Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

"WP:RFD" redirects here. For other requests for deletion, see WP:XFD. For requests for discussion, see Wikipedia:Request for comment.

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

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

Please do not change the target of the redirect while it is under discussion. This adds unnecessary complication to the discussion for both potential closers and participants.

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 we delete a redirect?

Further information: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Common outcomes

Further information: 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

"WP:RDELETE" redirects here. For revision deletion, see Wikipedia:Revision deletion. For deletion review, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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", 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, are an exception to this rule. (Note also the existence of namespace aliases such as WP:. Speedy deletion criterion R2 may apply if the target namespace is something other than Category:, Template:, Wikipedia:, Help:, or Portal:.)
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, though you should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first.
8. If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name, 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 the article texts because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links.
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 run 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 and old subpage links, should be left alone in case there are any existing links on external pages pointing to them. See also Wikipedia:Link rot § Link rot on non-Wikimedia sites.
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. Perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is therefore 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

I.	Tag the redirect.   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.
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.
III.	Notify users.   It is generally considered good practice to notify the creator and main contributors to the redirect that you are nominating the redirect. To find the main contributors, look in the page history of the redirect. 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 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

October 22

Salah Uddin

• Salah Uddin → Muhammad Salah-ud-din  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

As this appears to be a variant of Salah ad-Din (name), and there are multiple articles with titles containing this name, I think it should point there and not to any specific person. – Rummskartoffel 10:54, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

MiniTV

• MiniTV → Amazon (company)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a duly-sourced mention can be added. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 23:05, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

• Weak stubify per the text below the redirect (it doesn't make sense for a redirect to also serve as a stub here), which could potentially be expanded. It's meant to refer to a platform launched in India, as explained in the text. If that happens, we'd need to add a sourced mention; and if that doesn't work, I'm also open to deletion. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 23:33, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete or write article. TechCrunch has RS coverage, but again from the launch. Television Business International has a short analysis from June. Everything else from after May is primarily about a specific programme (that will be) featured on the platform, sometimes with a little background but adding nothing. Everything from before 2021 is about a variety of other products unrelated to Amazon. NMTV mentions a Norwegian "broadcast mobile TV via DMB" branded as MiniTV launched in 2009, no:Norges mobil-tv offers little more information. If the consensus here is something other than delete then the link at NMTV needs to be removed or changed. Thryduulf (talk) 11:15, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:53, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

English English girl name Fiona

• English English girl name Fiona → Body (Russ Millions and Tion Wayne song)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Delete the redirect. Dubious usefulness, although it is a lyric of the song it is practically unused, as shown by PageViews tool. Except for the four views mid-August (and any views I've added now), no-one have used this redirect. - 49.147.69.72 (talk) 09:31, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. English girls' name Fiona could maybe be a plausible redirect to Fiona (the article about the English girls' name) but the duplicate "English" and poor grammar make this implausible in my opinion. Thryduulf (talk) 13:04, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

State of Takasago

• State of Takasago → Taiwan under Japanese rule  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

State of Takasago=ja:高砂国 Konno Yumeto 11:21, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

• Redirect to Taiwan. The disambiguation page for Takasago defines State of Takasago as the name Japan called Taiwan during the Edo period (1603 to 1867). Therefore it should link to the article on Taiwan. It's misleading to point to the current target because that suggests the name applied specifically when the Japanese ruled Taiwan Province in 1895. I suggest adding these redirect category templates: {{R from alternative language|ja|en}} <!--name used by Japanese during Edo period --> and {{R without mention}}Coastside (talk) 14:40, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

@Coastside: I went ahead and struck your !vote above, since you apparently voted twice. CycloneYoris ^talk! 17:34, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

• Redirect to Takasago. I agree Taiwan under Japanese rule is wrong. Wiktionary says this is an "archaic" Japanese name for Taiwan. This says the term goes back at least to the 1500's, so it may not be exactly correct to only associate it with the EDO period on the dab page. But it's not mentioned in Taiwan, so that would cause confusion unless it's added. The foklore website also says "Between 1895 and 1945, when Taiwan was colonized by Japan, Taiwan’s indigenous peoples were collectively referred to as the “Takasago tribes” by Japanese anthropologists and colonial authorities" - which probably explains the current target. I don't think adding an obsolete Japanese name for Taiwan into Taiwan is warranted, so handle with the dab. MB 04:39, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

If you simply redirect to the disambiguation page, the only relevant entry is the entry for State of Takasago, which would then be a self-referential (circular) redirect back to the disambiguation page. If you delete that entry, then there would be no reference to Taiwan at all on the disambiguation page. What would you suggest doing with the dab page if you redirect this title to it? Coastside (talk) 05:17, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

I would change the entry to Takasago, an archaic name for Taiwan. This is better than redirecting directly to Taiwan. MB 20:17, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Taiwan under Japanese rule#Background. That section seems to mention the name and that is just the background information of the Japanese rule and not necessarily refer it to the main idea of Taiwan under Japanese rule. Sun8908 _Talk 06:06, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to History of Taiwan#Japanese rule. I think this is the same logic as Sun8908 above, i.e., that it mentions that Takasago is the Japanese name for Taiwan and it's just background on Japanese rule. The difference is the redirect points to an article on Taiwan, which is a more suitable topic for "State of Takasago" vs. redirecting to Taiwan under Japanese rule. Plus History of Taiwan makes sense since Takasago is a historical name. Coastside (talk) 15:26, 25 September 2021 (UTC)
  • I think I should have also mentioned this, but the section's main article is Taiwan under Japanese rule which made me hesitate. I wouldn't disagree to retarget to History of Taiwan#Japanese rule if others also think that is a more suitable redirect target. Sun8908 _Talk 15:41, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:03, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

• This is tough. I'm thinking aloud here. Are any of the following assumptions wrong?

1. "Takasago" is a Japanese term for Taiwan, though it has other meanings (per Takasago), and is no longer used to refer to Taiwan today.
2. Per History of Taiwan#Japanese rule, "Japan had sought to claim sovereignty over Taiwan... since 1592". This is slightly before the Edo period (1603–1867).
3. Per Taiwan under Japanese rule, Taiwan became a dependency of Japan in 1895, almost 30 years after the end of the Edo period.

But this discussion is about "State of Takasago", not just Takasago. Can we say with certainty that any political entity in present-day Taiwan was specifically called "State of Takasago"? Especially if we can't, I'm inclined to retarget to the disambiguation page per MB, along with some updates to the disambiguation page accordingly (those should probably happen regardless). Just wanted to show my work here in case I missed anything or made incorrect assumptions. --BDD (talk) 21:34, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete given the extremely minimal off-Wikipedia usage of this name. The sole Google Books hit for "State of Takasago" is a taxonomy dictionary (i.e. not a WP:RS for history topics) which pretty clearly copied its definition of "State of Takasago" out of Wikipedia, there are no Google Scholar hits for this phrase either [1], and a regular Google Search with Wikipedia excluded gets a grand total of five hits [2]. It appears that Wikipedia is the only place anywhere that chooses to translate 国 as "state" in this name. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 00:03, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per 61.239. Redirects should follow usage, not create our own, and there is no external usage here. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:10, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:07, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

October 21

The pit with gino

• The pit with gino → The Pit  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Created for, and then removed from, WRPI in 2006; currently no incoming links. Leschnei (talk) 16:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete: Per nom. ––FormalDude talk 06:53, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:RfP

• Wikipedia:RfP → Wikipedia:Requests for permissions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

I would like to see this redirect restored to it's previous target, which it pointed to for 15 years - Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. Chickdat retargeted this redirect to point at requests for permissions on 6th July last year, on the 7th of July they nominated it's fully capitalised brother WP:RFP for retargeting [3] which ended with a unanimous consensus to keep it pointing at Requests for page protection. I reverted Chickdat's retargeting of this redirect earlier today, which they in turn reverted claiming that they have consensus to retarget it. I can find no evidence of such a consensus existing and no discussions regarding this redirect, so I'm bringing it here. It is completely ludicrous to have a situation where WP:RFP, WP:Rfp and WP:RfP point to different targets, I came across this redirect earlier today when I ended up at the wrong place while searching for Requests for Page protection. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 15:44, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

See also the redirect's talk page, where someone else is complaining about the retargeting. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 15:49, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Restore redirect to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection per nom and previous consensus. Jalen Folf (talk) 15:51, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Restore redirect to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection per nom and previous consensus. There's no evidence of consensus for the July 2020 retarget, notwithstanding the claims. It's poor practice to vary the redirect targets based on case alone, and the one discussion we have of targeting shows a strong consensus for that target to be Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. Furthermore, a spot check of uses of this redirect on talk pages show an intent to link to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, not to the current target of Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. The undiscussed retargeting broke pretty much all the links for which it was in use; restoring it to its longstanding status will correct that. TJRC (talk) 16:02, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

  That redirect has actually been nominated for retargeting three times - July 2008 July 2020 and February 2021, all of which closed with a consensus for Requests for Page Protection. 163.1.15.238 (talk) 16:10, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Restore original target per TJRC, all others above and multiple previous consensuses. Thryduulf (talk) 16:58, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

  I also suggest protecting the redirect to avoid any future unilateral retargetting or other disruption. Thryduulf (talk) 17:02, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Requests for page protection gets WP:RFPP and WP:RfPP. Those I support; those are its only logical redirects. WP:RFP and WP:RfP. Requests For Permissions. These redirects are not used very often at their current target, but are used a lot at their other, like WP:RFP/PCR to request pending changes reviewer and WP:RFP/PM to request page mover. Even on Twinkle, where there isn't enough room for a four-letter shortcut, it's RPP. And in the February 2021 discussion, there was actually a rough consensus to disambiguate, not keep at current target. Therefore, per WP:COMMONNAME (I know it is usually used at RM, but I can still use it here), which I use because the regular editor uses RFP and RfP as Wikipedia:Requests for permissions, I vote to keep the redirect the way it is and to additionally retarget WP:RFP to Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 10:22, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
• Restore redirect to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection, as much history e.g. people linking to it on pages/comments has been lost by unilateral decision to change redirect. Also, way more people will be looking for page protection rather than additional permissions, as nobody will ever need to visit permissions more than ~5 times ever. And there was a consensus for this redirect in 2020, and no consensus for the change. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:25, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

  @Joseph2302: There was a rough consensus to disambiguate in the February discussion. How about that for "consensus for this redirect?" 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 10:27, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

  Assuming you mean Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2021 February_19#Wikipedia:RFP, that had a clear outcome The result of the discussion was keep for Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. If you mean another discussion, then you'll need to link to it, but none of the linked discussions here show anything other than clear preference for Wikipedia:Requests for permissions. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:31, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

  Actually 34% of the votes are for Disambiguate. 🐔 Chicdat  ^{Bawk to me!} 10:45, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

  And it's not a vote, it's a consensus. And the closer noted the consensus was keep. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:48, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

2027 Cricket World Cup

• 2027 Cricket World Cup → Cricket World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This has been deleted many, many times before. Literally nothing is known about this tournament. It may take place in 2027, but that's it. Time to delete and salt this. This was the last AfD too, from August 2021. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 09:32, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete and salt per nom and WP:TOOSOON. This can be recreated when there is something to say about the tournament beyond "it is expected that a tournament will happen at this time". Thryduulf (talk) 14:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: It's likely the next Cricket World Cup will be in 2027, but nothing is confirmed. As such, there's no mention at target article, which is a firm reason to delete. And salt it. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:00, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Xus

• Xus → Latromirus  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

See Talk:Latromirus for background. Xus appeared as a placeholder name for Latromirus in a preprint. Xus is generally used as a hypothetical name in abstract discussions of zoological nomenclature (see [4]). Other three letter words ending in -us are also used as hypothetical names. Xus has no particular affinity for Latromirus. Plantdrew (talk) 02:14, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

• Weak Retarget to Xu as R from plural --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:42, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:53, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
• REtarget to Xu as {{R from plural}} -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:53, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Xu, {{R from plural}}.

