Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

"WP:RFD" redirects here. For other requests for deletion, see Wikipedia:Deletion venues. For requests for discussion, see Wikipedia:Requests for comment. For the reference desk, see Wikipedia:Reference desk.

XFD backlog

V	Dec	Jan	Feb	Mar	Total
CfD	0	0	41	21	62
TfD	0	0	2	1	3
MfD	0	0	2	3	5
FfD	0	0	7	2	9
RfD	0	0	31	25	56
AfD	0	0	0	1	1

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

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

• The purpose of a good redirect is to eliminate the possibility that readers will find themselves staring blankly at "Search results 1–10 out of 378" instead of the article they were looking for. If someone could plausibly enter the redirect's name when searching for the target article, it's a good redirect.
• Redirects are cheap. They take up little storage space and use very little bandwidth. It doesn't really hurt things if there are a few of them scattered around. On the flip side, deleting redirects is also cheap because recording the deletion takes up little storage space and uses very little bandwidth. There is no harm in deleting problematic redirects.
• If a good-faith RfD nomination proposes to delete a redirect and has no discussion after at least 7 days, the default result is delete.
• Redirects nominated in contravention of Wikipedia:Redirect will be speedily kept.
• RfD can also serve as a central discussion forum for debates about which page a redirect should target. In cases where retargeting the redirect could be considered controversial, it is advisable to leave a notice on the talk page of the redirect's current target page or the proposed target page to refer readers to the redirect's nomination to allow input and help form consensus for the redirect's target.
• Requests for deletion of redirects from one page's talk page to another's do not need to be listed here. Anyone can remove the redirect by blanking the page. The G6 criterion for speedy deletion may be appropriate.
• In discussions, always ask yourself whether or not a redirect would be helpful to the reader.

When should a redirect be deleted?

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

The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:

• a redirect may contain non-trivial edit history;
• if a redirect is reasonably old (or is the result of moving a page that has been there for quite some time), then it is possible that its deletion will break incoming links (such links coming from older revisions of Wikipedia pages, from edit summaries, from other Wikimedia projects or from elsewhere on the internet, do not show up in "What links here").

Therefore consider the deletion only of either harmful redirects or of recent ones.

Reasons for deleting

See also: Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion § Redirects

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

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

Reasons for not deleting

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

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

Neutrality of redirects

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

Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:

1. Articles that are created using non-neutral titles are routinely moved to a new neutral title, which leaves behind the old non-neutral title as a working redirect (e.g. Climategate → Climatic Research Unit email controversy).
2. Articles created as POV forks may be deleted and replaced by a redirect pointing towards the article from which the fork originated (e.g. Barack Obama Muslim rumor → deleted and now redirected to Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories).
3. The subject matter of articles may be represented by some sources outside Wikipedia in non-neutral terms. Such terms are generally avoided in Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. For instance the non-neutral expression "Attorneygate" is used to redirect to the neutrally titled Dismissal of U.S. attorneys controversy. The article in question has never used that title, but the redirect was created to provide an alternative means of reaching it because a number of press reports use the term.

The exceptions to this rule would be redirects that are not established terms and are unlikely to be useful, and therefore may be nominated for deletion, perhaps under deletion reason #3. However, if a redirect represents an established term that is used in multiple mainstream reliable sources, it should be kept even if non-neutral, as it will facilitate searches on such terms. Please keep in mind that RfD is not the place to resolve most editorial disputes.

Closing notes

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

STEP I.	Tag the redirect(s).   Enter {{subst:rfd|content= at the very beginning of the redirect page you are listing for discussion and enter }} at the very end of the page. Please do not mark the edit as minor (m). Please include in the edit summary the phrase: Nominated for RfD: see [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]]. Save the page ("Publish changes"). If you are unable to edit the redirect page because of protection, this step can be omitted, and after step 2 is completed, a request to add the RFD template can be put on the redirect's talk page. If the redirect you are nominating is in template namespace, consider adding |showontransclusion=1 to the RfD tag so that people using the template redirect are aware of the nomination. If you are nominating multiple redirects as a group, repeat all the above steps for each redirect being nominated and specify on {{rfd}} the nomination's group heading from Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion
STEP II.	List the entry on RfD.  Click here to edit the section of RfD for today's entries. Enter this text below the date heading: {{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName|target=TargetArticle|text=The action you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for that action.}} ~~~~ For this template: Put the redirect's name in place of RedirectName, put the target article's name in place of TargetArticle, and include a reason after text=. Note that, for this step, the "target article" is the current target of the redirect (if you have a suggestion for a better target, include this in the text that you insert after text=). Please use an edit summary such as: Nominating [[RedirectName]] (replacing RedirectName with the name of the redirect you are nominating). To list multiple related redirects for discussion, use the following syntax. Repeat line 2 for N number of redirects: {{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName1|target=TargetArticle1}} {{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectName2|target=TargetArticle2}} {{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectNameN|target=TargetArticleN|text=The actions you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for those actions.}} ~~~~ If the redirect has had previous RfDs, you can add {{Oldrfdlist|previous RfD without brackets|result of previous RfD}} directly after the rfd2 template. If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.
STEP III.	Notify users.   It is generally considered good practice to notify the creator and main contributors of the redirect(s) that you nominate. To find the main contributors, look in the page history of the respective redirect(s). For convenience, the template {{subst:Rfd notice|RedirectName}} ~~~~ may be placed on the creator/main contributors' user talk page to provide notice of the discussion. Please replace RedirectName with the name of the respective creator/main contributors' redirect and use an edit summary such as: Notice of redirect discussion at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion]] Notices about the RfD discussion may also be left on relevant talk pages.

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

Current list

March 12

Template:R from url

• Template:R from url → Template:R from domain name  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Misleading. I just had to revert someone misusing this redirect for a URL. Domain names are not URLs, they're just a part of them. Paradoctor (talk) 17:56, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Unless there is some desire to categorise them separately, this feels like an argument for swapping the template and redirect rather than deletion. Thryduulf (talk) 18:16, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Kenmore Grassman

• Kenmore Grassman → Bigfoot  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in any article on the English Wikipedia. Bigfoot in popular culture#Films has an (uncited) entry for "The Legend of Grassman", though I'm not sure that would be enough for retargeting it (even if the pop culture article stays the way it currently is). 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:35, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Actually, disregard the target alternative, the Bigfoot article does mention "Grassman", but this still seems to be a rather obscure alternative name, considering we barely even have content on Kenmore, Akron, Ohio, which is what the first part of the title is presumably referring to. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:38, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

🫈

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

This codepoint is currently unassigned in Unicode. It has been accepted for inclusion in Unicode 17, which is scheduled for release in around half a year, though its name is simply "hairy creature", and the emoji subcommittee recommendation also lists Yeti and simply cryptid as keywords. This makes the redirect both somewhat WP:CRYSTALBALLy and an WP:XY situation. 1234qwer1234qwer4 17:25, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

National Wuseum in Warsaw

• National Wuseum in Warsaw → National Museum in Warsaw  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

DELETE. Typo in the redirect title, unused redirect. Antoni12345 (talk) 16:49, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Branislav Regec

• Branislav Regec → Slovakia at the 2010 Winter Olympics#Luge  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unhelpful redirect. Name is only mentioned once at the target, and no further information is provided on the subject. This was redirected as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Branislav Regec, where I explicitly opposed redirecting for the same reason. CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:56, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:29, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. RfD is not AfD round 2. Your view not getting consensus in that discussion is not a reason to open an RfD to try again. Thryduulf (talk) 16:26, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

1.0000000000000000000000

• 1.0000000000000000000000 → Trailing zero  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect is not linked to any page and the number is so specific that nobody will likely ever come across it unless they are actively looking for it. Although it is technically related to "trailing zero", nobody is going to put this in a search engine and the number itself has no contextual meaning. Senomo Drines (talk) 14:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Noting that it was only "not linked to any page" because the nominator repeatedly removed the target. I have restored the link. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:36, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

I think you've misunderstood the nominator. The redirect is not linked anywhere on enwiki. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:10, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete Not linked on any wiki page and only one of any infinite versions of the number 1 with a trailing zero. This is no more plausible of a search term as 1.00000000000000000000 or 1.00000000000000000000000000. I do not see how this is useful. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:10, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Presidentman. FactOrOpinion (talk) 16:17, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Agustin Ramírez (baseball)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdraw and retarget to Miami Marlins minor league players#Agustín Ramírez

Athletics minor league players

• Michael Guldberg → Athletics minor league players#Michael Guldberg  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Brian Howard (baseball) → Athletics minor league players#Brian Howard  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Neither play is mentioned at the target anymore. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:45, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Toronto Blue Jays minor league players redirects

• Adrian Hernández (pitcher, born 2000) → Toronto Blue Jays minor league players#Adrián Hernández  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Adrian Hernandez (pitcher, born 2000) → Toronto Blue Jays minor league players#Adrián Hernández  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Miguel Hiraldo → Toronto Blue Jays minor league players#Miguel Hiraldo  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

None of these players are mentioned at the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:31, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

I have repaired the Leo Jiménez redirect as he has appeared at the MLB level and meets notability guidelines. Hernández and Hiraldo are now either minor league free agents or are retired, but in either case are not notable. Trut-h-urts man (T • C) 14:16, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

@Trut-h-urts man: I'm going to pull the Leonardo one from this list, as that's a pretty clear and obviously valid target that I didn't find in my search (for some reason). No need to waste additional time with us evaluating that redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:31, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

SpongeKnob SquareNuts

• SpongeKnob SquareNuts → Lee Roy Myers  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target page, became a redirect as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SpongeKnob SquareNuts just in case it ever became notable, but it doesn't seem like it 2 months later. The following reason: SpongeKnob SquareNuts, a parody of SpongeBob SquarePants. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sr26005/Archive for more case archive information. 112.207.123.170 (talk) 11:34, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• It is actually mentioned at the page in the filmography section. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:18, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Binchohtan

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

I never heard "長 (ちょう)" Onyomi reading to be romanized as "Choh", It Hepburn romanization is "Chō", other romanization uses "Cyou", "Chou", or "Cho". "Oh" is only use when there is two O (Oo) like Shohei Ohtani Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 09:08, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Erroneous alternative romanisation; support a decision to delete. Yue🌙 02:08, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:05, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete Does not appear to be a used romanization based on web searches. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 14:16, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Colchester Metro

• Colchester Metro → Colchester Rapid Transit  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Highly implausible: a metro system is usually taken as an underground, which this is not, and with no public schedule for service starting yet there is simply no reason to assume this, no parallel that would lead to misnaming thus. Creator has habit of invention. Kevin McE (talk) 08:23, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, although mostly not for the reasons the nominator gives which are mostly not relevant. What matters is whether people use the term "Colchester Metro" to refer to the target, regardless of whether that is "correct" (by any definition). While there are lots of sources that use the term, most are actually about a "Colchester Metro Bank", filtering them out there are references to a transport scheme but closer examination finds these relate to a rejected alternative proposal based around metro-frequency services on the Colchester-Clacton railway line, not the rapid transit system being built, and that was equally often referred to as "Greater Colchester Metro" or the "Colchester Metro Town (Plan)" so all in all I'm not seeing evidence this is a plausible search term for the target. It's not impossible this will change in the future, but until it does the redirect isn't of value. Thryduulf (talk) 12:16, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Essex metro

• Essex metro → Colchester Rapid Transit  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Highly implausible: a metro system is unually taken as an underground, which this is not, and it will be (no public schedule for service starting yet) very much a localised service, by no means across whole of Essex. Creator has habit of invention. Kevin McE (talk) 08:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete but not for the reasons the nominator gives (which are not relevant, see the #Colchester Metro nomination for details). There are lots of results for "Essex Metro" but with the exception of the first hit, which is explicitly about a fictional transit system, almost all of them relate to either Essex County Cricket Club's matches in a competition sponsored by Metro Bank, or the Essex Metro Immunization Coalition in New Jersey. Excluding those I'm still not seeing anything indicating that the target is known by this name. Thryduulf (talk) 12:24, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Novum Eboracum

• Novum Eboracum → New York (state)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Nova Eboracum → New York (state)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

not sure whether this refers to New York (state) or New York City, maybe retarget to New York (a dab)? Duckmather (talk) 16:45, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

I think it's relevant as it is on the new york city seal Seal of New York City. It could be useful for people trying to find it. I redirected it accordingly. Mechachleopteryx (talk) 16:56, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

@Mechachleopteryx Please do not change redirect targets while they're at RFD. I have reverted your change. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 17:48, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Idea: Whatever the decision ends up being, it should include the genitive Novi Eboraci as well. ⇒ Aerrapc they/them, 20:00, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:42, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment Novum Eboracum is mentioned at List of Latin names of cities and Nova Eboracum at List of Latin names of regions stating it refers to the state. Neither mention has an inline reference but might be supported by a general reference (I've not looked). Novi Eboraci is mentioned at Seal of New York City, but also at New York Pathological Society, Heraldry of Columbia University, Union Theological Seminary (it appears on the seals of those institutions too), Government of New York City (in relation to the seal, so that would be the better target if it were only those two), Flags of New York City (which notes those words are omitted, so this would not be a great target) and List of flags with Latin-language text (which states those words do appear on the flag of New York City). Thryduulf (talk) 12:43, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Wayward Tide

• Wayward Tide → Chucklefish  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Back when this redirect was made, WT was announced to be in development AND was listed in the article. However, the latest news I could find of the game is now 9 years ago, the game is no longer listed in the article, and this game is now essentially vaporware with just some Reddit posts and images from Adam Riches (the artist) as proof this game was even a concept. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 02:04, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Amanda Fucking Palmer

• Amanda Fucking Palmer → Amanda Palmer  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This subject USED to have this "nickname" of sorts on their website, but now that their website has since been modified to get RID of this nickname, this redirect serves no purpose but as fodder for mocking Amanda (which is what WP:G10 is for) User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 01:53, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as a {{R from former name}}. She was known by this for a long time, so it will remain a highly plausible search term for a long while to come. Thryduulf (talk) 01:57, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Thryduulf. Enix150 (talk) 07:10, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Thryduulf. --Lenticel ^(talk) 10:15, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• keep per thryduulf, and maybe bribe outlets into covering stephan weyte so we can have "STEPHAN FUCKING WEYTE" as a redirect as well (please don't actually do that) consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 11:07, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

James map

• James map → Dual space#Injection into the double-dual  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target, and a web search (apart from geographic maps) brings up a bunch of unrelated maps referred to by this name. 1234qwer1234qwer4 01:42, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Jairo Solis

• Jairo Solis → Houston Astros minor league players#Jairo Solís  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Non-notable retired minor league player. Removed from target page in Special:Diff/1240372846. Similar redirect to Jairo Solís, which was G7'd. Chew^{(V • T • E)} 01:15, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete: Per nom. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:26, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Cinderella III: In Another Fairytale

• Cinderella III: In Another Fairytale → Cinderella III: A Twist in Time  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Film is not titled this. RanDom 404 (talk) 00:00, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment when trying to find a connection, I found the French Wikipedia claims (without an inline citation) that this was a working title. The exact phrase also appears in other French-language sources according to google results, but I can't access any of them for various reasons (e.g. paywall, misconfigured server, expired security certificate). I tried to see if it was ever in the English article, but wikiblame just times out. It wasn't present in any of the 5 revisions I randomly spot checked, but that proves nothing. Thryduulf (talk) 02:00, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Pirates of caribbean 6

• Pirates of caribbean 6 → Pirates of the Caribbean (film series)#Untitled sixth film (TBA)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not only miscapitalized, but also missing the word "the," making it an unlikely search term. RanDom 404 (talk) 00:00, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Especially since the proper "Pirates of the Caribbean 6" redirect exists. Enix150 (talk) 07:07, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 09:38, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

March 11

Battle of Pereryaty

• Battle of Pereryaty → Battle of Pererîta  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

WP:OR. Nothing about "Pereryaty" can be found anywhere on the Internet other than on Wikipedia. Super Ψ Dro 23:13, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:53, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Do not speedy delete. This is a {{R from move}} that was performed less than a minute before being nominated here, however that was only about 8 hours after the article was created. The original author has not edited since a few hours before the move, so is likely unaware of it. Accordingly it is important that this is not speedily deleted. Thryduulf (talk) 01:43, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Bantu colonisation

• Bantu colonisation → Bantu expansion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Bantu colonization → Bantu expansion  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete as both offensive and not used by reliable sources. The only sources using this term are colonial histories and actual reliable sources refuting Apartheid era propaganda. This term was used to equate Bantu settlement with European settler colonialism. Having it as a redirect validates it. Kowal2701 (talk) 21:17, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment – Bantu colonization should be bundled with this. Randi🦋^Talk_Contribs 21:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  •  Done. Thryduulf (talk) 22:32, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:RNEUTRAL. As the nominator notes, there are many sources that use this term. People seeing the term in those sources benefit from being taken to our neutrally-titled article even if they are not familiar with that term. Thryduulf (talk) 22:36, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep Several hits on Google Books and Google Scholar. As Thryduulf notes, WP:RNEUTRAL applies here. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Oakenfold & Osborne

• Oakenfold & Osborne → Perfecto Records  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Paul Oakenfold and Steve Osbourne → Perfecto Records  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Oakenfold and Osbourne → Perfecto Records  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• P. Oakenfold and S. Osbourne → Perfecto Records  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• P. Oakenfold and S. Osborne → Perfecto Records  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Oakenfold and Osborne → Perfecto Records  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Paul Oakenfold and Steve Osborne → Perfecto Records  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

While both individual artists are mentioned at this target, the DJ duo is not mentioned even as a single entry in the artist list and it makes no sense to have this as a redirect when two other articles could be a possible target. Jalen Barks (Woof) 18:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Lil' Will

• Lil' Will → Dungeon Family  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Dungeon Family makes no mention of this person. Seems like it would make more sense to retarget to Lil' Wil tagged with {{r from misspelling}}. A hatnote could be added there, but I found little to no information on Lil' Will that would suggest reason to add them to the Dungeon Family article any time soon, so I don't really see the point. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 14:59, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Lil' Wil per nom as a highly plausible misspelling. No opinion about a hatnote. Thryduulf (talk) 16:50, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

it does things other than drawing a red box, too

• IDARB → List of Xbox One games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• It Draws a Red Box → List of Xbox One games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

extremely weird case, this one. the target doesn't directly mention the game, though it is on one of the lists in the target (specifically a-l), so i was going to retarget there... but it likely wouldn't be worth that, since then it'd be better off returned to red (and i do believe it has a shot at notability). no worries, then, i'll just retarget it to mike mika's article, since he's the big guy behind it... but keen eyes will realize that the mike mika who developed the game is not the same mike mika who has an article here (and i do believe that mike mika has a shot at notability as well, even if the results i got didn't have much to do with things other than that one time he hacked donkey kong). this is probably an open and shut case, but my brain is too fried to notice how, so i'll leave the thinky part to you. at least there's no long history to worry about consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 14:26, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Advice for editors

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 August 30 § Wikipedia:Advice for editors – No consensus

• Wikipedia:Advice for editors → Wikipedia:No angry mastodons  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I'd like everyone to consider PC78's proposal in the first discussion - retargeting to Wikipedia:Editing policy. Either way, I believe that the target needs to be changed as the current one is too specific for general "advice". it's lio! | talk | work 12:55, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Men in blue

• Men in blue → India national cricket team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is a 2022 US short film of the same name and the top result in a google search for it is Blue Man Group; should be a dab page. Vestrian24Bio 10:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Disambig it's also a common way of referring to police officers, which was my first thought. Thryduulf (talk) 11:50, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

2025 Runcorn and Helsby recall petition

• 2025 Runcorn and Helsby recall petition → 2025 Runcorn and Helsby by-election  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Irrelevant redirect - there will be no recall petition as Amesbury is to resign. CR (how's my driving? call 0865 88318) 09:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete - no recall petition ever took place DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 10:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Speedy keep - the redirect in question is the former name of the page points to, and it's very rarely a good idea to suppress such a redirect given external sites may have linked to it. See WP:R#KEEP. There aren't any other pressing reasons to delete it anyway. There was talk of a recall in sources for a couple of weeks so it's a valid search term.  — Amakuru (talk) 10:19, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep - there's no harm in keeping an old redirect, and there may be external links to it. A recall petition was likely before his resignation, so it's not a nonsense redirect. Gordon Meadows (talk) 11:29, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per Amakuru and Gordon Meadows. After his conviction the petition was automatic unless he resigned, so it is and will remain a useful search term. Thryduulf (talk) 11:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep As per above. The C of E God Save the King! (talk) 22:18, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Transparency (Guatemala)

• Transparency (Guatemala) → Front for Democracy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target page RaschenTechner (talk) 23:30, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep It's given as a former name in the infobox. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:36, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Presidentman. Obviously useful, and RaschenTechner probably just overlooked the infobox. Nyttend (talk) 22:17, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

  Yes, I did overlook the infobox, but the article doesn't give much information about the party's time as Transparency and when and why they were renamed. RaschenTechner (talk) 16:14, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, unsourced (what's there is dead), and I can't find anything to corroborate this...a simple google search for "transparency guatemala" finds all sorts of other stuff besides this, even when including the current name. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 23:40, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

  Wrong: it's sourced. Linkrot doesn't affect the validity of a properly cited source — consult any major academic style guide. As well, this is a print citation with a link for convenience; you wouldn't make such a statement if a link weren't provided. Not everything's on Google. Nyttend (talk) 01:26, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

  See below. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:29, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

• Update. I have removed the claim in the article that was the basis of this redirect, since it was unsupported by the source (which I was able to track down after all here). This would seem to render the keep votes above without merit...especially since even in the source, it was only referred to by its Spanish name (and always with "partido" attached, rather than mononymously). 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:29, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

  I don't understand this removal to be honest. It's a Spanish language document, so obviously it was only referred to by its Spanish name. Plus, the document is from 2003, just as the removed claim stated. It's worth noting that the article explicitly referred to Transparency as a former name. From what I see, the source did in fact support the claim made in the article. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:04, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

  How does the source support the claim? It has some information about a "partido Transparencia", with absolutely no information about it being a former name of Frente por la Democracia. In fact, the other main (later) source in the article seems to directly contradicct the claim, based on information about Frente's founding date and origins (also with no mention of Transparencia). 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:33, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

  But see this source, still in the article, which seems to confirm that "Transparencia" and "Frente por la Democracia" are the same party. I have added the claim back to the article based on this source. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 15:15, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:07, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Are you referring to the footnote at page 51 that says 47 Transparencia cedió su ficha para la conformación del Frente por la Democracia., which in my translation gives 47 Transparency ceded its tab for the formation of the Front for Democracy.? Is this a bad translation, because I do not understand what ceded its tab means? How does this footnote show that "Transparencia" and "Frente por la Democracia" are the same party? Jay 💬 18:42, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

ficha seems to have a specific meaning of a card allowing participation in the legal process. p18 Por lo tanto, no importa el Partido Político, ya que su valor está representado en la ficha que posibilita la participación en el proceso electoral. "As such, the political party doesn't matter, as its value lies in the card that allows the participation in the electoral process." There's also mention of parties selling or leasing fichas. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 05:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 05:13, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Kingdom of Malwa

• Kingdom of Malwa → Malwa Sultanate  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This redirect points to Malwa Sultanate, but term "Kingdom of Malwa" has been used for multiple periods, like the Paramara dynasty and the Ghuri and Khalji . Its a previously deleted article recreation (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kingdom of Malwa) showed there was no clear, singular topic. Per WP:REDIRECT and WP:PRECISION, this redirect is misleading. NXcrypto Message 05:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete : It is an unnecessary redirect; it redirects to the Malwa Sultanate. Prior consensus resulted in a deletion, so restoring it as redirect serves no purpose whatsoever. AlvaKedak (talk) 11:29, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Controversial autism therapy

• Controversial autism therapy → Applied behavior analysis  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A cursory search indicates that ABA is one of multiple "treatments" for autism, all of which appear controversial to an extent, with this particular one apparently attracting more controversy due to being the most popular. Therefore, I think this redirect is ambiguous (and even if it weren't, probably not a likely enough search term to justify a clearly non-neutral redirect). — Anonymous 03:15, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

No I think it's just this one, as it is controversial in the autistic community and it's not just because it's the most popular, its because of the mental health outcomes of autistic people who have had ABA and because it encourages normalization (all of witch is mentioned on the page). There arnt any other ones that I know of that are as bad as this one. Anthony2106 (talk) 04:46, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Can I ask WP:AUTISM to come vote on my side or is that against the rules? Anthony2106 (talk) 04:49, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

too late, i already did that consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 12:43, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Anthony2106, look up "bleach therapy" and "chelation therapy". They certainly appear much more controversial (and probably much less effective) than this. Also note that telling people to come vote on your side in any discussion is called canvassing and against WP rules. — Anonymous 13:12, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Okay these two you pointed out seem worse, maybe it should be changed, maybe re-targeted, couldn't be a disambiguation page could it? I've already made 8 bad redirects I don't wanna add to the list. Anthony2106 (talk) 13:25, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

We don't usually make DAB pages for vague descriptive terms. Also, it seems we only have an article for this one. — Anonymous 14:36, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete I support anyone developing a Wikipedia article on this topic, but opinionated disambiguation pages for topics where there are multiple perspectives are beyond what editors can manage. I support anyone criticizing this therapy. It seems developed in the 1960s, so I am sure like most psychological therapies it has been challenged. Wikipedia is not effective for setting SEO for disambiguation pages, so if the intent is to find readers seeking this term, then keeping this page will not achieve that anyway. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:33, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. ABA is still controversial, enough said. LarryL33k (Contribz) 17:09, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

  @LarryL33k the problem the nom proposed is that it's not the only controversial flavor of "autism treatment" (whatever autism is) consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 20:40, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

  That's true, but Most people who search up "Controversial Autism Treatment" would most likely be looking for ABA, anyway. LarryL33k (Contribz) 04:18, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

  @LarryL33k, is there any way to prove this? If anyone ever actually searches it, we have no way of confirming which of the multiple "controversial autism therapies" they are looking for. — Anonymous 02:08, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

  Excuse me what is "whatever autism is"? There is an autistic person right here! Anthony2106 (talk) 13:22, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

  @Consarn I forgot to @ you Anthony2106 (talk) 07:04, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

  @Anthony2106 the reason a good handful of "autism treatments" are seen as controversial can be attributed to them being based on misunderstandings of what autism is or isn't, and whether or not it's something worth "treating" or "fixing". case in point, i've been autistic all along! maybe! the diagnosis was done at birth and was torn between autism and a really shitty respiratory system so i can't actually be 100% sure until i have that checked again but shush

  that aside aside, this is why my vote will be to delete, since it wouldn't be a fitting topic for a redirect or dab. if the concept can be expanded into an article about controversial treatments, i'd really recommend playing it safe and working with a draft until it's at least c-class consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 11:57, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

  Oh cool you might also be autistic though I don't know how a bad respiratory system and autism can overlap, anyway good luck with an adult assesment especially if your a girl they might be sexist. The YouTuber I'm Autistic Now What? made some knowledge that might help:[1] Anthony2106 (talk) 23:46, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, we don't redirect descriptions of things to the thing itself. Google is there, as is the Wikipedia search engine. No need for this redirect. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 03:19, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Autism therapies. While orange tagged, it does go over criticisms of various techniques, including ABA. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 03:37, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A new target Autism therapies has been suggested.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:27, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

• A quick google suggests that ABA is by far the main topic for "controversial autism therapy". On the first page of hits I get only one for something else (Facilitated communication [2]). That being said, this is vague enough that I think retarget per Patar knight is the best option here, I think someone searching for this will be best served by an overview article without us being opinionated about whether ABA is THE controversial autism therapy or just A controversial autism therapy, though I have somewhat mixed feelings on this given how predominate ABA is in the search results. Rusalkii (talk) 20:10, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete because the current target is misleading (this is not the only controversial or discredited therapy), a DAB page doesn't make sense, and there's no perfect alternative target. As a second choice, we could retarget to Autism therapies, as suggested by Patar knight above, but this article includes non-controversial ones as well. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:17, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

  @WhatamIdoing unrelated to the discussion, but it seems that in the process of voting, you accidentally duplicated the section lmao consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 20:23, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

  Maybe a section of that article? Like autism therapies#Anti-cure perspective and autism rights movement I got the idea from another listed redirect I made. Anthony2106 (talk) 00:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:21, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Autism therapies per Anthony2106. I don't support the section suggested by Asilverting as I think it more likely that someone is using this search term is looking for information about therapies (or one particular therapy) rather than information about why some people oppose the concept of autism as something that needs treating. Those that are interested in the latter can easily find it from the TOC if they arrive at the top of the article, while those interested in the former aren't going to know to scroll up to find what they're looking for if they arrive at the section. Thryduulf (talk) 04:45, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Interstitial space (biology)

• Interstitial space (biology) → Extracellular fluid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Interstitial region → Extracellular fluid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The target does not mention "Interstitial space" or "Interstitial region", and the expression may be ambiguous: perhaps not all interstitial spaces are filled with fluid. My instinct here is to delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:16, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget Interstitial space (biology) → Interstitium. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 19:55, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
• Ah this seems like a good idea, I agree with the idea to retarget per Hyphenation Expert. I created this in 2008 and don't actually care what happens to it. Seems like an unlikely redirect, but hey, they're cheap right? delldot ∇. 20:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget Interstitial region → Interstitial. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 20:31, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Delete given AfD. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 07:43, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Tagged Interstitial space (biology) as an {{R from merge}}. Notified of this discussion at the suggested targets. Note that Interstitial is being discussed at AfD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 21:40, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:14, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

When you are young, they assume you know nothing

• When you are young, they assume you know nothing → Cardigan (song)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Lyric not mentioned in target. Rusalkii (talk) 01:31, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

But lyrics don't need to be mentioned at the target. Anthony2106 (talk) 01:34, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

• I'm kind of torn for this one. At face value, it seems fairly unambiguous and I can't see an especially strong argument to delete it. On the other hand, I think the creation of redirects to random and not especially significant song lyrics should generally be discouraged, as there is always some room for ambiguity (the English language only has so many combinations of words, after all), and they can always be potential vandalism targets. Still, I'm leaning keep unless someone could demonstrate a more concrete issue with this specific redirect. — Anonymous 01:46, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete - It's a random lyric, and pageviews show no evidence that anyone is using this as a search term to find this article. If another song in the future includes this lyric, obviously we are not going to turn this into a disambiguation page.--NØ 04:55, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

  Would it of been better if I linked you put me on and said I was your favorite? Because that one is more popular. Anyway there's lots of lyric redirects, I don't really get why mine is worse. Anthony2106 (talk) 06:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

  It looks like most of those lyrics either include the title of the song or are mentioned at the target. Also, see WP:OTHERSTUFF. — Anonymous 21:18, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:32, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep valid unambiguous {{r from lyrics}} are helpful for navigation. Mach61 14:29, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete this recently created redirect, and potential future redirects whose only purpose is to link strings of words of a song to its song article. The song is encyclopedic, not the string of words unmentioned in the article. Jay 💬 21:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:53, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Identitarian

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

This also refers to idpol Skemous (talk) 17:12, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate. Some examples of "identitarian" being used in the sense of identity politics: [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] Alternatively, use a redirect template at Identitarian movement. Astaire (talk) 20:51, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. There is adequate disambiguation with the hatnote at the current target. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:17, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

  "Not to be confused with" isn't the appropriate template because "identitarian" is used to describe identity politics, as I showed above. It isn't a matter of "confusion". Astaire (talk) 02:13, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:12, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

A third thing to disambiguate, to avoid 2DABS, is social identity. Skemous (talk) 06:05, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

University of Islamic Studies

• University of Islamic Studies → Al-Qaeda safe houses, Karachi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target, possible confusion with ur:جامعہ الدراسات اسلامیہ, which does not say whether they are related. GnocchiFan (talk) 20:00, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: There's more content in the article history before it was blanked by an IP editor in 2021 and redirected in 2023. --Paul_012 (talk) 19:15, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

  Still no indicaction from the previous version that this is independently notable (i.e. no in-depth secondary RS in that now-redirected article), so I understand why this was redirected. But right now it doesn't seem to make much sense and is probably best deleted if it's not mentioned at the source article. (That article seems to have its own issues too, but that's not the purpose of this discussion). GnocchiFan (talk) 17:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:39, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This redirect has history, so I'd prefer to see some actual delete !votes before we axe it.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:49, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Restore and send to AfD per WP:BLAR. There isn't a good existing target to redirect this to, but there is history as an article and given the subject matter it is likely there are sources which aren't in English so it needs a full evaluation as an article. Thryduulf (talk) 04:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

LemonParty

• LemonParty → Shock site  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

this is definitely a shock site that exists (proof: i fell for it when i was 12. long story), however since it's not mentioned to any encyclopedic extent in this article I propose that this redirect should be deleted User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 08:41, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• The rule at WP:RFD#DELETE #8 is to consider deletion if it's not mentioned at the target and it's "a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name". For example, "not mentioned" is a valid reason to delete a redirect if is is a translation of the title of the article into a non-English language that is unrelated to the article's subject. Redirects should not be deleted if the connection to the subject is obvious or if the redirect is correct but not appropriate for inclusion in the article, such as {{R from brand name}}. If it bothers you, then I'd suggest editing the target article to add something like a brief mention (e.g., "such as LemonParty") somewhere.
  Additionally, it's getting a lot of traffic – about 2000 uses during the last year. That's more than about 85% of our articles. Deleting it is therefore likely to break incoming links. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:40, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  Thankfully RDELETE is not all encompassing and we can recognize redirects as misleading and deal with them. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:13, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  I don't think it's misleading: It's not deceptive. It doesn't create a false impression. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:54, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

  It does though, there's an impression that a term like this would be mentioned or at least explained in some capacity. As it stands, it looks like someone just forgot a space when searching for Lemon Party. Anybody actually searching for that term won't find any relevant information at the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:21, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

  I do not agree that the existence of a redirect gives the impression that the redirect's title will be mentioned or explained in the article. WP:RFD#DELETE does not agree with that view, either, as it recommends deletion only for "novel or very obscure synonyms" that are unmentioned. This view – that taking readers to a relevant page automatically misleads them into expecting the word to be mentioned or explained on that page – would recommend deletion for all unmentioned redirects, and that is clearly supported by neither our rules nor our practice. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:54, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• Redirect to Lemon Party, as the current target is misleading given that there's no information or mention there. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:13, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• 50/50 keep/delete, but do not retarget. This is one of those rare cases where a redirect without a mention might actually be somewhat useful. It's pretty plausible that someone looking for information here won't know the specific term "shock site", but may instead search for a well known example of one, and might be reasonably happy to find general information, even without specifics about the one they searched for. Meanwhile, the lack of a space makes the above proposed retarget pretty questionable, especially given the existence of the current target. On the other hand, there's no mention, so I'm not really all that opposed to a simple delete either. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 12:59, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

  I'm opposed to keeping the current target for what it's worth. Being that there's no relevant information at the current target, it stands to reason that it'd be misleading to stay targeted there. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:20, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:47, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

President Elon Musk

• President Elon Musk → Elon Musk  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This would probably be a better redirect to criticism about Musk's role in the US federal government then his main article. cookie monster 755 11:04, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Opposition to Elon Musk's role in the US federal government. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:25, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Comment: the Opposition to Elon Musk's role in the US federal government article now focuses solely on lawsuits involving DOGE and is itself in the midst of a move discussion to make that clear. There may be a better target than the Elon Musk article, but Opposition to Elon Musk's role in the US federal government isn't it. FactOrOpinion (talk) 20:00, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Maybe redirect to Political activities of Elon Musk or Views of Elon Musk? cookie monster 755 09:50, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

My guess is that it makes most sense to create a section about it in Public image of Elon Musk and redirect to that. Maybe I'll create a short section about it later today. FactOrOpinion (talk) 17:24, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

I like either Political activities of Elon Musk or Public image of Elon Musk better than the "Views" article. This is about how people view him, not about his own views. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:06, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

OK, I ended up adding text about it to Political activities of Elon Musk § United States. I also discovered that President Musk redirects to Éminence grise § Historical examples, so that should likely be retargeted as well. FactOrOpinion (talk) 03:22, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Elon Musk. Keep. He is president of the Musk Foundation so it's been a legitimate title before the recent events. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:46, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

  That's the current target, and nobody uses actually uses a title like "President Musk" as a way of addressing the head of a private foundation. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:05, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

  The nomination is incorrect then, I have fixed that. In the context of the foundation, yes they would. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:56, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

• Most readers who are searching for President Elon Musk are not doing so because of his private foundation, but because of his new role in the second Trump administration. Sources [9][10][11] referencing it in association with his role in the US federal government, not because of his private foundation. cookie monster 755 17:33, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

  To all involved @Tavix, CookieMonster755, FactOrOpinion, and WhatamIdoing: Precisely because of this, I propose the speedy deletion of this nonsense. Perhaps when he's actually president of something, in the near future I assume, this discussion could be up for debate again. Bemloko ᴬʰᵒʸꜝ‍✉ 06:27, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

  The question is whether "President Musk" / "President Elon Musk" / "President Elon" are used as search terms often enough that they're useful redirects, and if so, what the target(s) should be. In the last 3 weeks, President Musk was used 101 times, President Elon Musk was used 45 times, and President Elon was used 13 times. A Google search on one of the first two terms pulls up ~5M results. I think it's worth keeping them as redirects (and that Redirect Views tool pointed out that "President Elon" is another redirect to include in this). I added relevant text to Political activities of Elon Musk § United States and think that makes sense as the target for all three. FactOrOpinion (talk) 14:31, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Bemloko: Elon Musk is 'actually' President of something: the Musk Foundation. This is established in the infobox at Elon Musk. Also, this redirect does not meet any of the criteria for speedy deletion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 10:53, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Tavix, it is extremely unlikely that anyone in the US uses "President So-and-so" to address the president of a private foundation. That might be a thing in other countries, or in an old institution that has more theatrical traditions (although 'Mister Chairman' would be more likely), but I'd bet dollars to doughnuts that he's addressed as "Elon" or "Musk" (sans honorific) in board meetings.

