to a town or simply a geographic expression. So I'm not sure whether a mention is worth adding. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 18:44, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Presidentman, thanks for doing all that leg work! I'll defer to your judgment, so this is probably best not pointing to its current target. Thryduulf's suggestion should work fine then. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 14:22, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

^ 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]

Retarget to Westlake#United States. I will add it to the list. Westlake is mentioned in Moses Lake, Washington, with several references (may have been added after this discussion started). Westlake, Seattle is almost certainly the more well known, but Westlake, Washington is an unlikely way to refer to a neighborhood. Westlake Center is a well-known shopping center in the state and though also unlikely to be labelled Westlake, Washington, but when I Google it I do get hits for the neighborhood, the shopping center, and the park. ~~It's sufficiently ambiguous that it should be DAB'd.~~ --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:04, 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). Sounder Bruce 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]
Keep as a redirect to Moses Lake, Washington per SounderBruce. --Enos733 (talk) 18:36, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per Tavix. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:59, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilinks

Wikilinks → Hyperlink#Wikis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikilink → Help:Link#Wikilinks (internal links) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

target hyperlink WP:XNR to non-reader content should be removed -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 06:55, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand avoiding XNR links, but hyperlink is too broad. Wikilink is used in {{R from shortcut}} with clear intention. Of course that could be edited with a piped link if needed. I prefer to delete both or retarget ~~Wikilinks~~ ~~to Help:Link#Wikilinks (internal links) if this is an allowable exception~~ both to the same place. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:22, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The help page is wrong though. If you were using UseModWiki, it wouldn't be square brackets to create a wikilink.Wiki software has limited information on links in wikis -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 17:36, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have a good handle on this so won't make a specific recommendation but, if not deleted, these should both point to the same place, wherever that is, per nom. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 17:55, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget both to Wiki#Linking to and naming pages, which has more details than hyperlink and avoids a WP:CNR. - Eureka Lott 19:48, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - a mainspace target, likely the same one for both, is much preferred. Where in particular, though, is another question. — Godsy^(TALK_CONT) 22:25, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget both to Wiki#Linking to and naming pages for better specificity than hyperlink, per Eureka Lott. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:28, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget both per Eureka Lott and David Eppstein and add a {{selfref}} hatnote to the help page there. Thryduulf (talk) 12:07, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:R semi-protected

Template:R semi-protected → Template:R protected/semi (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Keep or retarget to Template:R protected per 86.23.87.130. Helpful as a search term. Steel1943 (talk) 23:22, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This may be helpful as a search term, but that doesn't outweigh the fact that this should never be used. I should also mention that this was previously deleted (technically not kept after a move) following a TfD. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 02:53, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your concern can be resolved with a WP:BOTREQ if necessary to bypass incoming redirects. Redirects are primarily utilized as search terms, and one cannot expect readers to know all the "secret handshakes" of titling conventions we use in various namespaces. Steel1943 (talk) 14:39, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Stance updated, updates in italics. Steel1943 (talk) 16:15, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Retarget {{R protected}}. I'm going to disagree that this is helpful as a search term as it stands. Sending people looking for a template to a "behind the scenes"/"core" template that is not actually supposed to be used and where the only documentation is "you're in the wrong place, go look somewhere else" does not strike me as a useful result. Retargeting to {{R protected}} seems like a reasonable option to me, that way any attempts at using this template will actually work, and I don't agree with the nom that it wouldn't make sense. All the protection padlock templates (e.g. {{pp-semi}}) are redirects to {{Protection padlock}}, which automatically detects the protection level. 86.23.87.130 12:45, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to {{R protected}} per the IP. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:01, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's written as "semi-protected", which is how the protection term is spelled. Definitely useful for those who try to look for the template. 1isall (talk/contribs) 17:13, 23 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]

Comment I TfMed R protected for merging into {{Rcat shell}}. 174.138.212.166 (talk) 19:39, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(nominator comment) I was unaware there is precedent for pages like {{pp-semi}}, in which case I am more than happy to retarget this to {{R protected}} per 86.23.87.130. I still hold my belief that keeping this current redirect is not helpful, as it cannot handle cases where protection levels are changed. ~ Eejit43 (talk) 02:43, 25 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

1930 BD → Pluto (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Comment do you know what "1930 BD" represents? Presumably it should exist, since "M" is allocated after "D". It should be the 4th asteroid discovered in the second half of January 1930. -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 03:21, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
According to the Minor Planet Center, 1930 BD refers to an object sighted twice by the Heidelberg-Königstuhl State Observatory on January 26, 1930. -insert valid name here- (talk) 04:59, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as 1930 BM appears to be correct. -- Kheider (talk) 18:09, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Child feeding

Child feeding → Child (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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. Bizarrely, this redirect appears in two articles as piped links children's food, in White chocolate and Types of chocolate. "Child feeding" is an odd phrase and too vague to identify a better target. (I'm removing the links from the chocolate articles as unnecessary.) --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 00:39, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Myceteae, I added these links. We have a page for infant feeding, but no page for generally child feeding, covering childhood nutrition, culture (e.g. children's menu's in restaurants) and preferences (bland food, picky eating). White chocolate is obviously one example of food associated with children in some cultures. I think it is a reasonable redlink, and am looking at writing such an article in the future, although I'm open to a better name. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 00:59, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's at least a borderline case of MOS:OVERLINK but that's beyond the scope of this discussion and I won't object if you revert my edits at the chocolate pages. I appreciate the explanation. "Child feeding" strikes me as odd but "infant feeding" does not. I don't have a better suggestion and perhaps Child feeding is suitable. I agree it would be better as a red link for now and would still delete the current redirect. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:16, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Poor target. Background: this redirect was created as part of a broader effort to remove redlinks from white chocolate, using the edit description Less red links against the guidance at WP:REDLINK. Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 01:13, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree. Artem's pages (talk) 18:58, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I notified the target page of this listing. Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:12, 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

Avant Prarie, Texas

Avant Prarie, Texas → Dew, Texas (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Comment: I see I created the redir in 2007, but don't remember anything about it. Possibly from some typo? No particular opinion about it; no objection to deletion if it isn't of any use. -- Infrogmation (talk) 00:00, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:03, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and creator. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:28, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep as a typo by omission of a single character, a common form of typo. Avant Prairie, Texas would be the correctly spelled form, and Avant Prairie the base term; either of which this redirect could be displaced to as a {{R from former name}} fpr the current target -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 03:24, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per IP. I didn't realize Avant Prairie was a former name for the place. (My bad for not reading the article more closely.) Prarie is a redirect to the correct spelling so we've established that this misspelling is plausible. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 14:29, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:ChartDisplay

Template:ChartDisplay → Template:Chart (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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"