I note that the only reason this redirect exists at all is that the author of the thesis that was the major source for the article used Xus as a placeholder name (X being the traditional indicator used for an unknown, and -us being the common genus suffix). Xus was then used as the article name by the creating editor, who apparently mistook its placeholder use in the thesis for an actual name. The article was subsequently moved to a more appropriate name Latromirus. The redirect "Xus" is merely debris from the move from the initial incorrect name. See discussion at Talk:Latromirus, as well as the further discussion in this blog article “Xus yus” : the problem of placeholder names in preprints. TJRC (talk) 19:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I'd also be okay with a delete on the basis that only one of the entities listed on the Xu disambiguation page ("X unit (symbol xu)") is subject to pluralization. All of the others are proper nouns or abbreviations for proper nouns. TJRC (talk) 19:36, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

The surname can be plural (eg: The Unforgettable Memory#Xus). -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment. Per Wiktionary, Xus is a contraction of Christus. Xus is also attested as an autonym for the Tolowa people. Both are very minor usages, but I thought I'd report my findings. -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Then we could dabify it with these two uses, and plural of Xu, for a 3dab -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 22:52, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

    • Support dab. I'm fine with this as well. --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:32, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Naya Rivera drowning

• Naya Rivera drowning → Death of Naya Rivera  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

unused redirect left over from reversion of undiscussed page move TJRC (talk) 03:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Weak keep. While yes, the page move was undiscussed, and it doesn't seem to get very many pageviews nowadays, it's unambiguous and potentially helpful. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 12:59, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep per Sonic. The only notable person called Naya Rivera did drown so it's quite plausible for someone to search for information about the event at this title. Thryduulf (talk) 14:32, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Nigger toes

• Nigger toes → Brazil nut  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

The redirect is offensive and abusive. ―NK1406 02:14, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom Weak keep per Tavix, plus we are not Urban Dictionary, and that term is outdated and unacceptable by modern standards, but it is still used in outdated works. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 03:13, 21 October 2021 (UTC), updated 03:23, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep as an attested historical name, thus useful for someone using a dated work. Per the article: In North America, as early as 1896, Brazil nuts were sometimes known by the slang term "nigger toes", a vulgarity that gradually fell out of use as the racial slur became socially unacceptable. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:17, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Reluctant Keep, while agreeing with the nom's characterization of the phrase. The term is clearly racist, but for a long time was regrettably the common name in some areas for Brazil nuts. TJRC (talk) 03:26, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep: concur with Tavix —¿philoserf? (talk) 14:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep per Tavix. The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there. Thryduulf (talk) 14:36, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep as a dated yet plausible and sourced synonym --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:00, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep - agree it is very offensive. Wikipedia is not censored, though, and this was the common name for the nut for decades, sad enough. But it also shows how far we’ve come. I don’t want to ignore that progress, i just don’t want to go back there. --awkwafaba (📥) 12:57, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Chosen, Japan

• Chosen, Japan → Korea under Japanese rule  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Chōsen, Japan → Korea under Japanese rule  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]  Added -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Seems to me like it would be more offensive than useful. Title format gives the impression that Chosen was a place in Japan when it was a different country occupied by it. Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:38, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

I have found more similar redirects which only reinforces the idea that this is inappropriate and untenable: Chōsen, Japan and Taiwan, Japan. In my opinion, this is leading us toward India, England; Ceilão, Portugal; Ceylon, England; America, England; and many more ridiculous redirects. Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:46, 26 September 2021 (UTC) [Revised formatting for clarity] Coastside (talk) 17:56, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

• Delete as per nominator. Also, redirect in question is unhelpful, confusing, and unlikely to be needed. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 17:54, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
• Delete Coastside (talk) 17:58, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
• They are different countries except during 1910–1945, when Chōsen (Korea) was part of Japan. There are also redirects like Macau, Portugal. Konno Yumeto 05:16, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
• Keep - I'm not seeing a reason to delete. Being "offensive" is irrelevant per WP:RNEUTRAL and the fact that redirects are NOT highly visible. As to the "title format gives the impression that Chosen was a place in Japan when it was a different country occupied by it" is irrelevant or incorrect for a few reasons, including the fact that a redirect doesn't need to be "correct" if it aids in searching, and that at least my reading of consensus on Wikipedia is that it was not an occupation at all, eg see Talk:Korea_under_Japanese_rule/Archive_2#Requested_move_2012. I am struggling to see how it could be considered confusing since it is literally an article about a part of Japan (or at least the former Japanese Empire) called "Chosen". The politics of the situation aren't really relevant. I believe it is plausible someone would search in this way, and I believe this is the article they are looking for. Redirects are especially helpful for articles with long, non-obvious names such as this one. A7V2 (talk) 04:02, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:09, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

• Rename the redirect to Chosen, Empire of Japan -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 02:02, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
  • That would be discouraged per WP:MOVEREDIRECT. -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:57, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to add Chōsen, Japan
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:55, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep per A7V2. I think the complain would have had some merit if the target page was Korea as a whole, but the target here is Korea as part of the Japanese Empire, so it makes sense. Cavarrone 08:20, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Mr. Huggles

• Mr. Huggles → Nicktoons: Attack of the Toybots#Characters  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This is one of the most common enemies in the game, who used to have an article for less than a minute in November 2008 until it was redirected to the target. Now he isn't mentioned anymore on the page since the character section was removed almost nine-and-a-half years later, making this redirect seem like WP:GAMECRUFT at this point. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 01:44, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete A character of the same name is mentioned at W.I.T.C.H. (TV series), but that article needs a serious fancruft trim, and the character is mentioned only in passing at List of W.I.T.C.H. characters. 16:12, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: Not mentioned at target, and not a useful (non fandom) alternative target for it. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:01, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

October 20

HAIFA

• HAIFA → Haifa  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Created four years ago as a redirect to HAIFA construction and recently changed to Haifa. Is someone who searched on all caps more likely to be looking for the city or the hash function usage? No current usage in other articles. MB 22:51, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to HAIFA construction. Similar cases like BATMAN, COBRA, and COWS don't point to the normally-cased base title (e.g. Batman) either. They point to the respective disambiguation pages which have multiple topics written in all-caps. However in this case the current target is the only topic at Haifa (disambiguation) which is normally written in all-caps. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 01:27, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Haifa (disambiguation) as {{R from other capitalisation}} and {{R from ambiguous term}}. Have you ever hit CapsLock by accident? This is the same as e.g. band names stylised in caps, where our article is Bandname (band) or Bandname, not BANDNAME. Narky Blert (talk) 04:52, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• First choice is to to the city as person who just writes HAIFA he probably forgot his caps lock. The Second choice Haifa (disambiguation)

Shrike (talk) 15:26, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

National Coffee Ice Cream Day

• National Coffee Ice Cream Day → List of food days#September  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• National Macadamia Nut Day → List of food days#September  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Beer Lover's Day → List of food days  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• National Beer Lover's Day → List of food days#September  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Wienerschnitzel Day → List of food days#September  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• National Steak Au Poivre Day → List of food days#September  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• National TV Dinner Day → List of food days#September  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• National Acorn Squash Day → List of food days#September  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• National Eat a Hoagie Day → List of food days#September  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Various food days, not mentioned at target and otherwise only listed as passing mentions at the September article with links back to the list at the redirects' target. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 21:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment So? Add them! Remember to source 'em reliably! Here's a couple for "National beer Lovers Day" to get ya started!

• Irish Post (Hey! If you went through the shit they did your country would be famously inebriated too!)

• USAToday (Yup, we have our fair share of drunkards! [mostly with battered wives and sad kids that can just about start to hear the mournful sound of CPS vehicles fast approaching, but I digress.) Americanfreedom (talk) 22:46, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment: I merged the National Eat a Hoagie Day discussion into this one. Hopefully that helps. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 02:20, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget all to the corresponding section in September. Unlink the entries from September to avoid the self-redirect. Jay (talk) 05:49, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

The Can Opener

• The Can Opener → Norfolk Southern–Gregson Street Overpass  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Currently redirects to the overpass with the nickname of "The Can Opener". In my opinion, Can opener would be a better target as, while having 25 less average daily page views than the overpass article, it is far more notable. Figured this could go either way, especially considering factors like the fact that the redirect is in Title Case, so I'm starting this discussion. iWillBanU (User:Mattx8y) ^{what did i fuck up now} 18:51, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep: for me it's not about the capitals, but the 'The'. I don't think readers are looking for can opener and starting their search with a definite article. Firefangledfeathers (talk) 19:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep as-is. The hatnote on can opener will get readers to what they're looking for. It strikes me as very implausible that any reader interested in the topic of devices for opening cans (which in the very earliest days included hammer and chisel) would start their search query "the". Narky Blert (talk) 19:18, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• The keep per Narky Blert. ~~~~
  User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 22:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep as-is, agree with above. MB 03:45, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Reformed

• Reformed → Calvinism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Many other things than religion can be reformed; including but not limited to to bands, criminals, legal systems and petroleum. Retarget to DAB page Reform (disambiguation) as {{R from ambiguous term}}. Narky Blert (talk) 12:54, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom. As an observation, the Reform (disambiguation) page could do with some attention, I'm not sure I've seen a disambiguation page with that many see alsos before. Thryduulf (talk) 14:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

  @Thryduulf: I have, almost, in 2018. At least all SAs bar one in Reform (disambiguation) bear plausible relations to the title and belong on the page. I've made a note to tidy it up. Narky Blert (talk) 18:36, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Reform (disambiguation) per nom and Thryduulf. Although Calvinism does appear in the first Google search results for the term, I don't really see a reason why it should be the primary topic, given the many other uses and ambiguity. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 20:18, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Reform (disambiguation) per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:18, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

ST9

• ST9 → Star Trek: Insurrection  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

The source phrase of "ST9" does not appear in the target article. I'd propose that the redirect be deleted. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 06:33, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete as ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:27, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. I can't find anything in search results that could be an alternative target let alone enough for a dab page. Thryduulf (talk) 22:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: While this is an abbreviation of the film's name, it is far to vague to be useful. Furthermore, I support the deletion of ST8. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 15:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
• Weak keep - only the second through sixth Star Trek films are series numbered in their titles, but this was the ninth Trek film made. Absent any other uses, this is harmless. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 15:26, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep: I am the one who made this redirect page, as well as notes on the disambiguation pages for ST3 and ST6, the redirect page ST8 and a note at the top of the page ST10 redirects to, because when I typed ST7 (expecting Star Trek Generations) that page had a note at the top redirecting me there. The disambiguation pages for ST1, ST2, ST4, and ST5 had redirects as well. I figured it would be harmless (as well as balanced) unless there was something else that was referred to by this name. --Specialsam110 (talk) 19:00, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
• Weak keep per creator's statement immediately above. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Disambiguate for the things which actually meet WP:DABMENTION (ST9 in the ST postcode area, the Sarsılmaz Arms ST9, the ST9 exam of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries) and put the current target in the "See also" section. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 00:45, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:INVOLVED relist to allow the October 7 log page to be closed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 11:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Dabify, since this is certainly referred to as ST9 in the wider world, (ninth Star Trek film), and there are other ST9 uses. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 22:48, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Te Ao Maori

• Te Ao Maori → Māori people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Te ao Māori → Māori people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
• Te Ao Māori → Māori people  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

Wanting to have a discussion around the best target for this redirect (and the similar Te ao Māori. This concept translates loosely as the Māori world, and is generally used to describe Māori concepts, beliefs, and ways of doing things moreso than Māori themselves as a group. As such, I feel like another page that relates to this, such as Tikanga Māori, Mātauranga Māori or even Māori culture might be better suited as a target. I'm not quite sure which of these however, and I'm keen to have a kōrero (talk) about it, hence putting it up for discussion. Turnagra (talk) 05:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment tagged Te ao Māori and other capitalised forms and added them to the discussion. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 05:26, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget all to Māori culture. I was unfamiliar with the term until today - when this article in The Guardian informed me. Narky Blert (talk) 04:30, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

A Random Act of SpongeBob

• A Random Act of SpongeBob → List of SpongeBob SquarePants episodes#A Random Act of SpongeBob  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This is a series of SpongeBob shorts that aired in November 2006, which isn't mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia at the target since the section wasn't restored after being removed more than a year later. It also has an erroneous {{R from section}} that The Transhumanist added in 2018. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 05:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Best Day Ever, where it's mentioned with some info. Narky Blert (talk) 14:12, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Support retargeting to Best Day Ever as nom. It is indeed mentioned somewhere on Wikipedia. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 15:20, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikiholic

• Wikiholic → Wikipedia:Wikipediholic  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Unnecessary cross-namespace redirect. Elli (talk | contribs) 04:06, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete this should actually be a G4 per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2006 August 2#Wikiholics, Wikiholic, Wikiholoc, Wikipediholic, Wikipediholism → Wikipedia:Wikipediholic but since we're here no harm in re-establishing the consensus in a more recent discussion. Regards, 2A0A:C802:4:1:0:0:0:34 (talk) 04:18, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Weak soft redirect to wikt:wikiholic, this is actually the 8th time a page has been created at this title (7 times as a redirect, once as a dicdef), although the first time since 2006-7. This suggests that people are looking this up and so we should have something here, and a soft redirect to Wiktionary seems fine, and I've added a link to the project page to Wiktionary's entry for someone who wants more than the definition. Thryduulf (talk) 14:37, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Template:Uda

• Template:Uda → Template:Update  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Orphan and delete. This recently-created redirect has been used only one time (by its creator) and is extremely implausible either as a misspelling or abbreviation of the target. Having unreadable abbreviations in Wiki markup just makes it harder to understand, which is not worth the benefit of saving four keystrokes in typing out the far-more-understandable English word "update". For comparison, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 5#Template:Reimprove where we deleted a much more plausible misspelling. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 03:58, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. On seeing the title I expect this to be a redirect to Template:Ulster Defence Association. Thryduulf (talk) 14:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per Thryduulf; wrong capitalisation for Template:Ulster Defence Association. Narky Blert (talk) 04:36, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep - Keep, or redirect to Template:Ulster Defence Association. --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:06, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

  Why? Thryduulf (talk) 09:08, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

SuWiki

• SuWiki → SketchUp  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not mentioned at target, nor anywhere else on Wikipedia. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 16:30, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment in Wikipedia/WMF jargon, suwiki refers to su.wikipedia.org, the Sundanese language edition of Wikipedia. su.wikipedia.org and Sundanese Wikipedia both redirect to List of Wikipedias, the latter as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sundanese Wikipedia (June 2013). Thryduulf (talk) 02:05, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:05, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Malita (disambiguation)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy delete per WP:CSD#G14.