More relevantly, as Cookie says, nobody looking for information about "President Musk" is looking for anything about his private foundation. They're looking for information about his role as an unelected bureaucrat. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:49, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

If someone's looking for Elon Musk's role as a bureaucrat, they can find that information at his biography... -- Tavix ^(talk) 10:53, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

The question isn't where someone can find information, but what people are most often looking for when they search for "President Musk" / "President Elon Musk" / "President Elon", and I agree with cookie monster and WhatamIdoing. The most frequent context for people using these terms outside of WP (in statements, in memes, in editorial cartoons, ...) is in connection to his political activities. FactOrOpinion (talk) 22:16, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

It's simply a title for Elon Musk so it should redirect accordingly. It's the same reason why eg. President Biden redirects to Joe Biden and not Presidency of Joe Biden. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:25, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:45, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep - News may call him "president musk" as commentary, and this redirect will assist with navigation when people search for it DimensionalFusion (talk · she/her) 10:04, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep as in keep redirecting to Elon Musk, or? cookie monster 755 11:52, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Political activities of Elon Musk § United States. Also retarget President Musk and President Elon to that section. All three terms are most often used by people referring to Musk's very significant role during and after the presidential transition in Trump's second presidency, calling Musk the "President (elect)" / "co-president" / "shadow president." This was also reflected in memes, editorial cartoons, and a Time magazine cover portraying Musk behind the Resolute desk. FactOrOpinion (talk) 16:32, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Playhouse Disney around the world

• Playhouse Disney around the world → Playhouse Disney  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Is this needed though? RanDom 404 (talk) 15:56, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete: not mentioned at target article. Unlikely to be a necessary search term. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:30, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment Looking at the page history, this used to be a separate article but was moved when the channel name was changed. Later, the redirect was pointed to the current target. There is relevant content at both the original target and the current one. I don't think this should be deleted but unsure which article would be the better target. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:44, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

  That former target, Disney Jr. (international), also does not mention this redirect. From searching, I'm still not entirely clear what Playhouse Disney around the world even is, and I don't see any reliable sources with which to add a mention anywhere. I'm unconvinced that this would be doing any good at either page. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 00:10, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

  "Playhouse Disney around the world" just means non-U.S. versions of the channel, which both the original and current targets discuss. There's no need to "add" a mention because it's just describing the subject of the article. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 02:14, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete or the weakest retarget to Disney Jr. (international) since Playhouse Disney changed their naming scheme (i'm User:Someone-123-321 by the way, but due to reasons the reply system I'm using doesn't work on Chrome :[). Delete, because of the unnatural grammar, retarget to match redirect Disney Junior around the world 65.181.23.139 (talk) 05:27, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 03:44, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Gummi Bears-Winnie the Pooh Hour

• Gummi Bears-Winnie the Pooh Hour → The New Adventures of Winnie the Pooh  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Is this needed? RanDom 404 (talk) 01:40, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete Only brief mentions at the pages for both shows and a bit of an WP:XY situation. Let the search bar do its thing here. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 03:24, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Draft:Encanto Character List

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

DZYT

• DZYT → Sonshine Media Network International  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• DYKZ → Brigada Group  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This list was redirected at AfD back in 2021 At the time, there was a "Bandera News Philippines" section. at time DYKZ does not appear the station. 112.207.123.170 (talk) 01:02, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Myspace stuff

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

Maybe not a likely search term. RanDom 404 (talk) 00:06, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. "Myspace stuff" isn't explained anywhere in the article, and searching for it on Google doesn't really yield any good results, unless you count "My stuff", as in your content. Justjourney (talk) 00:45, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

March 10

Bob Sample's tank

• Bob Sample's tank → Bob Semple tank  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible misspelling of an alternative name Schützenpanzer (Talk) 22:38, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 12:41, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Bob Sempl's tank

• Bob Sempl's tank → Bob Semple tank  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Implausible typo of an alternative name Schützenpanzer (Talk) 22:36, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete - We can't have every typo as a redirect, only the most common or understandable. This one is clearly not a common of understandable typo. Cheers, ✏️ C809 ⌨️ (let's chat) 14:29, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Kilgore (Smudge)

• Kilgore (Smudge) → Kilgore (band)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

this redirect makes no sense. the band was called, at various points, either "Kilgore", "Smudge", or "Kilgore Smudge", but never "Kilgore (Smudge)" -- FMSky (talk) 22:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep – {{R from move}}, used to be the page title for ~3 years and still gets regular page views. Randi🦋^Talk_Contribs 19:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

DreamWorks Animation Television (animation studio and production company)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

Freedom bread

• Freedom bread → List of French breads  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target or at List of breads. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete as the association is unknown ("freedom breads" pop up in search, but not popular and not French), so the redirect is very confusing. Was it a failed attempt to create a mem of the freedom fries variety? Викидим (talk) 16:14, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep or retarget to Freedom fries. The terms "Freedom bread', "Freedom toast", and "Freedom fries" were commonly used in US restaurants post-9/11 as replacements for "French bread", "French toast", and "French fries", respectively, to show dissatisfaction with the lack of French support for the War in Afghanistan. This is similar to the World War II-era replacements "Liberty cabbage", "Liberty sandwich", and "Liberty steak" for "sauerkraut", "hamburger", and "Hamburg steak", respectively, or to the currently ongoing controversy (and redirect discussion) over caffè "americano" and its replacement "Canadiano". (Author) Enix150 (talk) 21:31, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  Do you have any sources for "Freedom bread" in this sense? I did perform a search and did not get anything similar in the top results. In fact, my top result in Google is [12] that does not describe "French bread" in its common American (or British) meaning. Based on the top results as seen by me, the redirect should be to List of sweet breads. I think that this is too obscure, thus my !vote above, the "French bread" is even more obscure. Викидим (talk) 22:24, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  I'm not sure I agree with the idea that we can simply replace a group from an item's name with "freedom" and it becomes a valid redirect. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:57, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment there is a wiktionary entry listing freedom bread as a rarely used synonym of freedom toast, with relevant quotes included. — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 04:08, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Rain, paint mare

• Rain, paint mare → Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Adding a comma after the character name isn't necessarily making this a likely search variation. However, Rain is a character in the film. RanDom 404 (talk) 15:30, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Tron rumored sequel (film)

• Tron rumored sequel (film) → Tron#Sequels  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not a likely search term. RanDom 404 (talk) 15:30, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Joe Biden health cover up

• Joe Biden health cover up → Age and health concerns about Joe Biden  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention of any type of cover up at the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:14, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep, a search for "Joe Biden health cover up" (both in and without quotation marks) gives relevant results. Just a few days ago (if my memory is not failing me) an episode of The Daily referenced more or less this. Perhaps tag with r from non-neutral name. JayCubby 16:02, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

The problem is there's no relevant content regarding a health cover up at the target, making the search term misleading to anybody actually looking for such information. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:09, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

There is no direct mention of a cover-up, sure, but the White House's vehement denial of Biden being unfit to serve is mentioned, and it's not unreasonable for the term cover-up to be used to describe what has happened. JayCubby 18:46, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

So, we're drawing conclusions and targeting to a place with an expectation that people will draw their own conclusions...? There's no words one might expect in relation to cover-up that I'm seeing either, such as hid, lied, deceived, downplayed, misled, etc. This is the type of redirect where one would certainly expect there to be detailed information regarding a possible cover-up of some kind, but there's nothing. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:49, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Josh, there is enough denial of legitimate claims by the White House to justify such a non-neutral redirect. Coverage of the exact term exists on the internet, as I said above. JayCubby 14:39, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

That sounds like even more reason not to target an article that doesn't discuss it. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:58, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Weak keep I'm a little hesitant because of the lack of an explicit mention, but this is a plausible search term. There also doesn't seem to be a more suitable target. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:49, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  Search term maybe, but the lack of any type of relevant information at the target is an issue. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:04, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Original Sin: President Biden's Decline, Its Cover-up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again. At least this refers to a cover-up, and if the person who searches on Joe Biden health cover up actually just wants info about concerns re: Biden's health, that initial article links to Age and health concerns about Joe Biden. FactOrOpinion (talk) 22:45, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep, add a section on aides hiding the decline to the target. Decent sources would come from WSJ, The Times and NYT:

• https://www.wsj.com/politics/biden-white-house-age-function-diminished-3906a839
• https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-world/article/joe-biden-presidency-white-house-sb8d3kd6j
• https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/17/us/politics/biden-age.html

Less decent from NY Post:

• https://nypost.com/2024/12/19/us-news/white-house-aides-hid-bidens-apparent-mental-decline-from-day-1-of-his-presidency-explosive-report-reveals/

Викидим (talk) 23:12, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Marco Lubio

• Marco Lubio → Marco Rubio  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely typo / not helpful search term. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:43, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. @Hey man im josh: This may qualify for WP:G10. Steel1943 (talk) 20:17, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  how so? consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 23:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  ...Lubricant. Steel1943 (talk) 23:14, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  eh, don't think so. the whole r/l thing pretty much always takes priority over over sex jokes, and even then, i doubt the people making those jokes actually know what lube is consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 10:52, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete as implausible search term. First of all, based on page history, it likely wouldn't qualify as G10. the intent wasn't to compare Mark Rubio to lubricant but a good faith attempt to add a "translated term used by Beijing". That being said, it definitely doesn't satisfy WP:RFOR by a longshot, and the transliteration isn't even correct (it should be lubiao— from either 卢比奥 or 鲁比奥 depending on the character used) — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 03:55, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

User:Reschly

• User:Reschly → Special:Contributions/Reschly  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Seems like an unnecessary redirect to Special:Contributions/Reschly to possibly promote a user's contributions The real JustSomeoneNo (talk) 14:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as harmless and unproblematic. A user is perfectly entitled to redirect their user page to their contributions, and doing so is nor promotional in the slightest. Redirects to special pages do not work, functioning as soft redirects, so there isn't even any chance of confusion. Thryduulf (talk) 14:46, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Thryduulf. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 12:44, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep, there's nothing wrong with a user promoting their contributions. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

2026 SA20

• 2026 SA20 → SA20  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

per this recent-ish rfd, though it might not warrant a g4 because it was recreated as an article and then hit by the blar beam consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 14:20, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Restore article without prejudice to AfD. We don't delete article content at RfD. Thryduulf (talk) 14:48, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  eh, i think this is more of a "restore and send to afd" case. admittedly, i'm not the biggest expert on the matter, but it seems that the most reliable sources in the pre-blar content (citations 2, 3, and 5) only actually might be reliable. unless someone who is more experienced in the south african cricket scene than me can opine here, in which case i'll uncritically believe their assertions :3 consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 15:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  When I say "without prejudice to AfD" it's because I have no strong opinion on whether it should go to AfD or not and I'm not advocating for or against it being nominated. Thryduulf (talk) 04:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  yeah. hence my disagreement. if restored, i think it absolutely should go to afd unless someone could evaluate the sources here (because i'm still no expert on ball sport #701). then again, this was created and blanked early enough that just draftifying would be a better option consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 10:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• The 2026 season is not mentioned at the target, making it confusing / misleading for anybody who searches for the title and finds nothing of relevance there. But, as Thryduulf points out, this was previously an article. The fault lies with the person who redirected it to a location which had no information about it. I'm also leaning towards restoring the article. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
• Draftify it. Yes, it's too soon (which means that restoring it to mainspace is problematic) but the redirecting was also problematic due to there being no information on the 2026 edition at the target. Draftying it resolves both issues. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:29, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Also fine with Keep per Blue Square Thing's additions. Thanks! -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:00, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Restore article and Draftify per above. No need to close this RfD and drag the article through another XfD if consensus is clear. — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 04:02, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Draftify the article and delete the redirect. Vestrian24Bio 04:49, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• The SA20 article now mentions the 2026, 2027 and 2028 seasons, all of which were created at the same time and redirected by me. I wasn't aware that they needed to be specifically mentioned. They are now. Up to y'all what you do with the non-articles that were created Blue Square Thing (talk) 16:25, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Nana (entertainer, born 2001)

• Nana (entertainer, born 2001) → Wooah#Members  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This list was redirected at AfD last 5 months. At the time, there was a "Members" section. Their request was the following: The Nana (entertainer) and Nana (entertainer, born 2001) are 2 differents in South Korea. 112.207.123.170 (talk) 12:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep as the RfD rationale is incoherent without mentioning the why. — Paper9oll (🔔 • 📝) 14:09, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• keep, if by default. i can guess what the nom might be trying to say... but it's at best not a deletion rationale (or a rationale at all), and nana is mentioned in the target (i wonder why). maybe an argument could be made for her birth date being unmentioned at the moment, but my brain is allergic to remembering things related to k-pop, so i can't help much consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 14:25, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. No rationale presented for why this should be deleted as a redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 20:15, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  No, was gonna say "delete per nom", see also the edit history and this afd discussion 112.207.123.170 (talk) 21:07, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  ignoring potential copyvio issues, do we need two images cluttering up the next nom? consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 23:05, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  I don't understand the relevance of either the images or the AfD to this discussion? Thryduulf (talk) 23:41, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  2 Images were removed, sorry that all. 112.207.123.170 (talk) 00:34, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep, the target article has content about an entertainer named Nana who was (presumably) born in 2001. No reason to delete. Thryduulf (talk) 21:29, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Tighten

• Tighten → Megamind#Cast  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

closed twice before with no consensus (first time, second time), with the recommendation of waiting at least 2 months to nom again. thus, to celebrate the 69rd day of the year (nice), it's time to nom again. with that preamble aside... that's a word with seemingly no fitting enough target and not much to work with for a dab, though an argument could be made for this resident incel being the primary topic. what do? consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 12:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

notes:

• tighten (character) is a redirect that exists, but it likely doesn't matter since it has that juicy disambiguator
• yes, it's tighten. megamind tried to name him titan, but he's canonically a dumb stupid bad at writing doofus who thinks the triangle doesn't go in the square hole, so the discussion about whether or not that is his funny name is at best an irrelevant misconception

not important notes, but notes nonetheless consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 12:15, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete Redirecting a dictionary word to the misspelling of a film character's name is downright wrong and astonishing. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:29, 28 September 2024 (UTC)

* Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:51, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

again, it's not a misspelling of a character's name, it's a mishearing, which is itself canon because hal is the kind of person who thinks the possessive form of "it" has an apostrophe

also what happened with your reply's formatting, holy fr*ck consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 10:50, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

oh wait now i got it, should have realized that it was a quote. whoops consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 14:31, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Crusader 1865 ship

• ''Crusader'' 1865 ship → Crusader (1865 ship)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Per prior consensus (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_May_7#Weird_Al_Yankovic and that's only ONE rfd), redirects with double single apostrophes in a row should be deleted to avoid technical problems. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 11:12, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Support - The only reason the redirect exists is because someone created the article like that and I moved it to its proper title. Llammakey (talk) 11:20, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. Should never have been created at this title by NealeWellington, given that the creator bypassed a title pattern (2+ consecutive apostrophes) that has been blocked by the title creation blacklist ... since 2014. (2014 discussion.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:24, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 17:44, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Electoral history of Hanuman Beniwal

• Electoral history of Hanuman Beniwal → Hanuman Beniwal  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete, as per WP:GNG, Electoral history of Hanuman Beniwal is already merged with the redirected article Hanuman Beniwal. Unnecessary redirect. — Hemant Dabral (📞 • ✒) 10:44, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per {{R from merge}}. GNG is a notability guideline and thus irrelevant to redirects. When content is merged we very nearly always keep the resulting redirect both for attribution purposes and to ensure that people can find the content that has been merged. Thryduulf (talk) 14:50, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

MAIN PAGE!

• MAIN PAGE! → Main Page  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The exclamation mark at the end is what pushes this straight into implausible territory. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 10:25, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 March 2 § MAIN PAGE! – Keep
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2019 May 23 § Targeting the Main Page – Keep

• Keep. This has existed harmlessly since 2012 and nothing has changed since this was kept at RfD in 2015 and 2019. Thryduulf (talk) 14:54, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Week keep - As noted per above, two RfD's have decided to keep, plus it is doing no harm. Pageviews show that at least a couple people use it.

✏️ C809 ⌨️ (let's chat) 14:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

MP: redirects (excluding MP:T)

• MP: → Main Page  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• MP:TFP → Main Page  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• MP:WSP → Main Page  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• MP:OTD → Main Page  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• MP:TOP → Main Page  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• MP:DYK → Main Page  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This seems like an inappropiate attempt at a WP:PNS that didn't go far.
Internal links range from 4-3 (for MP:) all the way to 0 (for MP:DYK), so it's not like any links will break from deleting these redirects.

I should note that these pages (other than DYK, which was a discovery made by me just now) were previously RFD'd as keep ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2010_December_19#MP: ) but consensus changes. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 10:22, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep all. The MP: prefix is mentioned in WP:SC#Pseudo-namespaces as an explicitly allowed case. People in the previous RfD said they find these redirects useful and all of them still get views so there are some editors that still do. And finally, there are some links that don't show up in Special:WhatLinksHere such as links in edit summaries. We can't know for certain whether deleting will break any links or not. Nickps (talk) 23:57, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Relighting

• Relighting → Polynomial texture mapping  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Could also refer to Flameout#Engine restart, for instance. 1234qwer1234qwer4 02:11, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• No opinion. I see a lack of internal and external "research". Relighting is linked from 3 pages for just that meaning; one was a REDLINK from 2013 until 2021. (See Pages that link to "Relighting".) Relighting could refer to RE-computer graphics lighting or some kind of RE-illumination. Relighting could be RE-ignition, but that's hardly a big topic. Engine relight redirects to [Flameout#Engine restart]. Relighting could be REPEAT fire lighting (fire making) after it goes out. How about Rocket engine restart (a redirect to [Rocket engine]). Relight My Fire (album)? RE-[lit]? Why nominate it for discussion? If relighting has other notable meanings, just be bold and make it a disambiguation page! -A876 (talk) 20:01, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep and place a hatnote on the Polynomial texture mapping page, because it seems that said article fits more into such. Justjourney (talk) 23:18, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:46, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Bornean

• Bornean → Borean languages  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to Borneo; term is not just a typo of "Borean", it is an established term used to refer to something as belonging to/from the island of Borneo Anthropophoca (talk) 03:40, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Borneo per nom. This feels like it could have been done boldly (the redirect used to point to Borneo until 2020 when it was retargeted by Kypioys sx) Duckmather (talk) 04:51, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Borneo per nom. Enix150 (talk) 21:41, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Televsion

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

Not every typo deserves a redirect, this is implausible and so not needed. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:26, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete per nom (normally I dislike these kinda "votes" and want to add more to say, but in this case I genuinely don't have anything of note to add. It was created only 2 days ago, so there's no history to worry about btw.) User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 11:15, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete: Per nom. Not every possible typo in existence is a helpful search term. Hey man im josh (talk) 16:10, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Enix150 (talk) 21:42, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  Delete per nom and Enix150 112.207.123.170 (talk) 22:27, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete per nom. This typo is highly unlikely. Oreocooke (talk) 04:58, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Weak keep it is a single character omission typo, thus a likely form of typo -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:17, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

March 9

Nonlinear electrodynamics

• Nonlinear electrodynamics → Nonlinear optics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The current target does not appear to be appropriate but it is not clear that a better target exists right now. A red link would be preferable, to encourage creation of an article. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics#Nonlinear electrodynamics. Srleffler (talk) 22:05, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

This review:

• Sorokin, D. P. (2022). Introductory Notes on Non‐linear Electrodynamics and its Applications. Fortschritte der Physik, 70(7-8), 2200092.

begins In 1933-1934 Born and Infeld constructed the first non-linear generalization of Maxwell’s electrodynamics that turned out to be a remarkable theory in many respects. So redirect to Born–Infeld model. The review is only 13 pages so I think expanding the Born-Infeld article would be the first priority. Johnjbarton (talk) 22:43, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with the proposal to redirect to Born-Infeld—as noted in both Born-Infeld model and the review article you cite, Born-Infeld is *an example of* nonlinear electrodynamics, but NED in general refers to arbitrary Lagrangians that are a pure function of $F_{\alpha \beta }F^{\alpha \beta }$ and $F_{\alpha \beta }{\tilde {F}}^{\alpha \beta }$. IMO, redirection to Born-Infeld would be misleading. Eiis1000 (talk) 10:43, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Deep sea angler

• Deep sea angler → Krøyer's deep sea angler fish  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to Ceratioidei; this is a very generic common name that can be used for any one member of the suborder Anthropophoca (talk) 15:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 23:59, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Deep-sea fangly fish

• Deep-sea fangly fish → Anglerfish  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete; this is not a term anyone uses, especially in the literature Anthropophoca (talk) 15:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep The term is included in Urban Dictionary.[13] GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 22:53, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete It seems to be a Homestar Runner reference, to a figure who resembles an anglerfish. [14] (archive). It's not an anglerfish, and is WP:FANCRUFT anyway.

  Aprzn (talk) 00:41, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  If it turns out to be popular enough that many people actually use the term then it could be redirected to "deep-sea angler" (Ceratioidei) since i'm aiming to rework the Lophiiformes page for better scope, but we'd have to wait for what other people think Anthropophoca (talk) 02:24, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

History of the Orthodox Church in Italy

• History of the Orthodox Church in Italy → Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy#History  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The article was first created in 2006 to contain the history of Eastern Orthodoxy in Italy.

Then, it was repurposed to tell the history of the fringe group Chiesa Ortodossa in Italia on 27 July 2007 (still with a general history of E. Orthodoxy in Italy). Two days later, the topic of the article was changed to be about the history of the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy. And 15 minutes later, the article was turned into a redirect to Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy to which its content was merged into.

The current target, Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of Italy, is obviously wrong as this jurisdiction does not represent the whole of E. Orthodoxy in Italy; it is a WP:RSURPRISE.

Therefore, I propose the redirect be retargeted to the broader article Eastern Orthodoxy in Italy. Veverve (talk) 15:24, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:52, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Félix Quincy Lengyel

• Félix Quincy Lengyel → xQc  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Félix Quincy → xQc  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Felix Quincy → xQc  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. The author, Mylian from Drow Omens, altered the name in the xQc article and created these redirects without providing reliable sources to support the claim that xQc's full name is "Félix Quincy Lengyel". A quick Google search for "Félix Quincy Lengyel" only yields two results: the xQc article and a mirrored version of the article. If the author provides reliable sources for these changes, I will withdraw my request. Xoontor (talk) 15:22, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete — page creator has been indef blocked. – Pbrks ^(t·c) 21:03, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Nehruvian rate of growth

• Nehruvian rate of growth → Hindu rate of growth  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Nobody has used this term except fringe Indian right-wing. Capitals00 (talk) 03:11, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as redirects don't have to be neutral. You yourself admit it's used by some. Should probably be mentioned at the target, though. — Anonymous 22:16, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:08, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

2024 United States Constitutional Crisis

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy delete as G7

2025 United States constitutional crisis

• 2025 United States constitutional crisis → Department of Government Efficiency  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

As well as DOGE's activities on federal agencies, the term 'constitutional crisis' has also been used around the same time to refer to threats to ignore court rulings as well. Xeroctic (talk) 13:03, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Delete popular discussion of a constitutional crisis is not limited solely to DOGE or to its actions.

This would have to be its own article, but the use of the term in a descriptive sense would have to become much more widespread in the RS than it currently is in order for it be considered a neutral point of view description. Mikewem (talk) 14:46, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Delete as the identification of this name with the target subject is not sufficiently established. Neither is expansion to an article appropriate to describe what is currently a matter of passing opinion (WP:RECENTISM). 2601:642:4F84:1590:DDA6:FEA5:D834:38CE (talk) 16:16, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

• Redirect to Second_presidency_of_Donald_Trump#Federal_funding_freeze, the same as the 2024 United States Constitutional Crisis created earlier that I made in January 2025. Also I don't know why this specific redirect was created, as the capitalized one led to it, so delete one as you don't need two. The current usage of the term comes from the Government freeze of which (I can't believe I am saying this) DOGE is responsible for. Usage: 1. Des Vallee (talk) 21:59, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

  different capitalizations are fine and dandy, so don't worry too much about that part (provided they're not implausible) consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 12:29, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

  Yea that is completely fair so keep both. Des Vallee (talk) 23:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:53, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

@Xeroctic: I was looking to close this discussion. Is Des Vallee's suggested target fine with you? Do you wish to bundle the 2024 redirect as well to this discussion? Jay 💬 14:24, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

@Xeroctic: response? it's lio! | talk | work 08:21, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Since they are inter-linked events, I guess the 2024 redirect could be bundled with this as well. Xeroctic (talk) 11:39, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

I did not bundle it here because the WP:CRYSTAL arguments will not be applicable. I have nominated it separately though. Jay 💬 09:45, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete It would be WP:CRYSTAL to say that one will occur this year, and an outright constitutional crisis as that term is generally understood has not yet occurred (concerning developments wrt rule of law etc notwithstanding). RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 11:55, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

• Don't delete I'm not convinced this is a crystal ball violation - IMO even the current situation could reasonably be called a constitutional crisis. DOn't care what target to use, though. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:37, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

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 💬 08:33, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

• Don't delete. There are plenty of sources (e.g. New York Times, Brookings, The Atlantic) describing the US as being in/having a constitutional crisis and lots more asking the question about whether the current situation is one so this is a very plausible search term that should be a blue link. That leaves the question of what the target should be, and frankly I'm not sure. Second presidency of Donald Trump isn't really specific enough but every plausible subsection of that is too specific. Possibly Department of Government Efficiency but again that's only part of the reason (albeit a large part) why sources are calling it a constitutional crisis. Thryduulf (talk) 15:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
• Don't delete. I agree with Thryduulf, both re: the existence of plenty of relevant RSs and it being unclear what article/section is the best target. I'm inclined to either keep the current target or retarget it to Second presidency of Donald Trump, with a mild preference for the latter, since the phrase is being used in response to a combination of diverse actions by the administration. FactOrOpinion (talk) 21:59, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
• Comment The page "2024 United States Constitutional crisis' was deleted G7 per creator request because I didn't realize it stated "2024" and not 2025 when creating it, as people referring to the crisis did not start until 2025 see here. The 2024 redirect however should be kept, as sources use "2025 United States Constitutional Crisis" in reference to the funding freeze. Des Vallee (talk) 17:49, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Comment - There is currently a draft in review at Draft:2025 United States constitutional crisis. Should the draft be accepted and the redirect deleted? Robert McClenon (talk) 20:39, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

  The draft should replace the redirect if it is accepted, but the existence of the redirect is not relevant to whether the draft should be accepted. Thryduulf (talk) 22:28, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

List of Linux MMORPGs

• List of Linux MMORPGs → Video games and Linux#Massively multiplayer online role-playing games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No such list or section in target article. (However, this redirect is a {{R with history}} due to being an article prior to its redirection in 2009.) Steel1943 (talk) 08:26, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Empire of Death (Doctor Who)

• Empire of Death (Doctor Who) → Empire of Death  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Retarget to Empire of Death (Doctor Who episode). The only other Doctor Who related article is Empire of Death (novel), and that is only a redirect to a list entry. It can be easily dealt with by a hatnote on the episode page (which already exists) so our readers don't need to go to the full disambiguation page if they are looking for Doctor Who related articles. --woodensuperman 08:52, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep There are zero articles that link to Empire of Death (Doctor Who), so there is no fear of our readers [going] to the full disambiguation page if they are looking for Doctor Who related articles.. As there are multiple titles of "Empire of Death" within Doctor Who, this redirect needs to link to the disambiguation page where both are linked, as neither is the primary topic. -- Alex_21 _TALK 08:57, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  There are only two "Empire of Death" titles related to Doctor Who on the disambiguation page, not "multiple", and only one of these is an actual article. --woodensuperman 09:29, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  Two = more than one - multiple. Is there any form of guideline stating that there has to be more than one actual article? -- Alex_21 _TALK 20:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Weak Retarget will make it slightly less of a hassle to wikilink the episode in the future. DWF91 (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Retarget, the episode is much more well known than the novel, not to mention that the novel doesn't even have its own article. drdr150 Yell at me Spy on me 17:23, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Weak keep per Alex21 -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 05:00, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget as proposed by nom. This redirect includes a specific disambiguator for Doctor Who, while the current target is a DAB with half the entries being non-Doctor Who related. There are only two Doctor Who targets, and both are covered by the proposed retargeting given the existence of the hatnote. The person typing this into their search bar doesn't want DC comics or a book unrelated to Doctor Who, so let's not bother giving those options. Every Doctor Who option is covered by the retarget, and the episode is far more likely the desired destination anyway... it's the WP:PTOPIC for this narrow disambiguation. Fieari (talk) 00:09, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the proposed target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:05, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget per Fieari. This is the most helpful option for those using this search term. Thryduulf (talk) 15:07, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

"Yangchuanosaurus" zigongensis

• "Yangchuanosaurus" zigongensis → Yangchuanosaurus  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This seems like an implausible search terms given that Yangchuanosaurus zigongensis already exists. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 08:04, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 22:07, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:AFFINITY – quotation marks have a specific meaning in binomial names. For example, see "Anomalocaris" briggsi, "Baru" huberi, and "Brachiosaurus" nougaredi. jlwoodwa (talk) 00:52, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete: Checking the relevant scientific literature, as far as I've been able to tell this species is only ever called "Szechuanosaurus" zigongensis (with or without quotes) or Yangchuanosaurus zigongensis (without quotes), and never "Yangchuanosaurus" zigongensis with quotes. Unless I'm mistaken and this last form of the species' name is used in an article somewhere, I say delete because it doesn't exist in the scientific literature in that form and therefore not likely to be actually searched for. Monster Iestyn (talk) 15:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:PADEMELONS

• Wikipedia:PADEMELONS → Wikipedia:Large_language_models#Original_research_and_"hallucinations"  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete as not explained at destination. While I found the in-joke viewing page history then searching, others may find this WP:RASTONISHing. This shortcut was never used by editors besides its creator and unnecessarily uses up a potential shortcut seeing the shorter WP:AIFAIL already exists. 173.206.110.217 (talk) 07:18, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

(Creator) meh. Maybe it'll get used in the future, maybe it won't. That said, I don't find the WP:RASTONISH argument very convincing, since a silly title like WP:PADEMELONS could point anywhere. Cremastra (talk) 13:32, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep but include some mention of the exchange somewhere in the "demonstrations" section to make it a bit more obvious. It's an obscure internal shortcut that the public won't see, it's not doing enough harm to worry about deleting BugGhost 🦗👻 15:21, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Should we move the anchor down, retarget, or add the quote to the current section? (same IP editor) 173.206.105.221 (talk) 23:27, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:00, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the target talk.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:18, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 22:08, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep and include mentions of the exchange somewhere in the "demonstrations" section to avoid WP:RASTONISH User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 10:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

let's run this little program i made up in 5 minutes yesterday as a safe alternative to thinking, i'm sure it's perfectly functional

if (HasMention = true) {

run (wp.VoteKeep);

} else {

run (wp.VoteDelete);

} end

though i am admittedly a little opposed to actually adding that mention without a redirect like wp:goosechase to go along with it consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 14:45, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Speared

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

weird case. "speared" as an adjective can refer to wielding or being poked with the big disjointed hitbox the target speaks about, sure, but as a verb, it can refer to pretty much any form of stabbing, plus tackling people with your head in gridiron football, and plants going brrr (so wiktionary says, at least). admittedly not keen on retargeting to spearing, but you never know consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 20:26, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:02, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:09, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Maybe retarget to spear (disambiguation)? Or to spearing#Other, which has verb forms that could reasonably be used as "speared" and avoids the awkward issue of it pointing to people's names first. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:46, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Mixed-culture

• Mixed-culture → Multiracial people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The redirect is not synonymous with the target: Someone with multiple cultures is not necessarily of multiple races. Steel1943 (talk) 19:34, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: Multi-ethnic and Mixed ethnicity also redirect to Multiracial people. That article bolds multi-ethnic people in the lede as if it will meaningfully deal with the topic, but it does not as it stands. StainedGlassCavern (talk) 17:57, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
• Comment Syncretism ? --- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:43, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:04, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:07, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to syncretism, which also discusses cultural mixing and is wider than just religious syncretism (a separate article). The article has a #Cultures and societies section if needed. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:49, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

DXYD

• DXYD → Brigada Group  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Restored the article or Delete There was WP:BLAR due to blank and redirect also could be Brigada Group is the mentioned at target. 112.207.123.170 (talk) 04:37, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

• Restore and send to AfD, improper venue for contesting BLARs per WP:BLAR. Randi🦋^Talk_Contribs 21:36, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

H:IPAS

• H:IPAS → Help:IPA/Slovene  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There are multiple language codes starting with "s" in ISO 639-1, and there's no link to this shortcut. And since it's a shortcut, there's no need to create a disambiguation page. Kethyga (talk) 03:47, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:52, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia home page

• Wikipedia home page → Main Page  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unnecessary redirect recently (December 2024) created. Only has 7 pageviews in the 30 days. Justjourney (talk) 02:06, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Weak keep – unambiguous target and not too implausible of a search term. But the main page is by far the easiest page to get to on Wikipedia, so there's not much of a downside to deleting this redirect. jlwoodwa (talk) 06:54, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. I would suspect someone searching this precise phrase would actually be looking for an article or section of an article about the main page. In fact, I'm a bit shocked that there is no section regarding Wikipedia's main page on Wikipedia. So ... WP:RETURNTORED. Steel1943 (talk) 08:28, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Steel1943. I also checked on English Wikipedia, surprisingly nothing there either beyond one sentence about TFA. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 11:54, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Jlwoodwa. Someone using this search term is looking for Wikipedia's home page, which we call the Main Page. We don't have any encyclopaedic content about the Main Page, if that changes we can reconsider but until then this is unambiguous. Thryduulf (talk) 15:11, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Thryduulf. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:52, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Pppery and Thryduulf above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JayCubby (talk • contribs) 00:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep Someone who is looking this up clearly wants to go to the home page, so (like with almost all of these redirects, excluding those which I will RFD soon) we should serve that user. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 10:13, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep - Per "useful to someone" valid keep reason. Fieari (talk) 23:54, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

March 8

Orbiter

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

In the course of an old (merge) discussion it was determined to redirect it to spaceship. I am bringing in the alternative of redirecting it to satellite, since orbiters are a type of mobile satellite. I think this is much better fitting, but I was asked to post here because of the old discussion (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orbiter (2nd nomination)). Satellite was back then not discussed. Nsae Comp (talk) 23:24, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Yes, an orbiter is a satellite, but I would keep the redirect to spacecraft, because the term "satellite," in the context of artificial satellites, usually refers to satellites in orbit around Earth, not other planets. T g7 (talk) 22:39, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

As far as I understand the term orbiter: an orbiter is a moveable satellite, including around Earth, afterall the spaceplane of the Space Shuttle system was called orbiter. Of course if I turn my argument around, then a satellite is a more or less unmoveable spacecraft and therefore is less than an orbiter. But about every other satellite has some altitude correction capability, so not really unmoveable. Since I get the argument for spaceship, I am thinking now of redirecting it to something else: how about to orbital insertion? It has a part about orbiter already. All in all orbiter is kind of every spaceship other than sub-orbital spaceship or interstellar spaceship. Both of which are not neglectable examples of spaceships and thus spaceships cant be equated with orbiter, orbiters being particular types. If the space shuttle was an orbiter and many spaceprobes are, than maybe its not the ability to stay and adjust orbits, but the ability to travel from Earth to an (extraterrestrial) orbit, as with the space shuttle and many probes likewise, and not so much the orbital insertion it self. .. so maybe spaceship after all? Hmmmm...