Common tiger beetle (2) → Cicindela (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Common tiger beetle → Neocicindela tuberculata (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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: [18]. 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]
If Neocicindela is a subgenus, should it mentioned in Cicindela? That article would then cover all the (purported) "common tiger beetles". --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:23, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neocicindela may have been treated as a subgenus at some point, but all the taxonbar links treat it as a genus. Plantdrew (talk) 16:14, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, at this point it just looks simpler all around to delete both common tiger beetle redirects. KoA (talk) 13:44, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both BugGuide is the source for "common tiger beetle" as a vernacular name for Cicindela, but the primary name BugGuide uses is "temperate tiger beetles". BugGuide is user generated content (there is some vetting of users), and I would not consider it a reliable source for vernacular names. Observations on BugGuide use "common tiger beetle" for other species, e.g. Cicindela duodecimguttata. Google results for "common tiger beetle" include a variety of species in not very reliable sources (as well as some more reliable sources describing a species as "the most common tiger beetle" in a particular region). While there is a reliable source for "common tiger beetle" being applied to [19] Neocicindela tuberculata], as well as Cicindela campestris (though the primary vernacular name given there is "green tiger beetle"), I think overall "common tiger beetle" too vague and too widely applied by sources of varying reliability to be able to construct a disambiguation page that would accurately guide readers to any particular species they might be trying to find under the term "common tiger beetle". Plantdrew (talk) 16:27, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

GRiDi

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Arrowroot biscuit

Arrowroot biscuit → Uraro (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Arrowroot biscuits → Arrowroot (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Hmm. And Arrowroot biscuits redirects to Arrowroot, so we should sort that out too. There are mentions of the Australian type at Arnott's Group, Cecil Augustus Motteram, William Arnott (biscuit manufacturer). Biscuit also names arrowroot as a variety and has an image of one. So maybe Biscuit#Semi-sweet is the best we can do? It would be good to mention uraro there, though. --BDD (talk) 19:38, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note I've added Arrowroot biscuits to this discussion as the plural and singular should have the same target, whatever that ends up being. Thryduulf (talk) 21:06, 18 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

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Seating Arraignment

Seating Arraignment → Judge John Hodgman (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

14 March 2004 Mumbai Bombing → March 2003 Mumbai bombing (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Delete per nom. Thepharoah17 (talk) 14:17, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Question: I think from the history the date may have been a typo so it was moved to the correct title (correct year). I can't really tell, but if that is the case, should this be merged with March 2003 Mumbai bombing to preserve the history or is it minimal enough that it's OK to delete? --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:21, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ri Hak

Ri Hak → April 25 Sports Club (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related page discussions. — Jkudlick ⚓ (talk) 21:04, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Per nom. Svartner (talk) 09:19, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Generally speaking, redirecting to clubs is frowned upon, given that players often transfer and will play for multiple clubs across their career. Giant Snowman 19:03, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not mentioned at target, and this is a reason why we don't redirect people to clubs they play for at a point in time. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:57, 4 July 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

Eastern Americans → Asian Americans (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Far Eastern AmericanFar Eastern American → Asian Americans

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) Not DAB’ing per Myceteae Roast (talk) 16:49, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Neither Asian Americans nor East Coasters are called "Eastern Americans". While it's conceivable someone would come up with this and you might find it attested, rarely, it is not in use and should not be DAB'd. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 01:27, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete--Srleffler (talk) 01:29, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Agree with MYCETEAE above. Asteramellus (talk) 01:38, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Should we bundle Far Eastern American also from the same creator? Jay 💬 09:07, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes.--Srleffler (talk) 11:51, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not a term.--Srleffler (talk) 11:51, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this user has !voted twice Thepharoah17 (talk) 15:04, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

R-Haine

R-Haine → National Rally (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Nickname for the party [20] 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]
Delete this redirect doesn't even exist on French Wikipedia. My search results turn up William R. Haine rather than National Rally. Per WP:RFOREIGN there is no reason to have a French-language nickname as a redirect. Traumnovelle (talk) 23:31, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Per RFOREIGN, it would seem to be an appropriate redirect, since the target topic is from France, a French-language topic, so French is the native languge of the topic. It would only need to be properly mentioned and referenced to survive. Of course, that is currently the problem. -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 19:15, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, as mentioned before, there is F-Haine -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 19:18, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

July 6

K2 Co., Ltd.

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

Primordial God

Primordial God → Genshin Impact (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Very general term, surprised it redirected to the video game. Leaning towards delete in favor of an article being written on the topic. Disambig page could be fine for now, though. JackFromWisconsin (talk | contribs) 14:54, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ponni Nadhi

Ponni Nadhi → Kaveri (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 13#Men & Motors / ITV5

Cryptid

Cryptid → List of cryptids (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cryptids → List of cryptids (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2018 May 4 § Cryptid – keep

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]
I agree there is a difference between a field of study and the object of study. Where we have articles for both (Microorganism, Microbiology), it is straightforward to determine where to point a synonym of one or the other (Microbe → Microorganism). Where we have only one article for a field of study or subject area, it makes sense to redirect the object and closely related words to that article, or vice-versa (Symbiont to Symbiosis; Naturalist to Natural history). Here we have a full-length article on the field of study that provides extensive background on the history and current use of the term and concept, where the term cryptid appears 24 times on the page, and a list with only a brief description and some examples. Lists aren't intended to give a comprehensive treatment of the subject. Botanist redirects to Botany, not List of botanists, and I see this as similar. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:32, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And I see just as my statement says. Article on bees and article on study of bees. Article on mollusks and article on study of mollusks. Article on cryptids and article on study of cryptids. I don't like treating one thing different just because some WP:dontlikeit. It seems unfair and not what our readers would expect. So I stand by that. Fyunck(click) (talk) 23:25, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't like treating one thing different just because some WP:dontlikeit. It seems unfair and not what our readers would expect. Every accusation is a confession. Bizarre comments that fail to engage with the argument and dismiss a well-reasoned minority viewpoint in the discussion as "unfair" and "WP:IDONTLIKEIT" are counterproductive. They should be dismissed from any assessment of consensus and seen for what they are. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 04:44, 11 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]