Triangle Strategy

• Triangle Strategy → List of Square Enix video games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This also seems like it could reasonably point to triangulation (politics), which describes a political triangle strategy. Unsure if the Square Enix video game is the primary use. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 01:20, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep I cannot find any real-world instances of triangulation (politics) being referred to as "triangle strategy". There are some other topics actually called "triangle strategy" [5] but I don't think we have coverage of those. All uses of the phrase "triangle strategy" in Wikipedia are in reference to this game, meaning there's nothing else that meets WP:DABMENTION to create a disambiguation page either. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 04:02, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Redirect to Octopath Traveler#Legacy and leave it as a redirect with potential. It's notable enough to make its own article if someone were to make it._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 08:31, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Australia is why

• Australia is why → Telstra  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

The "slogan" doesn't actually appear in the target page. This doesn't seem like a reasonable redirect to have. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 01:16, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete: It is mentioned in quite a few sources from a quick search, so it seems reasonable to have it mentioned somewhere, but since it isn't mentioned anywhere in Wikipedia currently, it is unhelpful to readers who search for the term. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 02:21, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Section du Théâtre-Français

• Section du Théâtre-Français → Jean-Paul Marat  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Yes, I get that at one point this subject was named after the target. But does it have to redirect towards his article? I don't think he ever represented there or had any special connection to it other than it being renamed in his honor.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  00:59, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

FlyingKitty

• FlyingKitty → YouTube Rewind 2018: Everyone Controls Rewind#Reception  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

FlyingKitty is a highly active YouTuber, and is more than just Youtube Rewind 2018. But I don't think they are notable either, so I propose that this redirect be deleted, as there is no apparent purpose. 98.179.127.59 (talk) 00:12, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• @98.179.127.59: New nominations go to the top of the page, not the bottom, I have just corrected this. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 00:22, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • @Champion: Thanks. 98.179.127.59 (talk) 00:26, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• I don't think notability applies for redirects. ― Qwerfjkltalk 06:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete regardless of notability, Wikipedia discusses two different videos in which he appears. Search results are more informative than a redirect to just one of those videos. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 07:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Note: if this is deleted, I created a few similar redirects at WP:AFCRC they should also be deleted. ― Qwerfjkltalk 20:24, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

U2BE

• U2BE → YouTube  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

No evidence of this stylisation. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 00:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep as helpful, odd nomination statement as there absolutely is evidence of this stylisation as a 10-second search would reveal. Frequently searched up here as well. No reason for inconveniencing the reader here. Looks at first to be ambiguous with The Belgian U2 Experience but that is U2be rather than U2BE. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 00:45, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • @J947: If I'm not mistaken there is a chance that the acronym etc. websites are simply copying this usage from Wikipedia, a Google search for the term minus Wikipedia only brings up 52 unique hits and most of them aren't using it as a synonym for YouTube. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 02:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
    • @Champion: Huh, it says 93,600 results and only displays 58/59. There's still the matter of the pageviews however. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 04:23, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
      • @J947: Then, you can't be sure people looking this term will be helped by the current target, and given I'm not seeing much evidence that other sources are using it as a synonym for YouTube, I'm inclined to believe that they won't. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 04:35, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
        • I doubt they are looking for other targets in significant numbers, and in consideration of the circumstances I think it would be better to keep it as it is. But YMMV. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 04:40, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep This does not appear to be a common way to refer to YouTube, yet as a redirect it is harmless. I did not identify any other notable targets for the redirect, so keeping it as is seems reasonable. ―NK1406 02:22, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

October 19

Laura Brehm

• Laura Brehm → Losing You (Ephixa and Laura Brehm song)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

I don't think there's any good possible redirect target for Laura Brehm, so this redirect should be deleted. She's worked on multiple songs/albums. No redirect target we have provides much useful information about her that a reader would be looking for, and the current target is somewhat WP:ASTONISHing. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:06, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep as this is the only song with an article that this artist has worked on. When a more notable, more successful song that Brehm contributed to releases, we can retarget there. Jalen Folf (talk) 23:09, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
  • I'm not suggesting retargeting to any song. Any user searching for Laura Brehm would not find the information they'd like to know on Losing You (Ephixa and Laura Brehm song). Could for example also redirect to TheFatRat who she's worked on multiple songs with - but that wouldn't be a good idea either, because that doesn't provide much useful info on her. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:32, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Allison Young

• Allison Young → List of Terminator (franchise) characters#Allison Young  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Deletion, or new page for singer Allison Young. There is no "Allison Young" text in the current target page. Zaslav (talk) 21:51, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to List of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles characters#Allison Young, there are multiple lists for the Terminator franchise, so it would be useful to check the other one. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 21:39, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment all the incoming redirects need to be checked, as there was a redirection mess in March 2021 where redirects appeared at the TSSC list, and the "redirect bot" *fixed* the double redirects, so they all need to be reverted if they haven't already been so. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 21:43, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Blue phone

• Blue phone → Telephone interpreting  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

No mention of "blue" at the target, no relevant results in an internet search. Delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:42, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to BLU Products, a company that sells mobile phones, as a homophone and the only thing I'm finding in search results other than phones which happen to be blue. Possibly add a hatnote to Blu (Italian company), as they were also in the mobile phone business, but I don't know they were ever referred to as "Blu phone" and as they've been defunct for a decade it's not easy to tell. Thryduulf (talk) 22:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete, unless there is ample documented evidence of "blue phone" being used colloquially by doctors. As the creator of the redirect, I'd like to clarify that I was referring to the interpreter phones used in hospitals, which are very often bright blue (particularly models made by CyraCom Language Solutions and LanguageLine Solutions). I have only ever heard one doctor call interpreter phones "blue phones," and unless we find out that a significant amount of doctors call them that, we shouldn't keep a redirect based off what just one person calls them.
  A retarget to BLU Products could potentially work, but I doubt it would be used very often. Marisauna (talk) 01:19, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment; I'm seeing stuff about CyraCom Language Solutions, a company that apparently provides blue phones that offices can use to contact interpreters. I think that might be what the redirect creator had in mind.  — Mr. Guye (talk) (contribs)  01:29, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment: redirect creator here, that is precisely what I had in mind.
  My full explanation is above; if it can be verified that people call CyraCom phones "blue phones" colloquially, then I say the redirect should be kept. Marisauna (talk) 01:34, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

  If there isn't any mention in the target article then people will just be confused. If you can source it, and it's WP:DUE, then a mention can be added and we can target whatever section the mention is in. In that case I'd add a hatnote to BLU Products (maybe {{redirect-distinguish}}). Thryduulf (talk) 02:41, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:SK4

• Wikipedia:SK4 → Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Slowking4  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

I propose retargeting this to point at Wikipedia:Speedy keep#4 to match WP:SK1 WP:SK2 and WP:SK3. I came across this by accident and thought it strange that this redirect didn't match the other redirects of this form. I'm not seeing any particular reason to have this targeting the long term abuse case when we already have the standard WP:LTA/SK4 shortcut. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 16:39, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom. We always need to be careful with retargetting shortcut redirects to avoid breaking discussion old and new when linked and unlinked references refer to targets irrelevant to the discussion or which mean different things to different people. However here, there are no links and the unlinked uses I can find all either relate to Speedy keep point 4 or are not relating to the shortcut in any way. Thryduulf (talk) 22:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Florida, Florida

• Florida, Florida → Florida City, Florida  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Google searches aren't indicating that this is a real name commonly used to refer to this city. Hog Farm _Talk 05:26, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep per my !vote in the section below. Google results are misleading here, and it's a plausible search term. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 05:59, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
• Weak delete I think the redirect is silly and highly unlikely to be a search term, but then I grew up in Miami, and always knew the place as Florida City. There is a pressure to avoid ambiguity in naming things, and I just don't see people calling the city Florida. There is a municipality in Collier County that used to be officially named just Everglades, but everyone insisted on calling it Everglades City to avoid confusion with the wetlands area, so the municipality gave in and changed the official name. - Donald Albury 16:01, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep per Tamzin and the arguments at the #Kansas, Missouri discussion below. Thryduulf (talk) 09:59, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete, this was created by a user with a history of creating redirects from made-up terms. If someone can show usage for the term, I will reconsider. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:08, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

  Unfortunately, despite this being an obviously plausible search term for those unfamiliar with how Americans refer to their cities it's almost impossible to demonstrate this use as firstly it will mostly be an informal use and secondly even, using a verbatim search Google completely ignores the comma and presents results for a mix of "Florida" and any page that happens to have two or more instances of the word "Florida" in close proximity in the source (see, e.g.[6]). Thryduulf (talk) 10:51, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:53, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep as harmless and potentially useful for navigation. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:43, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Kansas, Missouri

• Kansas, Missouri → Kansas City, Missouri  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Doesn't seem to be an actual common name for this city. Hog Farm _Talk 05:26, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. It's hard to get good information from Google because it ignores the comma and "Kansas Missouri" comes up much more often in phrases like "Kansas–Missouri border". This gets a few pageviews a month; hard to say if that trend will hold, but regardless, I would argue that "$cityname, $state" → "$cityname City, $state" is an inherently plausible search term. Someone unfamiliar with U.S. geography won't necessarily know the general rule that you can drop "City of" from a city's name but not drop a trailing "City". Plus the most famous city in the U.S. is the one major exception to that rule; yes, New York City is technically just called "New York" to begin with, but most people don't know that. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 05:51, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
  • I spent half my life 2.5 hours from KC and have never heard this used once. It's just as likely to refer to the dual topic of Kansas and Missouri. Hog Farm _Talk 06:06, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
    • I'm not saying it's a name that's used there. I'm saying it's a name that some people might use out of ignorance, for instance if they see "Kansas City, Missouri" on a map and don't know that in American placenames we generally don't drop the "City" bit . A forgivable misunderstanding given that our largest city is the one(?) exception to that rule. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 06:20, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep per Tamzin. This is a plausible error for someone unfamiliar with American naming practices. Thryduulf (talk) 09:58, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Kansas and Missouri per Hog Farm. Another Midwesterner checking in to confirm that "Kansas, Missouri" is not used for the city in my experience, but I can maybe see it as plausible for the Border War. I'm also fine with deletion, and I definitely prefer deletion over keeping as-is. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:04, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

  Per Tamzin this might not be used locally, but it's definitely a plausible search term for those who are not locals. If this is targetted to Kansas and Missouri it will need a hatnote to the present target. I strongly oppose retargetting to Border War (Kansas–Missouri rivalry) per WP:ASTONISH. Thryduulf (talk) 10:46, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:53, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

IMix

• IMix → ITunes#iMix  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

No longer mentioned in target. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 01:54, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

• Very weak retarget to History of iTunes#iTunes 4, which mentions iMix briefly. Else delete. Seeing the variety of results at Special:Search/~Imix, I'm going to be making a DAB page at Imix; so if this is retargeted it should probably have a hatnote to the dab. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 06:42, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:52, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Just Another War in Space

• Just Another War in Space → List of real-time strategy video games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not mentioned at target, and extremely obscure so probably shouldn't be included there (and thus should not exist as a redirect either) Fram (talk) 14:00, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to List of Atari ST games where mentioned. The developer Azeroth Publishing doesn't seem to have an article.. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 02:34, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Well, it was only added after the RfD started[7], and oh dear, what a dreadful list that is (that lead sentence is the icing on the unreferenced cake). I don't really see what this redirect adds (will anyone search for the title and not already know that it is an Atari ST game?), but oh well. Fram (talk) 07:19, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. I agree with Fram that List of Atari ST games is a dreadful list (and I just tagged it as unreferenced). In my opinion, skeleton mentions that do not include any additional information is not substantial enough to support a redirect. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:19, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:37, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Buffalo Football Team

• Buffalo Football Team → Buffalo Bills  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Ambiguous with Buffalo Bulls football, suggest retargeting to Sports in Buffalo. Hog Farm _Talk 17:38, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Sports in Buffalo per nom. While the Bills are certainly the more well known topic, they're rarely referred to as the "Buffalo Football Team" and search results for "Buffalo Football Team" show results for both the Bulls and Bills on the first page. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 17:45, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete. This is an attempt to make other Washington Football Team names. No traction yet to rename; reconsider when it becomes official. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 02:30, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete Most G-hits for the term 'buffalo bills renaming' involve the current 'name du jour' of Highmark Stadium, not the team being renamed (first result among many for that is sixteen results down). This isn't happening. Nate • (chatter) 04:42, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Sports in Buffalo per Hog Farm, if anything the Bulls are primary for searches on the exact phrase, with a few hits for the Bills and football team(s) of at least one Buffalo High School but without quotes there is clearly no primary topic between them. Thryduulf (talk) 09:55, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Weakish retarget to Sports in Buffalo per nom. We don't have a WP:PRIMARYTOPIC here, and this action could potentially aid readers in their searches. The team isn't being renamed like Nate above me says, but there are still multiple teams (current and former) that the phrase could refer to. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 23:26, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Sports in Buffalo per nom and per a similar RfD for Atlanta Football Team. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:50, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. This is a made-up term in reference to Washington Football Team that is not in usage for any of the other NFL teams. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:13, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
  • @Tavix: Whether or not the intent was to refer to Washington Football Team (and I'm not certain it was) this is a highly plausible search term for someone looking for the football team playing in/associated with Buffalo who do not know or cannot remember their name in the same way Atlanta Football Team is used for that city. There are multiple such teams and no primary topic, so we should take readers to the existing page that lists the options. Thryduulf (talk) 11:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

That would be the case if the redirect were Buffato football team or Buffalo football, but then it should redirect to Buffalo (disambiguation)#Football. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:12, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:36, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