Just as a mind map:

Launch system

Lower stage

Sub-obrital spacecraft

Satellite

Upper stage

Interplanetary/lunar spacecraft (incl. impactor etc.)

Third stage

Orbiter

Fourth stage

...

This would categorize an orbiter even more mobile than a interplanetary/lunar spacecraft, which is always powerful enough to become at least a satellite or solar orbiter. So thinking of the space shuttle, orbiter is the added characteristic of a (interplanetary) spacecraft to be the orbital insertion STAGE, not just perform orbital insertion, like the space shuttle is as well. But that said, maybe bot all extraterrestrial orbiters performed the insertion.

So I am back at satellite, just a term used for traveling satellite.

Or as in the original merge discussion proposed as the target for the merger, but now insted rather as thw target for the redirect: to the List of extraterrestrial orbiters. Nsae Comp (talk) 09:45, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

I'd prefer a redirect to Satellite but I have no strong preference - just don't delete it :P _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:16, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• 'REtarget to Orbit where orbiting already targets. Orbiter is something that orbits -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:20, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Unconsecrated ground

• Unconsecrated ground → Churchyard  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete, retarget, or retain, and if necessary, add a discussion of the topic somewhere. The target article does not currently directly discuss this topic. The current target article is Churchyard, and a churchyard is described as being consecrated ground, not unconsecrated ground. If I understand correctly, unconsecrated ground has been a place for burial of infidels, outcasts and criminals (and perhaps those who died in some remote place too far away from a consecrated churchyard) – e.g., the article on the subject says the person accused of committing the 1880s Deptford poisonings was buried in unconsecrated ground. I also did not find any significant mention of consecration or the lack of it in Boot Hill, Potter's field, Prison cemetery, Grave desecration, or List of ways people dishonor the dead, and only a passing non-relevant mention in Cemetery. Consecration is a redirect to Sacredness, which discusses consecration but doesn't really discuss the lack of it. Burial touches on the subject of consecration somewhat. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 23:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment - Isn't this just a simple {{R from antonym}}? Fieari (talk) 23:44, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete. This seems like a notable stand-alone topic, likely bigger then churchyard. If the target doesn't mention it - kill it per WP:RED. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:16, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete churchyard is too specific for this antonym -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:21, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

2025 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi Federation)

• 2025 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi Federation) → 2025 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirect created due to misidentification of World Kabaddi with World Kabaddi Federation and subsequent page move. Later reverted after discussion at Talk:2019 Kabaddi World Cup (World Kabaddi)#Governance of global Kabaddi and World Cups. —CX Zoom[he/him] ^{(let's talk • {C•X})} 12:02, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete or keep, whichever CX Zoom prefers: Its only potential usefulness would be to help someone who has read one of the off-Wikipedia articles that misidentified the sponsor of the World Kabaddi event or to help someone who was trying to track the history of how articles evolved on Wikipedia, but both of these are unlikely. On the other hand, its existence could add to the confusion that is inherent in trying to understand the world of kabaddi. The World Kabaddi Federation will not be holding a Kabaddi World Cup event in 2025. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 15:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 21:59, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Junior minister

• Junior minister → Minister (government)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not sure what the best course of action is. This presently goes to a page that never mentions this term at all. But it seems like it should. I've not found a better target. Also skeptical that this is a good thing to red-link since it might not make sense as a stand-alone article. People who live in parliamentary countries probably already have a clear sense in their minds of what this means, but others will not. From what I can tell, it definitely includes "Under-secretary of Foo" positions; it might or might not include "Secretary of Foo" or "Deputy Minister of Foo" positions (and whether it does or not might vary by country), and it excludes "Minister of Foo" positions, which are senior ministers, I gather (but Senior minister is a red link). I think the best result is to have at least a paragraph of content on what these terms mean, at the Minister (government) article. But maybe some stand-alone article(s), perhaps listing junior (and senior?) ministerial positions by country could be viable. In the interim, the redirect going to a page that provides no salient information is not helpful.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:53, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

PS: Some actual (stubby) content that used to be there [15] in various versions [16] suggests that even "Minister of Foo" positions can sometimes be junior ministers, so this is even more confusing than I anticipated, i.e. in even more need of proper encyclopedic coverage.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  21:56, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment would this possibly refer to Deputy minister? cookie monster 755 19:12, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
  • It does not refer to deputy minister, instead it refers to ministers of portfolios that are considered of more juniorly rank. Senior ministers are those of the foreign office, finance, war (and some few more) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:25, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• Comment "junior minister" is not restricted to government, it could also refer to religious personnel... -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:25, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Mass execution

• Mass execution → Capital punishment  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This topic is not mentioned in the target article. It is likely notable and deserves a stand-alone article. Maybe someone can think of a better redirect target (User:Buidhe?). _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:08, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

I would redirect to massacre (t · c) buidhe 05:54, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:RETURNTORED. There doesn't seem to be a good target here. I oppose retargeting to massacre because equating the two terms seems inaccurate based on the section defining "massacre". - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:31, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:04, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:RETURNTORED --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:53, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Mass killing. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 18:53, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Mass killing, as per MrPersonHumanGuy. The phrase certainly exists, and that seems to be the best target that we have for it. BD2412 T 21:33, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested targets.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 21:14, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Mass killing per above, unless a convincing argument is made where Mass execution is distinct enough from Mass killing to warrant its own article — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 07:06, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Draft:MINECRAFT

• Draft:MINECRAFT → Minecraft  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. This redirect serves no purpose and no pages link to it. Additionally, a previous discussion on a similar redirect resulted in deletion. Xoontor (talk) 17:56, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete. Identical to Draft:Minecraft that was deleted per a deletion discussion. In that discussion WP:COSTLY and WP:PANDORA were invoked; same applies to this.

Though this wouldn’t qualify for G4 speedy deletion, since this was a redirect before Draft:Minecraft was. ApexParagon (talk) 19:07, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete per above. Enix150 (talk) 21:29, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Middle School Public Debate Program

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

Rachel Dixon (formerly Wright, née Jordache)

• Rachel Dixon (formerly Wright, née Jordache) → Rachel Jordache  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Overly specific, implausible search term. Rachel Dixon already exists as a redirect to the same target. Created yesterday, seemingly for the sole purpose of this diff. However I have removed the redirect, so currently obsolete. it's lio! | talk | work 11:09, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete, far too specific for anyone to search or find in the wild. ApexParagon (talk) 19:14, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep The redirect was (righly) reviewed by User:DannyS712 bot III. I found the link "in the Wild" from Here or possibly Here - both on first page of a Goole Search. Also this edit by the OP actually removed knowledge from the article - classic case of putting the wiki policy Horse before the "sum of all human knowledge" cart. Tiny Particle (talk) 12:46, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

@Tiny Particle: I don't believe that the previous surnames of the character Tiffany Eglin is known for portraying is necessary information in the article; feel free to add it back if you want to, I'm not watching it. Either way, I'm not disputing that the former surnames are relevant information to the subject - it just shouldn't exist as a redirect due to it being overly long and specific. Rachel Dixon and Rachel Jordache already exist as redirects - for the former, if someone really wanted to look up the character by her former surname, Rachel Dixon alone would suffice. Please know that I'm only acting in good faith - the only reason I came across this was my shortdesc drive. Cheers, it's lio! | talk | work 12:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete very specific wording, feels unnecessary. – Meena • 22:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

2022-2023 Moldovan energy crisis

• 2022-2023 Moldovan energy crisis → 2022 Moldovan energy crisis  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 2022–2023 Moldovan energy crisis → 2022 Moldovan energy crisis  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

See Talk:2022 Moldovan energy crisis#Requested move 21 January 2025. The article was moved without any discussion or elaboration by PoppysButterflies on 1 January 2023 [17]. I tried to look into whether this was appropriate and proposed that the article be moved back, which it was. Even the Moldovan government was talking about the crisis in past tense by late January, and solutions to the original causes had already been found in December. This redirect suggests a timeframe that has not been defended by a single Wikipedia editor and is original research. I think it should be deleted to clean up from the undiscussed move. I think everyone can understand, from looking at the edit diff, that the move took place because the editor thought it was appropriate now that we were in 2023, as this editor is not active at all in the Moldovan topic area. Super Ψ Dro 10:27, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Also bundle 2022-2023 Moldovan energy crisis. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:29, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Adding the hyphenated counterpart to this nomination, as suggested above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:51, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Canadiano

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

Redirecting a brand to "coffeemaker" may not be an appropriate approach. SunAfterRain 08:57, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• that's "canadian" in portuguese portuguese (with its brazilian portuguese equivalent being "canadense"). delete per nom, and i guess also per rlang, with mild opposition to soft retargeting to wikt:canadiano for the same reason consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 12:13, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Caffè americano. Lots of coffee shops in Canada are changing the name of the drink on their menus given the current trade war with the US. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/stephaniegravalese/2025/03/03/the-canadianowhy-canadian-cafs-are-renaming-the-americano-explained/) -- Earl Andrew - talk 14:59, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate due to the new definition, the brand of coffeemaker, and the Portuguese for "Canadian". Enix150 (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:37, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support retargeting, oppose DAB: It seems that only the new definition presented is a topic that deserves to be discussed anywhere on Wikipedia. DAB pages are not foreign language dictionaries (especially given that the Portuguese language has no special significance in Canada) and the brand is non-notable in itself and probably not worth a mention in an article about coffeemakers in general. — Anonymous 14:54, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Serious Games Interactive

• Serious Games Interactive → Global Conflicts: Palestine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The group is arguably much more infamous for "Playing History 2 - Slave Trade" (and ESPECIALLY the Slave Tetris minigame), so perhaps this redirect should be deleted to avoid confusion User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 07:16, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• Restore Special:Permalink/736647372. Czar was right that the article had serious problems, but they have at least the one award-winning game, and also the one infamously bad game (with plenty of RS coverage), so we treat this like a contested PROD and restore, either to fix the article or to send to AfD on WP:TNT and/or WP:NOTINHERITED grounds. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 08:37, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Theodore Schulz

• Theodore Schulz → Theodore Schultz  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unclear why this is treated as a (rather implausible) typo of Theodore Schultz rather than a redirect to the person actually named Theodore Schulz. — Anonymous 05:45, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• It's a totally plausible typo, and the current target is considerably more notable. But a correct spelling takes precedence over an incorrect one 99 times out of 100. Retarget with hatnote. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 08:25, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget with hatnote per Tamzin. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 23:46, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Areo Magazine

• Areo Magazine → Helen Pluckrose#Areo Magazine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_April_3#Areo_Magazine User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 04:46, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as a plausible search term. The previous RfD advised creating an article at Areo Magazine, but no new article had been created after more than 8 months. Since the magazine now appears defunct (areomagazine.com goes to a private WordPress blog), I doubt any new WP:SIGCOV will appear. A search for "Areo" "magazine" turns up no more likely target pages. —Sangdeboeuf (talk) 12:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Immerse

• Immerse → Music in the Rockies  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

User:Mircrez blanked the page and gave the following rationale for it: "This page redirected to Music in the Rockies. The Music in the Rockies article mentions that the festival changed its name to Immerse in 2009. However, there is only one source citing this and that source leads to some sort of porn/gambling website."

After it was blanked, someone tried speedy deleting the page for having no content. However, I do not think this redirect should've been blanked to begin with, and it likely wouldn't have qualified for A3 since the page had content prior to someone else blanking it. The redirect is also not recently created, with it being created in 2013. I thought that setting up an RfD discussion for it would be more appropriate. ApexParagon (talk) 03:28, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: Archived press release from GMA saying that they "created Immerse, a new event in Nashville to replace GMA Music in the Rockies".[18]. Can't find anything better. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 06:00, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate among current target, Immerse Learning (shortenable to Immerse), Havas Immerse (formerly just Immerse), Holding Absence (have a single "Immerse"), and probably a few other things. Immerse Entertainment may be redirectable to Enrique Gil but a bit more info would be needed in the article's body about his relationship to it; if that's done, it could be listed too. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 08:33, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep or at worst Disambiguate redirect etc. until or unless an article for Immerse is set up. Links are all the time purchased by other entities on the Internet, so it’s no surprise that it got co-opted by some sort of naughty site or porn site. It wasn’t that originally. I am not in the habit of starting new pages or articles, so there’s no new article for that. I contacted someone at GMA today about this to see if there might be a response. Not sure if I contacted the right person. It’s a huge and busy organization, and so it might take a while for them to respond—assuming that my email to them doesn’t go to a spam folder in the first place. Misty MH (talk) 15:46, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate per Tamzin - and also add a see also to Immersion (disambiguation). * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

List of sexuality related phobias

• List of sexuality related phobias → Outline of LGBTQ topics#Anti-LGBTQ topics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous with sexual phobias and it looks ampler. LIrala (talk) 02:07, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• Weak Retarget to sexual phobias per nom. Sexuality often refers to LGBTQ+ and identity politics style topics, but I think it's reasonable that someone would search this looking for the broader topic... sexuality can just refer to things related to sexual acts as well. Fieari (talk) 23:51, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Anti-LGBTQ discrimination

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

American Alligator Extinction Threats in Florida

• American Alligator Extinction Threats in Florida → Burmese pythons in Florida  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Proposing deletion under D8, probably D3 as well. — Kodiak Blackjack (talk) • (contribs) 01:55, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Can't

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Withdrawn

Guido Quaroni

• Guido Quaroni → SolidThinking  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Guido Quaroni is probably notable in his own right, and is a voice actor in the Cars franchise. As such, he's a blue link in the cast list in our article on Cars 3 and probably other articles. But the link is this redirect to SolidThinking, a graphics company (and its product), which was bought by Altair Engineering. The SolidThinking article does associate Quaroni with the company, but I can find no evidence to support this, apart from more recent things that look as though they probably got the information from Wikipedia. The original source for the founders mentions the two brothers Mazzardo but not Quaroni. This redirect, which was originally an article about Quaroni (and converted to a redirect I think because of poor sourcing) is now inappropriate because (1) there is no evidence to connect Quaroni to the redirect target, and (2) even if it did, the target gives no information about Quaroni, and doesn't reflect his potential notability. To be honest, I think it's worse than getting rid of it and accepting that Quaroni should be a red link until someone gets round to writing a proper article about him. Elemimele (talk) 11:53, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:23, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

March 7

Donut President

• Donut President → John F. Kennedy  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

i don't think people seriously refer to John F. Kennedy as the "Donut President" (and google seems to back me up?) Duckmather (talk) 22:05, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep Ich bin ein Berliner#Urban legend explains this- and there are plenty of continuing coverage if you search "Donut President JFK". Joseph2302 (talk) 08:50, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete If you search donut president (no quotes), sure, you get the JFK story. But if you search "donut president" (with quotes) you get exactly one thing: this redirect. It's a completely unknown phrase made up by a Wikipedia editor. EEng 11:06, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

  the fact you find it from a Google search means it's a plausible search term.... Joseph2302 (talk) 00:24, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

  Not if the redirect itself is the only result. EEng 00:31, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete – An obscure phrase about a language barrier misspeak of little note; certainly not a useful serch term redirect. Drdpw (talk) 23:06, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete I don't think a dumb unmentioned meme deserves a redirect. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 23:58, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. FDR liked donuts for breakfast - Station1 (talk) 04:02, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. Similarly no relevant results for the phrase "doughnut president" online. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Howard University Speech

• Howard University Speech → Lyndon B. Johnson  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

way too vague, there have been lots and lots of speeches at Howard University Duckmather (talk) 22:03, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete Howard University isn't some one-and-done thing where only one speech has been made, so this redirect is incredible vague. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 09:46, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete – As noted, too vague to be useful. Drdpw (talk) 18:13, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete - Per above, I can't just find a university and redirect it to a presidents article. Especially if many speech have occurred, like Howard. Cheers, ✏️ C809 ⌨️ (let's chat) 14:23, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Poppy Bush

• Poppy Bush → George H. W. Bush  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

this could also refer to a literal bush of poppies, so maybe retarget to poppy? Duckmather (talk) 21:57, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• From the article: young Bush was called "Poppy". Nom seems to have missed this, so this should probably be speedy keep. — Anonymous 22:25, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

  @An anonymous username, not my real name: I'm not saying that "Poppy Bush" isn't a way to refer to George H. W. Bush. I'm saying that it doesn't unambiguously refer to Bush. Duckmather (talk) 22:26, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Duckmather the title case is indicative of a person's name. "Poppy bush" in sentence case might be a plant, although most poppies don't seem to grow as bushes anyway. — Anonymous 22:28, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep and hatnote – "Poppy Bush" indeed gets used to refer to the person from a search, and it makes sense for it to differ in target from a poppy bush per WP:DIFFCAPS. Randi🦋^Talk_Contribs 20:15, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

BHOII

• BHOII → Barack Obama  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

not seeing this as an established acronym (presumably for "Barack Hussein Obama II"); the google search results are instead mostly partial title matches for various South Asian (???) names, so maybe delete? Duckmather (talk) 21:45, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete Yes, it's an abbreviation of "Barack Hussein Obama II". No, nobody refers to him like this. – Muboshgu (talk) 22:04, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete – Useless as a Barack Obama search term / redirect. Drdpw (talk) 22:15, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Kumamoto, Japan

• Kumamoto, Japan → Kumamoto Prefecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I see this redirect has some unusual history, with its most recent edit being unilateral retargeting to its current destination a few years ago by a dead account with under fifty edits. The formatting seems more indicative of a city name than a prefecture, and I believe it should be retargeted to Kumamoto. — Anonymous 20:57, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:05, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
• REtarget to Kumamoto (disambiguation) -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:28, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Mt ev

• Mt ev → Mount Everest  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Based on the prefix finder page, there's a lot of articles that start with "Mount Ev". Delete as ambiguous / not an accepted / common name for Mount Everest. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete – An ambiguous and unlikely search term for Mt. Everest. Drdpw (talk) 22:55, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Only a couple of days old. Station1 (talk) 04:08, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Mt mc

• Mt mc → Denali  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not a common name for this mountain. Additionally, based on the prefix finder page, there's 52 articles that start with "Mount Mc". Delete as ambiguous / not being an accepted name for the mountain. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete – An ambiguous and unlikely search term for Mt. McKinley. Drdpw (talk) 22:55, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete: Yeah, as an Alaskan, I don't see how "Mt mc" connects with Denali/McKinley. BOTTO _(T•C) 03:01, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per all above. Only a couple of days old. Station1 (talk) 03:51, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Oh Man

• Oh Man → Souldier  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

yet another very common phrase that somehow ended up as a song redirect; maybe retarget to wikt:oh man? Duckmather (talk) 20:10, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Wiktionary per nom. Editorial comment: redirects based on a common phrase, epithet, idiom or motto should never target a musical album or artist because of a song that is not notable enough to have a dedicated Wikipedia page. To me, this is a clear violation of MOS:EASTEREGG. Carguychris (talk) 22:06, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Super Mario Shirayuki-hime

• Super Mario Shirayuki-hime → List of non-video game media featuring Mario#Anime  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at the target, unclear connection to the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:08, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Comment: Super Mario Shirayuki-hime is one of the OVAs in Amada Anime Series: Super Mario Bros., listed in target Aprzn (talk) 17:49, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep - Per Aprzn's comment. Useful redirect, targets the correct location. Mentioned in the text as saying that the OVA covers the story of "Snow White", and Shirayuki-hime is simply the Japanese translation of "Snow White"... WP:RFOR allows this. Fieari (talk) 00:27, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 20:09, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per above. Meets WP:RFOR as original name of OVA — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 07:19, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Hitler war crime

• Hitler war crime → The Holocaust  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I just created this redirect. I do not know where it should redirect. Should it redirect to Nazi Party, War crimes in World War II, or somewhere else Mast303 (talk) 18:45, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to German war crimes#World War II. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 19:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to war crimes subsection per Yovt. Carguychris (talk) 19:53, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Elgoog cool

• Elgoog cool → elgooG  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. This page was created in 2007 with the words "ElGoOg Is CoOl" and was later redirected to the article elgooG. It seems like a pointless redirect to me. Xoontor (talk) 18:30, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Pointless and implausible, seemingly created as vandalism back in 2007. — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 07:02, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete elgooG's url is elgoog.im, elgoog.cool either isn't registered as a valid domain or doesn't have an webserver attached as of the time I tried it User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 09:49, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete old vandalism is still vandalism. Is this a record for longest vandalism unremoved? Fieari (talk) 23:41, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

SCP-108

• SCP-108 → SCP Foundation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete, because it is not mentioned in the target article. Xoontor (talk) 18:16, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Why not. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:26, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Next queensland election

• Next queensland election → 2028 Queensland state election  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Clearly a title that needs continuous changing. Not useful as a search term as well. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 14:07, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep Reasonable search term and correctly targeted. The target can always be changed in the future as needed. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 18:22, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

  @Presidentman @Muaza Husni Isn't it another hassle to update this redirect every 4 years? See Wikipedia:Redirects_are_costly#Redirects_sometimes_need_to_be_updated_as_articles_change for my concern. If someone does not update this, it'll be outdated and misinformational. We'll end up having pages like this which haven't been updated since 3 whole years. (please ping on reply) ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 10:59, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep Whats the issue. This is a search term. This page is helpful. Muaza Husni (talk) 02:35, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. The existence of pages such as Next United Kingdom general election and Next South Korean presidential election would seem to indicate that this is a legitimate and reasonable search term. To my mind, this would fall under the first part of the last sentence in the section of WP:COSTLY linked above: Therefore, there should be as many redirects as are needed to guide readers to what they are looking for, but not more than that.. This seems to me as though it falls under "needed to guide readers to what they are looking for". – Michael Aurel (talk) 23:08, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Techno Mechanicus Musk

• Techno Mechanicus Musk → Elon Musk#Personal life  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Per WP:BLPNAME, WP:NONAME and WP:NOTPUBLICFIGURE. Absolutiva (talk) 12:30, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Does any one actually use this?Slatersteven (talk) 12:35, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

However it fails mentioning a minor's name per WP:NONAME and WP:NPF. Absolutiva (talk) 12:08, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Khabardar (unreleased film)

• Khabardar (unreleased film) → T. Rama Rao  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2019_February_15#Khabardar_(unreleased_film) for my reasons

note that a khabardar mention has still not been added after the 6 years between the last rfd. otherwise, i would've simply specified User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 10:56, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Redirect to Kamal Haasan's unrealized projects, mentioned in detail in that article. Gotitbro (talk) 13:31, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Ed Vezey

• Ed Vezey → USS Oklahoma (BB-37)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Subject not mentioned in target article. - \\'cԼF 05:09, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete. NB: mention was only added to the article at the time of the previous RfD in 10/2019 (as last survivor alive, had died 2016); that mention was deleted in 12/2020 per WP:NOT, correctly in my view as ephemeral. - Davidships (talk) 22:34, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

South Italian

• South Italian → Neapolitan language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Southern Italian language → Neapolitan language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• South Italian language → Neapolitan language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• South-Italian language → Sicilian language  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The first one most definitely ought to go to the Southern Italian disambiguation page. The other three should at the very least be consistent with each other. 1234qwer1234qwer4 03:53, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Glottolog calls Neapolitan 'Continental Southern Italian', but we def shouldn't have diff spellings going to Neapolitan and Sicilian. — kwami (talk) 04:02, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget all to Southern Italian All of these terms appear roughly equivalent, so they should point to the same place. And they all also seem ambiguous. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 04:44, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

  Southern Italian Languages is not ideal, but would work better than the alternatives mentioned so far. If the intent is to indicate autochthonous Romance languages only, Southern Italo-Romance is the usual label. Both Southern Italian and Southern Italian Language would very likely be interpreted by non-expert readers as referring to varieties of Italian, e.g. Italian as spoken in the south of Italy, not the indigenous languages of the area. As for Neapolitan, the language of Naples is one of the several Southern Italian Languages, i.e. part of the Southern Italo-Romance continuum. Barefoot through the chollas (talk) 05:31, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• "South Italian" is only very rarely a linguistic term - Retarget to Southern Italy. The others are linguistic, and I'll let others fight over them. Johnbod (talk) 13:47, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

  Southern Italy is mentioned at the Southern Italian DAB page. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:55, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

False or misleading statements

• False or misleading statements → False statement  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Feels like having "apples or oranges" redirect to "apples". I can't really see why this was created to begin with, except to parallel False or misleading statements by Donald Trump. — Anonymous 03:44, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

"False" and "misleading" are synonymous for the most part as explained with the Trump example; Keep. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 14:59, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep because this is a common phrase used to talk about false statements. Misleading statements doesn't have it's own article because it's a subset of false statements. Apples and oranges both have their own article though. KyleSirTalksAlot (talk) 15:35, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Eye twitch

• Eye twitch → Blepharospasm  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Should retarget to Myokymia along with Eye twitching. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 01:59, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Draft:X

• Draft:X → X (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete. Pointless redirect. Same with Draft:C and Draft:E. GilaMonster536 (talk) 00:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:SALT. Absolutiva (talk) 12:33, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

March 6

Topologically nilpotent

• Topologically nilpotent → Rational homotopy theory#The Sullivan minimal model of a topological space  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is an unrelated meaning at Nilpotent operator (and the current target does not even use this exact phrasing). (There is also the notion of topologically nilpotent element (Q104819584), but the closest we currently have on this seems to be the phrase a nilpotent infinitesimal is a variable tending to zero at Nilpotent#Algebraic nilpotents.) 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:25, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Executive Orders 14158, 14210, 14219, and 14222

• Executive Order 14158 → List of executive orders in the second presidency of Donald Trump  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Executive Order 14210 → List of executive orders in the second presidency of Donald Trump  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Executive Order 14219 → List of executive orders in the second presidency of Donald Trump  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Executive Order 14222 → List of executive orders in the second presidency of Donald Trump  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There are currently four executive orders from Donald Trump (#s 14158, 14210, 14219, 14222) pertaining to the Department of Government Efficiency. All four EOs have Department of Government Efficiency in their titles, but none have their own article, as there's a single Department of Government Efficiency article focused on its creation, effects, etc. (and several child articles already). Right now, Executive Order 14158, Executive Order 14210, Executive Order 14219, and Executive Order 14222 all have List of executive orders in the second presidency of Donald Trump as their target. That article is mostly a table with the #s, names, signing dates, etc. of all of Trump's EOs in 2025, where the name of an EO in the table either links to the article for that EO (when an article devoted to that EO exists) or is unlinked text. I was told that the names of these four EOs in the table shouldn't link to the DOGE article, since the DOGE article is not devoted to any single one of the DOGE EOs. I think it would make sense to at least have all four redirects retargeted to the Department of Government Efficiency article. Apologies if I shouldn't have placed all four redirects in the same section; this is my first time posting at RFD, and it made most sense to me to place them together since it's the same issue for all four. FactOrOpinion (talk) 19:55, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Department_of_Government_Efficiency#DOGE_executive_orders. Morris80315436 (talk) 02:21, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Agreed that that section is a better retarget than the article as a whole. FactOrOpinion (talk) 16:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Orlik (armoured train)

• Orlik (armoured train) → Zaamurets  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

While the traincar Zaamurets was a part of the armored train Orlik for most of its existence, they are two distinct entities. On German Wikipedia and Wikidata, they have separate entries. As such, this redirect should undergo WP:RTR. CitrusHemlock 18:52, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

"Alliance for Unity"

• "Alliance for Unity" → All for Unity  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Per WP:UNNATURAL, no reason to have the title in quotes. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 18:49, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Enix150 (talk) 01:34, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete, it’s very unlikely that anyone would search for this alternate name in quotation marks. Alliance for Unity is already a redirect, so this one is completely unnecessary. ApexParagon (talk) 21:10, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

"Alaska back to Russia" petitions for secession

• "Alaska back to Russia" petitions for secession → Secession in the United States#State secession  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Extremely unlikely and unnatural search term. Was an article for less than an hour in 2014, the subject of the article is not mentioned at the target. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 18:40, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete, I agree with the nom, and the topic does not seem supported by sources; a Google search for "Alaska back to Russia" only brings up calls by Russian political figures for Alaska's return to Russia, which are hardly petitions for secession—more like fatuous foreign political posturing. Carguychris (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Enix150 (talk) 01:34, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Bangladeshis held in the Guantanamo detention camps

• Bangladeshis held in the Guantanamo detention camps → List of Guantanamo Bay detainees  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Bangladeshi detainees at Guantanamo Bay → List of Guantanamo Bay detainees  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• Bangladesh captives held in Guantanamo → List of Guantanamo Bay detainees  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

deletion, there are no Bangladeshi Guantanamo Bay detainees. this redirect suggests that there are. this redirect should be deleted as it serves no purpose.
Tausheef Hassan (talk) 18:05, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

• Comment Mubarak Hussain Bin Abul Hashem's article states that he is a Bangladeshi who was held at Guantanamo. WikiBlame is giving me HTTP 504 errors so I can't check if he was previously mentioned at the target and been removed for some reason. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 01:50, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

  Bangladeshis held in the Guantanamo detention camps (old version) of 2010 mentions him from this source of department of defense. the link is currently unavailable and wayback machine achieve gives "one pakistan/bangladeshi and one bangladeshi" I couldn't find if the original article ever mentioned him or why they didn't mention him. However, I believe that having only one or two individuals may not justify the need for a redirect. Tausheef Hassan (talk) 06:40, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

References

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (talk) 14:10, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

• Also bundle Bangladeshi detainees at Guantanamo Bay and Bangladeshis held in the Guantanamo detention camps. Jay 💬 15:09, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundling both redirects mentioned above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:34, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. The nominator's presumption appears incorrect and there is no policy reason to delete. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:56, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
• No entries from Bangladesh in that list. Delete unless there is another target. Jay 💬 08:31, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, / RemoveRedSky ^{[talk] [gb]} 15:47, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Most obscure topics covered

• Wikipedia:Most obscure topics covered → Wikipedia:Unusual articles  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Obscurity might not always correlate with unusualness. Xeroctic (talk) 15:46, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:00, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

271k

• 271k → Holocaust denial  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The anti-semitic claim that 271k Jews were killed is not mentioned in the target article. Chuterix (talk) 20:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Jay 💬 09:40, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 12:53, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