Keep. Or, rename the article to "List of cryptids" and redirect "cryptids" to it. "Cryptozoology" is readily accessible via the opening section of the list. --tronvillain (talk) 01:21, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, cannot really add anything, its a likely search term for people looking for this sillyness. Slatersteven (talk) 10:13, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both or weak retarget to Cryptozoology per my comment in the previous discussion. I was considering sitting this out, but the comment Myceteae made in this discussion, [21], convinced me that my stance from years ago still has validity. Steel1943 (talk) 17:40, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll also weakly support retarget Cryptid to Cryptozoology and keep Cryptids per Rhododendrites. I think my stance is that something needs to target Cryptozoology (or neither should exist per WP:REDLINK) since readers may not be looking for a list, and then resolve any possible confusion with hatnotes. Steel1943 (talk) 17:45, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If the link in the first line of the List of cryptids article isn't prominent enough (I personally think it is) then the solution to something needs to target Cryptozoology is to add it to the hatnotes. I definitely oppose deletion as that benefits nobody while making everything harder to find. Thryduulf (talk) 16:00, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A very likely outcome if we delete is that someone creates a new Cryptid article or redirect, unilaterally selecting the target. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 18:06, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, maybe rename the page KanyeWestDropout (talk) 20:53, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ITV6

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Horsemen of the Apocalypse (album)

Horsemen of the Apocalypse (album) → List of Metallica demos (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Comment two albums (neither by Metallica) are listed at Horsemen of the Apocalypse (disambiguation)#Albums. Thryduulf (talk) 21:49, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Thryduulf: Did you notice those subjects are WP:PTMs? (The word/number "Four" is absent in the nominated redirect.) Steel1943 (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. My comment was explicitly marked as comment so people could consider whether they felt that was relevant (some partial title matches are useful search terms even though most aren't). If I was recommending retargetting there I would have said that. Thryduulf (talk) 23:14, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. On a related note, I have nominated the redirect Horsemen of the Apocalypse (disambiguation) at RfD: See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 9#Horsemen of the Apocalypse (disambiguation). Steel1943 (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bomberos

Bomberos → Firefighter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Bomberos (Chilean firefighters) → Firefighter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

It's generally inappropriate for "X (Y)" to exist when "X" doesn't without a very good reason, so oppose the course of action proposed by Myceteae. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:48, 27 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

Scraface → Scarface (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Weak keep Adjacent character transpositions are a very common category of typo -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 04:49, 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: Single adjacent transposition. I'm not aware of any other possible targets that would make this typo ambiguous. Jruderman (talk) 23:07, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Looks like a misspelling of Sacrifice. Steel1943 (talk) 01:20, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- That would be a multi-error, not a single-error -- 65.93.183.181 (talk) 03:32, 8 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

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

NaMo

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

NH2CH(CH2CH2SCH3)COOH

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

AGONSA

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Muƹawiya

Muƹawiya → Mu'awiya I (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]
Lean delete. We normally redirect transliterations, transcriptions, and alternative forms where an all-ASCII variant points to the correct version with diacritics or other "special characters" (Beyonce → Beyoncé) or for official or widely used schemes likely to be encountered by readers (Hànyǔ Pīnyīn → Pinyin). Here we have an unusual character ⟨ƹ⟩ that requires special keyboard entry and a transcription we can't find attested anywhere outside of this redirect. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:07, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See my above comments. Google not knowing about it is not the same thing as it not being attested anywhere, especially as the most likely places for it to have been used are among the least likely places for Google to have indexed. Thryduulf (talk) 16:05, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your comments along with LWG's and the listing comment by Rusalkii are why I'm only lean/weak delete and why I waited several days to weigh in, to see if more support for this transcription would materialize. I should have addressed this directly. It doesn't quite pass my threshold for plausibility/utility, even if I can rationalize a use case, but I'm open to it. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:47, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per Redirect Creator. Tiny Particle (talk) 11:33, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

271,000

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

July 5

Ingénieur

Ingénieur → Engineer (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Keep Mentioned at target 9ninety (talk) 06:39, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On further thought, possibly refine to Engineer#France, the specific section which talks about the title. 9ninety (talk) 15:59, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
In Quebec, it is a protected term, thus, refining isn't good. We just need to source it for the "Ing." of Quebec to be added. -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 22:13, 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) 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]
It's still very much a nonstandard disambiguation page, regardless of the repeated links. It has entries without any links and it employs lots of piping (see MOS:DABPIPE). - Eureka Lott 18:13, 12 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]
Perhaps Engineer's degree is the better target for Ingénieur and Ingenieur. The word appears 34 times on the page (with or without accent) and it covers usage in many more countries than the draft DAB or Engineer. Or, simplify the DAB to just point to Engineer and Engineer's degree. Thoughts @9ninety? --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 16:23, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Astro Premier League 2

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Astro Premier League 2

Islamic State provinces

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Islamic State provinces

Big Challenges

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

2.725

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Baijiahao

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Baijiahao

Chlodwig

Chlodwig → Louis (given name) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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) EDIT: I have specified a preference below. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:43, 12 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]

Retarget – definitely to either Chlodwig, Prince of Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst or Clovis I. They should both probably have Template:Distinguish to each other in that case however.

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]
Though I poo-pooed the idea below, Chlodwig (disambiguation) is preferable to redirecting to Chlodwig, Prince of Hohenlohe-Schillingsfürst. "Chlodwig" used alone for Clovis I is well attested, even if this is not his most common name, and that is the far more popular page, and readers following links about the history of the name won't be helped much by the German prince article. I would quibble about which "Chlowig" to list first on the page, but such content questions could be dealt with on the DAB talk page itself. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 21:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, "Chlodwig" even shows up in some dictionaries defined as Clovis I.[22][23] 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)~~ Chlodwig DAB page ~~(not that anyone has suggested this) page seems~~ may be extraneous and would mostly point to and duplicate entries from Clovis (given name). WikiNav[24][25] 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]
Retarget to Clovis (given name) or DAB. The given name article already contains the etymology and lists individuals called "Chlodwig". Readers clicking Chlodwig from one of the other given name articles or entering the search term after seeing the name in reference to Clovis I will be confused and potentially mislead if they land at the article for the relatively obscure German prince. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 15:43, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

C4SS

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#C4SS

High House Shadow

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#High House Shadow

Parachute (EP)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Parachute (EP)

Inscript

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Inscript

Inscriptional

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Inscriptional

Influencer Smurf

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Maggie Weinroth

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Maggie Weinroth

List of Lebanon women's international footballers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#List of Lebanon women's international footballers

Carla Abdel Khalek

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Carla Abdel Khalek

Aya El Boukhary

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Aya El Boukhary

Cecile Iskandar

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Cecile Iskandar

Rida Wahab

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Rida Wahab

Foot play

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Sir Peter Pindar

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: soft delete

Sedevacantist Antipope

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 14#Sedevacantist Antipope

Plain rice

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Elon Musk 2028 presidential campaign

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

EU's

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Tail wing

Tail wing → Empennage (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Tail-wing → Tailplane (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These should point at the same target. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 22:36, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Probably target both to empennage, which includes a section on tail planes, or disambiguate. Cremastra (talk) 15:16, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It could also refer to a canard or a delta wing. I suggest disambiguating. Carguychris (talk) 17:28, 27 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]