The disabled

• The disabled → Disability  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not sure this is really needed as a redirect; we don't have a redirect for the deaf/the Deaf to redirect to our Deafness article. "The disabled" as a term is also deprecated by a lot of style guides; see Wikipedia:WikiProject Disability/Style advice. AFreshStart (talk) 22:05, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. Despite the term being oft deprecated it remains a useful entry point to the topic of disability for those ignorant of the deprecation. It does more good than harm, and the deletion of it seems like busywork Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 22:26, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep per Timtrent. It's not harmful to the 'pedia and might occasionally be useful. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:48, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. I can't say I've ever even thought of putting "the" into wikipedia at the start of a term. Who, realistically, is searching "the disabled" instead of just "disabled"? If you look at the page views for each redirect, no one. No one has used "the disabled" in the last month before this RfD went up, but hundreds have used "disabled". There is no reason to have this term, which is deprecated not only by WP style guides and relevant external organisations, but also just isn't any where near as commonly said now, when it is also simply not useful. Redirects are cheap, so why should we keep it when no one is or will use it? --Xurizuri (talk) 09:15, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:35, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. If "The gays" is an acceptable disambiguation then so is "The disabled". Marisauna (talk) 04:17, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
  • @Marisauna: Question: is "The gays" acceptable? You have not actually made an argument as to why either one is worth keeping. You may want to have a look at WP:WHATABOUT and WP:OTHERCONTENT. Also, they aren't directly comparable. "The disabled" is actively insulting and dehumanising in a way that really isn't also true for "the gays". It's not good for either group, but it's not the same. --Xurizuri (talk) 05:10, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep. This is a way of referring to a group of disabled people that is/was in use, but which is considered to be offensive, see for example this style guide from the UK government [8] which advises against use of "the disabled". Redirects do not have to be inoffensive, they merely need to be plausible search terms, see WP:RNEUTRAL and WP:NOTCENSORED. It does see some use (~20 page views in the last year) and is pointing to a reasonable target, so in my opinion it should be kept. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 08:11, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep per 192.76... Thryduulf (talk) 14:17, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

24 pounder

• 24 pounder → 24-pounder long gun  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Heavily ambiguous, as this was a generic cannon rating. There's also the M1841 24-pounder howitzer and the 24-pounder Dahlgren gun and maybe others; specific meaning is probably too context-specific to point to a single place. Hog Farm _Talk 04:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

• Disambig per nom. Thryduulf (talk) 11:16, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
• setindexify per nom. Add information on what being a 24-pounder means (ie. it's not the weight of the gun itself) -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 21:46, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Well I Never

• Well I Never → Never have I ever  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

"Well I never" is a phrase used for exclamation of great surprise, not a drinking game. ––FormalDude talk 06:56, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

• Soft redirect to Wikt:well, I never, which defines the exclamation (1^st choice), or retarget to Flesh & Blood (Whitesnake album)#Track listing, which includes a song by that title (2^nd choice). To be fair, this originally targeted the page when it was under the title I never (a term for which a redirect exists in Wiktionary), and there is a possibility it could be used in such a drinking game, but there's a good chance the current target would WP:ASTONISH people. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ (Well, I never!) 15:34, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

* Retarget to Flesh & Blood (Whitesnake album). Since this phrase without the comma is the title of a song in the album, I would redirect there with {{R from song}}. The phrase, "Well, I never", technically should have a comma, and the wiktionary entry is correctly punctuated with a comma. I wouldn't soft redirect an incorrectly punctuated phrase to wiktionary, especially when there is a reasonable article to redirect to. Coastside (talk) 17:31, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

• Note: Well I never, I never, and I Never all redirect to Never have I ever, while Well I Never (song) redirects to Flesh & Blood (Whitesnake album). - Eureka Lott 17:38, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
• Well I never! Never have I ever expected this to be this redirect's target. Retarget per above, since article content should take precedence over a soft redirect, with hatnote to Wiktionary. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 17:51, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
• Note: Uh, turns out it's also a song that was a b-side single by Hedge and Donna. Different song, meaning F&B didn't do a cover. Should probably hat note the Flesh & Blood article to point there I suppose. Coastside (talk) 19:35, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

  Hmm... Then I wonder if a DAB would be the better course of action. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 19:37, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

  A dab with two entries? Coastside (talk) 20:37, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

  Three entries, since there would also be a Wiktionary link. Dabs with only two entries are perfectly acceptable, regardless. Mlb96 (talk) 05:12, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

  A Wiktionary link on a dab isn't an entry. It's cross-link at the top of the dab for a dictionary definition. Entries are links to articles. Regarding being acceptable, per WP:ONEOTHER such a page "is not needed" and "may be deleted", at least if we consider the F&B song the primary topic. Acceptable, maybe, especially if we consider there to be no primary topic - but if someone deletes it later, it might be better to handle with hatnotes as per the guidance at WP:ONEOTHER at the start. Let me temper that by saying I'm fine with such a dab on the argument there is no primary topic if that's the consensus. Coastside (talk) 16:56, 3 October 2021 (UTC) [Revised] Coastside (talk) 16:59, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

  WP:ONEOTHER doesn't apply here, as there is no primary topic. The correct policy is WP:NOPRIMARY, which states that dab pages with two entries are acceptable (and even gives an example of one). Mlb96 (talk) 01:00, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

  Changing !vote to disambiguate (already drafted). If closed in favor of this outcome, Well I Never (song) should likely be retargeted here. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 00:35, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

  Changing vote to disambiguate as per Tamzin. Coastside (talk) 21:07, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

• Note: A quick google for ''"well i never" drinking game'' quickly confirms that this game is sometimes known by that term in Australia and NZ. Stevage 06:06, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:17, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

October 18

Sons

• Sons → Son Kolis  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

From 2005 until the middle of September 2021, this pointed to Son. It was changed to Son Kolis after an editor built a page on top of the existing redirect, and then moved it. I believe that a retarget is in order so that Sons points to Son. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 22:23, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Return to long time use per nom -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 23:15, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget back to Son (the longstanding primary topic) per nom and 64... above. We already have the page for Son Kolis, so now it doesn't serve the purpose of directing readers to a WP:ASTONISHingly different target. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 01:26, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Son: Revert to the long standing consensus, and common sense. Sons is plural of son, so that's what people will most likely be looking for. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:47, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Son as {{R from plural}} --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:34, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Differential notation

• Differential notation → Differential rotation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Notation for differentiation seems like a more apt place for us to retarget this redirect to. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 22:16, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• REtarget per nom. It certainly shouldn't stay where it is. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 23:16, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Notation for differentiation: Common sense that people would much more likely be searching for this, Joseph2302 (talk) 08:04, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Work from office

• Work from office → Office  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

It seems like commuting might be a better page to redirect this to, so I propose that this be retargeted. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 22:13, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Women's Hockey League

• Women's Hockey League → Zhenskaya Hockey League  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

I don't think that Zhenskaya Hockey League is the primary topic for "Women's Hockey League". I propose that this be retargeted to the relevant disambiguation page (currently at Women's Hockey League (disambiguation)). — Mikehawk10 (talk) 22:04, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Support the "disammbiguation" page is actually a set index, so it should be located at the base name or at women's hockey league instead, and the footer changed to {{SIA}} instead of {{dab}} -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 23:20, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Move dab over redirect per above. Thryduulf (talk) 23:53, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Move dab over redirect as no clear WP:PRIMARYTOPIC for the term Joseph2302 (talk) 08:05, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

October Storm

• October Storm → Lake Storm Aphid  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not the only notable storm in October. Destroyer (Alternate account) 21:25, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep or disambig. This is indeed far from the only notable storm to happen in October, but it seems to be one of only two referred to as the "October Storm" as a proper noun, the other being the Great storm of 1987 - and the latter is far more commonly the "Great October Storm" and so a hatnote to that would be appropriate. As a second choice a disambiguation page between the two of them and would be OK, but I don't think it's necessary as the current target is primary and the only other uses I found are a racehorse and a song, neither of which seem to be notable and three see also entries: the St. Jude storm (briefly referred to as the October Storm 2013 in Danish, i.e. Oktoberstormen 2013); Typhoon Songda (2016) (also known as the "Ides of October Storm"); and The October Storm of 1800 (about which we have less than a paragraph of information). The 2006 storm is also known as the Surprise October Storm, and is unquestionably the primary topic for that phrase but it does If we have list of notable storms that happened in October that should be hatnoted/dabbed too, but I don' t think we do. Thryduulf (talk) 22:05, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
  • It's also worth noting that a two-sentence "article" was independently created about this storm at this title 6 years before this redirect, beforebeing speedily deleted for no context (incorrectly as it was clearly about this storm, I would have speedily deleted it for no content though). Thryduulf (talk) 22:11, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Dabify -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 23:21, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Dabify per Thryduulf --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:36, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Things to Do in Phoenix When You're Dead (Medium)

• Things to Do in Phoenix When You're Dead (Medium) → Medium (season 4)#ep78  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

• Things to Do in Phoenix When You're Dead → Medium (season 4)#ep78  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

This is created as a redirect from the name of a television episode, but there does not exist any television episode with the redirect source as its title. Therefore, I propose that this be deleted. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 21:25, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget both to Medium (season 5)#ep78, the season containing the episode in question. Yes, Medium does have an episode by that name, but we don't want to put readers at the page for the wrong season. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 01:34, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Medium (season 5)#ep78 per Sonic. I was copy and pasting #REDIRECT [[Medium (season 4)#ep78]] into the redirects I was creating and must have forgotten to change the season. EN-Jungwon 03:32, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget as nom. The above seems more reasonable than deleting and recreating. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 00:36, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Moral supremacy

• Moral supremacy → Moral absolutism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This seems like it may be better fit as a redirect to Moral high ground than to Moral absolutism, so I propose that the redirect be retargeted along those lines. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 21:20, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Disambiguate between the two topics -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 23:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

James while John had a better effect on the teacher

• James while John had a better effect on the teacher → James while John had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This may be, per its creator's edit summary, a "shorter title", but that's because it strips away the thing that makes the phrase notable: all the "had"s. That would be fine if this were an abbreviation that people use, but that does not appear to be the case. This is essentially a shortcut title, which we don't do in mainspace. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 15:38, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Delete no need for a shortened sentence to be used as a redirect. We have search for this. User:GKFX^talk 20:50, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. I like this clipping because then you don't have to guess how many additional hads are in the sentence. One 'had' had a better effect on Tavix. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:21, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Weak keep per Tavix. The correct form certainly comes up in search results, so the utility of this redirect is questionable, but I suppose it could be useful for creating piped links and whatnot as an alternative to having to find and then copy/paste the cumbersome full title. Could possibly be confusing in that it could suggest the short version is also notable, however. On the fence here, Mdewman6 (talk) 21:24, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hog Farm _Talk 20:58, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. It seems useful with respect to us not having to type in a million "had"s and it may be useful when searching. This isn't harmful in any real way, so I see no reason to delete. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 21:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep keep keep keep keep keep keep keep keep keep keep per the "keep" voters above. It doesn't hurt hurt hurt hurt hurt hurt hurt hurt hurt hurt hurt to have a shorter title in cases like this, in fact fact fact fact fact fact fact fact fact fact fact it can also be helpful to people searching it. Regards regards regards regards regards regards regards regards regards regards regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 04:06, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Tiff Watson

• Tiff Watson → Made in Chelsea  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Should retarget to List of Made in Chelsea cast members, as she's actually mentioned there Joseph2302 (talk) 18:41, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 00:35, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget per nom. --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:31, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Ways and Means Committee

• Ways and Means Committee → Ways and means committee  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This had previously targeted to United States House Committee on Ways and Means for ten years. Is this a case where the capitalized version should have a different target because it most commonly means the US committee? MB 18:33, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep: Better to have it pointed at a general article rather than a specific one for the US. It's the same text but different capitalisation, we shouldn't be assuming that everyone wants to read about the US-specific content. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:57, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep per Joseph2302. If the capitalised title was US committee's proper name then it might be different, but as things stand there is no primary topic for "Ways and Means Committee" in any capitalisation. Thryduulf (talk) 11:21, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

All American authoritarian

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy delete per WP:CSD#G10

Bruce Whalen

• Bruce Whalen → 2006 United States House of Representatives election in South Dakota  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

The subject has declared his candidacy for the United States Senate from South Dakota in 2022. The subject should be redirected from the 2006 election to the 2022 election, which is much more likely to be what the reader is looking for. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:20, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget as nominator. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:21, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft:R.O.B. Gronkowski

• Draft:R.O.B. Gronkowski → Rob Gronkowski  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

Not a plausible redirect to Rob Gronkowski. Larry Hockett (Talk) 22:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

• Note moved from MfD Elli (talk | contribs) 15:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: No idea why this redirect from draftspace to an existing article was created recently. Makes no sense, and there's no history to preserve (which is generally why we keep sensible redirects from draft to mainspace). Joseph2302 (talk) 21:56, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Delete me Telfer

• Draft:Delete me Telfer → Randall Telfer  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

Not a plausible redirect (not even mentioned as a nickname at the target article). Larry Hockett (Talk) 21:51, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

See NFL.com. --2601:192:8801:6970:3152:C359:81F3:656A (talk) 21:52, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

NFL.com doesn't mention a thing at Randall Telfer's page. Larry Hockett (Talk) 21:55, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

See this link: https://www.nfl.com/players/delete-me-telfer/ --2601:192:8801:6970:3152:C359:81F3:656A (talk) 21:56, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't see where it says that refers to Randall Telfer. Larry Hockett (Talk) 22:03, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

• Note moved from MfD Elli (talk | contribs) 15:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: Pointless redirect, looks like an IP just wanting to cause disruption (as they can't create in article space, it's gone into draftspace). Joseph2302 (talk) 21:57, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Truth Of Consequences

• Truth Of Consequences → List of All Grown Up! episodes  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