I thought it would be a straightforward delete, so didn't provide any reasoning. Then the nomination got relisted... 271K is a specific number that apparently comes from a document in the Special Registry Office in Bad Arolsen, Germany per this reddit discussion. Unless this fact is mentioned at some article, this redirect is pointless and leads to no useful information that a reader would be looking for. Both for those who know the significance of this number and those who don't. Jay 💬 10:11, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. / RemoveRedSky ^{[talk] [gb]} 14:06, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep - The mention is in the lead as "The actual number of Jews murdered is significantly lower than the accepted figure of approximately six million." No, this doesn't mention the exact number that antisemites use, but remember that redirects are not typically user-facing-- if the USER has typed in this number, then they likely know what it refers to to begin with. This article will inform them that the number is wrong, right there in the lead. This utility remains even without naming the number expressly, because again, the user has already provided the number and knows what it is. Fieari (talk) 23:20, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete: I'm not convinced by Fieari's argument, this just comes across as a random number and, if it's not mentioned at all, it's an unexpected target from my perspective. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:25, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

  Assume you are a neo-nazi or in the neo-nazi sphere due to the alt-right algorithmic pipeline. You "learn" that "only 271k jews were actually killed in the holocaust". You want to find more information about this! You check the holocaust article, but just see the true fact that the number is closer to 6 million. Confused, you decide to search wikipedia to the exact number you were given. You are taken to the holocaust denial article where it explains that neo-nazis falsely claim the number is far lower than the truth. How is this confusing? What other reason would someone type this number into the search bar? If we remove this redirect, we will fail to educate someone that needs education. If we keep this redirect... who is confused or WP:ASTONISHed? What would they be looking for OTHER than this? Fieari (talk) 00:54, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Raymoo

• Raymoo → Characters of Touhou Project#Reimu Hakurei  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 August 15 § Raymoo – no consensus

it's likely that following the target's afd closing as redirect, its own redirects will eventually be automatically relinked, but until then, might as well check a few of them out again. for this one... same case as the previous rfd, i guess. unmentioned, potentially unnotable meme, but might be a somewhat plausible mishearing (though i don't think it might be, considering that it comes from resident former touhou shitposter ciryes) consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 18:36, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Following the conversion of the target to a redirect after its AfD, I have made the new target Touhou Project § Characters, and also tagged as {{R from incorrect spelling}} of Reimu. This change is independent of the outcome of this Rfd; the AfD had concluded before this nomination was made. Jay 💬 10:47, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

yeah, i should probably have clarified before that this means keeping wouldn't be an option, and thus nameless's vote was technically "retarget to touhou project#characters" consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 10:51, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep. Same reason as last time: it's still a plausible misspelling or respelling. Technically speaking, the 'Raymoo' redirect was created in November 2012, while Ciryes didn't have a Tumblr or YouTube account until 2013, so I'm not exactly sure how you came to the conclusion that he came up with it? In fact, you can find 'Raymoo' being mentioned as far back as 2007–08 in the archives of 4chan's /a/ (old.sage.moe, desuarchive.org) and /jp/ (warosu.org) boards. I didn't bring this up last time since I know forum posts aren't reliable sources or anything, but here it is now. ┐(´ー｀)┌ — Nameless^(?) 03:58, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

ciryes, you lying liar! you lied to me! consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 18:45, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Delete As per before. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 07:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 12:52, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

2026 Indy NXT

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cephalobaenida

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

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 17 § Cephalobaenida – keep

I’m putting this up again, for the reason that Invavita is also a cephalobaenid. IC1101-Capinatator (talk) 15:13, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• @Jlwoodwa, Loopy30, and CycloneYoris: pinging the previous participants and closer, in case this is a Speedy. Jay 💬 19:47, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

  WP:WikiProject Palaeontology should be canvassed to determine if Wikipedia should follow either PBDB (classifying Invavita as a cephalobaenid) or Henga et al. (2020) (that places Invavita as a genus within the parent subclass Pentastomida). As Henga did not explicitly state that Invavita was "not" a cephalobaenid, I lean towards supporting the PBDB view in this matter. Loopy30 (talk) 22:25, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Siveter et al. (2015) provisionally assigned it to the Cephalobaenida. Typical convention is that Invavita would be listed with a question mark in the taxobox (if Cephalobaenida had its own article), or Cephalobaenida would redirect to Pentastomida. Lythronaxargestes (talk | contribs) 14:39, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 12:48, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Interstitial fauna

• Interstitial fauna → Meiobenthos  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"Interstitial" is not mentioned at the target, and I think the term may be ambiguous with Microfauna. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:41, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Interstitial fauna are those "Animals that inhabit the spaces between individual sand grains. The term is often used synonymously with meiofauna, mesofauna, and microfauna" (source) I assume interstitial fauna include both meiofauna (45 μm to 1 mm) and microfauna, but not larger fauna. Meiofauna is probably the best target but not ideal. The Interstitial disambiguation page has "Interstitial fauna, small aquatic invertebrates, larger than microfauna but smaller than macrofauna" (unsourced), which might be an alternative target, but has been proposed for deletion.  —  Jts1882 | talk  15:39, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Multiple targets have been suggested including one (Interstitial) that has an AfD in progress following a contested PROD.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 16:58, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 12:48, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Cybersexism

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

Sexism is not restricted to bullying, and the target does not talk a lot about it anyway. There is wikt:cybersexism, but apart from that I am not sure how much relevant content we have to point the reader at. 1234qwer1234qwer4 05:15, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Delete/Wiktionary redirect rare term that is too vague to point a specific article. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:20, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to sexism as {{r from hyponym}} and tag as {{r with possibilities}}, per "Cybersexism: How Gender and Sexuality Are at Play in Cyberspace ". Paradoctor (talk) 13:43, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per Traumnovelle and WP:RETURNTORED (though maybe, given the concerns expressed at the essay WP:AVOIDCYBER, a future article wouldn't be at this exact title). Search results are probably the best we can do for now as they show the Wiktionary definition, online gender-based violence, and Laurie Penny's book. Sexism doesn't contain any discussion of sexism in "cyber" contexts, so would not be a useful target. Online gender-based violence does mention the word "cybersexism" but isn't quite an exact subtopic/supertopic (as that article itself points out), so I don't think retargeting there probably would be much improvement on the current situation. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 02:49, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Either sectionize if reliable sources are found, or redirect to Wiktionary otherwise. 67.209.129.142 (talk) 01:54, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested target. I did not get what IP meant by "sectionize", perhaps it is to create a section about the subject in some article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:40, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 12:48, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Jee Star

• Jee Star → Tyla  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at at target nor is there any indication why this should point to this singer. Whpq (talk) 12:43, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikimedia Brasil

• Wikimedia Brasil → List of Wikimedia chapters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete, due to criteria 10, it has no content about the chapter and worse, the new item Brazil should link to a red article to get people to create an article for that, but instead it redirects to same page. Augustresende (talk) 23:35, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep: I don't think this deletion nomination is valid. The target article mentions Wikimedia Brasil so it's definitely a reasonable search term. If you want to expand the redirect into an article, be bold. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:39, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

  Criteria 10: "If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject." Augustresende (talk) 23:02, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

• I have fixed it at the target by removing the self-redirect. Note that the self-redirect was created by nom a few minutes before making this nomination. Jay 💬 10:30, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete A bare entry in a list is not really enough substance to warrant a redirect. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:19, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 12:40, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

• delete per pppery, at least for now. if it can be elaborated on, i wouldn't oppose recreating. i thought the redirect would have been spelled wrong, with it being referred to as "wikimédia" or "wikimídia" in brazil, but nah, it's actually just "wikimedia". wacky~ consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 14:20, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Lukas Miklos

• Lukas Miklos → List of Left Behind characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Redirected at AfD in 2009, no longer mentioned on the list of characters from this series, or anywhere on Wikipedia for that matter. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:54, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

• He's mentioned at The Indwelling, The Mark (novel), and Desecration (novel). I read these books in the mid-2010s but I have no memory of this character or his role in the books, which probably isn't a good sign. Hog Farm _Talk 03:32, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:04, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

• One of the options at the AfD was to merge into the list. If that cannot be done, take back to AfD since it has been 15 years. Jay 💬 14:55, 25 January 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. And also consider AfDing the target as poorly-sourced fancruft. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (Ughhh.... What did I do wrong this time?) 13:49, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 12:36, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

• do the things pppery said per pppery consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 11:22, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Odenpa Love Girl

• Odenpa Love Girl → Characters of Touhou Project#Cirno  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

unmentioned meme, unnotable, results gave me nothing. i have no idea what else can be said so here's a ⑨ consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 18:44, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Even before the nomination, the target had been turned into a redirect at its AfD to Touhou Project. Notified of this discussion there and at the creator's page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:11, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 00:01, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Turn that ⑨ into a Ⓞ (there is no circled digit 0) - unnotable song (I wouldn't call it a "meme" as from a quick listen it sounds like someone made this as a serious fan project) by an unnotable producer, nowhere near Bad Apple!! feat. nomico levels User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 09:38, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

if ⑨ is associated with cirno, and ⑥ is associated with utsuho (if only because she does the opposite of what cirno does, while being just as dumb)... who would 0 be associated with? consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 12:23, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Abandon Ship or Abandon All Hope

• Abandon Ship or Abandon All Hope → Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Rather low pageview count. RanDom 404 (talk) 18:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

Comment I haven't watched the movie but from some Googling I'm unsure what this phrase has to do with it. It appears to be the title of a song from Rise or Die Trying, but I wouldn't retarget to there because there's essentially no discussion of the song on that page. Aprzn (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. Nominator hasn't presented a reason to have the redirect deleted: "Low view count" means that the redirect is being searched by someone, and thus makes it de facto helpful (unless it is determined the target is wrong ... but such a claim hasn't been presented yet.) Steel1943 (talk) 02:19, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep - No rationale for deletion given. Fieari (talk) 06:11, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete: While the nominator did not provide a valid reason, Aprzn has demonstrated that there is clearly some ambiguity here. The song certainly gets far more hits on Google than anything related to the movie. — Anonymous 20:30, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 04:29, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Rise or Die Trying. I agree the nomination is insufficient, but there's no mention of this at the target, and it's not even clear what this has to do with the target. On the other hand, this is the title of a track on the album, so redirecting there is generally pretty standard. On the other other hand, it's not all that useful either, so I wouldn't be that opposed to simply deleting. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 00:50, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 09:28, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Median of the trapezoid theorem

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Venue inappropriate

Connected two point set

• Connected two point set → Particular point topology  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The trivial topology on a two-point set (or any other set) is also connected, and this does not seem like a likely search term anyway. 1234qwer1234qwer4 03:56, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom; can't see much (haha) connection between the redirect and the target. --Trovatore (talk) 05:25, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Disney Cartoon Studios

• Disney Cartoon Studios → Walt Disney Pictures  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Walt Disney Pictures is the division focusing on live-action films. Walt Disney Animation Studios is its animation sector. RanDom 404 (talk) 14:47, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as either a {{R from former name}} (per the article) and/or a {{R from subtopic}} (per the nominator's description). Either way, a variation of the redirect is currently mentioned in the target article. Steel1943 (talk) 19:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  @RanDom 404: seeing as consensus has been established to keep, do you think {{R from former name}} or {{R from subtopic}} is more appropriate? it's lio! | talk | work 14:18, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per Steel1943 and since a variation appears at the target. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:05, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• The Walt Disney Animation Studios referenced in the nomination also has mention of the "variation" Disney Brothers Cartoon Studio (DBCS) which targets the animation studio article (since 2010). So I would rather support the nomination's retarget suggestion. Jay 💬 16:39, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, feminist🩸 (talk) 03:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Lasalle College, Bogota

• Lasalle College, Bogota → LaSalle College  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No mention of a "Bogota" branch at the target article. The only content that made it to the main page was immediately reverted in 2013. People who are looking for the Bogota branch of LaSalle College will not be able to read about it at the target page without a mention. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 15:35, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

• Keep, preserves edit history. J947 ‡ ^edits 07:33, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:42, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

• The redirect is not helpful per nom. Delete it at AfD. Jay 💬 15:34, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:29, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete: Not seeing anything to do with "Bogota" at the target. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:01, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. I really don't see any reason to bother AfD with this. -- asilvering (talk) 23:39, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @J947 and Jay: any responses? it's lio! | talk | work 13:53, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

  The pre-BLAR content was just one edit that was sourced to a primary source. I don't know if it can be cleaned up and re-sourced, or merged in to another article. Clicking on the old link takes to a new website for Bogota. Jay 💬 15:53, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 00:32, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Jd v

• Jd v → JD Vance  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely capitalization of an already unlikely name - we don't have JD V. A search pulls up "JD v. something", as in versus, and an assortment of pages that seem to just have "JD Vance" on them, I can't find the bare JD V used to refer to him anywhere. Rusalkii (talk) 03:14, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep (creator): no other article could be referred to by Jd v, it is unambiguous and helps a reader out. With this in mind, I am not opposed to creating JD V. Note: I added {{R from lowercase}} to Jd v. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 03:48, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete: an obscure formatting that would likely only be used by the creating user —ADavidB 07:23, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Mistakenly adding a space within a JDV search seems a likely way this redirect would be accessed. There are seven other entries in that disambiguation page. —ADavidB 16:29, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Delete per ADavidB. drdr150 Yell at me Spy on me 17:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to JDV seems the best choice. —ADavidB 14:37, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to JDV as a {{R from alternate capitalization}}. No evidence that Vance is the primary topic for this initialism. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback)
• Delete per ADavidB. Enix150 (talk) 01:37, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per ADavidB. / RemoveRedSky ^{[talk] [gb]} 17:01, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, per reason provided by @Adavidb. RedactedHumanoid (talk) 20:39, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
• REtarget to JDV -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 05:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To discuss if retargeting or deletion would be preferable.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 00:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

March 5

Swasticar

• Swasticar → Tesla, Inc.  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

It's a wordplay on Swastika and car, because the Elon Musk Nazi salute business happened, and since the performer of the alleged Hitler heil, Elon Musk, runs the car manufacturer Tesla, Inc, this wordplay has become marginally popular on the internet by virtue of the subjects having common association. Having said that about the internet joke, there is no info at target regarding Teslas being called "Swasticars", and I have not even seen any general content there about post-Musk-gesture backlash against the company. Maybe delete this? BarntToust 23:44, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

delete no real notability for this moniker yet User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 00:04, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep I'm honestly surprised no one's added anything about the term yet to that article yet. Redirects aren't themselves required to be notable, that people may be expected to search on them suffices. This one makes sense, though, yes, the target article needs to mention it. I think it can be written to fit into the "lawsuits and controversies" or "criticism" section. Largoplazo (talk) 01:00, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

I had added a whole bit about the backlash for Musk's support for parties such as reform and AfD and his supposed salute resulting in the swasticar moniker in the tesla sales section since that was where they were talking about the dip in sales being due to Musk's far right dalliances but it was reverted for being political and I didn't have the will in me to fight it. Others may feel free to pick up that particular gauntlet Shadebug (talk) 01:09, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

see WP:NEWSWEEK for cautionary principles on using that source. It would be fitting to write content in indeed.

Anyone wanting to add content about the Swasticar and general ''Musk-Fuhrer-comparison'' content: try Irish Times, The Hollywood Reporter, Evening Standard, The Guardian. BarntToust 01:24, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

I've restored the mention and added these additional cites to the article. Enix150 (talk) 06:17, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

delete, you guys are bored? ThurnerRupert (talk) 03:39, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per Largoplazo and Shadebug. Enix150 (talk) 04:21, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep - Well sourced mention is now in the article, thanks to the effort above. If necessary, refine it to the section where it is mentioned, but I think expecting the user to ctrl+f may be enough in this case. Fieari (talk) 07:37, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep***, especially following the edits to the article. It's a redirect -- no big deal... Nomoskedasticity (talk) 13:30, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Tesla, Inc.#Vehicle sales as now encyclopedic content around the term rests there. BarntToust 17:44, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget per BarntToust. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 00:07, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to either Tesla Takedown or Criticism of Tesla, Inc.. Andra Febrian (talk) 04:45, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Scheme-theoretic fiber

• Scheme-theoretic fiber → Fiber product of schemes#Interpretations and special cases  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Fiber (algebraic geometry) → Fiber (mathematics)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

These should point at the same target. 1234qwer1234qwer4 21:11, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Am I wrong if I understand the latter to refer to a general mathematical/algebraic topic and the former to refer to a very specific concept falling under that topic? If so, it make sense for the latter to be mapped to an article about the general topic and the latter to be mapped to a passage that's specifically about that.

That said, the target for the former doesn't have the word "theoretic" in it so a person taken there by the redirect isn't going to know which part of the "Interpretations and special cases" section is relevant. That can be fixed by a suitable edit to the section. Largoplazo (talk) 22:24, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Well, the latter could in theory refer to the use in classical algebraic geometry (in which case it would just be the definition from set theory), but currently its target article only explicitly associates with algebraic geometry the one-line definition for schemes, which is at least somewhat more detailed in the actual Fiber product of schemes article (i.e. the target of the former redirect). 1234qwer1234qwer4 05:44, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Despite the name, a scheme-theoretic fiber is actually a fiber product. So, I think the current target is alright. I do think the target article should probably more explicitly discuss a scheme-theoretic fiber, though. — Taku (talk) 10:23, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

I'm not arguing that the first target is wrong; I'm arguing that the two redirects should probably have the same target. What is your opinion on the second redirect? 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:07, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Should they? A fiber in algebraic geometry doesn’t have to scheme-theoretic one, I think. —- Taku (talk) 14:22, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Maybe that is an argument to leave it as it is, depending on how likely a reader specifying "(algebraic geometry)" in the search is to be referring to a set-theoretic fibre but used in the context of algebraic geometry. Currently, Fiber (mathematics) has no other content in the "In algebraic geometry" section. I suppose at least one of the articles should mention something about finite or quasi-finite morphisms. 1234qwer1234qwer4 14:52, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Maryam Rostampour and Marziyeh Amirizadeh

• Maryam Rostampour and Marziyeh Amirizadeh → Marziyeh Amirizadeh  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Maryam Rostampour → Marziyeh Amirizadeh  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

After two inconclusive AfDs (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maryam Rostampour and Marziyeh Amirizadeh, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maryam Rostampour and Marziyeh Amirizadeh (2nd nomination)) based on a quasi-WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE situation for one of two women in the article, there was no consensus on what to do but a general sense among participants that Marziyeh Amirizadeh has a stronger claim to notability than Rostampour (who requested not deletion outright but rather not to have a bio paired with Amirizadeh), so I WP:BOLDly moved the page to Marziyeh Amirizadeh to preserve the page history. Due to the subject's request and the unusual nature of a double-named BLP, I would nominate this redirect for deletion, as well as Maryam Rostampour, for deletion. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:35, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Thank you for doing the page move, much appreciated! But there is no benefit to keeping these redirects now. – GnocchiFan (talk) 21:53, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

The Red Machine

• The Red Machine → Red Machine  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Should be a redirect to Soviet Union men's national ice hockey team; was previously targeted there until it was changed to Red Machine dab page. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 20:03, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep Unless there's evidence to suggest that the hockey team is a primary topic, this term is ambiguous and should target the DAB page. FWIW, when I searched this term, I got more hits for the Cincinnati Reds than anything else but not enough to suggest primacy IMO. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:19, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Presidentman -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 10:13, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget with hatnote – Soviet Union men's national ice hockey team establishes The Red Machine with the definite article as the nickname, while other targets at the DAB use Red Machine or "red machine", makes sense to refer specifically to the hockey team per WP:SMALLDETAILS. Randi🦋^Talk_Contribs 20:56, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Tramopoline

• Tramopoline → Bart's Inner Child  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This is a deliberate misspelling of the world 'trampoline', but the actual quotation 'tramampoline' is not mentioned in this article. This, or a new redirect from 'tramampoline' could instead be targetted to trampoline as a misspelling redirect. Xeroctic (talk) 19:20, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 21:21, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

2025–26 Lao League 1

• 2025–26 Lao League 1 → Lao League 1  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Nothing at the target about the relevant season. Delete as misleading and WP:RETURNTORED. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:05, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete per misleading. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 16:37, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Also bundle 2025-26 Lao League 1. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:36, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Figel Narage

• Figel Narage → Nigel Farage  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unlikely typo / search term. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:02, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Delete per nom, implausible typo, possible in-joke. Carguychris (talk) 18:25, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Islamic imperialism

• Islamic imperialism → Islamic State  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Targets a subtopic - other previous options were List of Muslim states and dynasties and Caliphate. Tule-hog (talk) 07:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

• Spread of Islam would seem a more pertinent target. 2601:642:4F84:1590:B4BC:9F58:E79E:AF6 (talk) 20:44, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Retarget somewhere else per WP:RECENTISM. 67.209.130.82 (talk) 01:24, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:49, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Retarget perhaps to Umayyad Caliphate as they, unlike their predecessors and successors, pursued policies that could be unambiguously characterized as imperialistic. Cheers, RadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 11:51, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Redirect to Efraim Karsh#Islamic Imperialism? Unsure of whether the phrase would be more likely to be used by people looking for the Ummayads, the Ottomans, IS, and so on, I did a quick Google search, and most of the results were about this book. StainedGlassCavern (talk) 15:05, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Comment: per WP:RNEUTRAL, we should only retarget Islamic imperialism to Spread of Islam if this usage is "established" and "used in multiple mainstream reliable sources," as this would be a {{R from non-neutral title}}. StainedGlassCavern (talk) 15:14, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

It should just be made into a disambiguation page since the retarget votes also seem unsure as to what the best target would be and are just citing their personal opinions. Yue🌙 02:45, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

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 💬 17:40, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Redirect to Criticism of Islam. (Or maybe, per StainedGlassCavern's suggestion, to Efraim Karsh#Islamic Imperialism.) This is a politically loaded term usually used for polemic purposes, most notably (to my knowledge) by Efraim Karsh, as noted above. Criticism of Islam is an overview of these types of issues, including the history of conquest and similar issues, so this seems like the most neutral and useful target. R Prazeres (talk) 20:31, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Vonk (Netherlands)

• Vonk (Netherlands) → Revolutionary Communist International  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Multiple organisations have had the name "De Vonk". One of them was at some point I guess mentioned on the target page, but not any more. The more prominent uses of the name however have nothing to do with the target page. This combination is very confusing. Dajasj (talk) 15:51, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: This was BLARd as a declined PROD. Jay 💬 17:30, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• Restore and send to AfD as a contested BLAR and contested PROD. Thryduulf (talk) 18:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Binchohtan

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 12#Binchohtan

GPT-5

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Branislav Regec

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 12#Branislav Regec

Xiyonji

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Stages of grief

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep two, retarget "dying":

March 4

Achiever

• Achiever → Enneagram of Personality  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Like achieving, also a super common word. Maybe retarget to achievement? Duckmather (talk) 23:26, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget - 'Enneagram of Personality' is already linked at 'achievement'. Good catch. Grayfell (talk) 00:23, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

  It's only linked at Achievement through a link to Achiever... so retargeting this would actually remove that link. It could be manually re-added, of course. Maybe: "Achiever" (not a link) ", a personality archetype in the psuedoscientific Enneagram of Personality model."? Fieari (talk) 04:09, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Achieving

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

National Memorial Museum

• National Memorial Museum → National Memorial (Thailand)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This was left pointing to the wrong target (Bangkok National Museum) for 16+ years. I just fixed it to what is most likely the intended target, but I'm finding only a handful of sources that refer to the place it redundantly as "National Memorial Museum". Most search hits are instead partial matches for other places that include the phrase as part of their names, e.g. Oklahoma City National Memorial Museum, Katrina National Memorial Museum, and National Memorial Museum of Forced Mobilization under Japanese Occupation. There's also a National Memorial Museum in Karachi, but it doesn't appear to have a Wikipedia article. Maybe this should just be deleted. Paul_012 (talk) 21:12, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

• Set-indexify per WP:SETINDEX. The term was created as a proper name, so an argument can be made that it refers to any of the following, including those suggested by Paul_012:
• National Memorial Museum of Forced Mobilization under Japanese Occupation
• National Guard Memorial Museum
• National Pulse Memorial and Museum (https://www.architectmagazine.com/design/coldefy-associes-and-rdai-to-design-the-national-pulse-memorial-and-museum_o)
• National September 11 Memorial & Museum
• National Showa Memorial Museum
• National Veterans Memorial and Museum
• National World War I Museum and Memorial
• Oklahoma City National Memorial Museum
• See also might include some or all of the following, including the current target:

• National memorial (set index)
• Memorial museum
• Lists of monuments and memorials
• Lists of war monuments and memorials
• List of national memorials of the United States
• List of national museums
• List of military museums
• War memorial § List of war memorials
• List of Holocaust memorials and museums
• List of Holodomor memorials and museums
• List of presidential libraries
• List of slavery-related memorials and museums
• African American Civil War Memorial Museum
• Federal Hall National Memorial (a museum)
• Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum
• Independence Memorial Museum
• Indian War Memorial Museum
• Lofoten War Memorial Museum
• National Churchill Museum
• National Gandhi Museum
• National Memorial (Thailand) (a museum)
• National Museum of the History of Ukraine in the Second World War
• The National WWII Museum
• Pearl Harbor National Memorial
• Royal Australian Armoured Corps Memorial and Army Tank Museum
• Soldiers and Sailors Memorial Hall and Museum
• Wright Brothers National Memorial (a museum)
• Yu Da Wei Xian Sheng Memorial Museum

• National memorial museum can be created as a redirect. Havradim leaf a message 08:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  Support this. Thank you for the effort put in to compile relevant articles. it's lio! | talk | work 08:49, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or set-indexify?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 19:12, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Set-indexify as there's several reasonable candidates for what someone means with National Memorial Museum. Based5290 :3 (talk) 17:41, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Set-indexify per nom and previous comments. Carguychris (talk) 18:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Jacob Hornberger

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Land of flowers

• Land of flowers → Florida  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

extremely vague, maybe delete or dabify? Duckmather (talk) 17:18, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Kinda vague; it could also refer to the Netherlands. ⇒ Aerrapc they/them, 20:04, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

• DABify Pascua Florida includes the statement Florida is now known as the "land of flowers" because of the connection to Ponce de Leon and Pascua Florida., cited to (Hatch, Jane M. (1978). The American book of days. The H. W. Wilson Company. ISBN 0-8242-0593-6. OCLC 953162536.). I do not have access to that book, but it looks like a reliable source for this redirect. The first page of Google hits for "land of flowers" includes mentions of books by Elisabetta Dami, the Netherlands, Zamboanga City, Florida, and some fantasy fandom sites. - Donald Albury 21:05, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
• disambig per the aboves -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 10:14, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
• Comment - I have drafted a Disambiguation page at the current redirect. I put the Netherlands at the top as a nigh-WP:PTOPIC, based on google results, but our article on Netherlands doesn't even include this nickname, so should that be changed? Fieari (talk) 05:24, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Scottish America

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

City of DC

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Washington City

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

"NJ"

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Novum Eboracum

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 12#Novum Eboracum

N hampshire

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

"NH"

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

"RI"

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Nexua

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Annular form

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipediya

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Johann Hertel

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

British genocide

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Index of statistical mechanics articles

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

List of Jewish United States Supreme Court justices

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Point both to Demographics of the Supreme Court of the United States#Jewish justices

LGBTQ+ production of family

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 March 19 § LGBT reproduction – Keep
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LGBTQ+ Production of Family – Merge
• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 December 8 § LGBTQ+ Production of Family – Restore article

• LGBTQ+ production of family → Use of assisted reproductive technology by LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• LGBTQ production of family → Use of assisted reproductive technology by LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• LGBTQ+ Production of Family → Use of assisted reproductive technology by LGBTQ people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] Added 23:06, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

This is just very odd phrasing. I might understand having one redirect, but having multiple iterations of this phrasing feels off to me. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 05:22, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Delete not a natural search phrase, admittedly neither is the article title but I still don't see this redirect being of any use. Traumnovelle (talk) 05:28, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Comment As the creator of these redirects, I have nothing against them being deleted. But I will say, if they do get deleted, LGBTQ+ Production of Family should probably get deleted as well, since I created these redirects based off the existence of this redirect, since I felt that someone searching it like this would search it with the terms I used for the redirects. If anyone disagrees with this, please let me know. JeffSpaceman (talk) 11:58, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Thanks, JeffSpaceman! I've added this one to the RFD. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 23:06, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

• LGBTQ+ Production of Family has a long history and more importantly has been merged, so I don't think it may be deleted for attribution purposes (could perhaps be deleted after a history merge though, as as a title/search term it is not worth keeping). Fram (talk) 09:11, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 11:47, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 13:16, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep LGBTQ+ Production of Family to preserve page history from merge (WP:RK#1), Delete others as implausible search term. If others feel the page title is still too clunky to be suitable as a redirect, one option might be to rename the article to an alternate redirect such as LGBTQ reproduction and then delete (open to other suggestions if this is viable). Per Fram, histmerge would also work. — 🪫Volatile ^{📲T | ⌨️C} 08:17, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Doo (pseudonym)

• Doo (pseudonym) → John Doe  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There is no mention in the example of "Doo" being used as a pseudonym. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:20, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. Mention inexplicably removed by IP restored. Hyphenation Expert (talk) 05:52, 19 January 2025 (UTC)
• Mention is of John Doo, and we have the redirect John Doo. Is Doo by itself used as a pseudonym? Jay 💬 11:45, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

  I'll go with Cyclone - delete. Jay 💬 10:43, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

• On the other hand John Doe is listed at Doe. Weak keep I guess. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per *shrug*. Unambiguous, obvious to the reader once John Soon was restored to the article. Not particularly useful but WP:CHEAP.Rusalkii (talk) 18:14, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. Confusing redirect. Not entirely clear that "Doo" is used as a pseudonym. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:31, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, All Tomorrows No Yesterdays (Ughhh.... What did I do wrong this time?) 13:49, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 13:11, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, as the pseudonym only seems to be used as the full name. And even still, with the disambiguator, this is a wholly unlikely search term; you'd have to already know what it is, and at that point, there's really no extra detail at the target that provides any value. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:13, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Apache shirt

• Apache shirt → Telnyashka  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Appears to refer to shirts commonly worn by the Parisian criminal Apaches (subculture) rather than the Native American tribe. A quick search suggests the most common use by far is a shirt worn by or referencing the Native American Apaches. Rusalkii (talk) 05:21, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:40, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Keep. There doesn't appear to be a Wikipedia article about the shirts made by Apaches. You could make a dabpage with Traditional Native American clothing or Buckskins, but that seems like a stretch to me. 162 etc. (talk) 20:24, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate. Apache shirt could refer to either the buckskin war shirts traditionally worn by the Apache tribe, or the striped shirt worn by criminal gangs in Paris 16:08, 27 January 2025 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by 53zodiac (talk • contribs)
• Delete Not mentioned at all at Telnyashka. Not discussed with enough substance at Apaches (subculture) to warrant a redirect. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:30, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Pppery. Jay 💬 19:09, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:38, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate. The dab has already been written, and it seems useful enough. I'd want to see some evidence that the term is not used to describe the gang shirts before deleting this. The disambiguation is, imo, a bit too big for a tidy hatnote. -- asilvering (talk) 23:43, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 13:10, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

I don't approve of the drafted dab. Fails verifiability. The entry articles have nothing on "Apache". Jay 💬 07:30, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• disambig -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 01:31, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Jewish Israeli Aramaic

• Jewish Israeli Aramaic → Jewish Palestinian Aramaic  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target and this appears to be a completely invented usage - the phrase appears nowhere else on the internet. Rusalkii (talk) 22:41, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

• Perhaps redirect to Judeo-Aramaic languages#Modern dialects? 2601:642:4F84:1590:B4BC:9F58:E79E:AF6 (talk) 00:57, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

  This seems likely to misleadingly imply that there is a dialect called Jewish Israeli Aramaic. Aprzn (talk) 15:46, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:08, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The redirect creator changed the target to the IP's suggestion, and I have reverted it. Notified that target of this discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 12:00, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Greenhouse gas emissions from streaming music

• Greenhouse gas emissions from streaming music → Streaming media#Greenhouse gas emissions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

NOTE: This has been RFD'd before, but that one was closed as keep as at the time the section was still there. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2022_March_6#Greenhouse_gas_emissions_from_streaming_music ).

The reason I'm re-nominating this redirect is because the section no longer exists, and as such we no longer have any information on the greenhouse emissions from music streaming. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 10:55, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

• Add the section back, and trim it per Talk:Streaming media/Archive 1#Should greenhouse gas emissions be mentioned in this article? Jay 💬 20:28, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Cotton ribbon

• Cotton ribbon → Ink ribbon  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

what is this doing here anyway? was about to retarget to ribbon since cotton isn't mentioned in the current target but is mentioned there, but it's only mentioned in passing in the lead, so is it even worth it? consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 20:19, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Old-fashioned typewriter ribbons were made of inked cotton. This magazine describes the manufacturing process. This book describes how it worked (and says that the IBM Selectric, which is what I learned to type on, used a plastic substitute). You can use those sources to expand Ink ribbon if you'd like to.