Wouldn't that be the tail fin? Is "tail wing" only a colloquial usage, or are there sources that phrase it in this way? Both Empennage and Tailplane don't mention a "tail wing". Jay 💬 05:33, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Main pages

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

End of Life on Earth

End of Life on Earth → Tinchy Stryder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Death of everything is another possible target to consider. Thryduulf (talk) 12:42, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Future of Earth also covers the topic of the future of life on Earth. Perhaps it should point to an 'End of life' disambiguation? Praemonitus (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The capitalization makes it clear that this is an (unmentioned at the target) title. Looking at the history, it seems to be an unreleased album, which was renamed, and then deleted for notability reasons...or something like this; it's a bit confusing. In any case, the original purpose of this redirect no longer exists, and none of the proposed targets are good matches; they're all about vaguely similar, but different topics. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 16:03, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Global catastrophe scenarios. 21 Andromedae (talk) 16:56, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:43, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Future of Earth § Climate is going to be a better target, since it actually talks about...you know...the end of life on Earth, and not varying levels of different types of sudden catastrophes, which is kind of different. However, even still, this redirect should be deleted due to the capitalization, and anyone is free to make a new one if they think it's worthwhile enough. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:43, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree that Future of Earth#Climate is a good target because that's only one of many possible ways that life on earth could end. Thryduulf (talk) 10:15, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Global catastrophe scenarios, which discusses scenarios that could cause the end of life on Earth. Future of Earth#Climate impact only discusses one scenario. Death of everything combines my proposed target, two irrelevant musical works, and Heat death of the universe, which doesn't refer to life or merely to Earth. Nyttend (talk) 20:46, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate to all the choices listed in the aboves, including the album (via the artist's article) -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 04:57, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this capitalized version per the first anonymous editor above. The canceled album isn't notable, and this capitalization doesn't directly refer to any of the suggested targets. The articles that currently link to End of Life on Earth (2012 album) should probably be updated, since the album doesn't exist. - Eureka Lott 14:27, 28 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

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

ROH

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Procedural close

JD Vance 2028 presidential campaign

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

July 4

Wikipod

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

Hounds of Shadow

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 13#Hounds of Shadow

Fish or fishes

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 13#Fish or fishes

Peter Pan Syndrome (anime)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Nien

Nien → TripleS (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Keep' The only other destination would be a dictionary definition for a foreign word, and 'not popular' is a judgement call, not a proper reason for deletion. Nathannah • 📮 20:49, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This redirect obscures Search. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:01, 22 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]

Delete per Shhh. Many people named Nien, and someone familiar with firstnames and surnames may create a firstname or surname dab in future if feasible. Jay 💬 08:15, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Viimsi JK (women)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Viimsi JK (women)

JK Tabasalu (women)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#JK Tabasalu (women)

Roman civiel war of 461

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

may (anime character)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Kyrgyz Republic national beach soccer team

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

University (Scandinavia)

University (Scandinavia) → University (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Delete per nom. We don't have any articles for which this would be a useful search term. Thryduulf (talk) 15:00, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to University college (Scandinavia). Worgisbor (congregate) 17:09, 30 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]

Retarget to University college (Scandinavia); better target. 🌳 Balsam Cottonwood (talk) ✝ 07:59, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, whilst university colleges are usually distinct from universities University college (Scandinavia) is pretty much dedicated to explaining the differences and similarities between 'university' and 'university college' in the Scandinavian context, making this a very suitable retarget. Katiedevi (talk) 15:40, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. University colleges are a different thing, so not an appropriate target. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:10, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- It seems this was created to avoid a red link at Oslo and Akershus University College, which had been added without explanation by an IP in Special:Diff/879955703. I've reverted the change, so it's now properly orphaned. I stand by my !vote to delete, given its origin as a result of disruptive editing. --Paul_012 (talk) 07:07, 7 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]

Delete per above. —Compassionate727 ^(T·C) 18:05, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to University college (Scandinavia) per Katiedevi. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:36, 20 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]

Retarget To University college (Scandinavia) per Katiedevi Servite et contribuere (talk) 22:36, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Oppose retarget to University college (Scandinavia) since University ≠ University college on the English Wikipedia. Steel1943 (talk) 20:19, 29 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]

Retarget To University college (Scandinavia) because the article explains what a university in Scandinavia is. feminist🩸 (talk) 03:56, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2027–2029 ICC World Test Championship

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Beanie boo

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: soft delete

Trollpasta

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 11#Trollpasta

July 3

Mt Iron(Wanaka township)aerodrome

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Flashing light of death

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 13#Flashing light of death

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

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: soft delete

Fur cap

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Ludobot

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 13#Ludobot

European area

European area → European Economic Area (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Disambg either by retargetting to Europe (disambiguation) or to a new set index titled something like (but ideally better than) List of supranational areas in Europe listing European Economic Area, European Union, European Communities, European Higher Education Area, Eurozone, Single Euro Payments Area, Free trade areas in Europe, European Common Aviation Area, European Broadcasting Area, Schengen Area, European Union Customs Union, Common Travel Area, Warsaw Pact (maybe better as a see also), NATO (ditto), Euratom, European single market and any others. Thryduulf (talk) 12:52, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

EU market

EU market → European Economic Area (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
EU Market → European Economic Area (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
European market → European Economic Area (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
European Market → European Economic Area (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Disambig at European market. These are all plausible search terms for the current target and both the other targets identified (and possibly others). Thryduulf (talk) 12:55, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fardu