The episode's name is Truth or Consequences. Kailash29792 (talk) 10:42, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Truth or Consequences (disambiguation) (which maybe ought to have the base name). Everything that Google brings up for the exact phrase is either a non-notable article or an error for some meaning of "Truth or Consequences", most commonly Truth or Consequences, New Mexico but not commonly enough to be primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 12:17, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete given the uppercase O, this isn't a common enough typo to be worthwhile to redirect anywhere. Elli (talk | contribs) 15:55, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• REtarget per User:Thryduulf -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 16:51, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Weak retarget to Truth or Consequences (disambiguation) per Thryduulf. Though the page doesn't list this exact spelling, it can be a reasonable misquotation of any one of the entities on that page, plus the R and F keys are really close on a QWERTY keyboard. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 18:34, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Core vocabulary

• Core vocabulary → Swadesh list  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

The linguistic concept of core vocabulary is bigger than the Swadesh list where the redirect leads. A core vocabulary is a broad concept in linguistics which is indepedent from the Swadesh list, see [9], [10], [11], [12].
There exists other lists of core vocabulary, such as the General Service List and the New General Service List. The concept of core vocabulary applied to French can be found at Français fondamental.
Lastly, the expression "core vocabulary" is nowhere to be found at Swadesh list.
I did not find the explanation of the concept of core vocabulary on Wikipedia. Therefore, I think the redirect should be deleted, as no retarget is possible. Veverve (talk) 10:31, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Disambig or write a broad-concept article. I agree that the term is broader than the current articles we have, but disambiguation or a (better yet) a broad concept article would server readers better than search results, especially as almost none of the targets noted by the nom appear on the first page. If this is not deleted, Basic vocabulary should lead to either this title or wherever this title redirects. Thryduulf (talk) 10:39, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Side channels

• Side channels → Nadi (yoga)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Term not mentioned at the target, an internet search does not turn up relevant results, with most results being about Side-channel attack. I'm leaning towards deletion over retargeting to Side-channel attack _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:52, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget: Side channels -> Nadi (yoga)#Side channels. Now a heading in the article. Skyerise (talk) 17:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Side-channel attack as {{R avoided double redirect}} of side channel. If side channel eventually gets turned into a disambiguation page, then this should point there instead. I see a fair number of Google News & Books results for waterway side channels. We don't exactly have a great target for that (distributary covers the case for natural waterways, I don't see a good target for canals), and I am not sure whether that's enough to displace side-channel attack from WP:PRIMARYTOPIC status. There are also side channels of various audio & image encoding schemes, e.g. joint encoding, JPEG 2000#Side channel spacial information, etc. Nadi (yoga) is certainly not primary either by usage or long-term significance. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 04:12, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Side-channel attack per 61.. as that seems to be the clear primary topic. I'm thinking a Side channel (disambiguation) might be in order as there is the attack vector, the waterway (natural and artificial), the present target, a secondary youtube channel (Dodie (singer) and Connie Glyn contain example usages) and possibly more. Thryduulf (talk) 11:49, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to the same destination as Side channel, and consider replacing that redirect to Side-channel attack by a disambiguation page. The term also refers to interactive television services. Yoga is clearly not a primary topic here. Certes (talk) 12:28, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to side channel; disambiguate side channel to yoga, side-channel attack, interactive television, sideband communications, and River bifurcation for river side channels. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment central channel is also a yoga redirect, that needs fixing -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:54, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

  Almost all the hits for that exact phrase are related to yoga so this one might be correct, but I'm not certain it's the only "central channel" related to yoga - someone with more understanding of the subject than me needs to look. I've added a hatnote to Central (TV channel) which was the only other specific thing I found (everything else was channels that happened to be central in some way or a Comedy Central channel). There are quite possibly other things I haven't found of course. Thryduulf (talk) 23:02, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

  There's the medical "central channel" [13], central channels of rivers in River bifurcation, aside from channels named Central. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 16:54, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Two potential targets are being discussed...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:26, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• In reply to the previous comment, Central Television lists several other stations which could plausibly be called "Central channel", though they don't turn up in a search for that phrase. Certes (talk) 18:10, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

  @Certes: It sounds like we need a full nomination of the Central channel redirect then to avoid hijacking this one further. Thryduulf (talk) 22:16, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to side-channel attack. The cyber term seems to be the primary term for "side channel" and it would make little sense to redirect the singular and plural to different locations. A hatnote on top of the new target would suffice to guide users to the yoga concept. There is no need to create a new disambiguation page over this, though if we create one it should be at side channel (disambiguation) rather than at side channel. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 00:33, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Interstate transport

• Interstate transport → Commerce Clause  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Interstate travel → Commerce Clause  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

The target is a specific US law regarding regulations of interstate commerce, but the search term could also refer to general travel between states, whether in a US context or elsewhere. I think that deletion is probably the way to go here _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:41, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment these terms are clearly not exclusive to the US. The first page of search results for the exact phrases on Wikipedia brings up topics related to (in order of first appearance: Travel: US, US and Canada (with a globalise tag), Malaysia and Australia. Transport: Australia, US, India, Australia and New Zealand. The status quo is clearly not correct, but I have a feeling that we should be able to do better than search results, which are a real hotchpotch of mostly (transport) and entirely (travel) articles that are too narrow to be useful (e.g. Interstate 20 in South Carolina). That said I haven't actually found anything existing that is better, a dab page wouldn't work and so I'm left at maybe a broad concept article? Thryduulf (talk) 00:12, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment Neither of these terms have anything to do with the Commerce Clause; they're more closely associated with the Privileges and Immunities Clause. But the concept of interstate travel is much broader than a single clause in the U.S. Constitution, so that's not a very good target either imo. Mlb96 (talk) 05:30, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete as ambiguous and likely to cause confusion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:52, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:15, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment I immediately thought of South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. when seeing the RfD. However, the case was about the Dormant Commerce Clause from the Commerce Clause. I would say the redirect is ambiguous. – The Grid (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: as ambiguous. There doesn't seem to be a broad article about this covering all countries, so better to let the reader choose which country's interstate travel they want, rather than assuming everyone wants US. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:59, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
• Disambiguate. If it's ambiguous, then disambiguate it. Don't delete it just because there's not a single natural thing to point to. A DAB would be much more helpful to users than to not have the term there at all. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 00:30, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

  What entries would you put on the disambiguation page? The lack of obvious articles that could be at this title is why I suggested a broad concept article rather than a dab. Thryduulf (talk) 00:43, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Property of a Lady (film)

• Property of a Lady (film) → Production of the James Bond films#Timothy Dalton  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• The Property of a Lady (film) → Production of the James Bond films#Timothy Dalton (1987–1994)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Needs to be retargeted as Property of a Lady is not mentioned in the redirect pbp 19:34, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment: I also found The Property of a Lady (film), which I'm adding here. Similar action should also be considered for that. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 21:42, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. According to the articles, there was a short story "The Property of a Lady" in editions of the book Octopussy and The Living Daylights, and the film Octopussy contains a scene adapted from that short story, but neither Octopussy nor any other film I can find is titled (The) Property of a Lady. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:00, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

@Shhhnotsoloud: Here's what I seem to gather: Timothy Dalton was contracted for three films. "License to Kill" and "The Living Daylights" were made. The third one was in production, but never finished, due in part to a dispute over the ownership of the Bond franchise. "Property of a Lady" may have been the working title of that film. But it's not laid out in those words, with the phrase "Property of a Lady", at the targeted article. pbp 15:00, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:14, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

SW Cephei

• SW Cephei → List of largest known stars  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Delete to avoid circular redirect. Nussun05 (talk) 06:49, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:RFD#D10 to encourage the creation of the article. It's included (piped as "SW") in navbox {{Cepheus (constellation)}}), and we have a List of stars in Cepheus but it is not mentioned there except via the navbox. There was a deletion discussion in late June 2020, the result of which was to change the article to this redirect on the basis of the one and only !vote, a weak redirect. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 15:19, 9 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:30, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

  The nom removed it from the navbox on 10th. Jay (talk) 18:05, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete because every other entry at the target is either a blue or redlink. Retargetting to Cepheus (constellation) is not an option as there is no information about the star there. Jay (talk) 18:05, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep. To preserve the article's history, which was redirected as a result of an AFD. ✗plicit 00:31, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:13, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment the target has information on this star, and this star was deleted at AfD under redirection outcome, so cannot be easily recreated, and should not be encouraged by being a redlink. Therefore, the current redirect seems to be serving its purpose, discouraging recreation, while pointing to a target that contains information. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 03:19, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

October 17

Taagad

• Taagad → Yes (Israel)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Redirect not named in target for the purposes of explaining or contextualizing why it redirects there. Bearcat (talk) 23:40, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete this is the Hebrew name for an Israeli television series known as Charlie Golf One in English. It gets mentions in the biographies of a few actors connected with the series but we don't have any other coverage I can find. My only guess as to the current target is that it was broadcast on one of that network's channels, but that's only a guess. Redirecting to any one biography would be inappropriate and with no other mentions there is nothing we can do other than delete. Thryduulf (talk) 00:11, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Indian nation

• Indian nation → Indigenous peoples of the Americas  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Ambiguous redirect Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:30, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. Ambiguous with what? Every hit on google for the exact phrase on the first five pages relates to Native American tribal nations in North America, at least most of them in the United States. There is already a hatnote to India and Indian people for anyone using this uncommon search term for those topics. Thryduulf (talk) 00:05, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

@Thryduulf: How this then applicable to this article, which is about Indigenous Americans across all of the Americas? If this term largely applies only to Native Americans in the United States It should redirect there instead. Hemiauchenia (talk) 00:22, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

I am not sure that it is only applicable to the United States, or that someone using this term will be looking for things exclusive to the United States - it's not a subject I'm incredibly knowledgeable about. I'm not opposed to narrowing the target a bit if it is narrower than the current target, but I didn't evaluate it with that in mind - your nomination implies that you think the target is too narrow rather than too broad. Thryduulf (talk) 00:39, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Rather than deleting this, I think the users consulting Wikipedia are better served by a dab page: "Indian nation or Indian Nation may refer to ..." . As far as I know, the term is not used for any of the indigenous peoples of Central and South America, but for North America the term is synonymous with American Indian tribe and seen used, for example, in the tribal designations Catawba Indian Nation, Monacan Indian Nation, Oneida Indian Nation, Quinault Indian Nation, Samish Indian Nation and Shinnecock Indian Nation. But there is also The Indian Nation, the name of a former and a current nationalist newspaper published in India, as wel as an alternative title of the film Cherokee Strip. And, of course, someone may be looking for the Indian people, the nationals and citizens of India.  --Lambiam 05:08, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Support disambig proposal. Hemiauchenia (talk) 01:46, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Dabify per Lambiam --Lenticel ^(talk) 05:33, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Courtenay Edward Stevens

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Resolved

Richard Groff

• Richard Groff → Regis Groff  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Delete. Richard Groff and Regis Groff are not the same persons, and "Richard" is not mentioned in Regis' article. Geschichte (talk) 09:05, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 18:43, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 20:44, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:06, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: per nom, not same person Joseph2302 (talk) 08:18, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

San Diego Wave FC

• San Diego Wave FC → San Diego NWSL team  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This is not in the article, and I can't find reliable sourcing that would indicate that this is the name. I see some social media rumblings, but I don't think that's enough to make a redirect. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 02:36, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

2030 in association football

• 2030 in association football → FIFA World Cup hosts#2030 FIFA World Cup  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This was targeted here by an IP before the article on the 2030 FIFA World Cup was created. This redirect doesn't make sense because the 2030 FIFA World Cup is not the only major association football event that will take place in 2030. It is also worth noting that articles on prior years of association football do not exist (for instance there is no article on 2025 in association football). So I'd propose deleting this page or possibly retargeting this page somewhere else. ColinBear (talk - contributions) 19:06, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:TOOSOON. Thryduulf (talk) 00:14, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete until there is something to say about it. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 11:02, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete in the same vein as Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_October_18#2060_Summer_Olympics. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 20:41, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Category:2030 in association football for now. We do know about something going on in football that year, and we ought to show what we have. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:29, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For consideration of Tavix's proposal.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:32, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Internally riffled boiler tubes

• Internally riffled boiler tubes → Internally rifled boiler tubes  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Please delete. Only one article (GWR No. 36) used this, and that now links direct. It does not seem a likely or common mis-spelling. Verbarson (talk) 21:11, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. This a {{R from move}} - the article was at this title for 5 years. The redirect got almost 100 hits last year, some of that probably came from the delinked article but we can't be sure whether that was the only source (it could be linked from somewhere outside Wikipedia). Thryduulf (talk) 22:32, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment the description in the article says ribbed. Ribbing would be riffling, and not rifling, since rifling is grooves cut into the surface, and not ribs sticking out of the surface. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 16:49, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• (OP) Comment The spiral nature of the rifling is of the essence, since the imparted centrifugal motion of the fluid improves the heat exchange. That applies to water-tube boilers, which is what the article mainly refers to; the Serve boiler tubes used on a locomotive are fire-tube boilers.--Verbarson (talk) 10:57, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep: Valid redirect from move, we can always tag it as a "R from incorrect name". But the fact it gets hits means that traffic is being generated from somewhere (probably Google searches), so valid to keep redirect. Joseph2302 (talk) 11:07, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