The redirect could become a disambiguation page, since ribbons made of cotton are (well, mostly "were") used in apparel. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:34, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:29, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Ribbon, where it is mentioned, and is the most logical target. I find it highly unlikely that the searcher would be looking for ink ribbons, even if said ribbons used to be made of cotton and the sourced mentions are added to that article. I find it much more likely that a searcher for cotton ribbons would still find information useful to them at ribbon, even if cotton is only mentioned once. Fieari (talk) 23:35, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Sonic movie

• Sonic movie → Sonic the Hedgehog (film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There are, in fact, multiple Sonic movies. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 20:27, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Note: the creator @Plutonical suggests retargeting to Sonic the Hedgehog (film series) 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 20:50, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea. At the time the redirect was created, there wasn't a series yet. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:35, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to film series per Plutonical. Carguychris (talk) 20:06, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Sonic the Hedgehog (film series). The upcoming redirect target is more sense giving that there's currently three Sonic feature films (becoming four in 2027). 103.111.102.118 (talk) 00:04, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Comment Sonic the Hedgehog: The Movie (OVA) exists and was a 1996 direct-to-video animated film. "Film series" thus is bad since it isn't listed there. Also, there are short films; so redirect to List of Sonic the Hedgehog features instead -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 05:18, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to either List of Sonic the Hedgehog features#Films or Sonic the Hedgehog (film series). The 2020 film is NOT the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC to term "Sonic movie", so retarget them into one of those existing articles seems fine. 2404:8000:1037:587:342E:5C0:8E20:2F33 (talk) 09:41, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget where?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:28, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to List of Sonic the Hedgehog features. There are other Sonic movies besides just the ones in Sonic the Hedgehog (film series). ⇒ Aerrapc they/them, 20:11, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Orabueze

• Orabueze → Biafra Referendum#Restoration declaration  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

In addition to this section mentioning Ngozi Orabueze, we also have Florence Orabueze. Not sure if it is better to retarget to Florence, delete, or disambiguate, but this target is clearly inappropriate. Thoughts? Rusalkii (talk) 22:02, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:26, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Listify as a {{surname}}. jlwoodwa (talk) 21:36, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

F�r

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

Exa Dark Sideræl

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Max max 4

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

March 3

Talk:Besame Mucho (film)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

pin game

• Pin game → Pinball  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Pin-game → Pinball  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Pingame → Pinball  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

weird case. "pin game" (with a space or dash) seems to be a collective term for the kind of games you'd find on YEAH! YOU WANT "THOSE GAMES," RIGHT? SO HERE YOU GO! NOW, LET'S SEE YOU CLEAR THEM! (with like 2.5 results related to pinball i guess), while "pingame" seems to refer to an unnotable band. though pingame journal is an article that exists, so maybe an argument could be made for it? consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 20:54, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep - per the article, By the 1930s, manufacturers were producing coin-operated versions of bagatelles, now known as "marble games" or "pin games". - redirect seems reasonable BugGhost 🦗👻 00:07, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep as Bugghost says. If some other potential target comes up, that we need to address versus claptrap like non-notable bands, then we can disambiguate by one means or another.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:28, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

time to yap lol

results from a slightly more in-depth search gave me the act of pinning games (whatever that could mean for both terms), "pin-pulling/pushing" games (like the ones in YEAH! YOU WANT "THOSE GAMES," RIGHT? SO HERE YOU GO! NOW, LET'S SEE YOU CLEAR THEM!, and those sexually questionable mobile game ads which i'm surprised don't have a lot of coverage here beyond gardenscapes), bowling, push-pin (that's a thing!?), and ring-and-pin. as is, this is a little confusing because the thing that seems to be the primary topic doesn't have an article, and the most reliable sources i got for pinball or related games were the source used in the article... and the article

that gibberish aside, if that's the case and i haven't misread the article (which is admittedly pretty likely), it refers to bagatelles as "pin games", not pinball, so wouldn't it be better to retarget and mention the nomenclature there for now? consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 13:09, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Notified of this discussion at the suggested target Bagatelle.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 13:16, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go in the hopes of getting some Bagatelle-related comments.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 21:35, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment - Are the set of games akin to bowling, such as 9-pin, 10-pin, duck pin, and so forth, known as pin games as well? I could easily see them being referred to as such, but I don't know if they are. If so, that would easily be enough to warrant a DAB being drafted. As it is, I'd weakly support a DAB anyway due to the existence of the minor indie band and the fact that pin-game is not currently a common name for pinball (even though it definitely used to be), meaning that it wouldn't necessarily obtain WP:PTOPIC status. Fieari (talk) 00:55, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

TPOT

• TPOT → Pennsylvania Opera Theater  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

An anonymous IP erroneously changed the acronym of the Pennsylvania Opera Theater (POT) to TPOT in this edit. This minor but incorrect change went unnoticed and the redirect was created in error. 4meter4 (talk) 16:30, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

• Comment One of the sources in the article says the abbreviation is "TPOT" but it appears to include the word "the", and I haven't reviewed the other sources yet as to if they say the same thing. I did a search and the only other mentions are Radio TPOT (doesn't have an article), and minor mentions including one in jacksfilms (that one here doesn't have an article either for reasons.) Nijika・🥁・📐 17:57, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
• Neutral. OhioMan10 (talk) 20:42, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
• Comment - seems like a source cited on the article used "TPOT". It was published in 1991, so there's no citogenesis concern. ObserveOwl (talk) 20:51, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete, seems like unlikely search result. Most people searching for "TPOT", especially now, are expecting to see something about the season of web series Battle for Dream Island (which is not on Wikipedia, see WP:BFDI), not the Pennsylvania Opera Theater. drdr150 Yell at me Spy on me 17:17, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

That's not a reason to delete. We're not responsible for non-notable meanings of a term. Otherwise, we'd have to delete most {{r from initialism}}s. Paradoctor (talk) 17:35, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

I don't think that follows - "we delete all initialisms where the overwhelming primary topic doesn't have an article, such that redirecting to our best article for it would surprise most readers" strikes me as a totally reasonable policy and I suspect doesn't actually get most of the current redirects. (Of the first five random initialism redirects I checked, four had the target as the clearly primary topic and one didn't seem to have a primary topic). Rusalkii (talk) 03:23, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Primary topics are notable, by definition, and they have an article, by definition: the topic to which the term should lead. I was talking about non-notable meanings. BFDI is not notable. That's why BFDI exists, but redirects to a German federal agency most likely not searched for by users entering "BFDI" into the search box. Or do you feel like nominating that one for deletion, too? Paradoctor (talk) 11:27, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

I do not feel like nominating that one for deletion because I'm pretty sure I just saw that discussion and I am not in the habit of re-litigating lost battles. My primary point was that in fact the case where the non-Wikipedia-notable meaning of the term is the primary topic (not as a term of art, but just as "what do most people seem to be looking for") are not anywhere near common enough that, if this was adopted as a principle at RfD, we'd need to delete most of them. Rusalkii (talk) 00:03, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Jason H. Moore § Research. If you want to include the theatre meaning, a hatnote can be added there. Paradoctor (talk) 17:45, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Jason H. Moore. tree-based pipeline optimization tool (TPOT) is sort of unpopular (most people searching TPOT will see Battle for Dream Island, but that's not on Wikipedia), but tree-based pipeline optimization tool (TPOT) appears to be the most notable TPOT. 49.145.100.19 (talk) 03:30, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 21:31, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Jason H. Moore (i'm User:Someone-123-321 by the way, but due to reasons the reply system I'm using doesn't work on Chrome :[). Ignoring the obvious target (which we don't have nor should we) this seems like the best target for now. 65.181.23.139 (talk) 05:21, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Manhattan Museum of Art

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Girl farts

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cyrillization of Persian

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:STATEMEDIA

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Lithuanian Cyrillic

• Lithuanian Cyrillic → Lithuanian press ban  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

I understand that this is the primary topic, but the target article does not actually contain anything about the writing system. WP:RETURNTORED? Janhrach (talk) 17:33, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Sbaio or Pofka probably know enough to be able to write a couple of sentences about that. Whether it should be in Lithuanian press ban or in Lithuanian language or a separate article is beyond me. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:00, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

@Janhrach:, @WhatamIdoing: The Lithuanians were forced by the Russian Empire to write Lithuanian language texts in Cyrillic alphabet with the primary aim of Russification of Lithuanians when we lost our statehood in 1795 (see: Grand Duchy of Lithuania), while the Lithuanian book smugglers illegally transported to Lithuania books printed in Latin alphabet (which is usual alphabet for Lithuanians historically and nowadays). I don't think that there should be a separate article "Lithuanian Cyrillic" because such a thing never existed voluntarily and simply Lithuanians along with other nations occupied by the Russian Empire were forced to write their native languages texts in Cyrillic alphabet instead of Latin alphabet. I think "Lithuanian Cyrillic" should be a redirect page to article "Lithuanian press ban" because it is related solely with this ban which was imposed in 1864 and was lifted in 1904. -- Pofka (talk) 20:19, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Thank you, @Pofka. Do you think we need a sentence in the Lithuanian press ban article that gives a definition of "Lithuanian Cyrillic" or describes anything about it (e.g., if it has any special characters or unusual features)? WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:49, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing: There is already a sentence in the lead about the usage of Cyrillic alphabet and there are also mentions of that with sources in different sections. – sbaio 14:35, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

I too don't think Lithuanian Cyrillic should have a separate article, but it (as a writing system) is a distictive topic which is not covered at Lithuanian press ban (but still could be covered), so, in my opinion, the title "Lithuanian Cyrillic" should be redlinked. Janhrach (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

@WhatamIdoing: I think it should be mentioned in article Lithuanian press ban that Lithuanians in the Russian Empire were forced to use Cyrillic alphabet and that by such means it was attempted to Russify them. I think that would be enough. The publications in "Lithuanian Cyrillic" were not popular as Lithuanians rejected them, so really there is little value in such publications and they are just an examples of Russian imperialism. I have slightly improved the beginning of the article and added two WP:RS as references. -- Pofka (talk) 14:11, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Thanks. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:41, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Thinking it over, it may have not been a good idea to delete this redirect. But let a few other editors express their opinions on this matter. Still, the target would benefit from a brief description of the writing system. Janhrach (talk) 14:13, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Sat (Romania)

• Sat (Romania) → City#Romania  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in the target article, and target section does not exist, leaving the connection between the redirect and the target unclear. In addition, if the intent of this redirect was to provide a translation, the target apparently is not the right target anyways; it seems the word "sat" in Romanian actually means village, but doesn't seem to be a clear place to target in that article either. It seems that no matter where this redirect is targeting, there is a WP:FORRED issue. Steel1943 (talk) 08:49, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

I don't have any memory of a redirect I created 15 years ago, but MediaWiki does. The page "City" as it existed when the redirect was created shows there used to be a section on cities in Romania, of which sat is evidently a relevant term. Checking the backlinks and my own edit history, the redirect in question was evidentially added to fix the "SAT (disambiguation)" page. Probably the most productive thing to do next would be to see if the relevant content from city was moved elsewhere. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 22:25, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

I attempted that before I made this nomination by using search phrases such as "Sat Romania" and couldn't find an adequate place to retarget this redirect. In addition, the word "sat" appears in the article Romania 0 times. Steel1943 (talk) 01:49, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

The content on Romania, and other countries, was not moved elsewhere, it was removed with comment Remove absurd section. Listing out how cities are defined and what they are like in every country of the world is obviously beyond the scope of this article. Later on, there was a discussion on splitting out the "Distinction between cities and towns" section to a separate article, but the participants may not have been aware of this large content that was removed. The most enthusiastic participant in that discussion has since retired.

Probably move that removed content to a new article? Jay 💬 09:46, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 17:06, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Yuogsphere

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Oswald the Lone Assassin

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Eternal Limited

• Eternal Limited → Zomato  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned in target. I'm having some trouble figuring out the connection between this and Zomato, a search is pulling up lots of clearly unrelated things. Rusalkii (talk) 19:34, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Appears to be a name change: https://www.republicworld.com/business/zomato-changes-name-to-eternal-limited-company-confirms-decision Aprzn (talk) 20:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Huh. Well, no objection to the redirect and/or a move if it's actually called that and the target reflects that. Rusalkii (talk) 20:37, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: This is part of a company renaming exercise (Zomato Limited → Eternal Limited) that has received board approval but has yet to receive shareholder approval [19]. If and when the name change takes effect, Eternal Limited will be the parent entity of Zomato, Blinkit and other businesses. This is similar to Facebook Inc changing its name to Meta Platforms. Yuvaank (talk) 21:10, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  It sounds like we should close this. Maybe the nom could put a note on her calendar to check back in a year. ("Not mentioned" is not actually a reason to delete a redirect. That only applies if it is "novel or very obscure".) WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:11, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 16:59, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• I have added mention using Yuvaank's source. Jay 💬 18:00, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Template:---

• Template:--- → Template:Long dash  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Subst-then-delete or retarget to {{mdash}}. wikt:---#Punctuation_mark shows how a triple hyphen is an em dash, but this redirect is to a 3-em dash. Deviating from the customary Hyphen#Use_in_computing only causes confusion. 173.206.110.217 (talk) 15:25, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep, because I don't think that anyone is helped by deleting this. I'd be happy to see all such templates replaced with the correct characters, but that should be done with a request at Wikipedia:AutoWikiBrowser/Tasks (perhaps once a year), and not by deleting a ten-year-old redirect that people might be accustomed to using as a short way to invoke the template. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

We could make the template a wrapper set to {{subst only|auto=yes}}. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 02:38, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

The people who might be accustomed to this are exactly the people that would be helped by deleting this. Deletion would free them of the misconception that "---" could mean anything other than a 1-em dash, and correctly teach future editors who see {{---}}. As an analogy, this is equally helpful as nominating a template that only supported yyyy-dd-mm, to teach them that the correct way of using ISO dates is yyyy-mm-dd. This should be deleted under WP:RFD#DELETE 2. confusion and 5. nonsense, unless someone can cite a source that recommends "---" for a 3-em dash. (same IP editor) 173.206.105.221 (talk) 08:07, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

It's not Wikipedia's job to teach editors that three hyphen-minuses, if rendered in plain text, will be interpreted as a single em dash by some people. People who can't figure out that typing {{---}} and typing --- all by itself are different are unlikely to be successful Wikipedia editors anyway. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:12, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 16:58, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep - It's a template only used by wikipedians, who can be expected to figure out what the template does before using it. Template names are pretty much arbitrary, and if people are using it, they find it helpful, and that's enough a reason to keep as any. Habit is fine in the backend, insisting on naming accuracy is only useful if more wikipedians find the naming confusing than not, and I don't think confusion is happening here. Fieari (talk) 00:58, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Shoo in

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Demolition lovers II

• Demolition lovers II → Three Cheers for Sweet Revenge  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

First time doing something like this, let me know if I've made a mistake. I believe this redirect should be deleted, especially to avoid confusion with the newly-created page for "Demolition Lovers". "Demolition Lovers II", from what I can tell, refers to the title of the album cover's artwork, but it is not referenced in the article (nor in reliable, secondary sources from a Google search). The redirect also seems to be rarely used, with Pageview Analysis showing only 121 uses over the past decade. In the case that this redirect ends up being kept, then it should at least be renamed to put it in title case. Thank you. Leafy46 (talk) 23:03, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

• Life on the Murder Scene says "Demolition lovers II" is the name of the album cover of the target, however this is unsourced and I have tagged it with {{citation needed}}. Jay 💬 08:07, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 12:09, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 16:48, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Keep Retarget to Three Cheers for Sweet Revenge#Artwork but change casing. The back cover of the album refers to front cover as "Demolition Lovers II", and there's a couple Reddit posts referring to it as such. There's a nonzero chance someone might want info about the cover art, so I would keep it under WP:CHEAP. Based5290 :3 (talk) 05:11, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

I think it's worth pointing out that, as mentioned in my original comment, the "nonzero" chance is much closer to zero given that the redirect was only used about 12 times a year on average, and that there is no mention of the cover art in the article (nor would I expect there to be in the future, given that there were no reliable sources mentioning it outside of those few Reddit posts when I did my search previously). Again, though, I agree with putting it in title case if there is consensus to keep the redirect. Leafy46 (talk) 15:22, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

I've added an artwork section (turns out almost none of the sources refer to the cover art by name), so that should be enough to keep the redirect. Based5290 :3 (talk) 07:13, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Looks alright to me, I personally agree with this retarget. Thanks for putting a section together on the page! Leafy46 (talk) 16:03, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

Banu Hoot

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Lifelore

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

Biology is about life, however this term seems odd. Biology used to have a #Etymology section that had: Historically there was another term for "biology" in English, lifelore; it is rarely used today. Later the entire #Etymology section was removed as: etymologies belong in wiktionary., and the suggestion was that these should go into a History section or a "History of" article, however this was not added back to Biology § History or History of biology. Without context, this redirect is confusing, as evidenced at another two RfDs for Life lore and Life-lore. Jay 💬 11:52, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

• Per Duckmather at earlier RfDs (life-lore and life lore), retarget to wikt:lifelore. it's lio! | talk | work 08:22, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

  Keep and add an external link to "lifelore". 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 14:38, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 16:46, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Soft retarget to Wiktionary:lifelore per HKLionel. Also, a mention solely in the "External links" section doesn't adequately fix the issue since the redirect is not mentioned or identified in the body of the article. Steel1943 (talk) 04:04, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete, obscure, archaic synonym not mentioned at the target. Wiktionary soft redirects are harmful, as they inhibit searching within Wikipedia, and search results already display a Wikt link prominently if something has an entry there. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 04:12, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

  ...This redirect existing inhibits what while searching within Wikipedia? There is literally nothing other than the nominated redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 05:04, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

  Any future mentions of this term on WP, or just confirmation of the fact that there are no mentions. It might not be much, but it's something. Meanwhile, searching for it if the soft redirect isn't there yields a link to the Wikitionary entry (with the start of the entry even), which is better. Wikt soft redirects are invariably bad, and I've never understood why people clutch at them as some sort of better alternative than the normal search result page. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 12:52, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

  That's a bit of a WP:CRYSTAL assumption there. You are basically betting on someone at some point in the future adding this word to an article, and if there's none now in the millions of article on Wikipedia, the odds of the word appearing later are next to nil. Steel1943 (talk) 22:05, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Playhouse Disney around the world

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 11#Playhouse Disney around the world

Indiana Jones Bonus Material

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

High skool musical

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Going Electric

• Going Electric → A Complete Unknown  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Electric Dylan controversy is a better target for this phrase. The movie more or less is a derivative of the controversy. _pbp 15:48, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

As the redirect creator, I won't say I'm strictly opposed to this, though I will say that this is specifically a working title of the film (mentioned in the second sentence of A Complete Unknown#Pre-production), so it's not directed there for no reason, and I did add a hatnote to A Complete Unknown linking to Electric Dylan controversy regarding this redirect. There is one instance of the words "going electric" in the latter article, but it doesn't appear that this precise phrase is closely associated with the controversy (at least as far as I can tell). QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:05, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Since this is an official working title (and is capitalized as such), then I think we should keep the current target. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:21, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

Xavier Musk

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

LGBTQ Conservatives

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

President Elon Musk

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 11#President Elon Musk

Recreational hypnosis

• Recreational hypnosis → Erotic hypnosis  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Although A) this is a redir from page move so we might need to be somewhat cautious of external links and B) thanks to what I can only call a redirect-specific version of WP:CITEGENESIS where other sources use Wikipedia as a synonym site, NN videos have started using the term in THIS sense...

it should be worth noted that the majority of usecases of "recreational hypnosis" I could find referred to... well, "recreational hypnosis" - as in turning someone into a chicken or something. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 09:03, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Stage hypnosis. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:27, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as vague. Search engine results are likewise vague with no clear established meaning. There's no need to guess at what someone wants here. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 04:16, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Stage hypnosis as what I believe best meets WP:PTOPIC... many more people have engaged with the stage performance (on TV, or at work/university parties/events) than the sexual version. If other agree with the IP that there's simply no consistent use of this term, however, then the solution would be to DABify it, which I would !vote for as my 2nd choice. Fieari (talk) 06:13, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

LemonParty

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 11#LemonParty

Vivian Musk

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

March 2

McDLT

• McDLT → Big N' Tasty  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The decision was made in 2007 to merge McDLT into Big N' Tasty, on the basis that, in the opinion of an editor with industry experience, these products had fundamentally the same role in McDonalds's business strategy. Although I can see that this is true, and I am grateful for User:Jerem43's contributions to the article and especially our coverage of McDonald's in general, it's not clear to me why these sandwiches should be thought of as the same product from any other perspective. The McDLT predates the Big N' Tasty branding and had a different selling points to the consumer: the McDLT is about the temperature contrast of fresh lettuce and tomato. The article as it stands does not justify identifying this sandwich as an iteration of the Big N' Tasty "series," and I would argue that this particular merge was based on original research. This redirect should retarget to List of McDonald's products#Discontinued food products, where it is already summarized.

For comparison, McOz, Big Xtra, and McRoyal Deluxe redirect to Big N' Tasty as well. I understand these all to be names for tomato and lettuce sandwiches that appeared contemporaneously with or after the Big N' Tasty, and seem a lot more like localized "versions" of the Big N' Tasty concept to me. StainedGlassCavern (talk) 13:50, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep but the information on the product is at the target page; and *not* at the proposed target list. There is quite a lot of information on the product at the current target, and only a sentence for it at the proposed target. Thus the current redirect points to where the information is. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 05:29, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:40, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per IP. This is an article content concern that may be handled by those with knowledge about these products. Jay 💬 18:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)

University of Islamic Studies

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 11#University of Islamic Studies

Cáncer de Esófago

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Subtropical rainforest(s)

• Subtropical rainforests → Rainforest  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Subtropical rainforest → Laurel forest  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I think these should probably point to the same title. Cremastra (talk) 19:31, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep but fix vandalism. First, the singular "subtropical rainforest" redirect appears to have been vandalized back in 2020. It should be restored as a link to "rainforest". It should be noted that tropical, subtropical, and temperate rainforests are rainforests that exist in three distinct climate zones. There are distinct articles for tropical and temperate rainforests, but not yet for those of the subtropics. It is quite plausible that a discrete article for subtropical rainforest could be created in the future. It therefore makes sense to redirect to the broader topic page for now. Grolltech (talk) 20:13, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Separate articles There should be separate articles for tropical, subtropical, temperate and dry rainforest. Each of these types of rainforest are important in Australia, at least, and there are important sub-categories of some of them, including vine forest (north Queensland) and cool temperate (Tasmania). Gderrin (talk) 03:19, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep both targeted at Rainforest per Grolltech, and tag as {{R with possibilities}} until the article is created. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 21:04, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Senegal national under-16 and under-17 basketball team

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Chtonobdella

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: made a genus article

Enalio Sauri

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Oakland Assembly Food Court Venue

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Identitarian

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 11#Identitarian

Mixed-culture

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 9#Mixed-culture

Kentucky militia

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Speared

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 9#Speared

Spears family

• Spears family → Spear  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

was about to retarget to spears (disambiguation), but nothing there strikes as "family-like". considered retargeting to spears (surname), but there's exactly one family there. considered retargeting to some section about britney spears' family, but that's pretty reductive. either way, the current target is grammatically incorrect, and that might be enough for keeping to not be an optimal choice. opinions? consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 20:34, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

should note that it did target the dab before, but that was a redirect, so it eventually ended up at the current target consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 20:35, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, which is what I think ought to have been done in 2006. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:38, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Spears (surname). Since there is one family there it's a good fix. Can be retargetted again if things change. All the best: Rich Farmbrough 17:01, 26 February 2025 (UTC).
  

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:01, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete - we don't have an article or single article section to retarget to. Remnant of an old page move of an inappropriate page. Jay 💬 20:53, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:PADEMELONS

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 9#Wikipedia:PADEMELONS

Volgare

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Misskarenenglishteacher

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Nehruvian rate of growth

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 9#Nehruvian rate of growth

Relighting

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 10#Relighting

March 1

Mass execution

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 8#Mass execution

Wikipedia:GOODRFC

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:BADRFC

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

WLBJ (defunct)

• WLBJ (defunct) → WLBJ (Kentucky)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This disambiguator may itself be ambigous; WLBJ-LP is also defunct. (This is a large part of why "defunct" is no longer used as a disambiguator for broadcast station articles.) This may need to be retargeted to WLBJ as an {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

For what it's worth, WLBJ-LP has been nominated for deletion; if that article is deleted, that might eliminate the need for the WLBJ disambiguation page and render this RfD all but moot. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:12, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete Not a very useful redirect apparently. Drdpw (talk) 04:18, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
• Wait for the AFD. Retarget to DAB if it's not deleted, otherwise delete. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 07:15, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
• The AFD closed as redirect to Annunciation Radio. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 00:14, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Drdpw. If there was an active WLBJ station article, then it made sense to have the "defunct" disambiguator. All we have are two defunct ones, we don't need a "defunct" disambiguator to redirect to a disambig page. This was the earlier title of the Kentucky station page, so at that time it made sense. Jay 💬 11:00, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The AFD closed as redirect.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 23:36, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Flatworm species redirects (3)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Flatworm species redirects (2)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Flatworm species redirects (1)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

When you are young, they assume you know nothing

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 11#When you are young, they assume you know nothing

William Watson: Civil War Surgeon

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Afterlove EP

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was:

2022–2023 Moldovan energy crisis

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 8#2022–2023 Moldovan energy crisis

Canadiano

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 8#Canadiano

Visting the page

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Xbs

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy retarget. BD2412 T 04:36, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

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

New disambiguation page XBS created. Should Retarget to XBS. Justjourney (talk) 03:03, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Support. This could have been done boldly. BD2412 T 03:36, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  @BD2412 Should I do it now? Justjourney (talk) 03:40, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Yes. I would. BD2412 T 03:51, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Partially  Done, but I haven't removed the templates at the top of that page yet. Also, how do I close this discussion? @BD2412. Justjourney (talk) 04:32, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

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

True death

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

February 28

Gelong

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: withdrawn

VLCS

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

History of metaphysical naturalism

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Guido Quaroni

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 8#Guido Quaroni

New name

• New name → Nomen novum  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

"New name" more commonly refers to name change or geographical renaming instead of the renaming of species. Mia Mahey (talk) 04:28, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete this hopelessly ambiguous placeholder title. Might as well have nominated New article. Steel1943 (talk) 05:04, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Maybe it should be retargeted to Rename (or Renaming if an article is ever created with that title)? PrinceTortoise (he/him • poke) 08:55, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• I suggest a disambiguation page. In the context of biological taxonomy, "new name" is definitely used as an English term for nomen novum – see for example the entry in the Dictionary of invertebrate zoology – although "replacement name" is more common in botanical contexts, I think. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• I'm not familiar with this discipline, but the fact that "new name" is in bold at the top of Nomen novum tells me that it's a conventionalized English rendering of that technical term. People who change their names are more likely to say that they "changed their name" than to say that they have a "new name." It is true that when geographical features are renamed, we often speak of its "new name," although I find it hard to believe that someone looking for the notion of renaming geographical features will search for it as "new name" with significant frequency. I think it could be reasonably argued that when a user searches New name, the topic that they are most likely to be specifically looking for is Nomen novum. This supports Nomen novum as the primary topic of New name via WP:PT1. However, the technical concept of Nomen novum is much less widespread, giving it less notability and educational value than Name change or especially Geographical renaming; therefore, WP:PT2 definitely does not support Nomen novum as the primary topic of New name.
  
  If it can be determined that Nomen novum is the primary topic for New name, then I don't think a disambiguation is needed. We could just replace the {{distinguish}} hatnote with {{redirect|New name||Rename}}, which will look like this:
  "New name" redirects here. For other uses, see Rename.
  However, if there is no primary topic, we should probably disambiguate. StainedGlassCavern (talk) 17:44, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• disambiguate per Peter coxhead -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:49, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:49, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate as suggested. People searching for this have a technical meaning in mind, and since there are arguably several in unconnected disciplines, a dab page would serve. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 08:41, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate as it could refer to a legal name change. cookie monster 755 14:30, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• I have drafted a dab. Jay 💬 07:43, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Curtiss-Wright Model 2500 Air Car

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2^61-1

• 2^61-1 → Mersenne prime  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This particular prime number does not seem to need a redirect. Tagged as an "r to section" but no such section exists in the redirect. "61-1" is not mentioned at the article for the Mersenne prime, among the many other prime numbers that could possibly exist. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:25, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to List of Mersenne primes and perfect numbers. It is indeed a Mersenne prime (one of 52), and is indeed mentioned in the article, but the list is a better target. StAnselm (talk) 06:41, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

  @StAnselm:, could you point out to me where "2^61-1" is mentioned in either article? Because I'm not seeing it in the list you linked either. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:44, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

  It's the 9th Mersenne prime, where p=61. StAnselm (talk) 06:47, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

  I was looking for the exact title-match of "2^61-1", which I didn't find at either article. It is generally encouraged to have something related to every redirect someone might use, to ensure that they landed on the right page and aren't stranded by mistake. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:51, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

  We do not need to have every redirect of a synonym in their target article, if reading the article makes the connection clear. The article clearly defines a Mersenne prime number as "one less than a power of two" and has M_n = 2ⁿ − 1 as the definition. And then later does list 61 as a Mersenne prime number. I don't think it'd be all that helpful to readers to have this exact string in the article but having this be a redirect to either article is helpful to readers because this redirect allows them to find information about the topic even though their exact search term does not appear in the article. Skynxnex (talk) 16:31, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

  (edit conflict)Followup: After some inference I do see now where "61" is mentioned, but I'm still not seeing how it becomes a useful redirect even with this fact? I.e. it's not obvious why 2^61-1 would be more important than 2^89-1, or 2^107-1 or any of the others in the sequence. We don't have any dedicated content besides just a list-entry, and nothing on the list besides the value of the number itself. Wikipedia isn't a calculator and these don't seem be useful redirects, if it's just to indicate that "it is on the table of mersenne primes". Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:50, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

  It is useful because it gets people to the right place. If you read about "2^61-6" on a website, and you search for it here, then you need to end up in the right place. You do not necessarily need to end up in the right place plus with circles and arrows and a paragraph typed on the back to reassure you that you really are in the right place, but you do need to end up in the right place. Therefore keep, and maybe even consider what it would take to get a WP:TBAN to stop you from nominating any more redirects on "not mentioned" grounds, because there is no such rule. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:59, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

  @WhatamIdoing: It's inappropriate to suggest a TBAN in these sort of situations. It's fine to vote to keep something, but Utopes' nomination rationale is not at all uncommon for RfD, I myself have used the same rationale quite a few times. I can't even understand how you jumped to the suggestion of a TBAN. Looking through my XfD log, I find I use this reasoning quite often, as redirects that aren't mentioned at the target are misleading. In the future, I strongly suggest you do not suggest/imply a TBAN is appropriate when editors are acting in good faith, have been solid contributors in the area you're suggesting they be banned from, and have not been disruptive. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:33, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

  @Hey man im josh, I think that systematically sending pages to XFD just to make sure that the community doesn't want to delete them is disruptive.

  I realize that Wikipedia:Nobody reads the directions, but editors can earn a TBAN if they consistently and repeatedly send articles to AFD for reasons that contradict the deletion policy, so I assume that consistently and repeatedly sending redirects to RFD has the same potential outcome. If someone sent a couple dozen unref'd articles to AFD every day, for no reason beyond being in Category:Articles lacking sources, I'd expect them to be TBANned. If someone sends a couple dozen "not mentioned" articles to RFD every day, for no reason beyond being in Category talk:Redirects to an article without mention, I'd expect them to be TBANned, too.

  If lots of people think that it's misleading to have 1909 constitutional crisis redirect to an article that talks at length about a "crisis" involving the "constitution" that started in "1909", without using the exact consecutive string "1909 constitutional crisis", then either a lot of our editors have poor reading comprehension, or we need to change the rules at WP:RFD#DELETE. Those words currently say a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned. Those words currently do not say anything that is not mentioned, or even most things that are not mentioned, because it's misleading. As usual, my main concern is that the written rules match editors' actual practice. Either we need to stop using this made-up rule, or we need to make the rule a real one. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:15, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

  @WhatamIdoing: Right, and there's no evidence that Utopes has been nominating anything that contradicts policy. Their nominations frequently end in delete and, when they don't, they adjust how they approach and avoid wasting participants time with similar nominations. If someone sends a couple dozen "not mentioned" articles to RFD every day, for no reason beyond being in Category talk:Redirects to an article without mention... That's not what's happening though if you look at their edit history or their nomination rationales. They're retargeting redirects to some places, removing the tags when unnecessary/inaccurate, and nominating redirects without a valid target. I'm also not sure what you're referring to that needs to apparently be revised. They aren't nominating things that they're not finding to be a synonym. It feels like an extreme overreaction to suggestion a TBAN when someone isn't familiar with a mathematic equation and the RfD happens to not end in delete, so I invite you to WP:AGF. Lastly, their number of nominations hasn't been disruptive. Hey man im josh (talk) 18:24, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

  WP:RFD#DELETE says that redirects may be deleted if both of these conditions are true:

  1. novel or very obscure synonym for an article name
  2. that is not mentioned in the article

  "Novel" encompasses both newness and things that were made up one day. "Very obscure" means the connection between the redirect and the target article is so "hidden" or "difficult to understand" that almost nobody (=not just the nom personally, but almost nobody) would be able to figure out why it redirects to that page.

  You have to have both of these conditions. The written rule does not say "It's enough for it to be unmentioned, because every redirect must be explicitly mentioned. Who cares if ordinary readers can easily grok that this website name redirects to the company of the same name? Who cares if – as is the case for this particular redirect – it used to be mentioned in the article, in a format that anyone who remembers pre-algebra math should be able to recognize? If it's not worth mentioning the redirect in the current version of the article, then it's not worth having the redirect."