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Bhakt

Bhakt → Bhakti (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

[!vote superseded following creation of Bhakta, see below the relist] Strong oppose: Due to schwa deletion in Indo-Aryan languages, the last 'a' vowel is deleted in several Sanskrit-derived colloquial languages (including Hindi & Urdu). Hence, Yog, Rag, Raag (all disambiguation pages) provide a link to Yoga and Raga respectively. Similarly, Dharm is a redirect to Dharma. Likewise, Bhakt is a valid {{R from alternative transliteration}} to Bhakta, and is the WP:PTOPIC for the term, which in turn redirects to Bhakti and therefore is a valid {{R avoided double redirect}}. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 14:11, 21 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Bhakt (slang)#Origin. Having taken a look at Talk:Bhakti, from what I am understanding, the issue seems to be that the redirect ‘bhakt’ is spelt the same as ‘bhakt (slang)’ so it would make more sense for it to be redirected there. But I also get what CX is saying about ‘bhakt’ being associated with ‘bhakti’ because of the spelling. Makes most sense to me to redirect to Bhakt (slang)#Origin since it would take a reader to a place in the Bhakt (slang) article that makes space for both uses of the word (devotional and political). Having a redirect to Bhakt (slang) more broadly would not necessarily encompass both uses of the word and neither would a redirect to Bhakti. Katiedevi (talk) 22:54, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly oppose divorcing Bhakta and Bhakt from leading to the same target, they should always point to same destination. Either transliteration can used to refer to both the concepts depending on the speaker, and the extent of schwa deletion in their language/dialect. Some examples of "Bhakt" referring to "Bhakti" in news items: [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32]. Some examples of "Bhakta" referring to "Bhakt (slang)": [33] (BJP-affiliated media; remove the tilde ~ from the link, which I used to bypass link blacklist), [34], [35], [36]. Personally, I am of the opinion that Bhakti would be the WP:PTOPIC for them, and thus, both should point there. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 01:33, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging Hemant Dabral since he seems to have recently moved 'Bhakt' to 'Bhakt (slang)' so may have a useful rationale for what to do with this redirect. Katiedevi (talk) 23:01, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we have an article titled 'Bhakt (slang)' then it would be helpful to also have an article on the non-slang usage of the word. The concept 'bhakta' is notable enough to have its own article. So it might be worth deleting the redirect and creating an article for Bhakt. Katiedevi (talk) 23:19, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Katiedevi I was thinking about adding a disambiguous page just like Yog, Raag etc after looking at the links given by CX Zoom, but I think this suggestion makes sense - one suggestion would be to have the article for "Bhakta" (and Bhakt can redirect to Bhakta). I will start a talk on Bhakta page to discuss this further - if all are ok to discuss further there, I can withdraw this Redirect discussion. Asteramellus (talk) 01:34, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you wish to work to create an article on the specific topic of Bhakta, then I have no reservations against that. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 01:38, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Based on what you have shared and what Katiedevi is suggesting, it seems it makes sense to go with creating article for Bhakta. I will go ahead and withdraw this redirect. Thanks for all the insights. Also want to share this link to see the usage of the two terms. Asteramellus (talk) 02:01, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawing nom to continue discussion at Bhakta talk page. Asteramellus (talk) 02:04, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion cannot be closed to "withdrawn" due to Katiedevi's votes (2 votes that seem to contradict each other, and neither has been WP:REDACTED yet), which are not compatible with the status quo. @Asteramellus: I'd recommend finishing what has been started here. Steel1943 (talk) 17:12, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done - a good quality article on 'bhakta' that would allow a reader to get to both 'bhakti' and 'bhakt (slang)' seems like the best solution. Both CX Zoom and Asteramellus make valid points, a good article could satisfy both needs. Katiedevi (talk) 21:03, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Steel1943 Thanks. Yes, I will wait for the discussion to end. Asteramellus (talk) 10:43, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm seeing a general consensus for creating a page for Bhakta. If/until there isn't that page I think the bhakt redirect should be deleted because it's too confusing to redirect 'bhakt' to Bhakti as bhakti is so broad compared to the specific slang usage. But if there is a Bhakta/Bhakt page, readers have a place to reach either usage, devotional or political, though it still leaves open whether to have separate pages or slang as a subsection.Swirlymarigold (talk) 20:31, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Does not make any sense at all. The pejorative use derives from religious use, as in "devotion to god" -> "devotion to Modi", and both Bhakt/Bhakta have been attested to have been used for either meaning. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 10:53, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Asteramellus: You nominated the redirect for deletion, and later were in favour of withdrawing, implying you did not want the redirect to be deleted. Can we assume you want to no action on the redirect until the article on Bhakta is ready? Jay 💬 19:00, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jay Yes, it seems no action on redirect. Asteramellus (talk) 11:09, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Disambiguate~~ between Bhakta (now created), Bhakti, and Bhakt (slang). -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:12, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Tavix sorry, just want to confirm - are you suggesting "Bhakt (disambiguous)" - that too I think would help avoid confusion. Asteramellus (talk) 00:31, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Okay with a retarget to Bhakta after reading the subsequent !vote. -- Tavix ^(talk) 11:08, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Bhakta as an {{R from alternative transliteration}}. We can use hatnotes to disambiguate, but the word's original usage is certainly primary over a modern slang; the latter use is rarely inferred outside of a specific political context. 9ninety (talk) 05:14, 3 July 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]

Retarget: Now that Bhakta exists as a standalone article, I support retargeting to it as R from alternative transliteration, either with a hatnote to Bhakt (slang), or with body content briefly mentioning it. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 20:43, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed! Hatnote works perfectly as per WP:ONEOTHER. Katiedevi (talk) 10:05, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

po(l)ypifer

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Inurement

Inurement → Desensitization (psychology) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Retarget to Non-profit organization laws in the U.S.#Federal taxes per Guy Macon. 'Inurement' or 'inure' do not occur in Desensitization (psychology) and the legal interpretation of 'inure' seems to be more prevalent. Katiedevi (talk) 20:17, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, look, it's a WP:NEELIX redirect. Inure also points to Desensitization (psychology), but it was a Wiktionary redirect before it was retargeted by Neelix. There's more information on Wiktionary than there is here, so I think a Wiktionary redirect would be appropriate. Normally, I'd suggest consolidating the Wiktionary redirects at a single title, but wikt:inure and wikt:inurement are different enough to deserve individual redirects. That's a roundabout way of saying that I'd support a soft redirect of Inurement to wikt:inurement and a revert of Neelix's edit on Inure. - Eureka Lott 07:00, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Either of the above suggested retargets would be fine with me. If I had to choose I have a slight preference for the Wikipedia retarget over the Wiktionary retarget, but they are both good choices. --Guy Macon Alternate Account (talk) 05:31, 29 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]

Redirect to wiktionary. "Fed taxs" is useless target: no explanation of the term. --Altenmann >talk 14:15, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Non-profit organization laws in the U.S.#Federal taxes says "The IRS may now levy a penalty on the organization for engaging in a transaction that resulted in a private inurement or private benefit." "Private inurement" is a redlink that should go to Wiktionary. --Guy Macon Alternate Account (talk) 21:45, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"to wiktionary" -exactly; same with "Inurement". Because "inurement" is a very specific kind of benefit, that's why I wrote that "Fed taxs" is useless target. --Altenmann >talk 21:54, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish massacre

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

USFG

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Feral gummint

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Berlin and Leipzig Railway

Berlin and Leipzig Railway → History of rail transport in Germany#Epoch 0 (1835-1870) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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

Retarget to Berlin-Anhalt Railway Company. I think this is what the redirect is referring to. There is a mention of it in Berlin–Halle railway#History but I think Berlin-Anhalt Railway Company is the better option for the redirect. Katiedevi (talk) 20:02, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the above target suggested is bad because there's no mention; there's not really a substantially helpful mention anywhere. Cremastra (talk) 16:28, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand where you're coming from about the lack of an explicit mention. The fact that the Anhalt railway travelled from Berlin to Leipzig does appear in Berlin-Anhalt Railway Company, just not the exact phrase 'Berlin and Leipzig Railway'. I wouldn't say this makes the target 'bad'. Redirects are cheap and so I prefer to be charitable with them. Someone who is searching for a railway between Berlin and Leipzig could likely find what they're looking for within Berlin-Anhalt Railway Company. The retarget also doesn't seem to cause any confusion or harm in this case. Katiedevi (talk) 10:02, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

delete . No such thing. --Altenmann >talk 14:08, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Earl Hilliard Jr.