October 16

Ali Harbi Ali

• Ali Harbi Ali → Killing of David Amess  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Request speedy delete, this is currently a WP:BLPCRIMINAL violation, he has been named in some sources as the perpetrator but only third hand, consensus on the linked article so far is not to name him. JeffUK (talk) 21:22, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Strong keep Several highly reliable sources has named Ali Harbi Ali as the murderer. Stating a fact is not a BLP violation (or else we'd have to delete article on living criminals). Not even sure what the nominator's reasoning is, to be honest. It's not WP who has named him, vut multiple reliable sources. Jeppiz (talk) 22:29, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. Per Jeppiz. Sufficiently reported in RSs. So not a blp violation. 2603:7000:2143:8500:A807:AEB1:9E73:BD45 (talk) 23:15, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep and refine to #Suspect. The article neutrally reports that a person of this name was arrested in connection with the killing, and there doesn't appear to be anyone else notable with the same name, so there are no BLP issues with the redirect. Given the prominence with which the person is being named by the media this is a highly plausible search term and will remain so. If they are released without charge or tried and found not guilty then the article will reflect that very shortly after reliable sources do. I've adjusted my recommendation above. Thryduulf (talk) 23:23, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Currently he is only named in the Killing of David Amess#Suspect section, so the redirect should be refined to that section to minimise both confusion and any misunderstandings of the nature of association between this person and the killing. Thryduulf (talk) 12:36, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Strong keep per above comments. Waddles 🗩 🖉 23:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete Keep since there are now charges. Foul play is involved but there is no murder conviction yet, and no criminal charge either. Redirect suggests some kind of culpability. WP:BLPCRIME is clear here. At a minimum, this individual must be charged for there to be this redirect. — Alalch Emis (talk) 00:15, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete Jumping the gun, all sorts of BLP and sub judice issues. PatGallacher (talk) 00:58, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

  Why? People are clearly searching the name and the article tells them that a person of this name has been arrested in connection with the event, which is completely factual and NPOV. If there was no mention of them in the article that would be a different matter, but they are mentioned and the place to debate whether they should be mentioned is talk:Killing of David Amess not here. Thryduulf (talk) 02:22, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep. He is named in multiple reliable sources, and in the target article. WWGB (talk) 05:52, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment. Many people in this thread refer to 'Multiple Reliable Sources. Currently the sole source on the article is a 3rd hand report from Singapore Times saying the BBC said an 'unnamed whitehall official' named Ali. I'm removing it from the article on the basis it's a BLPCRIMINAL violation JeffUK (talk) 08:07, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

• I've restored it, with a better source, attribution, and explanation. With this new source, I believe it is sufficient to pass WP:BLPCRIME. BilledMammal (talk) 08:19, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

I don't think it's sufficient, the right place to discuss that is on the article's talk page. we have a 'Perpetrator' section. Currently it's all gossip attributed to anonymous sources. Or Media quoting each other JeffUK (talk) 08:59, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment (circumstances changed). /circumstances changed again and the individual has been charged/ The name of this individual isn't even mentioned in the article anymore, and there's some likelihood that this change will stick for a while. — Alalch Emis (talk) 18:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

  The presence or absence of the name is under active discussion with no clear consensus either way and a likelihood that the facts on the ground will change over the next few days. I think "some likelihood that this change will stick for a while" is massively overstating the certainty. Thryduulf (talk) 19:50, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

  Yes, I was imprecise. I meant that consensus regarding the inclusion of the name wouldn't be formed very soon, presuming that this will likely default to the name not being included for a while. — Alalch Emis (talk) 20:51, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

  There is now a consensus to name him on the article, and his name has been re-added. Thryduulf (talk) 12:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

  And removed. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:47, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

• Strong keep. Arrested on suspicion at the site of the crime, Somali immigrant, Islamic extremist. It's an open and shut case and his name is in all the papers. Kittenenthusiast88 (talk) 23:04, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Is the term "immigrant" in all the papers too, or just in The Daily Mail? You think he's an immigrant? But why does that have any bearing on the question over this redirect? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:19, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
  • He isn't an immigrant (according to both the BBC and Sunday Times he is a British citizen who was born in Britain) and there is no proof he is an Islamic extremist, so it isn't an open and shut case, legally and your comment is very close to a BLP violation. The only parts of your comment that are relevant to this discussion are "Arrested on suspicion [...] of the crime" and "his name is in all the papers", but even the last part isn't true - his name is in many papers but not all of them. Thryduulf (talk) 10:58, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• I think the consensus on the article talk page is to mention that this individual has been linked to the crime by multiple media reports, as such I think the redirect is now appropriate. JeffUK (talk) 12:13, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per the precedence of WP:BLPCRIME over a now-obsolete local consensus. See [14] [15] and [16] for complete explanation. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 14:46, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep Now officially been charged [17].  Spy-cicle💥  ^Talk? 13:29, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

I changed my !vote to keep. — Alalch Emis (talk) 15:31, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

2022 Portuguese Social Democratic Party leadership election

• 2022 Portuguese Social Democratic Party leadership election → 2021 Portuguese Social Democratic Party leadership election  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

I don't quite understand why the year is being redirected here. It would seem to assume the absence of a 2022 leadership election, which doesn't seem to make for a prudent redirect. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 17:51, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep this is a {{R from move}}. The earlier revisions of the page indicated that the election would take place in January 2022 before being changed to 4 December 2021.[18] Based on my understanding of Google Translates rendition of this article it seems that the incumbent Rui Rio wanted the election to be in January rather than December. That the previous elections to the position (about which we have articles) were in January 2018 and January 2020 also makes 2022 a plausible search term. Thryduulf (talk) 23:33, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Yes. The election was expected to be held in January 2022, however, a series of internal party events forced an anticipation to December: The 4 December date was proposed by Rio himself, but because of the current political tension between the Socialists and the Left Bloc/Communists, because of the 2022 budget, Rio forced a vote to postpone the election to later date. This has massively rejected by the party in a meeting and the 4 December date was approved. Tuesp1985 (talk) 23:57, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Military-gaming complex

• Military-gaming complex → Military-entertainment complex#Video games  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This term does not appear in the target page and it doesn't seem like a common search term. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 17:34, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Keep as per maker. Mainly from this programme https://www.aljazeera.com/program/the-listening-post/2021/10/16/what-this-years-nobel-prize-says-about-the-global-media-climate : "Plus, a look at the US military-gaming complex." None of the term shows up here though:https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&q=Military-gaming%20complex,Military-entertainment%20complex Greatder (talk) 16:34, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

LeBlanc (League of Legends)

• LeBlanc (League of Legends) → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Leblanc (League of Legends) → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Le Blanc (League of Legends) → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

And...yet another character not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia (not even on Le Blanc (disambiguation)!), making these redirects fall squarely into WP:GAMECRUFT like those others below. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 17:28, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Neutral on the first as it's properly spelled. Weak delete on the second. Delete the third entry as an implausible redirect. Anarchyte (talk) 05:26, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

2044 Summer Olympics

• 2044 Summer Olympics → Summer Olympics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• 2040 Summer Olympics → Summer Olympics  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

These seems to be analogous to the repeated deletions available at WP:Articles for deletion/2032 Summer Olympics (5th nomination). — Mikehawk10 (talk) 16:34, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment: I fixed the second listed item here. Hopefully that helps. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 17:19, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:TOOSOON. Wikipedia has no information about any Summer Olympics later than 2036 - and even that is extremely limited. Thryduulf (talk) 23:38, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete, these will be articles several years from now, but the redirects are just results of an exaggerated eagerness to be the first to start the page. Geschichte (talk) 09:07, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete and salt per precedent at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2015_October_18#2060_Summer_Olympics. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 17:58, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: way WP:TOOSOON to assume that there will be ones in 2040 and 2044. Not mentioned at target either. Salt them as well- they can be created as articles once there's information about these events (in about 8-12 years time). Joseph2302 (talk) 13:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, it is most likely scheduled but not going to happen anytime soon. MoonlightVector^{Talk page} 19:58, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Kingston (city)

• Kingston (city) → Kingston, Jamaica  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

There's a disambiguation page for Kingston, and there are multiple cities listed there. There's also a List of places called Kingston, which is linked to from the more general Kingston disambiguation page. While the city in Jamaica is likely the most prominent, it might be better to retarget this to Kingston#Places. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 16:32, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• REtarget the the list article -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 19:59, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to List of places called Kingston. This is the most specific target encompassing the redirect. Mdewman6 (talk) 22:33, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to List of places called Kingston. A google search for Kingston city brings up results for in order of first appearance Kingston upon Thames (UK, even though it isn't a city), Kingston City FC (Australia), Kingston, Ontario (Canada), Kingston, Jamaica, City of Kingston (Australia), Kingston University (UK), Kingston, Hampshire (UK) and Kingston High School (New York) (USA) on the first two pages. The greatest number of results was related to Kingston upon Thames (likely influenced by my searching from London), but not to the extent of even approaching primary topic. Thryduulf (talk) 23:47, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Ninja film

• Ninja film → List of ninja films  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

I'm not sure that it's the case that the primary use of "Ninja Film" would be to point to List of ninja films rather than Ninja (film). The latter seems much more natural, so I propose that this redirect be retargeted to Ninja (film). — Mikehawk10 (talk) 16:21, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget per nom. We already have Ninja films redirecting to List of ninja films. Jay (talk) 16:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Ninja (film) per above (as per the precedent with stuff like Cars film), and maybe add a hatnote for the current target to that page. We don't want to get readers lost by leading them to a less natural target here. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 17:14, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep as is the list article is the proper target since the "film" is not a disambiguator. Clearly ninja film, would be a (sub)genre of film, and not the particular film named "Ninja" -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 20:02, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep as is I have my doubts that the average reader who may type ninja film is specifically looking for a film named ninja. Also, the existence of genre articles such as Action film, Romance film and Comedy film leads credence to the suggestion they someone typing this would be far more likely to be look for films about ninjas which Thr current target does.--67.70.102.227 (talk) 02:29, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep as {{R from list topic}} per above. The primary topic of the phrase "ninja film" is the type of film, based on the actual usage of this phrase in Google News and Google Books. Cars film differs too much from Ninja film to be any kind of precedent here: it's never been discussed at RFD, and due to the pluralisation it's at best a marginally-grammatical way of describing any of the entries at list of films about automobiles. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 16:55, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

  Fair enough, the precedent I was talking about doesn't always apply. Changing my !vote to keep per the "keep" voters above. Plus, people might be WP:ASTONISHed to land at the proposed target, hence my argument about a natural target still standing. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 01:56, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Summer soldier

• Summer soldier → The American Crisis#Themes  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Retarget I suggest that the redirect target of the term "Summer soldier" should be changed from The American Crisis#Themes (as it is now) to Summer soldier (disambiguation). Users looking up the term in the search field should in my opinion not be directed to an article which contains the term (and not even prominently), but have the choice on the disambiguation site which use of the term they want to look up. Robert Kerber (talk) 10:03, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Dabify replace with the disambiguation page. The dab page is also missing the campaigning season version of soldiers, who were traditionally at war only in the summer, between planting and harvesting, in ancient times. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 23:29, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Whoa, what a freak! Looked like a talking penis.

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

Snooping as usual, I see!

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

I've always wanted power. Now I have an unlimited supply.

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

I live for the simple things, like how much this is gonna hurt!

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

Finger to the throat means death!

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

I am not some starry-eyed waif here to succumb to your pelvic sorcery!

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

Lowanna

• Lowanna → Lowanna, New South Wales  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

It's not unambiguous that "Lowanna" refers to Lowanna, New South Wales. It seems reasonable to me that it could also refer to Lowanna College. For this reason, I propose that the redirect be disambiguated. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 06:08, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Disambig per nom; add a link to wiktionary -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 12:15, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Disambiguate -- I have drafted a dab page below it eviolite (talk) 00:06, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Rachel Hergert

• Rachel Hergert → Our Souls at Night  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Delete, not mentioned in target. Geschichte (talk) 06:00, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

AOTY

• AOTY → Album of the Year  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This doesn't seem to be an obvious redirect. There are plenty of "A-word of the year" phrases in English, and I'm not sure that AOTY would be unambiguously associated with "Album of the Year". — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:49, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep based on search results either this or possibly the Grammy Award for Album of the Year is very clearly the primary topic - other than one facebook hit which I couldn't actually view everything down to the end of the first thrid of page 3 of a google search is about that. After that point other uses are mixed in with album of the year results. Thryduulf (talk) 23:53, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep per Thryduulf's reasoning. Unless User:Mikehawk10 (or any other editor) has a list of these other "AOTY" phrases and results to show their common usage, I don't see why that wouldn't be the primary usage. QuietHere (talk) 00:56, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

• Though if such a list does exist, then I would change my vote to create a disambiguation page. QuietHere (talk) 00:59, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

79th Golden Globe Awards

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: speedy deleted, and Draft:79th Golden Globe Awards has been published into the main articlespace. Zzyzx11 (talk) 11:50, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Banana chili pepepr

• Banana chili pepepr → Banana pepper  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This doesn't seem like a very plausible misspelling, which got only 61 pageviews since July 2015, plus we already have the correctly spelled Banana chili pepper. Delete this unless someone can provide a justification. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 03:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete. As best I can tell this appears to have been a typo by the IP requesting creation of redirects at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories/2015-02#Redirect request: Banana chili pepepr, Yellow wax chili, Yellow wax chili pepper - even the text of the request uses "pepper". Thryduulf (talk) 23:58, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Annie, the Dark Child

• Annie, the Dark Child → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Annie the Dark Child → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Annie (League of Legends) → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Here's another character who isn't mentioned on the target article, dangerous as she may be, making these redirects fall afoul of WP:GAMECRUFT. She is mentioned on Annie (given name), but I'm not sure about redirecting there either, since people might be ASTONISHed about landing there. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 01:42, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete all these unnotable League redirects. Winston (talk) 02:30, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete the first two. Neural on the third. Anarchyte (talk) 09:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Date and time notation in Taiwan