  I don't know if you were aware of it, but Utopes proposed systematically reviewing every redirect in CAT:RAW and either removing the cat or proposing deletion of the redirect. The rule they proposed using was that every redirect must be mentioned in the article, "If not exactly verbatim, pretty dang close to it" or deleted. The discussion produced objections. I have added mine here. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to List of Mersenne primes and perfect numbers as a better target. I agree that both articles do mention it, although not by the exact string, but p=61 or M₆₁ are enough of a signifier to cover this redirect as being mentioned. Fieari (talk) 06:52, 24 January 2025 (UTC)
• Either Refine to §History, where there's actual discussion of Pervushin's proving this number prime (well prior to the use of computers), although it could use some better sourcing, so it would be a better target than those above. Or I wouldn't be all that opposed to a delete either; despite there actually being a bit to say about the discovery of this number's primeness, this still seems like an unlikely search term. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 13:17, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

The pageviews analysis shows it's being searched about once a month. StAnselm (talk) 16:31, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (Goodbye!) 16:06, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

• Leaning toward refine to Mersenne prime § History but keeping targeting just the article would be fine (but remove r to section in that case). Slight preference to that over retarageting to the list since the main article actually discusses M₆₁ in particular, unlike the list. Skynxnex (talk) 16:42, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 07:53, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Onlyinclude

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

2025 United States coup

• 2025 United States coup → Attempted takeover of US federal agencies by Elon Musk  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• 2025 United States coup attempt → Department of Government Efficiency#Actions within federal government  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not a neutral title, not sourced adequately enough to call it a coup — Czello ^(music) 17:28, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

I think this is a reasonable redirect because when I was trying to find out if there was a page on DOGE's recent actions I searched Wikipedia for coup and coup attempt until I eventually found Attempted takeover of US federal agencies by Elon Musk. So Keep for the third reason listed at WP:RFD#KEEP. //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 17:33, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Department of Government Efficiency - changing stance since seperate article no longer exists but its still a valid redirect per above. //Lollipoplollipoplollipop::talk 21:59, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Delete per nom pending consensus by scholarly WP:SECONDARY sources (not politicians, news-channel talking heads, or a handful of academics and journalists) describing the target topic as a coup. The term "coup" is WP:CONTENTIOUS, so it is WP:UNDUE to label an event this way without strong sourcing. Carguychris (talk) 18:01, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Strong Delete WP:UNDUE, for now, and WP:CRYSTAL. "Coup" has been used by some Democrats and, accordingly, is quoted in sources in almost all sources using the term, but that's it. Trump himself said Musk is acting to his bidding. This AP article has both statements, and attributes them. Even the article itself doesn't use "coup" in wikivoice, see lede. I'd go as far as to question whether the article itself is necessary and can't just be worked into Department of Government Efficiency, again for now, but let's wait and see. Mystic Cornball (talk) 18:14, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep for the reason given by Lollipoplollipoplollipop. Agree it's a non-neutral characterization, but the use of this language is verifiable - and that's all that is needed in this kind of situation. (There are I imagine similarly non-neutral search phrases which might be used by those strongly supportive of Musk.) Dsp13 (talk) 18:46, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Strong delete Expanding the imperial presidency is undesirable, but certainly distinct from the term "coup." Let's at least wait for history to speak before we assemble the review of lit for future scholars and journalists. Ornov Ganguly TALK 19:43, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep as there isn't any meaningful difference between 'coup' and 'attempted takeover of federal agencies by an individual.' Perhaps someone can offer a line in the sand which isn't contrived for this particular issue, but until then, the synonymity here should be considered implicit to the English language. SpooxTheSkeleton (talk) 19:50, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Considering Musk isn't overthrowing Trump or acting against his will according to him, I would argue there is a very strong difference in this particular case. Mystic Cornball (talk) 19:58, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

I disagree that the word coup necessarily implies an unwilling head of state. Donald Trump's complicity in the ordeal is at best a legal grey area. It's still an initiative to dismantle the current regime by an in-group of powerful actors, which I believe satisfies the definition of coup. SpooxTheSkeleton (talk) 01:01, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

There is when sourcing doesn't adequately support the word "coup" — Czello ^(music) 20:00, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

@SpooxTheSkeleton, you are begging the question by presuming that a "takeover" has in fact occurred. An article title that violates WP:EXCEPTIONAL does not in turn justify a similarly contentious redirect. I contend that both titles violate WP:NPOV and are inadequately sourced. Carguychris (talk) 21:48, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Delete. I don't see any reliable sources describing it as a coup; Attempted takeover of US federal agencies by Elon Musk only lists one article in the SF Chronicle which documents that one professor Seth Masket described it as a coup in his substack (substack is considered not a reliable source), but the chronicle always put it in quotes, indicating it's Masket's opinion. Hi! (talk) 20:08, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

To be fair Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez also called it a coup, but also as per my argument for deletion above all of this is very clearly opinionated so far. Mystic Cornball (talk) 20:26, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

AOC's tweets do not qualify as a reliable source. Agreed that calling it a coup is opinionated. — That Coptic Guy^{ping me!} (talk) (contribs) 22:01, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Comment the target page has been moved to draftspace, so it may be appropriate for this RfD to be procedurally closed. Carguychris (talk) 21:43, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

And, sigh, it's been undrafted with zero explanation. I wish people would put the forks down and act reasonably for once. Cremastra (talk) 22:12, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Agreed. <shakes head> Carguychris (talk) 22:39, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Delete - The article has been moved back to mainspace. No reliable sources are calling this a coup, nor can it be characterized as such right now. — That Coptic Guy^{ping me!} (talk) (contribs) 22:10, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep (or, if the article is merged, redirect to Department of Government Efficiency#Initial actions. Blatantly partisan and obviously incorrect term, but the fact that some notable individuals have been using the word "coup" means that it is a plausible redirect, and redirects are cheap. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 23:44, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep - Calls for deletion using the argument that it violates WP:NPOV should be reminded that redirects are explicitly allowed to violate NPOV. We create redirects specifically TO violate NPOV so that it stays out of article space, but still allows users who themselves use or have seen NPOV terminology to find the correct article. Redirects are also not required to be reliably sourced, merely sufficiently in use such that the existence of the redirect aids in navigation. Redirects are not generally user visible, so biased, opinionated, and even outright offensive redirects are generally acceptable if useful. This one is useful, and has been demonstrated to be useful above, which is a valid keep reason in and of itself. So, keep. Fieari (talk) 05:57, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

• Note, the article this redirected to no longer exists – therefore it is now eligible for Speedy Deletion under G8. — Czello ^(music) 16:51, 5 February 2025 (UTC)

  Try tagging it and see what happens :) —Alalch E. 02:40, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Department of Government Efficiency and and tag with Template:R from non-neutral name. Plausible search term and the target contains: DOGE employees have entered US federal buildings in Washington, D.C. The events have been described as "takeover", "freeze", or "coup" by members of the Democratic Party and media, who claim that the DOGE does not have the authority to carry out these activities (emphasis mine). The mention of "coup" in the lead is supported by content in the body.—Alalch E. 02:25, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep/retarget and tag per Alalch E., clearly WP:POV but redirects are not required to be neutral (Wikipedia:Redirect#Neutrality of redirects). Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 17:47, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
• Weak retarget to wherever contains the most information on the whole DOGE/Musk/Trump thing, which seems to be currently Department of Government Efficiency, per the above. Redirects don't need neutrality or reliable sources, just being plausible, unambiguous search terms. And I sincerely hope this one remains unambiguous, but there's still 10 months in the year! Sourcing found by Alalch suggests "coup" is plausible, though the full phrase "2025 United States coup" seems to occur nowhere but this redirect at the moment. Rusalkii (talk) 19:35, 9 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete - it is not a plausible search term. Google search gave me just five results for the term, with three of those results being to this discussion, one to Reddit and one to a post on Threads. So I don't why anyone would think it would be a credible search term on Wikipedia. Our readers aren't searching for this preposterous made up term, if they were, Google search results would reflect that. Redirects should make sense, this one clearly doesn't. Isaidnoway (talk) 12:22, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget per Alalch E. Redirects to not have to be neutral per WP:RNEUTRAL, so deletion would have to be on other grounds. This term has been used to describe DOGE's actions and its usage is already covered at the proposed target. Fine as a redirect. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:14, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as vague and misleading. If the redirect title had the words "DOGE" or "Elon Musk", then that would have been a worthwhile discussion. Also Oppose retarget to Department of Government Efficiency#Actions within federal government (which will happen as an avoided double redirect if this is not deleted). The fact that some call it a "coup" doesn't mean the redirect title "2025 United States coup" should redirect to DOGE. Jay 💬 13:40, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

  Second choice - retarget to Falling Gravity's suggestion: Response to Elon Musk's role in the US federal government § Coup d'état of U.S. government. Jay 💬 09:24, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

• Also bundle 2025 United States coup attempt which was created 3 minutes after the redirect under discussion. Jay 💬 13:40, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus not yet clear, and bundling 2025 United States coup attempt into the nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 07:45, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Don't delete Redirects are not required to be neutral, and the recent events could (unfortunately) reasonably be called a coup. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:51, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete Blatant WP:NPOV violation. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 01:34, 1 March 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Response to Elon Musk's role in the US federal government, which actually does have a section on the coup allegations. ^Falling_Gravity 06:03, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

20500

• 20500 → White House  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Ambiguous search term; not the obvious WP:PTOPIC Cremastra (u — c) 00:45, 16 January 2025 (UTC)

• I'm wondering how is this more ambiguous/different from the other examples in Category:Redirects from ZIP codes (which I'm somewhat surprised exists and only has ~400 entries but still they're there)? Looking some I can't find anything else referred to by 20500 that comes close to primacy compared to the White House's ZIP code. Skynxnex (talk) 15:01, 16 January 2025 (UTC)
• Keep and disambiguate. Pretty much the only WP:PTOPIC for this redirect, and Category:Redirects from ZIP codes is cromulent. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:26, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

  Changing to dab per Duckmather. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:20, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate, I think? A quick onwiki search reveals that this is also the postal code for Aiguá, Kalynopil, Katerynopil Raion, Mondragón, Nemea (town), and Tavas. Duckmather (talk) 05:12, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
• Weak Keep. I think I'd oppose a disambiguation page or SIA per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:04, 17 January 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. Too ambiguous, a disambiguation page is inappropriate because it would just be a directory, and the creation is part of a slew of problematic redirects by someone who needs to stop creating redirects. oknazevad (talk) 02:10, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

(nominator comment): I also support deletion rather than disambiguation. Cremastra (talk) 01:55, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 01:24, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate this is just a number, make it a disambiguation page -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 05:23, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

  Just drafted the dab! Duckmather (talk) 06:10, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:41, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep; it clearly refers to the target, and is at least as good as any other redirect from a ZIP Code. No objection to a proper disambiguation page if one can be created. Nyttend (talk) 23:26, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep or delete, oppose DABifying; not everything needs to be a DAB page. — Anonymous 16:33, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per oknazevad. The redirect was created in 2007 though, so I don't understand oknazevad's part about ..part of a slew of problematic redirects by someone who needs to stop.... Jay 💬 13:49, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete, does not clearly refer to the subject. Multiple possibilities have been aired, and there's nothing at the current target that says "20500 refers to this subject". No mention of "20500" outside the infobox, and this is understandably vague with other codes as well as the Z 20500 article. I'm open to disambiguating if someone wants to list every code that overlaps here, but in any situation the "white house" is a very easy search term, and also notdirectory. I'm not convinced someone would type in "20500" to get to this page, when <1% of all zip codes have redirects on Wikipedia, rendering this a wholly unreliable means of navigation that nobody would bank on. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 12:52, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Utopes. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:51, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate; apart from postal codes, 20500 can also refer to SNCF Class Z 20500 (per Utopes) and 20500 Avner on List of minor planets: 20001–21000. @Duckmather: Will you add these to the DAB draft? Have a nice day, because it's lio! | talk | work 15:51, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

  Partial title matches do not get into disambiguation pages per MOS:DABNOENTRY. Jay 💬 16:09, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

  Alright, then please add a See also section. Either way, the number 20500 is significant in other articles, and therefore shouldn't remain specific to the White House. it's lio! | talk | work 16:35, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 07:28, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete (and do not disambiguate). Completely ludicrous to expect searches by postal codes, and to maintain them, when there are hundreds of thousands of these across different countries. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 00:25, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

Birthright citizenship

US "Consular Report of Birth Abroad" for children of US citizen parents born in another country

• Birthright citizenship → Jus soli  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There has been a lot of toing-and-froing here. Jus soli is a good target, but the Infobox also has Jus sanguinis under the heading Birthright citizenship. It seems to me to be better to revert this page to the disambiguation page that it used to be [20]. Pinging contributors @Ben Azura:, @Hyphenation Expert:, @Lithopsian:. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:27, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

• I would agree if I was not writing an article for the redirect. There is a disambiguation page at birthright citizenship (disambiguation). Strictly speaking jus soli and jus sanguinis aren't ambiguous titles, but law latin is a special case and if consensus agrees to include the latin terms in the disambiguation page I would not revert that. I also support including the terms at birthright citizenship (disambiguation). Ben Azura (talk) 14:21, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Do you have a draft of the proposed replacement? Hyphenation Expert (talk) 16:46, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Note that Birthright citizenship (disambiguation) is a redirect, created as an WP:INTDAB redirect to Birthright citizenship when it was a disambiguation page. It now incorrectly targets Jus soli, which is the reason this situation came to my attention. But anyway ... we cannot proceed on the promise of a future article, the question is what to do now. If there is a new article it can overwrite a redirect or disambiguation page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:09, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

    I do not have a draft written and I don't know if anyone else is working on these articles at this time. I don't care about the fate of the redirect beyond saying that the problems introduced by disambiguating could have been avoided by creating a brief article. The vast majority of RS use the term jus soli for birthright citizenship exclusively, but a significant number use the term for both jus soli and jus sanguinis citizenship. This is not simply a matter of disambiguation. Some are using it for jus soli (including the natural born citizenship rights) and others are using it for citizenship that you can get at birth, in comparison with naturalization concepts like jus domicilii and related terms. There are multiple subjects but the inclusion of jus sanguinis is only used in the context of RS that are comparing "birthright citizenship" to naturalization. Too bad we can't just ignore the United States, that would make this easier. Ben Azura (talk) 09:46, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

• Note: There appears to be a complicated history here, where there was an article on birthright citizenship that may have been cut-and-pasted from this title many years before to what is now at Birthright citizenship in the United States. BD2412 T 19:39, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

  I have history merged the cut-paste from 2006. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

• Info: I have reformatted the dab page at Birthright citizenship (disambiguation) to be valid, given the current redirect at Birthright citizenship. This is just so it doesn't get further edited, possible deleted as invalid, while this discussion takes place. Lithopsian (talk) 20:00, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

  I have moved the US article to the See also section as a WP:PTM, and turned the disambig page to a WP:ONEOTHER. US is one of several countries that provide birthright citizenship, I don't see how the US article can be a disambiguation entry. Jay 💬 21:13, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

• Tentative support for a dab page: I'm no expert but it seems that there is ambiguity in what people might be looking for when searching this term. Lithopsian (talk) 20:02, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Revert to disambiguation page, could be either Jus soli or Jus sanguinis depending on country. HudecEmil (talk) 09:17, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

It's not the accuracy that is the problem, it just isn't ambiguous. Birthright citizenship is a principle of receiving citizenship as a right simply by being born, usually a natural right. jus soli and jus sanguinis are the way that birthright citizenship can be acquired. If you include sources like Vox and NPR, the vast majority of RS use the terms interchangeably because of the American context and issues arising from the constitutional text itself. European publishers of books, which I find myself using a lot, may state this with less ambiguity. Irrespective of that, expansion of the article birthright citizenship was proposed on the talk page of the article in 2006. I'm just a little miffed that it was important enough to turn the article into a dab by a "cut and paste" move but not important enough to expand the article. Ben Azura (talk) 11:07, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Once a standalone article "Birthright citizenship" is written support changing this redirect/disambiguation to that article. HudecEmil (talk) 15:44, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Seems there are concerns with the validity of a disambiguation page...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 07:18, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate. Consider my situation — my wife and I are US natives now living in Australia. We have birthright citizenship of the US, because we were born there, i.e. jus soli. Our children were born in Australia but have birthright citizenship of the US, because their parents are US citizens, i.e. jus sanguinis. Consider the image I've just placed here. It states that the holder was born in the Philippines and "acquired United States citizenship at birth" — the first bit shows that it's clearly not jus soli (subject wasn't born in US territory), and second bit shows that it's birthright citizenship. Nyttend (talk) 19:47, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

unmentioned suikoden characters (episode 2: j-l)

• Jeane (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Joshua Levenheit → Suikoden  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Kasim Hazil → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Kasumi (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Kessler (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Killey → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Kraze → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Kun To → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Kwanda Rosman → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Leknaat → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Leon Silverberg → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Lepant → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Lilly Pendragon → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Lorelai (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Lucia (Suikoden) → Suikoden (video game)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

re-nominating those after this discussion closed as "if only we knew the suffering that would befall us next", but only by a small chunk at a time. same rationale applies. also, kraze might be vague, but i'm a little iffy on it consarn _{(formerly cogsan)} 12:19, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

• Weak retarget "Lilly Pendragon" to Suikoden III where it is mentioned -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 12:51, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
• Disambiguate "Killey" there are several non-Suikoden uses of this. [21], such as: Philip G. Killey; Killey River tributary to the Kenai River; Lynne Killey, a founder of Games for Good; John Killey, the last public capital punishment in New Zealand; Killey, an alternate spelling of Killay, County Tyrone; Killey's Hill, Laurel Bank; Ellis Killey who stood for election in the 1996 Manx general election; Jonas Killey, a fictional character from Flash Point (novel); Killey, listed at List of townlands of County Tyrone; Adan Killey, a member of the 2014 Isle of Man cricket team; Erin Killey, a medalist at the 2010 Australian Short Course Swimming Championships; Julie Killey, who was elected in the 2021 Lincolnshire County Council election; Liza Killey, a fictional character from The Bondman (1916 film) and novel it was based on; Julie Elizabeth Killey, who was elected in the 2017 Lincolnshire County Council election; Phillip Killey, who stood in election, see Results of the 1922 New South Wales state election; Quentin Killey, who stood for election in the 2015 South Gloucestershire Council election; -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 13:21, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

  drafted, but left out killay (that should be a separate dab, i think), everyone who doesn't have an article of their own, and the fictional characters. a little iffy on adding them, to be honest. yes, i know this leaves the draft with three (3) entries consarn _{(formerly cogsan)} 13:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

• Retarget "Lepant" to Nafpaktos as {{R from former name}} -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 13:24, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
• Disambiguate "Kraze" as there are many uses [22]: Central Florida United Kraze, the soccer team "Kraze"; Kraze, a musician, a member of Whistle (band); Kraze United soccer team; Kraze (Richard Jean Laurent), a musician, a member of Discomind; Kražiai also known as "Kražē"; -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 13:37, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

  drafted, though the musicians have been left out as unnotable consarn _{(formerly cogsan)} 13:54, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

• Repeating some of my votes from the previous RfD. Delete if there is no content worth merging, or restore and AfD for these: Jeane, Kun To, Kwanda Rosman, Leknaat, and Leon Silverberg. Joshua Levenheit has mention at Suikoden#The 27 True Runes. While dealing with or after dealing with Leon Silverberg, we have to settle Mathiu Silverberg (nephew), Odessa Silverberg (niece), Albert Silverberg (grandson), and Caesar Silverberg (grandson). Attempt disambiguation per IP 65 for Killey and Kraze. Retarget Lepant and Lilly Pendragon per IP 65. Delete Lorelai (Suikoden). Retarget Lucia to Suikoden III#Hugo's point of view. Others are {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 16:49, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

  hopefully gonna draft dabs in a little over 2 hours. until then, do you think the silverberg family should be nominated on its own, separately? consarn _{(formerly cogsan)} 19:46, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

  drafted some stuff 3 days later. in my defense, i didn't procrastinate this time, i just thought i already did the thing. will say, though, that i actually disagree with taking them to afd, as they were completely unsourced stubs written in an entirely in-universe style, with no info we'd care about consarn _{(formerly cogsan)} 13:57, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks for the dab drafts for Kiley and Kraze. They look good. Jay 💬 12:52, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

  Some of the Silverberg family have mention in the plot, some don't. Jay 💬 12:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

• I support all listed WP:ATDs found so far (specifically, the suggestions for Lilly Pendragon, Killey, Lepant, and Kraze). Delete all others without listed ATDs, all of which do not seem useful and especially not so without mention. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 18:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
• Do what Utopes said. Steel1943 (talk) 20:28, 14 January 2025 (UTC)
• Support the ATDs except that I oppose any restorations. There is no claim of notability. -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:23, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:INVOLVED relist because the main RFD page is having expensive parser issues, and needs the old day which this entry was listed on to be closed since it didn't appear on the main RFD page.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 07:40, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

• I think we're approaching WP:TRAINWRECK yet again. From my (involved) point of view, there is consensus to disambiguate Killey and Kraze, and consensus to retarget Lilly Pendragon and Lepant. Those should be enacted upon a close of this discussion. As for anything else, it looks pretty train-wrecky to me. Most should probably be deleted, but there's simply too many different situations with several R from merges pending investigation, as noted by Jay, so it'll be rough to enact those. Anything that isn't a merge should be deleted as well, if anyone is comfortable poking through this list to do so. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:22, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

  Definitely not a TRAINWRECK. Each and every entry has been analyzed. Just too daunting for a closer. I'm involved so... Jay 💬 08:49, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

I haven't looked at any of the others. If an ATD has been found, I give my blind support as "probably fine". But at least for me I haven't actually looked at the histories of any besides the four I mentioned, and even those I only saw the disambig and new targets and stopped caring after as the pages would be kept so no history would be lost in those cases.

The line between "trainwreck" and "daunting for a closer" generally overlaps in definition, as it often hinges on one person having looked at every single one, and everyone else trusting the process and the judgement of that sole person without doing extra verification. In this case, you looked at them all. "Each and every entry being analyzed" can still signal a trainwreck in the making imo, especially so when the bar for reasonable participation hinges on an unreasonably high time threshold as this one does.

In this situation and similar ones, I'm trusting in your homework (the homework of whoever the solo checker is) because every single title here is totally different (different mentions on different pages with different histories) and this likely shouldn't have been bundled, or at least unbundled once the complex situation revealed itself. The fact that there are ~15 unique situations described for 15 redirects puts it pretty well in the trainwreck ballpark, imo, and nobody wanting to close this is pretty indicative of its nature. (RfD closes should be made as simple as possible for admins, to keep the process-cogs churning, and the structure of this discussion falls short of that expectation imo).

I appreciate what you've done in checking them all, and believe me I'd like this to be closed ASAP with everything besides the ATDs deleted, but with so much substantial history here from R from merges, I (personally) really feel the opposite of comfortable discussing all these titles as a bundle. At this point, it probably would've been faster to close this as a trainwreck a month ago, re-nom everything individually (as "individual nomming" was asked for by the closer of the original discussion), and get these decisions knocked out 1 by 1, rather than in a block of unbolded prose that makes it possibly difficult for admins to quickly analyze. Maybe I don't know what I'm talking about bc I've never deleted a page, but I'd imagine that discussions with less titles are prone to being deleted faster, as the conversation coalesces around a single title rather than customized solutions for 15 names. Especially for names that are closer to the generic end, i.e. that "Kraze", "Lepant" and "Killey" are super short titles that can be seen as controversial, and probably should be separated from "Lorelai (Suikoden)" and "Kwanda Rosman". Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 11:53, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

@Jay: You said on 27 December at the end of your statement that the "others are {{R from merge}}", however it's hard to tell which exactly are the R from merges, and/or which titles you are including in the designation of "others" without name. Could you list the 15 and your proposed solution for each, preferably bulleted/bolded and/or in alphabetical order? I feel like that would help accelerate the closure of this discussion, as all of the analysis is from December and is (imo) becoming stale/un-fresh and hard to recollect. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 12:00, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

After eliminating the ones I listed out, "others" would be only 3 - Kasim Hazil, Kasumi and Kessler. Jay 💬 13:17, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for that. Is a lot easier (for me at least) to read the names here in this way than it is to deductively keep track which have been said somewhere and cross referencing it to the list above. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 13:35, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Also I've now removed the mentions of Lucia and Joshua Levenheit which were unreferenced and total undue trivia within the article, respectively. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 12:14, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Edit #2: I've also removed the mention of Lilly Pendragon as unsourced trivia, so now my preference for that title is to delete Lilly Pendragon instead. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 12:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

in any case, this seems like it'd be closed as dabifying the ones with drafts and deleting all the others consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 18:24, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

Lepant should be retargeted to Nafpaktos as an R from former name. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 12:40, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

and that, if without prejudice to refining to #name, since it's where "lepant" is mentioned (as opposed to "lepanto") consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 14:20, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

...i'm nominating them two letters at a time next time consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 11:05, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Jay 💬 11:58, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for the exact same reason as last time.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 06:50, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

funniest shit i've ever seen consarn _{(prison phone) (crime record)} 11:21, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

T:SINGLE

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

T:ONES

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Zeytinburnu İce Rink

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

T:CD

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jesus donkey

• Jesus donkey → Alexamenos graffito  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The story of Jesus riding the donkey is the primary topic here, not this graffiti. Unsure if this should be deleted or redirected to Triumphal entry into Jerusalem#The donkey(s). Rusalkii (talk) 06:30, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Oh, okay. It was previously not redirected to anything. I added the redirect because I was looking for the graffiti but couldn't remember its name, so I put the two nouns in adposition as "Jesus-donkey".

If somebody wants to find the Triumphal entry I think they'd write "Jesus riding donkey" or something similar. Writing just the two nouns would strike me as strange coming from an English-speaker.

The one hesitance I have is that the page name might strike somebody as insensitive, but that kind of owes to the insensitive nature of the graffiti. I think that the two nouns most simply refer to the graffiti, while the nouns with the verb clearly refers to the Triumphal entry. Aspets (talk) 09:34, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

• Comment The first thing I thought of was the graffiti.★Trekker (talk) 10:03, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
• Comment: I may have seen the graffito before, but I don't remember it. I assumed this title referred to a donkey relating to Jesus—perhaps a character in a nativity play. I'm not convinced that Jesus' entry into Jerusalem is what people who type "Jesus donkey" are likely to be looking for, and the current target makes sense. My first impression is that any ambiguity could be solved with a hatnote at "Alexamenos graffito". A disambiguation page is also possible, but seems unlikely to be needed; I don't think that "Jesus donkey" is a very likely search term, though it's fine as a redirect. P Aculeius (talk) 14:16, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to Triumphal entry into Jerusalem#The donkey(s) as WP:PTOPIC, I agree with nom. I've never heard of the graffiti, but even if it does have some notoriety it's not going to compare with the huge portion of the world's population that is going to primarily associate these two words with palm sunday. Fieari (talk) 23:39, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Aspets and P Aculeius - it doesn't make sense that the two nouns together would be used for Triumphal entry into Jerusalem#The donkey(s), although a hatnote may be added. Jay 💬 22:22, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
• Comment: I've gone ahead and made a hatnote, although if this discussion is closed in favour of retargeting, it can be removed, and a separate hatnote made at the section of Triumphal Entry. P Aculeius (talk) 15:04, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

  Aspets thinks the hatnote should be removed because it might upset readers. I don't really think that's likely, but maybe some of the other participants in this discussion could give their opinions. If we retarget the redirect, then the hatnote I made would be unnecessary. If we keep it where it is, I think we need the hatnote. P Aculeius (talk) 18:09, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

  I hope it doesn't come across as an attempt to censor, I'm just skeptical of the need for the hatnote. The graffiti is a little blasphemous, so the natural names we may think of can also be. It just seems unnecessary to highlight those names outside of the search function, which I see as working in the background.

  I do think the hatnote is a good idea if some people really associate "Jesus donkey" with Palm Sunday. Just a question, @Fieari, but does the phrase refer to the event for you, or the words? I think the phrase more naturally refers to the graffiti. Also, @Rusalkii, do you interpret WP:REDIR to denote redirects as "topics"? I've understood it as if there are topics (primary topics etc.) with disambiguations and shortnames, and then there are "alternative names" or whatever which are often descriptive (along with misspellings and graphical variants). Aspets (talk) 13:37, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

  I'm not sure I understand the question. Personally I don't think the hatnote is necessary here, since this is a pretty obscure redirect (I overall prefer deletion, it's not particularly useful for navigation). Showing everyone on the page the hatnote makes a much bigger deal if it than it warrants. Rusalkii (talk) 20:38, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

  If your contention is that a different topic should be the target of the redirect, then it makes sense to have a hatnote linking to that topic unless and until it's retargeted, because people searching for "Jesus donkey" might be looking for that instead. P Aculeius (talk) 01:21, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

  The association I have is both with the words and also with a slight modification of the phrase "Jesus's donkey", easily akin to a very minor typo or misspelling or mishearing... a fair few dialects of English I've heard don't really have a clear 's ending for words also ending in "s" when pronounced. Fieari (talk) 23:19, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

  Oh, very good point. Aspets (talk) 14:49, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep on the whole - the graffito by some 2nd-century soldier frankly gets more attention than it deserves (really "Jesus donkey" oughtn't to suggest this first, but to some it does) & the redirect is adequate. Johnbod (talk) 18:30, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Discussion is ongoing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:04, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per above. Whether or not it's reasonable, this is the primary topic. Tenpop421 (talk) 23:08, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

  Just to clarify-- by which criteria(s) do you say Alexamenos graffito is the WP:PTOPIC? Google hits, journal hits, direct description match, or...? (Not trying to change your mind, just trying to see which argument holds the most weight) Fieari (talk) 23:32, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget and hatnote the graffito at target. "Jesus's entry into Jerusalem on a donkey" is one of the most well-known events of the canonical Gospel narrative, so much that it has an entire Christian holiday commemorating it which has been celebrated for over a thousand years straight as part of the holiest week in Christianity. If you were to grab a random person off the street reasonably familiar with the gospel narrative and say the words "Jesus donkey" to them, this is the first thing they would think of. --Slowking Man (talk) 01:47, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget. The graffiti is absolutely not the primary topic for this. Palm Sunday isn't obscure. It is celebrated by millions and millions of people worldwide, who have absolutely not heard of the graffiti. -- asilvering (talk) 04:57, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep since the expression still most readily refers to some sort of Jesus-like donkey, not Jesus's donkey. That mishearing which Fieari pointed out is the only case in which this expression refers to the Triumphal entry. Nobody thinks that the graffiti is more notable than Palm Sunday, but that's not important to the discussion. People don't refer to Jesus riding into Jerusalem with the phrase "Jesus donkey". Aspets (talk) 09:38, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 00:53, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to the Triumphal Entry per Slowking — when one possible target is an obscure topic, and the other is known by billions of people, we should be targeting the second possibility, since it's far more likely to be used for the latter. Also, Fieari makes a good point; "Jesus' donkey" would be pronounced identically (and obviously would refer to the Triumphal Entry), and someone could easily just leave off the apostrophe and be surprised to reach an unrelated article. Nyttend (talk) 22:55, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  I don't think it's particularly obvious that "Jesus' donkey" would refer to "triumphal entry into Jerusalem". I don't think many people would even remember that a donkey was involved; it's a fairly minor detail that had a slight symbolic value to generations that were more deeply invested in the story. And the donkey didn't belong to Jesus; he just rode it into town once—I don't recall if it was a loaner or a rental donkey. Without remembering that or the graffito, I thought that this redirect probably had something to do with the nativity. But I can certainly see readers who know about the graffito but don't remember its name searching under "Jesus Donkey" or perhaps "Donkey Jesus". P Aculeius (talk) 15:32, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

  Honest question... have you ever been to any church, anywhere, around the time of Palm Sunday? Personal experience here: pastors and priests of multiple denominations, both Protestants and Catholics. on at least two continents (probably more, but my personal experience only extends to two), put great weight and significance on the donkey. This is well known to literally (true literally, not figuratively) billions of people on the planet, without exaggeration. I'm not Christian anymore, and perhaps Christianity is declining in many parts of the world, but we can't discount the sheer number of Christians that still exist, former Christians, and Christian-influenced people with exposure to Christian cultural osmosis. Fieari (talk) 00:39, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

  I really, really don't think that "literally billions" of people put "great weight and significance on the donkey", in addition to "the sheer number of Christians that still exist, former Christians, and Christian-influenced people with exposure to Christian cultural osmosis." In fact, that's such a bizarre claim of importance that I'm going to assume it was tongue-in-cheek. P Aculeius (talk) 12:54, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

WYU

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

UWY

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

February 27

List of list

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Why Wikipedia Sucks

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

Interstitial space (biology)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 11#Interstitial space (biology)

Ambient jungle

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Water in Africa

• Water in Africa → Water supply and sanitation in sub-Saharan Africa  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Could also redirect to Geography of Africa. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 18:19, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

Comment: This edit by EMsmile to retarget the redirect to its current target may be relevant. Steel1943 (talk) 23:12, 30 January 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. I think anyone searching this is more likely to be looking for information about Africa's infamous water availability issues than a list of rivers in Africa (which is its own article, by the way). — Anonymous 01:39, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Additional note: I am mildly opposed to deletion, but I am much more opposed to the creation of a DAB page. DAB pages by nature should be for common names held by multiple topics, not vague descriptive terms. — Anonymous 16:44, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per the above and add a hatnote for the rivers. BD2412 T 02:17, 31 January 2025 (UTC)
• Create dab I think there are potentially multiple targets for this redirect. The original target was Water-related industry in Africa and the redirect was preserved from a page move. Water scarcity in Africa is a better target, compared to the present one, since Water supply and sanitation in sub-Saharan Africa is more limited in scope. Overall a disambiguation page would work best. Polyamorph (talk) 08:25, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

Support new disambiguation page. I think it's a good idea to set up a disambiguation page for this. Are there any "water in XX" for other continents or countries? I see we have Water in California. EMsmile (talk) 09:04, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

• Delete: Similar pages do not exist for other continents: Water in North America, Water in South America, Water in Europe, Water in Asia, Water in Oceania, Water in Antarctica. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:13, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

  Then again, Water in Australia is an article. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 23:08, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

• Either Create a SIA under the current title, that would include the articles noted by Polyamorph above, or Delete. Drdpw (talk) 03:26, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
• The Water-related industry in Africa article was under the title Water in Africa for 7 years, until recently. For such a broad title, no SIA can capture what Category:Water in Africa has to offer. Retarget to the category or delete. Jay 💬 13:58, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Jay. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:26, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 14:14, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per Jay. A DAB page doesn't seem feasible given the abundance of articles this could be referring to. Is the reader looking for something about human uses of water? Or do they want physical geography information? An SIA would be somewhat better but still implausible IMO. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:18, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Brave Books

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Bottom dweller

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Wikipedia:VT

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

TV Patrol South Central Mindanao

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Undescribed Carcharodontosaurine

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Abandon Ship or Abandon All Hope

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 6#Abandon Ship or Abandon All Hope

COM:MOA

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

February 25

Redirects to disambiguation page "Jawi"

• Djawi → Jawi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Dyawi → Jawi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Chowie → Jawi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Djaui → Jawi  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Seems misleading that these redirects target the target disambiguation page when all the subjects on the target disambiguation page are specifically spelled "Jawi". Steel1943 (talk) 22:58, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

• Both Jawi dialect and Jawi people mention the alternate spellings. Not sure how it should be handled given there isn't a primary topic. Kdroo (talk) 17:20, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate Djawi (drafted) for Jawi dialect and Jawi people, and add the Indonesia-related entries there once they meet WP:DABMENTION. ("Djawi" is the historical spelling of all the Indonesia-related entries at Jawi, from ꦗꦮꦶ 'Javanese'). No opinion on Djaui/Chowie/Dyawi whether the best solution is to create even more dab pages, or just redirect to Jawi people and hatnote for Jawi language, given that none of those are an alternative spelling of anything else. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 02:54, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:47, 4 February 2025 (UTC)

• Can't we just mention the alternative spellings on Jawi and specify that they are only alternative spellings of Jawi dialect and Jawi people? Otherwise support disambiguating Djawi and maybe others per 59.149.117.119 it's lio! | talk | work 08:16, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on it's lio!'s solution for Djaui / Chowie / Dyawi?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 21:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

Hi, feel free to refer to me as just lio :) it's lio! | talk | work 09:08, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

I could have said HKLionel but then they'll wonder who that is! Jay 💬 11:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Refine all besides Djawi to to Jawi#Australia per lio's suggestion. I divided Jawi#People and languages by region and mentioned those alternative spellings there. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 02:20, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
  • ... and Revirvlkodlaku (talk · contribs) removed them. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 05:32, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
    • I did, because you didn't provide any references. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 09:05, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
      • @Revirvlkodlaku: MOS:DAB: References should not appear on disambiguation pages. Dab pages are not articles; instead, incorporate the references into the target articles. The references in question are already there at Jawi people#Alternative names and in the lede of Jawi dialect. 59.149.117.119 (talk) 22:48, 3 March 2025 (UTC)

        Oh shit, I totally didn't realize that's a disambiguation page! My apologies, and I've restored the edit. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 00:56, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Mario finale

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Moumita Debnath

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Controversial autism therapy

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

Lindy Turn

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Interstitial fauna

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 6#Interstitial fauna

Sången han sjöng var min egen

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cybersexism

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 6#Cybersexism

Cephalobaenida

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 6#Cephalobaenida

Bravo Nolan

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

DYXV

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Temmplate:Conservatism in Belarus

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

The result of the discussion was delete. (non-admin closure) / RemoveRedSky ^{[talk] [gb]} 18:33, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• Temmplate:Conservatism in Belarus → Template:Conservatism in Belarus  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

A strange typo which also makes this an XNR. Maybe delete (since misspelling redirects to templatespace aren't usually kept)? Duckmather (talk) 02:07, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• Speedy delete. Tagged under G6 since it was clearly created in error. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:17, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.