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Flip (geometry)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Gender stereotypes

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 14#Gender stereotypes

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

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Kyle Dudek

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete

Jordan Pratt

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Ed Artau

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Covid deaths

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Stereotypes of homosexuals

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Stereotypes of Brazilian Americans

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Stereotypes of Canadians

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 13#Stereotypes of Canadians

List of never before seen Shen Gong Wu

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Terrestrial species

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

July 2

Definition of is

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Media personalities

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Maggie Robertson

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Te cunosc de undeva!(season 2)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Leo (Spectrobes)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Hunting accident

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

SOIL

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Typhoon 0801

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

Team Rocket Motto

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

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

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Alex Unknown

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Germany national kabaddi team

Germany national kabaddi team → Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi)#Team results (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Retarget to International Kabaddi Federation where the German team is mentioned in the list of non-member countries who have a national team. Katiedevi (talk) 10:08, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I removed it because Germany was no longer participating in the event. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 19:15, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm of the opinion to delete it because I do not know for certain if Germany does have a kabaddi team. It is not affiliated to the IKF, and the "non-member countries with teams" does not cite a source. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 19:15, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Loyal luz has created an article; so close as articlified. There are issues, but that may be taken up at the talk page. The article says Germany is affiliated to the International Kabaddi Federation, citing a possible11.com website, but the official website as per International Kabaddi Federation does not mention Germany as a member. The "non-member" section at International Kabaddi Federation also does not make sense, and needs to go. Jay 💬 07:29, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, that is an AI generated article:- Ref 1 does not exist, Ref 3 is a sports betting prediction site, and there are markdown remnants in **2023**, etc. Should be deleted, even if articlified, probably through AfD now. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 20:25, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean by "Ref 1 does not exist"? Are you not able to access Ref 1? Jay 💬 02:26, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I am not able to access it. Is it accessible to you? —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 09:27, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ya I can access it. Thepharoah17 (talk) 09:30, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I can access that reference just fine. If you can't, try the archived version. At a surface level look it seems reliable. I can only find two brief mentions at RSN, one describing it as generally reliable and one alleging it copies Wikipedia although it's possible that was an example of WP and The News copying from the same press release (there was no followup). Ref 3 isn't so much a sports betting site but a forum attached to such, the information there will come from other sources and we need to find them to determine the reliability (an unreliable source copying a reliable one doesn't make the first unreliable). The markdown is a non-issue, that can be trivially cleaned up. I've not looked in any more detail than that though. Thryduulf (talk) 12:22, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, it did not work for me, so I thought it is a non-existent article. The markdown part is not necessarily disqualifying by itself, but it is a part of WP:AITELLS. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 18:01, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What matters is whether the content meets our standards, determining whether it was or was not written with the aid of an AI is just a waste of time. Thryduulf (talk) 22:26, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have a very bad experience with AI contributors and the stuffs they write, here's one: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1188#User:M1rrorCr0ss creating articles with fake sources, possibly with LLMs. Not saying that LLM use is always bad, I gave a pass to an editor at Benoy Basu and Nirmal Sen (independence activist) (because their work was verifiable), but more often than not AI hallucinates and creates sources that look and feel original but don't really exist. With Ref 1 not available for me, Ref 2 being a primary source, Ref 3 being a prediction forum, alongside markdown remnants, I mistook it to be another worthless AI piece of the same category. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 22:41, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If is unverifiable/contains non-existent sources, etc then it is worthless for those reasons not because it's AI-generated. This is getting very off-topic for this RfD though. Thryduulf (talk) 22:55, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, which I thought was the case here. Now, I don't. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 23:05, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the non-member section. Jay 💬 14:12, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MediaTek Camera Application

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

Battle off the Lizard

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: soft delete

Prurience

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Prurience

List of terms associated with the color brown

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Iran–United States war

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

List of terms associated with the color green

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

July 1

Donald Trump (Wikipedia article)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Unlinked redirects in Category:Redirects from statistical redirects

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Philosophy (Wikipedia article)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 11#Philosophy (Wikipedia article)

Aruba national cricket team & others

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Retarget American Samoa and Guam to Cricket in Oceania, Delete the others

Deepak Punia (rugby union)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 10#Deepak Punia (rugby union)

Turkish genocide (19th–20th century)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 13#Turkish genocide (19th–20th century)

Sleeping dictionary

Sleeping dictionary → The Sleeping Dictionary (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Soft redirect to that Wiktionary entry/weak keep drinks or coffee ~ ♪ 16:11, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate between wikt:sleeping dictionary, The Sleeping Dictionary, and The Sleeping Dictionary (novel) per WP:PRIMARYRED. jlwoodwa (talk) 16:13, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Drafted a dab at the redirect. Jay 💬 03:16, 18 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]

Disambiguate per Jay's draft Katiedevi (talk) 21:34, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The dab draft doesn't make any sense; since The Sleeping Dictionary is primary over The Sleeping Dictionary (novel) for the term "The Sleeping Dictionary" surely it's also primary for "sleeping dictionary" which makes the disambiguation page void. I think either delete or retarget to Wiktionary convey what is meant to be accomplished here better. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:30, 23 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

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Spanking pyramid

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 14#Spanking pyramid

Solgier

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Wikipedia:Blocklog

Wikipedia:Blocklog → Special:Log/block (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Technical comment If everyone thinks the current target is good, i.e. we want people searching for "WP:Blocklog" to end up at the block log special page, the technical setup shouldn't be a reason to do anything except replace the current coding with the proper {{Soft redirect}} coding. Nyttend (talk) 05:04, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Convert to soft redirect. This has existed since 2004, so I'd avoid messing too much with it. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:56, 6 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Convert to a soft redirect per above. Thryduulf (talk) 13:06, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget to Wikipedia:Historical archive/Logs/Block log (as a {{R avoided double redirect}} of Wikipedia:Block log), which contains links to the current block log and also the various historical block logs from prior to 23 December 2004. I don't see a reason why the spaced and unspaced titles should lead to different targets. Thryduulf (talk) 13:09, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Wikipedia:Historical archive/Logs/Block log per Thryduulf. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:24, 20 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]

The point is that the historical archive page already functions as a soft redirect (in addition to including extra content). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:12, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First fire