• Date and time notation in Taiwan → Republic of China calendar  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Per Talk:Republic_of_China_calendar#Requested_move_24_July_2019 target does not cover date and time notation in Taiwan prior to 1945 and should indeed be formatted like other articles in Category:Date and time representation by country, which, on a side note, I think is better off titled Category:Date and time notation by country to be consistent with the articles themselves. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 01:20, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Hecarim

• Hecarim → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not mentioned at target, but Centaurs in popular culture#Games, while unsourced, appears to be a good enough alternative? ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:41, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Delete all these unnotable League redirects. Winston (talk) 02:32, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Retarget to Centaurs in popular culture#Games per nom. Curbon7 (talk) 17:39, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Ezreal

• Ezreal → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not mentioned at target, search results on-wiki consist exclusively of passing mentions in article about single gamers and similar. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:32, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment this could retarget to Azrael as a {{R from misspelling}} -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:38, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Delete all these unnotable League redirects. Winston (talk) 02:32, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Retarget to Azrael with {{R from misspelling}}. Curbon7 (talk) 17:37, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Arurf

• Arurf → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

WP:GAMECRUFT not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:29, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete all these unnotable League redirects. Winston (talk) 02:32, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Weak delete URF is mentioned, but I doubt anyone is searching for the lowercase typography of a spinoff gamemode of a spinoff gamemode. Anarchyte (talk) 09:37, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Kog'Maw

• Kog'Maw → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Kog'maw → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Kogmaw → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Apart from some passing mentions at Uzi (gamer) and Patrick Seitz, not described anywhere on Wikipedia. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:25, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Delete all these unnotable League redirects. Winston (talk) 02:31, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Khazix

• Kha'Zix → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Kha'zix → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Khazix → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not mentioned at the current target, but kind of described at League of Legends in esports and 2018 League of Legends World Championship, as well as having a passing mention at Game client. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 00:15, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Delete all these unnotable League redirects. Winston (talk) 02:31, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Celtic Orthodox Church in the United States

• Celtic Orthodox Church in the United States → Christianity in the United States  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

The subject is not mentioned in the article to which this redirect leads to. Therefore, I propose the deletion of this redirect. Veverve (talk) 13:35, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• I agree with Veverve. This redirection is tantamount to deleting the articles on every other Christian denomination in the USA and redirecting to the generic article. Why has that not been done? Why has this specific group been targeted? Dogface (talk) 15:19, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget, weakly to Ancient British Church in North America. According to Celtic Orthodox Church, "Ancient British Church" is an alternate or archaic name for the same orthodoxy. However, there is no information in that article specifically pertaining to the United States. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 16:20, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• @Ivanvector: The Church called "Ancient British Church" is a completely different church from the church called "Ancient British Church in North America", so a redirect there does not make sense. Veverve (talk) 04:23, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• From what I see in Celtic Orthodox Church, it was united with two other churches in 2007 to form Communion of Western Orthodox Churches which mentions that it has presence in United States among other countries (but this communion is not mentioned in the current target). So retargetting there, I believe the reader will get context of the subject, though not specific information. Jay (talk) 16:28, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• @Jay: No, it did not unite. It formed an organisation with other churches which is called "Communion of Western Orthodox Churches" so that each of those churches have a common medium where to cooperate and dialogue; such an organisation is similar to the Assembly of Canonical Orthodox Bishops of the United States of America. The "Communion of Western Orthodox Churches" is not a merge, all those churches which are part of it are still independent. Veverve (talk) 04:28, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
  • So, wrong choice of the word unite in the Celtic Orthodox Church page. I have struck off my vote. Jay (talk) 05:59, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:11, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

October 15

Corki

• Corki → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not described with this meaning anywhere; Corky is a better target. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:59, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• REtarget per nom, as a {{R from alternate spelling}} -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:39, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Corki Buchek

• Corki Buchek → Borat Sagdiyev#Korki Buchek  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not mentioned at target any more; no search results elsewhere on-wiki. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:58, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Cho'gath

• Cho'gath → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Cho'Gath → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• ChoGath → League of Legends  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not mentioned at target; all search results elsewhere on Wikipedia apart from the unrelated Chogath appear to be passing mentions. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Experimental treatment of androgenic alopecia

• Experimental treatment of androgenic alopecia → Management of hair loss  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Remnants of a hopeless article, now fortunately redirected elsewhere by Doc James (talk · contribs), but the name still popping up in Wikipedia search and whenever searching for "experimental treatment" in the Visual Editor's link function. Since I quite often have to wikilink "experimental treatment" in various articles, this has become annoying. Needless to say, the redirect is not linked to from mainspace and is certainly not a popular search term. — kashmīrī ^TALK 21:27, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep as a {{R from merge}}. Content from this article was merged into the target and at least some of it seems to still be there, so this is required for attribution purposes. It also had 77 pages views this year before the RfD nomination showing it is actually getting some use. Thryduulf (talk) 22:11, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

  The page had one incoming link from mainspace, which I now removed. There should be no more visits. Need of retaining attribution is a valid point, though. — kashmīrī ^TALK 10:21, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Belfairs Methodist Church

• Belfairs Methodist Church → Killing of David Amess  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This redirect is inappropriate. The church is not a sub-topic of Killing of David Amess it merely is the place where it happens to have taken place. People searching for the church itself will be surprised to be taken to the 'killing' article which makes almost no mention of the church. If this event becomes knows as 'The Belfairs Methodist Church Murder' then it might be, but I think just leaving it as a red link for now is entirely appropriate. The church could plausible become notable enough for an article itself. JeffUK (talk) 20:05, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep per WP:CHEAP. The church is not independently notable, but is a valid search term as the location of this event. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:08, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

  WP:CHEAP is an essay not a policy, This simply doesn't fit any of the purposes of a redirect WP:RPURPOSE. If it's a sub-topic of any article maybe it is a sub-topic of Leigh-on-Sea where the church is located. JeffUK (talk) 20:24, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

  Just noting that whether it is an essay or a policy doesn't matter if it is something that is widely followed in practice. "Valid search term" is also a valid reason for a redirect, provided it is likely to lead to the most appropriate topic. On that point you might be right that linking to the recent event might be obvious WP:RECENTISM and this should link to Leigh-on-Sea, although of course someone looking for this is at the time more likely to be looking for the recent event, and WP:Readers first is valid advice. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:28, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

  I just don't think it's realistic that someone typing 'Belfair Methodist Church' (even today) into the search is likely to be looking for this article, they're going to be looking for an article about the church. One does not exist and that is just fine. Without the redirect they will still see the Ames articles prominently in the search results, AND see the Leigh on Sea article, surely this is better for the reader? JeffUK (talk) 20:46, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• Note I have closed the duplicate Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belfairs Methodist Church, procedurally, as it was at the wrong venue and this was already open. Cheers, RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 20:09, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Change target to Leigh on Sea. It’s not worth deleting the redirect, but it is more accurate to have a location in the town without an article to redirect to the article about the town. Kingsif (talk) 20:58, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

  There is currently no content about this church in that article meaning that would be an inappropriate redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 22:15, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment add to the Leigh-on-Sea article for the assassination, and thus the location would be on the civic article. Then this can be targetted there. A high profile assassination is surely a notable incident in the history. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:18, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment it may be useful to write an article on Belfairs, the ward of Leigh-on-Sea, if anyone knows anything about it. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 02:08, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• This isn't the name of the killing its self so the redirect is arguably incorrect, that said at least temporarily may serve as a useful redirect for people searching. Belfairs is a ward so perhaps the church could be covered there but ward boundaries change a lot and that article doesn't exist. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:06, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

  The redirect should lead to wherever the greatest content about the church is. Presently that is the killing article, so it's not incorrect from that perspective. Thryduulf (talk) 19:51, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

• Change target to Leigh on Sea, per Kingsif. Redirecting it to a recent murder would violate WP:NOTNEWS. Yoshiman6464 ^♫🥚 02:25, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

John Reynolds (Actor)

• John Reynolds (Actor) → Manos: The Hands of Fate  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This is an interesting one. The current target refers to someone who starred in one film (widely considered to be one of the worst of all time) before commiting suicide in 1966, while people who don't capitalize the "a" will be sent to an article about someone who has a recurring role in Stranger Things. Recommend retargeting to John Reynolds (actor) and leaving a hatnote to the previous target. OcelotCreeper2 (talk) 19:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to John Reynolds (actor). I've added a hatnote. (For the record, there used to be an article on him.)— J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 23:07, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Actually, this film has such a meme cult following that an article on him has been created three times despite his non-notability. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 23:13, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to John Reynolds (actor) per nom and J947 (thanks for that hatnote!). Someone might hold the ⇧ Shift key for too long, plus it doesn't make sense for the differently capitalized disambiguators to lead to two different places. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 23:31, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget per above, pretty obvious/uncontroversial. ~~~~
  User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 23:50, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Mailinator

• Mailinator → Disposable email address  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Mailinator.net → Disposable email address  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

First page was merged into the current target in 2016, but isn't mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia anymore. Second one used to redirect to the first, but was retargeted as a double redirect. ~~~~
User:1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:42, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Delete - the only mention I can find so far is an attempt at linking the page in an old edit, since removed. No valid target to redirect to. edit: in my usual fashion, I forgot to check the page history itself, which is fairly significant. I've been looking for sources to indicate notability and so far I'm only finding mentions, so I'll keep my vote the same unless something else comes up.20:33, 15 October 2021 (UTC) ASUKITE 20:17, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete Ah yes, I remember this service, but that doesn't mean it needs to be mentioned. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 00:10, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Mortal Kombat: The Movie

• Mortal Kombat: The Movie → Mortal Kombat (1995 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Mortal kombat movie → Mortal Kombat (1995 film)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Now that a reboot exists, these redirects should be retargeted to Mortal Kombat (disambiguation) OcelotCreeper2 (talk) 17:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nom -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:27, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

C/O

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

The Border Battle

• The Border Battle → Kentucky–Tennessee rivalry  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

• Border Battle → Major League Baseball rivalries  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This expression is not used at the target, and may be ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:29, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment. "May be ambiguous" is unnecessarily cautious. We also have Border Battle → Major League Baseball rivalries, where "[The] Border Battle" isn't mentioned, and Battle of the Border. But my gsearch shows that the term is used for many interstate (international?) rivalries in many sports. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 14:07, 10 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:30, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Yes, you're right, it is certainly ambiguous. I'm adding Border Battle to this nomination today (15 Oct), and ask for it to be relisted to ensure proper debate. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to ensure the newly-added Border Battle has a full discussion
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Thryduulf (talk) 12:00, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• Convert to disambiguation page Border Battle should be a dab page, listing the various sports rivalries called "Border Battle" already so indicated in the two redirects, plus adding see alsos for the various "Battle of the Border"s. It would be good if someone could write a border skirmish military combat article. -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:36, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Moni Scarpa

• Moni Scarpa → Antonia Scarpa  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

The target mentions a Moni Ritchie but not a Moni Scarpa. The article formerly at this location suggests these are the same person, but I don't think a single unsourced sentence that uses a different name in an article about another person makes for a useful redirect. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 10:58, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

• Weak delete per nom. Although redirect seems to be a classic case of an {{R with history}}, so not sure if deletion is appropriate. One thing I did notice though, is that target article would make an excellent candidate at AfD, since it lacks proper sources and has very little content. CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:37, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: WP:INVOLVED relist to allow the October 2 log page to be closed.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• weak keep, Moni is mentioned at target. I don't know if this helps or hinders, but Moni (that's a ridiculously short article and nothing to do with this) or rather Móni are pet names, short names, for Mónika (name) in Hungarian. Although she (I assume) is only briefly mentioned, WP:BLP may apply as Moni Rtchiie founded the multimedia rock group, I know it is a passing mention but it is, to be pedantic, biographical details. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 13:00, 15 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. --CycloneYoris ^talk! 05:32, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Deathtoengue

• Deathtoengue → Bloom County#Notable storylines  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Yet another heavy metal Eubot redirect that isn't used much, which is getting A LOET fewer pageviews than the fictional band's proeper name Deathtöngue and the version without the umlaut because of the error. Delete it unless a justification can be proevided. Regards, SOENIC⁶⁷⁸ 04:04, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Delete. After five years we are still clearing up Eubot's crap. Others argued at the time for a new criterion at CSD, I said no I think we can handle it. I was wrong. The editor was in good faith, but misguided. This is metal umlaut, it is easier if you say so explicitly. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 13:06, 15 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:33, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Archer

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

Delay (game)

• Delay (game) → Rainout (sports)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

I'm not convinced this is the right target. Delay of game may be better. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 17:01, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

• comment hmmm I see the point, but "delay of game" and "delayed game" are indeed different cases. in American/Gridiron footbal, "delay of game" is a penalty where a team does not initiate a live-action play during a game within a specific period of time, where a "delayed game" is an occurence when the entire game is stopped or not started for an official reason (such as weather). They are two different cases with similar names. Maybe make it a Disambig? But seriously--nice catch.--Paul McDonald (talk) 17:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Delay#Sports that already disambiguates these two meanings. The first entry there will need to be reworded to point directly at the target though. Thryduulf (talk) 22:26, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Doesn't make much sense for the page "Delay" to have an entry "Rainout (sports)." If I had to guess, the entire reason that Delay (game) exists is so that there would be a reason to link to Rainout (sports) on the disambig page for Delay. In which case, the redirect is working as intended. Mlb96 (talk) 05:12, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

    You don't need a redirect to do that. You just write something like "Delayed game, or Rainout (sports), ...". Synonyms are not uncommon on dab pages. Thryduulf (talk) 23:50, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

    I agree that looks like a good solution. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:12, 11 October 2021 (UTC) (nom)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:01, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Delay#Sports with an entry obliquely mentioning Rainout (sports), per Thryduulf, who typically comes up with good solutions like this. BD2412 T 05:39, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