Jewish Israeli Aramaic

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 4#Jewish Israeli Aramaic

February 24

Champaign-Urbana Mass Transist District

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Orabueze

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 4#Orabueze

Beautiful, big-titty, butt-naked women just don't fall out the sky, you know

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ajit Kumar Banerjee (writer)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Sonic movie

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 4#Sonic movie

Cotton ribbon

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 4#Cotton ribbon

Ribbon, typewriter

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Draft:Utah Something

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

Ayno Maina (A Town)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Round Six

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Controversial autism therapy

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 11#Controversial autism therapy

Pet Supermarket

• Pet Supermarket → MedicAnimal  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There's a chain of pet stores in the United States called "Pet Supermarket", which I'm wagering is an entirely different organization than the (former?) UK chain that this redirects to the purchasers of. This link should either be disambiguated or redlinked with Pet Supermarket (UK) linking to MedicAnimal. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:43, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:58, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

@The Bushranger: Am I understanding you correctly in assuming one of the options you are proposing is that the nominated redirect be deleted and then Pet Supermarket (UK) be created? If so, that causes essentially a WP:PRECISE issue since the disambiguated version of the title "Pet Supermarket" would exist but the non-disambiguated version would not, which would almost be guaranteed to result in this nominated redirect being recreated anyways Steel1943 (talk) 20:00, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

• Actually, keep per my above comment and there being no other articles to disambiguate against that have been identified yet. Steel1943 (talk) 20:02, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
  • At the moment though it falls under, IMHO, WP:EASTEREGG as I suspect most viewers searching for "Pet Supermarket" will not be expecting the UK store. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:38, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
• Comment: "Pet Supermarket" is also mentioned at Roark Capital Group#Current investments. Dunno if that's what The Bushranger is referring to. it's lio! | talk | work 08:29, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
  • That would be the U.S. chain I'm referring to, yeah. @Steel1943:, would having Pet Supermarket (UK) (to Pet Supermarket's current target) and Pet Supermarket (US) to Roark Capital Group#Current investments (the latter, at least, as {{R with possibilities}}) as redirects be enough for this to be a dab? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 08:36, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 15:27, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete Not enough substance on either store at either target to warrant a redirect. Roark Capital Group#Current investments is a spammy mess that I'm tempted to delete entirely. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:41, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
• Convert to disambiguation page that says "MedicAnimal, business owning UK stores named Pet Supermarket" and "Roark Capital Group, business owning US stores named Pet Supermarket". WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:22, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

  @The Bushranger, Steel1943, and Pppery: thoughts on disambiguation? (pinging all for consistency) it's lio! | talk | work 08:18, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

  Dab would be ideal. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 17:50, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per Steel. Revisit when we have sufficient content about the US chain. The investments of Roark Capital Group is not an appropriate redirect target for the chain, nor a disambig entry. Jay 💬 11:37, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Template:---

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 3#Template:---

Cyber cold war

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

I only hope that we don't lose sight of one thing - that it all started with a mouse.

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Juvéderm

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: AfD and delete

Juvéderm Ultra

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia:NOLABLEAK

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Chicken Noodle

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

2025 United States constitutional crisis

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 9#2025 United States constitutional crisis

Islamic imperialism

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 5#Islamic imperialism

Reverse privatization

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

May 21, 2004

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Jamie MacDonald (comedian)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Boys only want love if it's torture

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

Rapes of Ronald Bennett

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

February 22

Dim Bastards

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Traditional architecture

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

L10n (disambiguation)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Allied star

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Attempted takeover of US federal agencies by Elon Musk

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Sharqi Arabic

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

Mass execution

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 1#Mass execution

Junkers Ju 53

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Western civilization

• Western civilization → Western culture (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Western civilisation → Western culture (disambiguation)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Western Civilization → Western culture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Western Civilisation → Western culture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Following RfD in 2022, this was retargeted to Western culture (disambiguation), but challenged within weeks by User:Archer1234 (who I belive did not noticed the RfD at all, but made a good point that there was incosistency with the target of Western civilisation). I'd also add that there is a ton of links to those terms, so piping them to a disambig is problematic (pinging non-blocked participants of 2022 RfD: User:Furius, User:Carchasm, User:El cid, el campeador). There is no perfect solution, but I think the best solution would be to retarget this to Western world which is a broader concept. Arguably, we might also want to rename "Western world" to "Western civilization" (discussion started). The Western culture is only about culture, world and civilization are IMHO larger in scope and similar to one another, and if there is confusion, it is the 'world' concept that is more ambiguous, isn't it? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:41, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Oppose I don't see what the inconsistency is. People talking about "Western civilization" might mean the western world or western culture or the other options on the dismbig page, so the disambig page is a good place to send people. It also encourages people linking to "western civilization" to choose the appropriate concept rather than assuming that linking to western civilization will magically go to the version of the concept that they have in mind. Furius (talk) 10:40, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Comment: I've added the "s" spelling and the Title Case redirects given nom mentioned the inconsistency with the target of related redirects. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:24, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

Change to consistent target of Western culture (disambiguation). An ambiguous term should point to disambiguation page. Oppose the proposal to change the target to Western world, as the latter is much better defined term. Викидим (talk) 20:07, 4 January 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Outline of the history of Western civilization which provides links to, seemingly, all of the reasonably relevant targets. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 18:02, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
• Following Alalch's purge of the disambig page, it has turned into a WP:ONEOTHER and I have PROD'd it. Jay 💬 15:14, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 19:53, 17 January 2025 (UTC)

• A target page was deleted through PROD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:46, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

  As the lowercased entries became targetless, I have retargeted them to Western culture. Jay 💬 19:26, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

• Disambig Western civilization between Western culture and Western world. Revisit when nom's RM discussion concludes. Jay 💬 14:36, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:45, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

Drafted at Western civilization. Jay 💬 07:34, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Western world, which is closer in meaning. @Jay: I didn't find an RM, where is it? –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 21:23, 2 February 2025 (UTC)

  Right, the discussion mentioned in the nomination was a move discussion, but not an official RM - Talk:Western world#World, culture, civilization. Jay 💬 06:26, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

• DAB. Multiple possible meanings for this, so a DAB page is helpful. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:18, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or dabify?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:52, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Comment Retargeting to Western culture (disambiguation) is no longer an option as the article has since been PRODDED by @Jay. However, the problem of the redirects being vague still remains User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:49, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Yuogsphere

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 3#Yuogsphere

Canadian Oak

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Isnt

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Clayton Ray Huff

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Felix Arvid Of Shellberg

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

When you are young, they assume you know nothing

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 1#When you are young, they assume you know nothing

Tau Ursae Minoris

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

Cackalacky

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

This redirect is currently useless because the article does not contain this word, and so gives no explanation as to why the redirect exists. Either a section should be added to the article explaining nicknames, or the redirect should be deleted as useless. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:56, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete I found a couple of sources attesting to the nickname, but it looks like the primary topic for this phrase may actually be a brand of food products mentioned on a couple articles. None of the articles seem to give much information on the brand, so I think a redlink is best here. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:54, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Comment: Any thoughts on the page history? This was created in 2006. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 06:18, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:31, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

Content was merged to the target and I have tagged this as an {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 16:25, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

February 21

Spears family

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 2#Spears family

Speared

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 2#Speared

Pointy stick

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Mixed-culture

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 2#Mixed-culture

Kentucky militia

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 2#Kentucky militia

Foundations of Aritmetic

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Nations at the 2025 SEA Games

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Soft delete due to no participation

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/NAME OF PAGE

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

Curse you, Perry the Platypus!

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

VerbalAse

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Disney Cartoon Studios

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 6#Disney Cartoon Studios

Homo smalluseditus

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ronald Trump

• Ronald Trump → Donald Trump  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 25 § Ronald Trump – keep

Clearly a typo. Readers will never search "Ronald Trump" to find Donald Trump. RealStranger43286 (talk) 13:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete of course Marcus Markup (talk) 15:53, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. I'm not sure it's a typo since there is a Ronald L. Trump, son of Ermal and Effie Trump, born 1939 in La Grande, Oregon, who self-published a book about his life in 2011 (Man named Trump). Donald T. is a tad too well-known for anyone to intentionally enter Ronald T. Space4TCatHerder🖖 16:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep based on my reasoning at the prior RfD, where sources using this term to refer to the target were presented. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete as an implausible error. It stretches credulity that anyone would have problem finding the target article normally and needs this redirect. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 17:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
  • In my opinion, "implausible error" makes no sense. R and D are close to eachother on the keyboard. The Master of Hedgehogs (talk) (contributions) (Sign my guestbook!) 11:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. Probably not an error, but a meme missing a word ... search "Ronald McDonald Trump" on third party search engines and see what happens. Steel1943 (talk) 22:24, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep - valid typo -R and D are right next to each other and are hit with the same finger in QWERTY touch typing. Furthermore, as the arguments were presented in the last RfD, there are some sources that refer to "Ronald Trump" to compare Trump to Ronald Reagan. -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez | me | talk to me! 05:47, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

  Re typo: a) Standard touch typing uses the left index finger for the R and the left middle finger for the D, and it's pretty hard to make that specific typo, and b) there are billions of possible such typos, what makes this one so special? And re: comparison to Reagan, if that's the case, we have no mention of this at the target, so if someone is using this to search for information about it, they'll be left confused. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 14:19, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

  right next to each other and are hit with the same finger — nope. The D is in the row below and to the left of the R on both QWERTY and QWERTZ keyboard layouts, and they're typed with the middle and index fingers, respectively. One of the sources cited in the RfD, the Daily Beast, uses 'Ronald' once, in scare quotes, and I don't know what Cohen aka Ali G's 2018 "tongue-in-cheek Twitter post" referring to Trump as "my main man, President Ronald Trump" proves.

QWERTY keyboard layout (US)

QWERTZ keyboard layout (German)

Space4TCatHerder🖖 15:40, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep as potentially referring to Ronald Reagan, another Republican president. 𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 20:01, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

  What? Are you suggesting we should retarget to Reagan instead? This doesn't really make any sense, nor does it address the various objections people have raised above. Why would anyone plausibly search for this? 35.139.154.158 (talk) 22:16, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

• Weak keep as a Template:R from typo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for "D" by "R" but retarget to Donald Trump (disambiguation) as it is for the term -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:48, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete I'm not convinced. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:48, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep as plausible typo. R and D are close on the keyboard, so calling Donald "Ronald" is a plausible mistake one can make when they ade typing too fast. The Master of Hedgehogs (talk) (contributions) (Sign my guestbook!) 11:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

  • Delete "Ronald" is not his first name. Herr Böna (talk) 13:23, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Strong keep unless there is another notable person named Ronald Trump I think having a typo redirect is fine. LegalSmeagolian (talk)

LegalSmeagolian (talk) 02:13, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• I have listed the previous RfD from 2023, and the current RfD has no new rationale as compared to the previous. As there was no closing explanation for the keep, it is not evident if the previous closer Cremastra closed it as a plausible typo or because of the Ronald Reagan reference or both. Jay 💬 19:18, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

  Thanks for the ping. I can't tell you which one I meant, though, since this was one and a half years ago. Probably both, since that seems to be the slant of the discussion. Cremastra (talk) 21:26, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

Zeolite redirects

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

New name

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 28#New name

"Bruin Theater"

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

February 20

Main page/sandbox

• Main page/sandbox → Wikipedia:Main Page/sandbox  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Unneeded cross-namespace redirect. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:42, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. I don't see anybody without the knowledge of namespaces using this. mwwv ^converse∫_edits 12:10, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per above. / RemoveRedSky ^[talk] 14:58, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep Since the page main page is in mainspace, I think it is natural to append /sandbox directly. It does not appear in search results so there is no clutter for readers. Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:04, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

• Comment There was a discussion for Main Page/Yesterday, Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2016 August 15#Main_Page/Yesterday, that was closed as no consensus. I'll also note that there are 10 similar redirects under "Main Page/" (the nominated one is the only one under the lower case "Main page/"): Special:PrefixIndex?prefix=Main+Page/. Not sure if there's desire to bundle them at this point. Skynxnex (talk) 17:32, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep - Useful redirect to the sandbox. Interstellarity (talk) 00:34, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
• Note that capitalized Main Page/sandbox has been salted since 2011. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 04:03, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep unless you move the main page first. Suggest Portal:Main Page and Portal:Main Page/Sandbox since this is the front portal, it should be in portalspace -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 08:14, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 22:40, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep As it is a helpful redirect, and it does not seem to be and issue currently. Sheriff U3 | Talk | Con 22:53, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom in order to be consistent with the current state of Main Page/sandbox; doesn't make sense for the nominated redirect and Main Page/sandbox to be different considering they differ only in capitalization. Steel1943 (talk) 19:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete and salt To match Main Page/sandbox User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 03:09, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete this unnecessary cross namespace redirect. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:26, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Ca and Interstellarity. It's a useful redirect, linked to the page it pertains to. Main Page/sandbox should probably be recreated as a redirect too.  — Amakuru (talk) 16:16, 24 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete If it's being used at all, it's probably causing Wikipedia:Main Page/sandbox to be mistaken for Wikipedia:Sandbox. Peter James (talk) 19:54, 28 February 2025 (UTC)
• I don't see why this should exist but not Main Page/sandbox. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:49, 2 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep and recreate Main Page/sandbox, both are sensible redirects. JayCubby 16:31, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
• Keep, per @Ca. Main Page is in mainspace. I also agree with the two comments above (Skarmory and JayCubby) to recreate Main Page/sandbox as a redirect. Justjourney (talk) 01:13, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Ấp

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Town ("US state not mentioned in the Town article")

• Town (Delaware) → Town#United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Town (Georgia) → Town#United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Town (Mississippi) → Town#United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Town (New Mexico) → Town#United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Town (South Carolina) → Town#United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Town (South Dakota) → Town#United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Town (Tennessee) → Town#United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Town (West Virginia) → Town#United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Each of these redirects has a disambiguator that is not mentioned anywhere in the target article. Yes, these states are part of the United States (which is probably why they target the section they do), but there's no information in the target article regarding the states themselves, leaving readers with no real information about anything specific to these states that could be a useful or exclusive to the United States ... which seems a bit misleading, considering that redirects such as Town (Washington) target specific sections in Town regarding towns in the state represented by the respective redirect's disambiguator. Steel1943 (talk) 19:59, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Retarget each redirect to its state-specific section Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 21:30, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

...Again, such sections don't exist. Steel1943 (talk) 23:45, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep: There is a whole set of redirects of this form which redirect to the appropriate US state section in Town, or to the United States section where no state-specific section exists. It is perfectly possible (and desirable) for someone to add a missing state section to that article, at which time the relevant redirect can be modified to go directly there. In the meantime, the general description of what is meant by a town in the US is at least some help. Colonies Chris (talk) 23:07, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Actually, since there are more readers than editors, that's probably not going to happen unless it occurs by someone responding to this RfD. Readers will try to skim through the page, trying to find information about these states, and find nothing. Utilizing WP:RETURNTORED (deleting these redirects) has a better chance of encouraging editors to add the missing information and/or articles than leaving them intact. As it stands, the lack of specific information about each state referenced in the disambiguators of each redirect in this nomination suggests that the target has state-specific information at it for each individual redirect, which it does not. Steel1943 (talk) 23:50, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

Clarified/corrected statement with strikeout and italics. Steel1943 (talk) 16:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete all per nom. We need no "consistency" here, other than that of the redirect layer faithfully reflecting the article layer and not leaking. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 05:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete all per nom. If there's no state-specific information at the target, then these are not helpful. I suspect that some of these states do not have formal "town" definitions like those listed at the target. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 16:04, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Colonies Chris. These seem like clear cases of redirects with possibilities. Content may be written about what's meant by a town in Tennessee, but for the time being the reader is at least taken to a section talking about the situation in the US generally.  — Amakuru (talk) 00:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

  The problem I see with that is in most cases where a redirect is tagged with {{R with possibilities}}, the redirect represents a subject that is at least mentioned in the current target article, presumably to give article creators a basis of where to find initial information to create such an article. In other words, I believe that redirects that can be tagged with both {{R without mention}} and {{R with possibilities}} do not make sense. Steel1943 (talk) 16:12, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• Probably keep, because they might have possibilities, but it is important to actually show that they are possibilities per Presidentman's concern. I checked South Dakota and apparently it has 154 towns and 914 townships, which I assume overlap in some way. That's not a definition, but it does show it's a used term someone might want to look into. CMD (talk) 02:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  I agree there's potential for some of these titles to possibly hold content, especially given the South Dakota example above. However, in my experiences with dealing with redirects, the purpose of stating a redirect is a {{R with possibilities}} means that the target article has content specific to the subject of the redirect they can be used and/or moved to create content specific to the subject of the redirect; in this instance though, that is not the case since information specific to these redirects's states is not in the target article. Without content at the target specific to these states, WP:RETURNTORED could have a higher potential for content creation since there would be no confusion of a redirect targeting nonexistent content, meaning it so a potential editor could then create the content at/and this title in the same edit(s). Steel1943 (talk) 09:06, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  I think I'm generally supportive of RETURNTORED for redirects which don't have a clear target yet are clear standalone article topics, but I've not really encountered it in the context of the possible content being perhaps a paragraph in a larger article. (I suspect the best course of action would be clearer if the United States section was its own article (Town (United States)?) and you could have a section for South Dakota that would be due even if it just said the number of towns without a definition.) CMD (talk) 14:24, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep It's useful to have these redirects, to confirm that towns exist in the state and what they are. Some can be retargeted, for example Town (Delaware) to List of municipalities in Delaware. Peter James (talk) 19:36, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

  I'm not keen on the idea of this redirect, as it seems to me that a user clicking this link would be looking for the definition of 'town' in Delaware, rather than just a list. However, the list in the target article does classify municipalities into 'city', 'town' and 'village' so there clearly is a distinction that could usefully be added to Town by someone with the knowledge. Colonies Chris (talk) 09:45, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

  Most lists for states not currently in the town article mention that some municipalities are cities and others are towns but there is no legal difference. I'm not sure about West Virginia and South Dakota as the introductions are very short and do not explain much. Mississippi is the exception, where they are classified by population. Peter James (talk) 10:17, 1 March 2025 (UTC)

• Delete all per all. What would you call a redirect that points to Delaware § Towns for example, or to List of towns in Delaware? How is pointing to a list that has no information better than articles that have some information? Is Georgia a state or a country? Jay 💬 21:04, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
• Note: I've added paragraphs for GA, MS, SC and TN in Town, and adjusted the redirects appropriately, so they can be removed from this list of proposed deletions. Colonies Chris (talk) 14:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

  Nominator comment: If this discussion gets relisted, I'm good with that. Either way, my initial rationale no longer applies to the aforementioned redirects. Steel1943 (talk) 18:37, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

Porkberry

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Miwiki

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Identitarian

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 2#Identitarian

Parachute Type foundry

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

PE infection

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: move without redirect

KWHY-TV

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

P:

• P: → Wikipedia:Contents/Portals  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Probably not useful as an open-ended redirect when no article title is given for it. There are mainspace articles such as P:Machinery and P:ano that could have very well been sought, but instead these two characters (which would otherwise indicate portalspace if a portal's name was given to them), take readers to a portal of its own choosing. People looking for portals using the P: pseudo-namespace, can do so by typing in "P:", followed by the name of the portal they were after. I'm not convinced an "empty"-titled redirect is going to be of much use here. Targeting P seems more useful, if it targets anything. This one doesn't even point to portal space. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 14:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Keep – I don't follow your reasoning. It's not for users looking for a specific portal, and it doesn't take users to a portal of its own choosing. It's a shortcut to portal space, and while it doesn't technically go to a portal space page, it goes to the contents for portal pages. Whether that's the best use for P: (as opposed to going to P (disambiguation)), I don't know, but it does make sense as a shortcut. Mclay1 (talk) 01:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

A shortcut to portalspace is good. I'm just not convinced that people who type in one singular alphabet character and a punctuation is looking for information on portals. Because all articles have a title, there is nothing specified after the "P:" so there is never any assurance that a portal is being sought after. And PNRs are not widely known about to our general reader-base, and especially so as this PNR is just the letter "P", so I don't think there's an automatic assumption here that adding a punctuation to this letter "P" would take someone to Wikipedia:Contents/Portals. We try to keep a barrier up to prevent readers from falling into the backrooms while navigating the encyclopedia. Wikipedia:Contents/Portals already has P:CP and P:PORT. P:P doesn't exist but perhaps it should in place of this titleless pseudo-namespace redirect for the simplest trapdoor people can fall into without catching innocent reading passerbys who were on their way to the P:ano content article but hit enter too early after the colon. Very plausible to type this in while looking for a mainspace title, which means that the search result should stay in mainspace and these two characters as a XNR is impeding that, imo. I'd suggest targeting P (disambiguation) where the portal page can very well be hatnoted. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 13:58, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

• Keep, makes sense as master shortcut for portals. —Kusma (talk) 22:05, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Other similar RfDs have ended in deletion. If this is going to be a keep contra all those, I'd like to see some more participation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 22:24, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

• Similar discussions: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 17#CAT: (no consensus), Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 9#T: (delete), Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 January 17#H: (delete). Skarmory (talk • contribs) 04:50, 3 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 18:05, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. This may offend some, but portals are quite frankly not something most readers will use. There have been efforts to kill the concept of portals on Wikipedia altogether, and if nothing else portals have been removed from the top of the Main Page. Hence I doubt that many people would use this as a search term. Also, basically per OP. feminist🩸 (talk) 13:12, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

  refer to WP:NOTCENSORED Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 20:40, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

  I don't think this is a valid reasoning to delete this redirect. Portalspace still exists for now, whether or not editors are trying to get it deleted. I also don't really think this redirect is meant for readers; how many readers that aren't editors know namespaces even exist, much less shortcuts for them? Skarmory (talk • contribs) 07:55, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

  It is a valid reason to delete this redirect if it starts clogging up searches for otherwise legitimate topics such as P:Machinery and P:ano, as pointed out by OP. feminist🩸 (talk) 03:44, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 14:00, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget and hatnote. I agree with nominator that this redirect will WP:ASTONISH a reader looking for something like P:ano. Redirecting to P (disambiguation) keeps newer users from accidentally leaving article space, and adding a hatnote or banner there that links to Wikipedia:Contents/Portals will ease the transition for anyone accustomed to using this redirect. StainedGlassCavern (talk) 18:21, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. This is a potentially confusing WP:Cross namespace redirect. Deletion would be consistent with T: and H:. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 20:09, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per others. There are several P: shortcuts (or WP:PORTCUTs) to portals - WP:Shortcut index#Portal shortcuts. Typing P: shows some (not all) of these shortcuts that lead to portal space. It is only natural to provide curious readers the complete navigable list from the current target in non-meta language. The presence of all the P: shortcuts render the P:ano argument moot. There are no entries at the dab page on P: either. Jay 💬 15:20, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

"Christian Tămaș"

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

"Drug-liking"

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Desert cities

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

City work

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

City employment

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Insular city, Insular cities, Island cities

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Sat (Romania)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 3#Sat (Romania)

Città

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Batembo

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Bangladeshis held in the Guantanamo detention camps

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 6#Bangladeshis held in the Guantanamo detention camps

State of the Turks

• State of the Turks → Turkey  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This name is more than a little ambiguous, and it doesn't seem like a particularly natural search term or general way of referring to Turkey. — Anonymous 21:28, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

• Delete I saw "State of the Turks" and wondered: emotionally? politically? economically? Neither clear nor expected. KeepRetarget, CheeseyHead for the win. Largoplazo (talk) 21:46, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

  By "Keep", and referencing CheeseyHead, did you mean "Retarget"? Jay 💬 15:29, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

  @Largoplazo: ping. Jay 💬 17:32, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

  Oh, yes, sorry. Retarget. Largoplazo (talk) 23:42, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Mamluk Sultanate, since that's what it's referring to. CheeseyHead (talk) 22:38, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Just noticed I made it lol. Definitely was a mistake on my part having it lead there. CheeseyHead (talk) 23:05, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to a disambiguation page. The name seems to not only apply to Mamluke Sultanate but also to Second Turkic Khaganate. Given its generic nature maybe other Turkic polities? DeCausa (talk) 23:58, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Disambiguate or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (talk) 14:09, 31 January 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget. The Mamluks definitely established a state, whilst the Second Turkic Khaganate sounds like a barbarian chiefdom; retargeting to the Mamluks, with a hatnote for the khaganate, seems better. Background thinking — is "state" correct, when it's in a language spoken by a pre-state confederation? I'm just wondering if there were alternate meanings, comparable to English "realm" or "domain" or "chiefdom". Nyttend (talk) 00:25, 3 February 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate. Another possible target would be Turkestan. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:11, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom as unusual title and especially since it is ambiguous. Will reconsider if we have other page titles of the form "State of the <ethnic or regional people>" (State of the Russians, State of the Chinese, State of the Arabs, etc.). I see we have State of the Jewish People redirect to Jewish state. Turkish state redirects to Turkey. Does it make sense to have redirects of "State of the xyz" to correspond to "Xyz state"? Jay 💬 13:42, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:30, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate, second choice retargeting to Mamluke Sultanate. The Mamluke Sultanate is what I associate it with, but our Second Turkic Khaganate article does include the term as a translation one of its names. CMD (talk) 08:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. Don't "disambiguate": there's already disambiguation page at Turk to which Turks redirects. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:50, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

  The Mamluk Sultanate does not appear on that disambiguation page, which is what the longer phrase was the name of. That is probably right, as I doubt "Turk"/"Turks" is often used on its own to refer to the Mamluks. CMD (talk) 06:57, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

ready mixed

• Ready-mixed → Concrete  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Ready mixed → Concrete  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
• Ready mix → Ready-mix concrete  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

was about to retarget the "mixed" redirects to heavy mix concrete, but results, at least on my end, were a little torn between concrete and mortar. admittedly on the extremely weak end of noms since concrete was still a primary enough topic and the article on mortar doesn't mention its ready mix flavor, but i'm pretty sure i'm missing something consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 20:28, 10 January 2025 (UTC)

• Well, I stand by my edit from 13 years ago for the last one, lol. I think they should all redirect to Ready-mix concrete if they all refer to concrete. I have never heard anyone say "Ready-mixed concrete," but if I did, I would immediately assume they meant Ready-mix concrete. I like to saw logs! (talk) 09:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC)
• Comment: When I hear "ready mix" I think ready mix food or instant food powders. Remove "concrete" from your search, and all the food results you get was my idea of the primary topic. Anyway we don't have an article on ready mix powdered foods, and concrete seems to be the primary topic. No comment on the nomination. Jay 💬 12:27, 18 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 22:40, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

• Delete could just as easily refer to food [23][24][25], or other stuff that should be mixed before use -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 08:12, 26 January 2025 (UTC)
  • That sounds like an argument for a Wikipedia:Disambiguation page. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

    ...Sounds more like a list of WP:PTMs, and I would oppose a disambiguation page of such listings. Steel1943 (talk) 22:30, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

• Adding to the complications, Ready Mix is a concrete company: https://readymixusa.com/ We don't seem to have an article on Heavy mix concrete, so I'm confused by the opening statement that was about to retarget the "mixed" redirects to heavy mix concrete. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:47, 26 January 2025 (UTC)

  minor spelling mistake （；´д｀）ゞ consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 12:16, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

  So which page did you want to redirect it to? WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:39, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

  ...I believe what Consarn means is that they meant "ready" instead of "heavy". Steel1943 (talk) 22:30, 27 January 2025 (UTC)

  i mean... yeah. i don't think there exists such a thing as "heavy mix concrete" or "heavy mix mortar". then again, i'm not much of an expert on things you can't eat, so don't quote me on that consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 11:06, 28 January 2025 (UTC)

• Keep/Retarget all to Ready-mix concrete. We have a topic, it exists, and we can revisit this if other articles are created. Steel1943 (talk) 22:30, 27 January 2025 (UTC)
• Delete all Ambiguous term, pointing to concrete is presumptuous. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:28, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. This is too ambiguous. The companies are Ready Mix USA, or I suppose Ready Mix, and there's also RMC Group plc, formerly Ready Mixed Concrete Limited, all of which are different from the redirects nominated here. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:35, 23 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep/Retarget to Ready-mix concrete. The page literally already exists. Why delete? Paintspot Infez (talk) 11:05, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

Court packing

• Court packing → Supreme Court of the United States#Size of the court  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Court-packing → Supreme Court of the United States#Size of the court  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Packing the court → Supreme Court of the United States#Size of the court  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

• Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 September 19 § Court packing – keep (targeting Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937)

It is unclear why these redirects target where they do instead of Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937. Seems the aforementioned article deals more with these phrases than the current target does. (However, the redirects have a complicated history, having an RFD in 2020 to "keep" the redirects targeting Judicial Procedures Reform Bill of 1937, but then the Court packing was retargeted in 2021 to its current target.) Steel1943 (talk) 19:47, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

• I would expect that the change was made because there were a flurry of proposals at the beginning of the Biden administration to more or less undo Trump's Supreme Court picks by expanding the court along the same lines as was proposed in 1937. Rather than redirecting anywhere, perhaps the best solution is to create a separate article on the concept of court packing, in terms of attempting to change judicial outcomes by changing the composition of the courts deciding them, with discussion of both the 1937 Bill and the Biden era proposals, along with instances of this occurring or being attempted with respect to other courts, including state supreme courts and federal appellate courts. BD2412 T 21:19, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
• It's unclear to me why this is a redirect; court packing is a notable concept in the U.S., perfectly capable of being covered independently from the articles on any individual court.⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 00:52, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

Comment: Added Packing the court to the nomination. @BD2412 and Swatjester: Pinging current participants in the event this addition changes their comments. Steel1943 (talk) 06:40, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

This addition redoubles my comment. BD2412 T 15:54, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom; it's far more relevant to the 1937 attempt than to any other currently existing article. Anyone's free to write an article about the subject, and until that happens, it's far better to serve wannabe readers of the 1937 article than to encourage article creation by deleting the redirect. (If we did that, probably someone would come along and recreate it as a redirect to the 1937 article.) Nyttend (talk) 20:38, 29 January 2025 (UTC)
• Court packing was merged to the target (then called Court-packing Bill), and I have tagged it as {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 09:16, 1 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. The current target discusses both the 1937 and 2021 efforts. That said, I would welcome creation of a general article on the topic, especially if it's a concept that exists in other countries. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:55, 12 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete to encourage article creation. Court packing is not limited to the United States. For example this paper on comparative court packing lists about 100 examples, of which only 6 are American. [26] -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 21:11, 13 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Patar, this is not a US-specific topic and should either have its own article or redirect somewhere that covers the topic generally. I may take a stab at it later today, we'll see how the sources look. 02:20, 16 February 2025 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rusalkii (talk • contribs)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More input is definitely needed here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:23, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete per Patar, and I don't think re-listing was appropriate... the volume and quality of discussion seems fine. Marcus Markup (talk) 16:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete Court-packing and Packing the court per WP:RETURNTORED. Redirecting a broad topic to one instance of it coming into play is usually a bad idea. Move Court packing to Court packing bill without redirect (or another title if preferred, but this seems fine) to preserve page history for a page that was merged. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 20:27, 22 February 2025 (UTC)

  Bill should be 'B' uppercase. How about Court packing Bill? Jay 💬 17:58, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

  Also fine. I went for the full lowercase title because I figured it's slightly more likely as a search term (if someone doesn't turn on caps lock). Skarmory (talk • contribs) 02:11, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete to WP:RETURNTORED. It's a broad topic that shouldn't point to a particular instance in the United States. At a very quick look there are papers like this one (noting I don't have full access), which discusses court packing in Hungary, Poland, and Turkey. (These cases also seem to be included in the source Patar Knight found.) CMD (talk) 14:28, 27 February 2025 (UTC)

Harry Oppenheim

• Harry Oppenheim → List of Austria international footballers (1–24 caps)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This has been a bug-bear of mine for a while: this was the product of an AFD discussion which closed as redirect. The problem was that Harry Oppenheim was not the name of the subject, since the non-notable Austrian footballer it was about was actually called Heinrich Oppenheim. "Harry Oppenheim" therefore isn't mentioned on the target page. FOARP (talk) 15:25, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

Redirect to Harry Oppenheimer I thought it would just be redirecting it for the sake of it, but I see "Harry Oppenheim -er" in a lot of OCR scans etc. from the time. I think it's actually a surprisingly common misspelling after all; and might be useful for someone coming from there JeffUK 21:39, 23 January 2025 (UTC)

I’d support this as a more useful redirect. FOARP (talk) 08:01, 24 January 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. The sources in the former article show that Harry Oppenheim and Heinrich Oppenheim likely refer to the same person. See also de:Heinrich Oppenheim (Fußballspieler) and it:Harry Oppenheim. - Eureka Lott 22:12, 23 January 2025 (UTC)
• I've added a {{citation needed}} at the target. I did see the word "Oppenheim" without the first name in one newspaper cutout from the sources at the de wiki, but as they are images, I could not get them translated. Someone who reads German may want to check these out. Jay 💬 19:49, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete The current target is a dubious misspelling of a bare list entry without enough substance to warrant a redirect. I'm not convinced this is a plausible misspelling for Oppenheimer. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:18, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:17, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

2025–26 College Football Playoff

• 2025–26 College Football Playoff → College Football Playoff  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

• 2026 College Football Playoff National Championship → College Football Playoff National Championship  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Not mentioned at target. Please note that a similar discussion was closed as delete. Worgisbor (Talking's fun!) 17:37, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete: Misleading at this point, as the target does not provide enough relevant context for those who may be looking to find information about the event. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:43, 11 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete: Was created WP:TOOSOON. Dmoore5556 (talk) 17:48, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep – This redirect is not misleading, as it directs users to the College Football Playoff National Championship page, where general information about the event can be found. The 2026 game is already scheduled for January 19, 2026, at Hard Rock Stadium in Miami Gardens, Florida, so WP:TOOSOON does not apply. Previously, 2025 College Football Playoff National Championship was a redirect until the game happened, at which point it became a full article. The same will likely happen with the 2026 game, so deleting this redirect now would be inconsistent with past handling of similar events. Many other major future sporting events have redirects well in advance, and keeping this one helps users find relevant information more easily. Abhiramakella (talk) 15:58, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

  Many other redirects of this type (also made by you) were deleted due to being WP:TOOSOON. Also, a reader looking for information about the 2026 College Football Playoff National Championship will see only that it will be hosted at a stadium also used by an NFL team and that it will be hosted at Hard Rock Stadium, which they would have to scroll down to Venues to even find. Worgisbor (Talking's fun!) 17:42, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

  I understand the concern regarding WP:TOOSOON, but I believe the 2026 College Football Playoff National Championship redirect should be treated differently for a few reasons:

  1. The Event Is Officially Scheduled – The 2026 College Football Playoff National Championship has a confirmed date (January 19, 2026) and a set venue (Hard Rock Stadium). This aligns with other redirects that have been allowed for major sporting events once their details are finalized.
  2. Precedent for Similar Redirects – In previous years, redirects for upcoming College Football Playoff National Championships have existed without issue. For example, the 2025 College Football Playoff National Championship now has an article because that game has already passed. The same will apply to 2026 as coverage increases.
  3. Redirects Improve Navigation – While it’s mentioned that readers can find information under the general "Venues" section, a redirect would provide faster access to relevant content. Without it, users searching for "2026 College Football Playoff National Championship" might struggle to locate the correct information.
  4. WP:TOOSOON Needs Clarification for Sporting Events – Right now, WP:TOOSOON does not define a specific timeframe for when a future sporting event is "too soon." It might be worth discussing whether events within 12 months (or those with confirmed venues) should be exempt from automatic deletion.