First fire → Furnace#First fire (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
First Fire → Junta (game) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] (Bundled. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:15, 1 July 2025 (UTC))[reply]

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]

Delete. Let's stop trying to guess what the very few using this multiply-ambiguous phrase might want. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:09, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete highly ambiguous -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 19:51, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I agree it’s highly ambiguous and we are just guessing with no indication readers are likely to use this term for any particular article on the site. --MYCETEAE 🍄‍🟫—talk 22:52, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Content was merged to the then Furnace (now Furnace (central heating)) per Talk:Furnace (central heating)#Merge "first fire", and I have tagged the redirect with a {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 06:29, 14 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]

Further to Jay's note, the merged content was subsequently removed so the topic does not now exist in Furnace (central heating). Cheers, SunloungerFrog (talk) 05:19, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Fossil record of fire; largely per Thryduulf's comments above (and deletion isn't clean per WP:Merge and delete) but I think the idea of "first fire" being exclusive to humans is presumptuous. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:59, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we retarget there, we should add a hatnote to at least Control of fire by early humans, and I'm not opposed to doing that, but I still think a dab or set index is slightly better. I'm not in favour of deletion as search results are not helpful. Thryduulf (talk) 10:57, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment First Fire redirects to Junta (game) for reasons that are not apparent to me. Thryduulf (talk) 10:57, 27 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It was mentioned at the time. Probably minor gamecruft that doesn't deserve a mention, so should follow the same fate as the lowercase version. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:42, 29 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

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Scuiside

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Villalba–Segovia railway

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Battle of Manupur (1748)

Battle of Manupur (1748) → Battle of Lahore (1748) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Battle of Manupur → Battle of Lahore (1748) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle of Manupur. @Star Mississippi:, as closer of the previous discussion, do you have any thoughts on this? BD2412 T 01:31, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@BD2412 thanks for the ping. I'm guessing I went delete and redirect as a viable ATD but to remove the copyvio concerns. Have no objection with @Noorullah21 overwriting the redirect with a new article. There's always the risk of another AfD and I don't have the time tonight to review the sources they put forward at the AfD to see if they overcome the issues raised by those who argue not to retain. I see no one has edited it since my creation following the AfD. If my G7ing the redirect solves this, I'm happy to save you seven days. Star Mississippi 02:12, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Jay. Will no longer save 7 days but my offer stands to G7 "my" redirect. Star Mississippi 12:25, 1 July 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]

Oops, didn't mean to break anything. If I'm following their request correctly @Steel1943, @Noorullah21 plans to create new articles at these titles which will also resolve your concern? if not, feel free to recreate if I wasn't solving something. Star Mississippi 17:50, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Mississippi Working on it atm here. Noorullah (talk) 20:41, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Noorullah21

With that context and the link within the draft to the Battle of Lahore article, I think the best resolution is for the draft Noorullah21 references to be at the current redlink and the parenthetical title to point there. Thoughts @BD2412 @Jay @Steel1943? Star Mississippi 21:21, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say that is a good draft. I'd recommend either the draft being moved to Battle of Manupur or recreate the redirect then overwrite the redirect with the draft after the discussion is over. Steel1943 (talk) 22:09, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Noorullah21, the consensus seems to be to use your draft, but I don't want to move it out of userspace without your OK. Do you think you could put something together very quickly for the battle section (perhaps just a sentence or two that can later be expanded) and then we can move it mainspace and close this? Rusalkii (talk) 21:49, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ikkei Watanabe

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: soft delete

India in the Eurovision Song Contest

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

كييف

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

Gag names

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Gag names

Chinaball

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

June 30

Somewhere on the Waterloo to Weymouth route

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Paris Black Friday

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

2005 Brussels NATO summit

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

Fraysexuality (main article)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

Eternal Liquid (album)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

The akron hammer

The akron hammer → LeBron James (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The l-train → LeBron James (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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) *Redirect to List of nicknames in basketball#L where they're mentioned. (By the way, I did notice those redirects before and thought about nominating them myself.) Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:15, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is List of nicknames in basketball § J as name lists are sectioned by last name. Jay 💬 19:08, 30 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
l-train comment Not among James' more common nicknames. Basketball-wise, I more associate it with Lionel Simmons (mentioned in his bio).[37] Generically, it seems this should be consistent—one way or another—with L-TrainL-Train and L TrainL Train, which both currently redirect to the El train dab.—Bagumba (talk) 08:16, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The akron hammer comment Also uncommon, but sourcable.[38] Sometimes I wonder if WP:NOTDICTIONARY applies to all these semi-obscure nicknames that people want to bold in bio leads, or here, creating redirects.—Bagumba (talk) 08:20, 22 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note that capitalized The Akron Hammer has been salted since 2009. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:44, 25 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]

I've added Lionel Simmons, Lionel Hollins, and LeBron James to the El train dab. Jay 💬 14:34, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

daisy, lily, and violet

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Nile Canal

Nile Canal → Suez Canal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Comment the redirect has history as an article. The last version before being redirected was proposed for merging with Suez Canal, and Suez Canal#Precursors does include most of the information (although not the term "Nile Canal") so this might be an unattributed {{R from merge}}, although the discussion was brief (2 editors) and didn't achieve consensus. al-Ma'mun al-Bata'ihi#New Nile canal and observatory mentions a new canal (without giving it a name) constructed in 1113-1115, which is not mentioned at Suez Canal and seems unrelated to it. Bashmur#Location talks of "a Nile canal" but the Nile article doesn't mention canals other than Jonglei Canal much further upstream. I'm leaning towards refining to Suez Canal#Precursors, especially if the term is added there, but I'm not certain. Thryduulf (talk) 11:46, 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]

Dabify per Prazeres -- 65.93.183.249 (talk) 03:45, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation draft requested Thepharoah17 (talk) 06:09, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - there is no "Nile Canal" per Thryduulf and R Prazeres. Nile canals cannot be a disambig page as it is not referred to as such as a term for the canals connecting from the Nile, but it can be a redirect to Suez Canal#Precursors which mentions both Canal of the Pharaohs and Khalij. Jay 💬 10:31, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
However we need an opinion on the pre-BLAR content of 24.80.151.193 of 3 December 2005. It had plenty of sources but was duplicate of the Suez Canal article of the time per the BLARer. Jay 💬 10:39, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

National railway

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

George Fitcher

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 11#George Fitcher

KineMaster

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: restore

Kyoto, JP, KY

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

لندن

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Glizzy

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

2025 Iranian strikes

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

Family guy catchphrases

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

June 29

Mask of Ice

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

B. Clayton Bonnefoy

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

imakuni?

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)

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)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ri Hak

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

LION

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Szczecin-Krzekoszow(2)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Frontier Park

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 July 12#Frontier Park

Buppie

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

JWG

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

User:Rewben Aladeen

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Soft redirect

Dance drama

Dance drama → Wuju (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

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]

Only reason I didn't DAB at creation was that we didn't seem to have any articles on the other genres of dance drama. Since WP:DAB requires at least two valid target articles, I went the redirect route. If we do have articles on these other forms of dance drama, a DAB definitely makes more sense. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:43, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Laterthanyouthink, QuietHere, what articles should this be disambiguated with? Rusalkii (talk) 19:21, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For a start, mudra, Saang, Rabinal Achí, and Khamba Thoibi Jagoi all have redirects with pointing toward them which contain "dance drama". That makes at least five options, though that was limited to just pages with "dance drama" in the title so there may be even more past that. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 20:11, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The one I came across that led me to find the redirect was Kakkarissi Natakam, but there are a lot of other forms of performance that use dance drama, especially Indian ones (see Dance in India), like Kuchipudi, Bhagavata Mela, etc., and there are Indonesian and Balinese ones Wayang wong and Gambuh, and others. Dance drama is a very generic term though. I'm wondering if it should target the section Dance#Theatrical, which could be expanded to include the term, mentioning some prominent examples, and also refer to Folk dance, many of which incorporate dance drama. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:00, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe leaving as a redirect, but targeting that section to provide an overview? It might be too difficult and onerous to try to list all the possible types of dance drama on a DAB, actually. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 02:02, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also Kathakali and perhaps Musicals too. The articles mentioned in this discussion don't really make a disambiguation page, but could rather be a List of dance drama forms or something such. Or a WP:BCA. Delete per WP:REDLINK. Jay 💬 06:30, 2 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am fine with BDD's suggestion too. Jay 💬 10:48, 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) 19:33, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Dance#Theatrical. I agree it could be its own article, but this seems useful in the meantime, so no need for REDLINK deletion. --BDD (talk) 20:35, 13 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]

Delete There isn't really enough substance at BDD's suggested target to make a redirect. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:27, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Dance#Theatrical, which is actually a nice summary of various dramatic dance forms. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:30, 28 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

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

List of piston engines

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete

B1454 road

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Big Steel

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Blade (2025 upcoming film)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: no consensus

Cambodia national beach soccer team

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

NaMo

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

Long relationship

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

[1] Phillips, James W. (1971). Washington State Place Names. Seattle: University of Washington Press. p. 157.

[Westlake 1]

v t e Wikipedia community
For a listing of current collaborations, tasks, and news, see the Community portal. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the Dashboard.
General community topics	Administration News The Signpost Goings-on In the media Meetups Mailing lists Wikipedians Statistics The Wikipedia Library Centralized discussion Village pump Idea lab Policy Proposals Technical Miscellaneous WMF Holidays Bots
Contents and grading	Requested articles Most-wanted articles Images needing articles Articles needing images Articles for creation WP:AFC/R WP:AFC/C Creating articles Help Vital articles Articles for improvement Peer review Good article nominations Featured article candidates Lists Pictures Topics Article translation Pages Main Page Errors
WikiProjects and collaborations	Directory Culture and the arts Geographical History and society Science, technology and engineering Wikipedia assistance and tasks Patrols Recent changes Counter-Vandalism Unit Accessibility Organizations category
Awards and feedback	Reward board Contests A nice cup of tea and a sit down Charitableness WikiLove Compliment before criticism Kindness Campaign Thanks!
Maintenance tasks	Task Center Open tasks Backlog Category Admin category Edit requests Category Database reports Category tracker Dusty articles Special pages New pages Recent changes Controversial issues
Administrators and noticeboards	Administrators' noticeboard Incidents Edit warring Vandalism Admin dashboard Admin requests Closure Page protection User permissions Sockpuppets Open proxies Revision deletion Oversight Request Usernames Changing Title blacklist OTRS Bureaucrats' Requests for adminship and bureaucratship Arbitration Committee Requests Enforcement
Content dispute resolution	Requests for comment Third opinion Dispute resolution noticeboard Biographies of living persons Conflict of interest External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view No original research Reliable sources
Other noticeboards and assistance	Regional notice boards Requests for help Category Asking questions Teahouse Help desk Reference desk Adopt-a-user Copyright assistance Copyright investigations Text problems Media questions Resource requests Mergers History mergers Moves Page importation Spam Blacklist Whitelist Bots Education General sanctions Editor sanctions Long-term abuse
Deletion discussions	Guide Admin Today Articles Templates Files Categories Redirects Miscellany Speedy Proposed BLP Review Undeletion Arguments to avoid Arguments to make Article Rescue
Elections and voting	Requests for comment (meta) Wikimedia Foundation elections WP Democracy Milestones
Directories, indexes, and summaries	Departments Edit summary legend Editor's index Essays FAQs Glossary Abbreviations Help Manual of Style Simplified Rules Five pillars Policies Guidelines Shortcuts Templates Citation templates Tips Today Tools Wiki markup
Media Category Templates

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

Before listing a redirect for discussion

The guiding principles of RfD

When to delete a redirect

Reasons for deleting

Reasons for not deleting

Neutrality of redirects

Closing notes

How to list a redirect for discussion

Current list

July 14

Gender stereotypes

Spanking pyramid

Marriage rights

LGBTQ rights in Corsica

Same-sex marriage in SA

Same-sex marriage in Columbia

Walmart opioids scandal

History from below

Eastern Denmark

Continental Denmark

LGBT rights in Guiana

Sedevacantist Antipope

1966–67 Divizia C

Israeli Iran Command

Cocycle condition

Walmart Opioids Scandal

July 13

Five-by-five

Men & Motors / ITV5

European primitive cave lion

Michelle Ezarik

Do not "fix" links that are not broken

Ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup I

Stereotypes of Canadians

Ludobot

Flashing light of death

Fish or fishes

Hounds of Shadow

HODL

Turkish genocide (19th–20th century)

Noix

July 12

Rida Wahab

Cecile Iskandar

Aya El Boukhary

Carla Abdel Khalek

List of Lebanon women's international footballers

Maggie Weinroth

Parachute (EP)

High House Shadow

C4SS

Islamic State provinces

Astro Premier League 2

Baijiahao

Winnipeg Monarchs (MJHL)

Frontier Park

Brent Díaz

Wikipedia:RESULT

Wifiskeleton

Inscriptional

Inscript

2020–21 Punjab, Pakistan budget

Mali wedding airstrike attack

Gunter glieben glauchen globen.

Uno dos tres cuatro cinco cinco seis

Long term relationship

Info wars

Gag names

Yong Yea

Prurience

Fel8me

Leash (BDSM)

WazirX

Distrito Escolar de Filadelfia

U.S. president 2020

Rice gadu

JK Tabasalu (women)

Viimsi JK (women)

July 11