  That said, I agree that the 2027 College Football Playoff National Championship redirect should be deleted, as it is much further away and lacks significant coverage at this time. However, I believe the 2026 redirect meets the criteria for retention.

  Would love to hear thoughts on this! Abhiramakella (talk) 00:10, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

  Personally, I agree that WP:TOOSOON should be clarified for next year's (or this upcoming year's) scheduled sports events... I would prefer such redirects kept as long as the target mentions some bare minimum information about the upcoming event. I think we may need a formal RfC for it though, since a lot of people are adamant that no redirect is allowed to survive before the event takes place per this guideline. Do you think we should we village pump it first, or do just jump in towards an RfC now? I'd want something like "If an upcoming event (or whatever thing) is sufficiently noteworthy to have been mentioned in an article, a redirect is appropriate/allowable." added to the page. Fieari (talk) 00:27, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

  (Noting this reply was made by the person who created the redirect)

  When we create redirects for events to articles there should be relevant information for the people who are searching for said event. There is, in this instance, not. It ends up misleading folks as a result and would be better left as a red link for the time being. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:04, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with an article (or redirect) creator defending their work, especially when legitimate arguments can be made. In this case, there are multiple mentions of the 2025-26 Championship Game on the main championship game (such as the game having been awarded to Miami being noted in the hosts/cities and the resuts sections). Not quite so much on the general CFP article, but even that covers general broadcasting and format descriptions of modern playoffs (which include 25-26) Frank Anchor 12:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

• Can someone more Wiki savvy then me please bundle in 2025–26 College Football Playoff? Worgisbor (Talking's fun!) 19:22, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

  @CycloneYoris: In the future, please consider not adding in additional redirect nominations 8 days after the initial nomination took place and multiple people have voted. There wasn't really a good reason to do so in this case and I'm personally bothered when I vote for something and then what I'm voting on changes after the fact. Hey man im josh (talk) 14:10, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

  Sorry! Worgisbor (Talking's fun!) 16:52, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

  @CycloneYoris: Also while bundling, new entries should go below existing ones per WP:RFDHOWTO STEP II. I understand that newer nominations go above existing ones, but within a nomination, placing a newer entry above the others gives the false impression that the newer one was added first, and most/all votes were for the upper one. Jay 💬 22:50, 8 March 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Bundled together with 2025–26 College Football Playoff as requested by the nom.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:11, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep redirects or spin out to full articles. This is not misleading as each links a specific edition to an event to a page describing the event in its entirety. That said, as these are less than a year away, there is likely content pertaining to the specific events (especially the championship game itself) such as location and broadcasting information, such that WP:TOOSOON does not apply. Frank Anchor 12:19, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete 2025–26 College Football Playoff - no/miniscule information at target. Jay 💬 22:50, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. No information at target = WP:REDLINK/WP:RETURNTORED. Steel1943 (talk) 19:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

Transparency (Guatemala)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 11#Transparency (Guatemala)

Half black half white

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Rex Pacificus

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Draft:Toy Story 6

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

"Carolingian system"

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

February 16

Wikipedia:CNN

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Toy story tree

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Miner's guild

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Melon Fasion Group

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted via G6

National Memorial Museum

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 4#National Memorial Museum

Wikipedia:VT

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 27#Wikipedia:VT

Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) for development

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2025 United States constitutional crisis

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 24#2025 United States constitutional crisis

BEASTofBURDEN

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Gaza massacre

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Laa laa laa laa laaaaaaaaah...

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Friends lesbian kiss episode

• Friends lesbian kiss episode → Friends season 7#ep166  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Are descriptive episode names like this helpful? I'm genuinely asking. Also, it seems to have been wrongly tagged as being from a merge. — Anonymous 02:03, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

Weak keep I don't doubt someone would see smth like "my favourite episode of friends was the lesbian kiss episode" on socmed and look up something like "Friends lesbain kiss episode" User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 09:48, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete, implausible search term, no evidence that this is a name. Let the search results do its thing imo. We don't redirect any "kiss episodes" of any television series, to the episode in question, on Wikipedia of all things, where every redirect requires perennial maintenance. Unhelpful redirect, let's not give the impression that these types of redirects are encouraged or acceptable. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 02:21, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

@user:Yirba did you use this redirect in Wikidata? Because it might be deleted. Anthony2106 (talk) 05:16, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:54, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

• Leaning keep. Accurate, harmless, I could see a reader looking up an episode centered on a moment iconic for the series in this way. BD2412 T 02:52, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
  • Note: Per the discussion below, I would also have no objection to retargeting to Lesbian kiss episode#Friends. BD2412 T 20:35, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
• Delete Based on searches, this actually seems to be ambiguous with The One With the Lesbian Wedding. Since we can't be for sure which episode the reader is looking for, I think this redirect isn't useful. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:31, 17 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per Presidentman. LarryL33k (Contribz) 00:34, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete bordering on uninterpretability. The way this is structured does not imply that it is an episode of "Friends", rather, it is some episode of something where some friends have a lesbian kiss. Which I construe could be an episode of Roseanne, that the U.S. Congress launched congressional investigations about. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 22:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep. Seems like a plausible search term, and an episode like this airing in 2001 is noteworthy. Also as far as I can tell, "The One With the Lesbian Wedding" episode didn't actually show a kiss. Correct me if I'm wrong Presidentman. Anne drew · talk · contribs · 15:32, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

  I haven't seen either episode so can't say for sure if there was no kiss. However, if you google "Friends lesbian kiss episode," information on both episodes pops up. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 17:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

  From the "The One With the Lesbian Wedding" article:

A writer with the Associated Press noted in an article that week that the ceremony would not include a kiss by the newlyweds, including the episode as part of an observed trend of portrayals of gay characters while skirting controversy by avoiding or minimizing physical contact.

And a clip I found of the ceremony on youtube does not have a kiss. Anne drew · talk · contribs · 17:54, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

• Comment: our article lesbian kiss episode lists "The One With Rachel's Big Kiss" (and not "The One With the Lesbian Wedding") as the Friends lesbian kiss episode. "The One With the Lesbian Wedding" does not seem to be a lesbian kiss episode: most obviously it apparently did not actually involve a kiss, but it also was not aired during a sweeps period, it did not involve a presumed heterosexual regular character, and the lesbian relationship wasn't solely for that episode. By contrast "The One With Rachel's Big Kiss" did have a lesbian kiss, did air during a sweeps period, involved an otherwise-heterosexual recurring character whose heterosexuality was reaffirmed by the end of the episode, and the lesbian character was solely introduced for that episode. It seems to me that "The One With Rachel's Big Kiss" is clearly what "Friends lesbian kiss episode" refers to; the question is whether or not this kind of redirect is useful. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 16:45, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Plausible search term per Anne and unambiguous per Caeciliusinhorto. First choice retarget to Lesbian kiss episode#Friends (where I added this anchor and linked the episode) because of the subgenre context, second choice keep. Jay 💬 15:17, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

  Support this. it's lio! | talk | work 09:54, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget to Lesbian kiss episode#Friends per Jay. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 05:04, 2 March 2025 (UTC)

English WikipediA

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 23#English WikipediA

Dhruva Natchathiram

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

The Killer is Calling

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Grieving process

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

February 15

Pet Supermarket

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 24#Pet Supermarket

Bottom dweller

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 27#Bottom dweller

Interstitial fauna

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 25#Interstitial fauna

Interstitial space (biology)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 27#Interstitial space (biology)

Lifelore

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 3#Lifelore

Anti-Muslim propaganda on Facebook

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Keep * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:22, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

2025–26 Big Bash League season

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Brave Books

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 27#Brave Books

Les Dix Commandements

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Disambiguate * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:21, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Final (album)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Banu Hoot

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 3#Banu Hoot

Turnib

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Video clip

• Video clip → Music video  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

While this is mentioned in the target article, and this should definitely not be deleted, I don't believe that this is the primary topic. Potential disambiguation or retarget? -1ctinus📝🗨 14:25, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

• So, in French, and I imagine probably some other languages, the English loanword clip is how you say 'music video'. I wonder if that's contributed to the decision to move the longstanding article at this title to Video clip (online media) and retarget the redirect. Either way, it's clear there wasn't consensus for that, so reverse move; send to RM if necessary. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 17:27, 1 January 2025 (UTC)
• Reverse the move per above. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 19:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to Short-form content, along with the plural. CheeseyHead (talk) 20:47, 8 January 2025 (UTC)

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 💬 12:43, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

• Reverse move per Tamzin. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 17:46, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
• Procedural close this and take up the reverse move / WP:RM outside of this RfD. I did not realize it during my relist, but Video clip (online media) too was moved, to Short-form content. Jay 💬 20:21, 5 February 2025 (UTC)
• Reverse both moves and send to RM. Nickps (talk) 22:00, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
• This is a messy situation, but I think the least disruptive option is just to send Short-form content to RM at its current title and let them deal with it there given it's been moved twice (one of which was during this RFD), and the structure of the content there has changed significantly. For now, it's probably best to target the redirect there while it plays out so older links to the article still point there, and if the Short-form content title is kept, this can be re-nominated at RFD. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 08:34, 8 February 2025 (UTC)
• Also pinging @Tamzin, Utopes, CheeseyHead, and Patar knight: to notify them that Video clip (online media) has been moved to Short-form content, which may impact their opinion on what should happen. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 08:34, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

  I would reverse all the moves as not uncontroversial and then start an RM. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 05:27, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

• Disambiguate between Music video and Short-form content. The context is important, so I don't think there is a primary topic. Another benefit to disambiguation is that it may be useful to have links cleaned up. -- Tavix ^(talk) 23:32, 12 February 2025 (UTC)

  I would also be fine with disambiguation, at least for now (I would nominate Short-form content at RM if disambiguation is the result of this RFD). Reverting the moves as controversial feels damaging with how much the article has developed since the moves. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 22:04, 16 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Involved relist to close an extremely old log page and to try and get some more eyes on this.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:46, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. Nobody is going to search up "Video Clip" trying to find "Music Video". Those are two different things. LarryL33k (Contribz) 04:08, 16 February 2025 (UTC)
• Disambiguate "video clip" and "clip" was used in the 1990s in Canadian English as a synonym for music video -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 23:55, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
• This RfD started on 1st January with a lot of promise, but has been stuck in limbo. I have struck my WP:RM suggestion, and support Tavix's and IP65's suggestion of disambiguate for now. It appears there is a lot of cultural context that we don't comprehend. Jay 💬 19:25, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Finario

• Finario → The Bonnie Lass o' Fyvie  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Delete as ambiguous with Damian of Finario and Battista dei Giudici. These three minor details do not between them warrant a disambiguation page, and search results will do the job quicker and more simply than hatnotes. J947 ‡ ^edits 02:57, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

• Keep or disambiguate The other two are "surname-type" uses, while the current target is an alternate name. If kept, we can hatnote the two people pointed out by the nom -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:00, 11 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:08, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 10:33, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

• Disambiguate. We have three entries, none of which is an obvious primary target. Tevildo (talk) 16:18, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and let search results help. The current target subject is known as "Fennario", not "Finario". Jay 💬 17:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)

  Struck per Tavix. I missed reading the part in the target that talked about permutations like "Fennario", "Fernario", "Finario"... Jay 💬 20:33, 22 January 2025 (UTC)

  Keep and hatnote per Patar knight. Jay 💬 06:38, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

•  Disambiguation draft requested * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 22:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)
  • Done. Cremastra (u — c) 22:04, 8 January 2025 (UTC)
• Delete Seems to be entirely PTMs and passing mentions without enough substance anywhere. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:36, 10 January 2025 (UTC)
• Keep, the article attests Finario as a permutation of the alternative title Fennario. I agree the other uses are WP:PTMs so there's not enough to disambiguate. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Consensus still does not seem clear...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 20:17, 14 January 2025 (UTC)

• Keep per Tavix. Cremastra (talk) 16:09, 30 January 2025 (UTC)
• Keep and hatnote to Finale Ligure, which was historically known as Finario. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 19:42, 4 February 2025 (UTC)
• Patar knight has brought up a fourth target, which makes me feel that disambiguation is the correct option. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 19:55, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

  It's still a WP:PTM, since those two people were from Finale. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 01:37, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

  Actually, yeah, I'd be fine with keeping and hatnoting to Finale Ligure. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 03:51, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Involved relist to close an extremely old log page and to try and get some more eyes on this.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 02:46, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Sharqi Arabic

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 22#Sharqi Arabic

February 14

Davids wars of Conquest

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Anti-Muslim propaganda on Facebook

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

Scimmy

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Aldaspan

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

Near Eastern sword

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ouija Board Criticism

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Alternative Learning Center

• Alternative Learning Center → Edmonson County High School  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This content only lasted 2 months in 2008 and was completely unreferenced. However, many articles [27] have "Alternative Learning Center" sections, or entire articles about one, while this target does not. Seems like a missing article on a generic topic, or a dab list should exist. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 06:26, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete as I have reviewed all mentions of the term and there does not seem to be a suitable target. However it may need to be kept as content was added to and then removed from Edmonson County High School in 2008. The UK equivalent, Pupil Referral Unit has its own article.

Alternatively, it might be possible to add a sourced sentence to High school in the United States (or a similar article) and point the redirect there. TSventon (talk) 17:50, 7 February 2025 (UTC)

The edit history can be displaced to Edmonson County High School Alternative Learning Center to clear the base location of the troublesome history -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 05:16, 8 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:41, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

Is there a consensus on this? Theadventurer64 (talk) 19:36, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• Convert to a disambiguation page per WP:D. As the nom points out there are many qualifying articles for the term. Any interested editor should do this. 5Q5|^✉ 12:58, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

  Per WP:CONCEPTDAB, because alternative learning programs are broad and relate to roughly the same concept (Alternative learning programs at public schools in the US), I believe this should be an article/subsection of an article instead of a disambiguation. Theadventurer64 (talk) 21:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

  Here are some sources:

  • https://www.hawaiipublicschools.org/ConnectWithUs/Organization/Offices/StudentSupportServices/AlternativeLearningProgramsBranch/Pages/default.aspx
  • http://www.austinisd.org/schools/alternativelearningcenter
  • https://www.igi-global.com/dictionary/schools-online-learning/1044

  Theadventurer64 (talk) 21:07, 18 February 2025 (UTC)

• Redirect to Special education, which covers the same subject in depth and globally. Someone should just include a mention of the term there. 5Q5|^✉ 12:13, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

  They're similar, but still different; Special education refers to those who receive education because of certain intellectual disabilities, while ALO programs are designed more for at-risk youth, not necessarily with intellectual disabilities. Addionally, there's a section which states that at-risk students being housed with Special Ed could be an issue?

  Edit: After writing this, found Alternative education. Could be added there.

• Alternative Learning Programs

  While not directly related to Special Education, Alternative Learning Programs may refer to alternative Learning Programs for at-risk youth. This can be accommodated through a designated part of a school, or students can be housed in another school altogether. Students in these programs may receive differentiated instruction from regular schools. Theadventurer64 (talk) 18:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)

• Redirect to At-risk students (note, not At-risk youth), until such time someone volunteers to write a separate article. I'm done. 5Q5|^✉ 13:11, 20 February 2025 (UTC)
• Weak retarget to Alternative education; else delete. As noted above, any specific target would be a surprise. My "weak" retarget comes from the capitalization. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 06:21, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Move without redirect (equivalent to Delete) to Edmonson County High School Alternative Learning Center per IP65. The capitalization is a concern per Significa. It is unclear to which country this capitalized term relates to. Alternative education is sub-sectioned by country and I would not know where to add Theadventurer64's drafted mention. Mention may still be added now or in future, but it doesn't change my view of this redirect. Jay 💬 15:40, 24 February 2025 (UTC)

References

'cause kalmer is my boyfriend

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

Ravinder Kumar (wrestler)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cackalacky

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 22#Cackalacky

Tau Ursae Minoris

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 22#Tau Ursae Minoris

Calling all engines-deleted scenes

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jhoom

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

February 13

Wikimedia Brasil

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 6#Wikimedia Brasil

List of 'years in home video'

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Johann Hertel

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 4#Johann Hertel

Wikipedia:Deletion log

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Simpsongate

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

West Baltimore

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

MAGAt

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

British genocide

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 4#British genocide

Klonoa (video game)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

5.1 Music Disc

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

Rojo (Cuban baseball team)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

What is wikipedia about

• What is wikipedia about → Wikipedia:About  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

Awkward, implausible cross-namespace redirect, especially with the lowercase "w". Compare Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2010_January_2#What_is_wikipedia * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:24, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep or retarget to the article Wikiepdia. Cyber the tiger🐯 (talk) 18:02, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

• Weak keep, but certainly don't redirect to Wikipedia. This was one of my first attempted cross-namespace redirects, and I didn't know if this would qualify as much as How to edit etc. I suggest not redirecting to the Wikipedia article because essentially anything under What is foo about can be a redirect. I'd be sad to see this redirect go but it must be for the best.

𝚈𝚘𝚟𝚝 (𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔𝚟𝚝) 18:36, 6 February 2025 (UTC)

• Keep. It's one of those occasional cross-namespace redirects that is actually helpful. If you type this into your browser address bar or your search box, you're looking for a brief summary, not an article whose sixth sentence includes a tidbit about Germany representing 4.8% of Wikipedia traffic in November 2024. Nyttend (talk) 23:32, 6 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep - Valid and useful WP:XNR... anyone looking for this is not going to be aware of namespaces, and yet this is the information they are clearly looking for. Nyttend's arguments are strong that Wikipedia is not going to be helpful to this query. Fieari (talk) 00:23, 7 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete XNR, and if you want to know about Wikipedia, read Wikipedia -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 07:48, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, this is not how redirects are constructed, and not how we do cross-namespace redirects. WP:XNR indicates that "most newly created cross-namespace redirects from the main (article) namespace to the Wikipedia (project) namespace should be deleted". This is also not one of the "very old ones [that] might retain their value for extra-Wikipedia links." No fear of broken links as this is indeed less than a week old. There is nothing that suggests that people will be looking for an article, or for the about page, by typing a question phrase. As it happens, there is a link for this very About Page on everyone's sidebar, which doesn't require typing in an awkwardly constructed question in the search. Aside from some of the first ever redirects, we never accommodate the "question-redirect to answer" format in titles nowadays, as its unlikely and unhelpful to maintain in mainspace, distracting from real topics that start with "what is". This can always be navigated to from the About Wikipedia redirect, which has served well for years. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 13:16, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 18:14, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete. Per Utopes. We're not google. -- asilvering (talk) 04:45, 21 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. WP:NOTFAQ. Steel1943 (talk) 02:40, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep: a very likely search term. J947 ‡ ^edits 04:32, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete: Instead of tying ourselves in knots with redirects like this, we should fix the real problems. For example, the search tool currently displays the meaningless (to new users) option ‘Search for pages containing foo’; it should make it clear that it is searching articles (at least by default). We should also decide what the proper entry point to this project is; the current main page’s most prominent link is to the article Wikipedia, and the main page does not seem to link to Wikipedia:About at all. Of course, that article’s lead should be a brief summary of its subject, as desired by Nyttend; if it is not, we should also fix that. Brianjd (talk) 07:43, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

  Wikipedia:About is linked on the sidebar that appears on every page. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 21:44, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

  The sidebar? I see a few options for controlling the appearance of the page. I don’t see this ‘Wikipedia:About’ you refer to.

  Oh, you mean the other sidebar? The one that appears when I click those three lines in the top left corner, which are dwarfed by the graphical link to the main page? I’m not sure that counts.

  Even if it did count, my comments about the main page prominently linking to the article and not the Wikipedia namespace page would still apply. Brianjd (talk) 01:24, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  Experienced editors should be careful here: the traditional left-hand sidebar is no longer displayed by default. Brianjd (talk) 02:05, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

  Ah, I guess it only appears on the new Vector if you're logged in. I didn't think to check what it would look like without an account. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 03:53, 26 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete this recently created redirect per Utopes. We already have About Wikipedia, and for some reason, have an "About:" namespace as well!! About:Wikipedia. Jay 💬 21:42, 7 March 2025 (UTC)

Index of statistical mechanics articles

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 4#Index of statistical mechanics articles

Faith Cavendish

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Faye Donnelly

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Self-partnered

• Self-partnered → Emma Watson#Personal life  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

The redirect title and the article content do not seem to be related at all. I was not able to find a better target page. Kwonunn (talk) 17:51, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

When I saw that this seemingly nonsensical redirect was created by an established Wikipedia admin, I knew I wasn’t getting the full story.

The redirect title used to be mentioned at the target article; that mention was removed for dubious reasons. See Talk:Emma Watson#‘Self-partnered’. Brianjd (talk) 06:48, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Pinging @Bagumba. Brianjd (talk) 08:31, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

Add back the mention. Jay 💬 11:05, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

@Jay: If you mean to add back the mention at Emma Watson, see the linked discussion at that article’s talk page. (It’s not really a ‘discussion’ yet, as no one else has contributed. Maybe you can change that.) Brianjd (talk) 12:28, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

I did see that before, and saw it has a link to this RfD. This RfD will have stronger consensus. Of course, if someone wants to take part in that discussion but skip this RfD, it is a separate matter, but I didn't see any participation other than yours. Jay 💬 12:48, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

I think RfD is the wrong place to discuss issues specific to target articles, but you probably have a better idea how things work on this project. Brianjd (talk) 12:54, 23 February 2025 (UTC)

Added back mention. Jay 💬 14:40, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

• retarget to Single person; The referenced material can be added there. And add link to wikt:en:self-partnered there. -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 21:05, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

  Support. it's lio! | talk | work 13:28, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

Confection (song)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

410 (song)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

List of Jewish United States Supreme Court justices

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 4#List of Jewish United States Supreme Court justices

Darren Sargent

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Floyd Charles

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Washington Nationals minor league players

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Navy ratings

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Expansionary

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

T:WPMHA

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

T:POV

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

T:POTD

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Template:R from style

• Template:R from style → Template:R from non-neutral name  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

This should be retargeted to Template:R from stylization as natural target for this redirect. Gonnym (talk) 14:36, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

• Comment, the current documentation has the following hatnote: "Template:R from style (in the sense of honorific royal/noble styles) redirects here; you may be looking for Template:R from stylization.". Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 14:53, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Retarget to TM:R from stylization since that is probably the primary topic. All three of {{R from style}}, {{R from styles}} and {{R from royal style}} are unused in mainspace so I'm guessing royal style redirects just use {{R non-neutral}} directly. Also, {{R from styles}} should probably be added to this RfD as well. Nickps (talk) 21:03, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Keep as-is. It already has a hatnote, and a noble style is a specific thing, for which there isn't an alternative name (they are distinct from titles and other appellations). The use of such a style in place of a usually more encyclopedic name for a biographical subject is indeed something that should be catalogued for potential cleanup with redirect-categorization templates.; The more specifically named redirects of those in turn, like the one at issue here, can be used more specifically with "What links here" (constrained to transclusions) to track a specific issue (and they sometimes become their own template category and separate rcat template over time anyway). The fact that someone somewhere paying no attention of any kind might be confused and use this to refer to typographic stylization is not important, since it's not frequent and is easy to fix. By the kind of "prevent any misunderstanding or misuse at all costs" reasoning behind this RfD, we'd have to rename several thousand templates, redirects, and other pages (including even some policies, using terms with a special WP-specific meaning rather than the vernacular one a noob would have in mind). This is not HeadInTheCloudsAndPayingNoHeedToAnythingPedia or EngineerEverythingForLowestCommonDenominatorDunderheadsPedia or ReduceFunctionalityForExperiencedUsersToMakeItAllEasyForNewOnesPedia.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:58, 15 February 2025 (UTC)

The template redirect isn't titled {{R from noble style}}, if that was the intended usage of it. {{R from stylization}} should be the primary usage of "style" alone. Gonnym (talk) 12:32, 17 February 2025 (UTC)

Can you list a few examples from the thousands of templates, redirects, policy pages, etc.? Just trying to understand what you have in mind. Jay 💬 21:49, 4 March 2025 (UTC)

• Comment - This redirected template does not appear to be currently used on any redirect page. As long as it isn't commonly or habitually subst'd, it might be safe to change the target without much in the way of repricussions. Fieari (talk) 07:25, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
• Retarget to {{R from stylization}}. {{R from royal style}} can be used for nobility styles (also {{R from noble style}} could probably be created as a redirect to the same location). Neutral on {{R from styles}}, as I would be less certain that it refers to a stylization in the plural. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 21:48, 25 February 2025 (UTC)

T:OTD

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

T:OAFD

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

T:ITV

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2026 Belgian Cup final

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2029 Uruguayan general election

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2026 NBA draft

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Provincial law

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

2028 NFL season

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

T:DOC

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

T:DAB

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: G7 deleted

T:ADMINDASH

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

T:ACI

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

T:ACDS/T

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Eastern (basketball)

• Eastern (basketball) → Hong Kong Eastern  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There are several other basketball organizations named "Eastern". Ones we have pages for include Eastern Basketball Alliance and Eastern Basketball Association, while google gives a number of other hits. The Hong Kong team doesn't seem to be the primary topic. The redirect is tagged as from a move I don't see it under this name anywhere in the history, but I may be missing something, since the redirect has gotten hundreds of views this month. If the page has substantially history under this name then happy to withdraw this. Rusalkii (talk) 21:56, 13 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:38, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

• REtarget to Eastern (disambiguation) as {{R from partial disambiguation}} and itemize the other uses there -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 07:11, 25 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cremastra (talk) 23:51, 29 January 2025 (UTC)

Hong Kong Eastern is a guest team in the 2024–25 PBA Commissioner's Cup and is the cause of the page (redirect?) views. Retarget and itemize as per the anon above. Howard the Duck (talk) 00:37, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

In the 2024–25 PBA Commissioner's Cup, Hong Kong Eastern is simply referred to as "Eastern"; I've named it as such but was reverted because in WP:OFFICIAL PBA lingo, the team from Hong Kong is simply referred to as "Eastern". Compare to the parallel 2024–25 East Asia Super League where they are referred to as "Hong Kong Eastern" and are referred to by that name on that article. I figured "Fine, let's do what they say". The links were originally targetted to Eastern Sports Club (basketball)", then was retargetted to "Eastern (basketball)" by Gayviewmahat on this edit. He also created this redirect, and has not commented here; that guy just edits and never engages in discussions. That's where the pageviews came from. Howard the Duck (talk) 01:23, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

• Don't keep: The only hit for "basketball" at Eastern (disambiguation) is Eastern Sports Club (basketball), which is the current target. I disagree with the current target, but I'm not sure what the best course of action would be. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 02:21, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

  "Eastern" can also refer to Eastern Conference (NBA). The problem with "Eastern" is that it's an adjective and should always have the accompanying noun it's supposedly modifying, that's why "Eastern" by itself is ambiguous. Howard the Duck (talk) 12:41, 1 February 2025 (UTC)

• Don't retarget to the disambig as the current target is the only hit for basketball there per Significa. Disagree with itemizing other uses there are they are all WP:PTMs. If a Phillippines tournament can refer to a Hong Kong team as just "Eastern", per Howard, then this is good enough for a weak keep. Otherwise delete as a confusing disambiguating title. Jay 💬 15:58, 10 February 2025 (UTC)
• Keep as the only "Eastern" in basketball that's not a partial title match. Can someone find sources of the NBA's Eastern Conference being called simply "Eastern"? The short form seems to be "The East". -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:19, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more try...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 12:34, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

• Could definitely be ambiguous with Eastern University (United States)'s basketball teams, which would often be referred to as just Eastern. Unfortunately, that article is not on the DAB page itself and is instead behind Eastern University (disambiguation), so retargeting to the DAB is less helpful. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 21:54, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
  • We could just turn this into a new disambiguation page, with ESC,HK and EUni,PA,USA teams -- 65.92.246.77 (talk) 05:47, 28 February 2025 (UTC)

Vitamin C2

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Demolition lovers II

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 3#Demolition lovers II

Glamorgan women's cricket team

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

LGBTQ+ production of family

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 4#LGBTQ+ production of family

Draft:Invest 92L (2024)

• Draft:Invest 92L (2024) → Hurricane Milton  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

There are more than one invest called 92L in 2024 A1Cafel (talk) 05:46, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Delete, at a certain point, it just becomes routine.✶Quxyz✶ 13:07, 13 February 2025 (UTC)

Delete, as the designation Invest 92L was used multiple times in 2024, not just for the system that became Hurricane Milton. Drdpw (talk) 21:01, 14 February 2025 (UTC)

• Did any of the content added by LemonJuiceIsSour get merged into the target, or did Vida0007 BLAR it? May be deleted if it was a BLAR. Jay 💬 08:19, 20 February 2025 (UTC)

  As far as I know, this was how it looked before I redirected it to the then-draft for TD14 (which became Milton); I do think that some of the contents there were merged into the target, particularly the infobox part. Vida0007 (talk) 01:46, 21 February 2025 (UTC)

• History merge the edits from 14:32, 5 October 2024 and prior to Draft:Tropical Depression 14 (2024) and then delete the rest. Both pages are LemonJuiceIsSour drafts. They probably should have moved the page rather than abandoning one to paste and continue the other one, but we can effectively carry that out now with a history merge. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:00, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

UKCF

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Jesus donkey

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 28#Jesus donkey

February 9

Immune complex deposition

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

Disney Channel (TV channel in Asia)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: No consensus to delete, therefore retarget to Disney Channel (disambiguation) * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 01:16, 6 March 2025 (UTC)

Târnavele Blaj

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

List of cameos of the Mario series

• List of cameos of the Mario series → Mario (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Cameos in the Mario series → Mario (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 
• Cameos of the Mario series → Mario (franchise)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ] 

No such list or topic in target article. Steel1943 (talk) 14:40, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Delete all per nom or retarget to a specific heading if applicable. Also, if only 2 or 3 exists, won't 2 act as 3 and vice versa? TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 02:10, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

delete per nom and as... kind of vague, if i'm being honest. on top of there not being a list, what would this mean for donkey kong, for example? consarn _{(speak evil) (see evil)} 11:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

• The List of cameos of the Mario series redirect was created as a result of a merge and I have tagged it as an {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 20:28, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

  Particularly, List of cameos of the Mario series was merged into Mario in popular culture, which was then blank and redirected to Mario ("nothing to merge").

  I'm not familiar with how the community/policy goes on this rather protracted case of attribution of removed/diluted content. Tule-hog (talk) 07:59, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:26, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

• Redirect: Cameos of the Mario series could be redirected to Mario#Cameos which mentions other characters, outside of the series itself.
  • Delete: Cameos in the Mario series not so much.
  • Comment: Barring my subcomment above about attribution, from what I understand from MOS:LISTBASICS, lists are a particular formatting style which Mario#Cameos does not follow so would not suit List of cameos of the Mario series. Also not familiar here with the precedent of 'List of' redirects to non-lists. Tule-hog (talk) 08:10, 19 January 2025 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 22:19, 9 February 2025 (UTC)

• Delete all except for Cameos in the Mario series which is sufficient when redirected per above. MimirIsSmart (talk) 13:13, 10 February 2025 (UTC)

• Retarget Cameos of the Mario series to Mario#Cameos and delete the other two per above. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:45, 25 February 2025 (UTC)
• Delete Cameos in the Mario series and Cameos of the Mario series as not having a suitable target. The suggested target Mario#Cameos is about the cameos of the character Mario, and not about cameos in or of the Mario series. Move without redirect the list to an appropriate title to keep attribution, if the merged content requires attribution. Jay 💬 13:08, 5 March 2025 (UTC)

May 21, 2004

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 17#May 21, 2004

Snape kills dumbledore

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

• @Consarn: G8 does not apply because it is a redirect pointing to a blue link. However, it does seem that G4 might actually apply because there was apparently an old RfD lol, although now that I'm actually reading it, G4 wouldn't apply either because back when this page was deleted in the 2009 discussion of Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2009 February 26#Snape kills dumbledore → Spoiler (media), it pointed at "Spoiler (media)" instead of the Harry Potter novel, so this wouldn't be a one-to-one replica either. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:07, 11 February 2025 (UTC)

Brasileiros

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Sour apple

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 23#Sour apple

Main page/sandbox

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 20#Main page/sandbox

Red Movement

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Doo (pseudonym)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 4#Doo (pseudonym)

Lukas Miklos

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 March 6#Lukas Miklos

Fédération de la Fonction Publique Européenne of the European Patent Office

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

HowDoesOneEditaPage

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

G (unit)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Telemedia International Italia Ltd.

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Chaguan

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Tamago

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 17#Tamago

Oil Pan (Transformers)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cybersexism

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 17#Cybersexism

Bo'oh'o'wa'er

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

Concise Grove Dictionary of Music

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 17#Concise Grove Dictionary of Music

PE infection

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 20#PE infection

Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Taumarere

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

ZeuS

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 17#ZeuS

Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Pukemiro

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

Cyberwarfare by India

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Clickskrieg

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cyber cold war

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 17#Cyber cold war

Online harassment

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Point all to Cyberbullying, Delete Attacking users

Soutane (malware)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Scamware

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

Momovirus

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Play Mp3

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Play mp3.exe (trojan)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Friends lesbian kiss episode

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 16#Friends lesbian kiss episode

Ddox

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

English WikipediA

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 16#English WikipediA

Пример

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Divrras šokolahta

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Bitter chocolate

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

The Y

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Withdrawn by nominator