W.E.B

• W.E.B → Web  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This is not a reasonable redirect. I nominated for CSD, though it was denied as it not being recently created. Currently, there are no articles that use the redirect and the only user pages that use it either do so in a warning message for vandalism or in the notification of the page's CSD/AFD nomination. I propose it be deleted. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:13, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete or disambiguate. My first thought was W. E. B. Du Bois. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here</ span>} 08:43, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to W.E.B. Leaving out the final period in an acronym is one of the most common typos there is. Mlb96 (talk) 05:20, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:55, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

AM/FM

• AM/FM → AM/FM/GIS  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

AM/FM is strongly correlated with the concept of AM broadcasting and FM broadcasting. This title should probably be disambiguated between this concept and the current unrelated AM/FM/GIS target. BD2412 T 01:17, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

• Agreed; maybe DAB with Radio broadcasting#Types. fgnievinski (talk) 01:40, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment FWIW, AM/FM radio points to Radio receiver#Broadcast radio receivers, while Am fm radio points to Tuner (radio)#AM/FM. Another target that covers both AM and FM is Modulation#Analog modulation methods. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 02:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. The slash is essentially WP:AND, things either work on AM or on FM. While it's possible to modulate in both frequency and amplitude (and indeed in phase), such as for QAM, I don't see that being the intended meaning here. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 00:24, 8 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:36, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
  • It is not at all difficult to find references that use "AM/FM" to describe the complete range of options within these formats. BD2412 T 05:56, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
  • That's not quite true: analog television signals are both. The audio is FM and the video is AM, with a QAM subcarrier in colour signals. They are distinct portions of the bandwidth, but for example you can pick up the high end of the low-VHF TV range on a standard FM radio (i.e. you can listen to NTSC channel 6 on a car stereo if it will tune down far enough). Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 15:40, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Indeed, there are schemes that modulate in amplitude, frequency and phase, which makes constellation diagrams look very pretty. I'm arguing that it's not useful to conflate the two without some further qualification (e.g. "radio"). To give an analogy, we have AC/DC (electrical) targeting Electric_current#AC_and_DC, that makes sense as the heading is "AC and DC". Here we have AM radio targeting AM broadcasting and FM radio targeting FM broadcasting, but AM/FM radio targets Radio_receiver#Broadcast radio receivers, even though there's a sub-subsection "AM and FM". While broadcast audio is probably the most familiar use by far, I feel that the unqualified "AM/FM" is not specific enough to target that. I'm probably in a minority, though. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 17:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:36, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Radio receiver#Broadcast radio receivers, which is a section that discusses combination radio receivers that tune both AM and FM signals, by far the most common form of commercial radio receiver since about the 1950s. You probably have an AM/FM radio at least in your home and your car, and so probably did your parents and grandparents. You might also have an AM/FM radio in your smartphone or other portable devices. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 16:16, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

  No doubt that's the primary topic for "AM/FM radio", but that's not the topic of discussion. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 17:47, 9 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:36, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

  It's the primary topic for "AM/FM" as well. What other topic besides broadcast radio could it refer to? AM/FM/GIS is a subtopic of another topic that's already very niche, especially compared with commercial radio. Yes, there are other common radio receiving devices that combine AM and FM and other modulations, but none are known by those terms. It's television, not "FM monaural audio with subtractive stereo and motion picture luminance on an AM-VSB subcarrier and additive chrominance over QAM". Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 22:50, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:55, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Tuner (radio)#AM/FM and add a hatnote and/or links in that section to Radio receiver#Broadcast radio receivers. In general I agree the radio context is the primary topic here, but I think it would be better to target a section with the specific title of the redirect. The tuner article is more about the frequencies, with the "radio" qualifyer getting readers to content more about the device. Note: I am going to WP:BOLDly retarget Am fm radio to Radio receiver#Broadcast radio receivers, as it should target the same place as AM/FM radio and I think there is consensus here that that redirect is properly targeted. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:54, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Radio receiver#Broadcast radio receivers. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 02:41, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

October 14

歌

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

BBUS

• BBUS → Big Brother (American TV series)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

There is no mention of "BBUS" in the article and although there is occasional use of this redirect, it is ambiguous with BBus (a redirect to Bachelor of Business), and there's no way to tell what the searcher wanted. I suggest delete as ambiguous and likely to lead to confusion. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:48, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. BBUS is the ticker code for a non-notable ETF, I didn't get any results that were not for that until the third page of my Google search. The TV show didn't come up at all. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 14:02, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Primary/replica (technology)

• Primary/replica (technology) → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Primary-replica → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Primary/replica → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Primary-replica architecture → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master slave architecture → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master-slave architecture → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master/slave architecture → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master/slave technology → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Controller/agent → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Primary/Secondary → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Primary/secondary architecture → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master/Replica → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master/replica architecture → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Source/replica → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Source/replica architecture → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master/standby → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master/Minion → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Provider/Consumer → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master/Puppet → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Controller/Peripheral → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Initiator/Follower → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master versus main → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master/main → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master vs main → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Source/mix → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Main-Parent-Server → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Worker-Child-Helper → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Master/Satellite → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Controller/agent architecture → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Controller/agent (technology) → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Primary/standby → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Main/secondary → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Leader/follower → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Leader/follower architecture → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Leader/follower (technology) → Primary/replica architecture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

All nominated redirects are unused and were recently created by Mechachleopteryx, who considers the term Master/slave (technology) offensive. I don’t think Wikipedia is the right venue for proposing new terms nor gathering statistics about lookup frequencies. ‑‑ K (🗪 | ✍) 10:16, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget any that are listed to the list at Master/slave (technology)#Terminology concerns, as valid results of a search for those evidently-in-use terms. Delete the rest per nom: Wikipedia is not a repository of made up terminology, regardless of merit. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 13:59, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

  That’s a reasonable compromise. Actually all terms, all nominated redirects were taken from the section you mentioned. And, if I understand correctly, WP: Notability does not apply to redirects, right? “Redirects are cheap.” I’m not sure though whether it really makes sense to create/keep redirects for various writing styles (hyphen, forward slash, space, you name it). At any rate I’d delete the subject domain “… (technology)” redirects, unless “…” is a disambiguation page (which isn’t the case here). Also, I must correct myself: Mechachleopteryx does not find M/S offensive. ‑‑ K (🗪 | ✍) 13:37, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Let’s Go Brandon

• Let’s Go Brandon → Kelli Stavast  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

• Let’s Go Brandon! → Kelli Stavast  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

Delete. Considered a SPEEDY on this, but there's no category this fits into, and it's obviously controversial. We thought we dealt with this on the F**k Joe Biden AfD, but now because a poor NASCAR reporter (the current rd target) tried to resourcefully drown out a profane chant of that on broadcast television (while interviewing Brandon Brown), this has become the 'work appropriate' way for a certain 'always online' minority to denigrate the President. Once this passes, it'll mean nothing to redirect to Brandon Brown, or Kelli Stavast. On a more technical note, a curly apostrophe rather than a straight apostrophe is used in the rd, meaning most people can't get to it anyways. Nate • (chatter) 03:49, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

• Speedy delete as G8, and salt as the only plausible retarget would be to the aforementioned Fuck Joe Biden article that has been deleted per SNOW consensus. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 08:05, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
  • I should add that searching for "Let's go Brandon" (straight apostrophe) on wiki led me to this redirect anyway. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 08:17, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
  • @GhostOfDanGurney: this is not eligible for speedy deletion under criterion G8 as the current target exists. Regardless of whether that target is correct is irrelevant to that. Thryduulf (talk) 11:27, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
    • Noted. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 20:39, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete Borderline implausible, but in any case, the aforementioned AfD consensus should apply here as well. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 13:48, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment I've also found Let’s Go Brandon! which redirects to the same target. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 22:22, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
  • The curled quote is what's nominated here. Let's Go Brandon! with a straight single quote (which is what most keyboards are setup to output by default) is a redlink. Nate • (chatter) 23:03, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
  • I've added Let’s Go Brandon! to this nomination as they should either be both kept, both deleted or both retargetted to the same place. Thryduulf (talk) 00:32, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
  • I saw the exclamation point now; the quote marks were puzzling me more than the "!", to be honest. Nate • (chatter) 03:57, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment both of these redirects originally targetted Brandon Brown (racing driver), which seems a better (i.e. less surprising) target for someone who is unfamiliar with the phrase but I'm not sure they're good redirects. Thryduulf (talk) 00:37, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep rdr. to Brandon Brown The FJB chant doesn't need any explanation. The LGB chant makes no sense on its own & therefore some sort of encyclopedic explanation would benefit readers. There is a well-sourced paragraph in the Brandon Brown article re: LGB. A reader trying to figure out the LGB chant would see the phrase & explanation in the article. Meets the purpose of a redirect: Sub-topics or other topics which are described or listed within a wider article. (Such redirects are often targeted to a particular section of the article.). If there wasn't a purposeful & verified mention in the article, then there would be nothing to rdr. to, but it is logical to rdr. to Brown.

  Re: the curly apostrophe, that was from cutting & pasting from a website rather than typing it in (I have my browser set up when I highlight a word it searches WP). That can be remedied by moving the rdr. Rgrds. --Bison X (talk) 16:38, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

  • The paragraph mentioned on Brandon Brown (racing driver) fails WP:10YT. GhostOfDanGurney (talk) 18:15, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep That meme alone is her claim to fame, it's being widely reported about. It's newsworthy for the BBC, The Independent, Newsweek, The Spectator, and others, so it's notable here.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-58878473

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/maga-lets-go-brandon-meme-biden-b1938322.html

https://www.newsweek.com/lets-go-brandon-meme-explained-1637434

https://spectator.org/lets-go-brandon

https://www.businessinsider.com/lets-go-brandon-chant-origin-video-what-does-it-mean-2021-10

https://www.the-sun.com/news/3849893/what-does-lets-go-brandon-meme-mean

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article255093152.html

https://tennesseestar.com/2021/10/18/joke-anti-biden-song-lets-go-brandon-goes-viral-tops-itunes-hip-hop-chart

tickle me 07:40, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Here's another cited example of the term's cultural notability: [19] --1990'sguy (talk) 01:27, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep per the post of Tickle me just above. This phrase is not just getting massive hits in social media and is growing, but you can now purchase T-shirts and other gear. This re-direct may become a full article soon. JungleCat Shiny!/Oohhh! 02:44, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete since it isn't mentioned in the redirect target. If someone wants to turn the title into an article that's one thing, but there's no point in sending readers to a page which doesn't cover it at all just because it's the closest thing we have. Hut 8.5 17:34, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

• Also happy with retarget to Public image of Joe Biden, which mentions it and where it's more likely to be suitable. Hut 8.5 11:33, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

• (edit conflict) Delete Neither Kelli Stavast nor Brandon Brown (racing driver) currently contain information about the recent meme/song/merchandising created by others for political/artistic/commercial purposes. I have also commented in the pending RfC about "Let's go Brandon" where inclusion in Brandon Brown (racing driver) is being discussed, and in the pending Kelli Stavast AfD about my concerns related to adding such content to those articles, so I incorporate those concerns here by reference. In the Stavast AfD, it is noted Draft:Let's Go Brandon! has been created, but an expansion into an article at this time, or an attempt at recreating Fuck Joe Biden due to this recent burst of news, both seem discouraged by WP:NOTNEWS. Beccaynr (talk) 18:10, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep or turn into independent article: Per User:Tickle me. This phrase has received significant media coverage and certainly deserves its own article, not merely a redirect. --1990'sguy (talk) 01:08, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep Per User:Tickle me and it fullfills WP:NOTE with so much media notability. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 16:38, 21 October 2021 (UTC)
• Redirect to Public image of Joe Biden, where I have added a reliably sourced sentence re: this chant. It's the most appropriate page, to avoid WP:BLP1E concerns. Ganesha811 (talk) 22:50, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Xus

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 21#Xus

Atheist logo

• Atheist logo → Atomic whirl  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Ambiguous, e.g. might also point to Variations of the ichthys symbol#Parodies, Flying Spaghetti Monster#Internet phenomenon, or especially something related to Atheist Alliance International, among many others that exist (and potentially might cover) and might be brought up below. — Godsy ^(TALK_CONT) 00:49, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete. If there were a citation for "...has come to be used as a symbol of atheism in general" then that would be different. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:55, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Mortal Kombat (2010 film)

• Mortal Kombat (2010 film) → Mortal Kombat: Annihilation  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

No such Mortal Kombat film came out in 2010, and there's no mention of a previous 2010 release date. The article for the reboot though does mention a short film that came out in 2010 in the production section. OcelotCreeper2 (talk) 00:37, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

• I would support deleting the article entirely - Enter Movie (talk) 02:01, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
• Finish it as it might cause confusion. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:37, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Republicanism in Northern Ireland

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Striped Sweater

• Striped Sweater → SpongeBob SquarePants#Music 2  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Another song not mentioned on Wikipedia, certainly not any SpongeBob article, since SpongeBob SquarePants: The Yellow Album was redirected to the main show's article. I'm leaning toward deleting this, but if it's kept, the closest target I can think of would be Marinière, another name for which translates to English as "striped sweater." Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 23:29, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Retarget to sweater. I've tried a search, but I remember an RfD from a few years ago about various sweater Rs, which I think the consensus was to retarget them to sweater. I've looked through the history and find no mention, though: @PamD: you moved Pullover(garment) in 2017, but that was just a technical move, I'm struggling to find the discussion. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 07:52, 7 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:44, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:09, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Marinière per nom, as the only available article on the subject. Jay (talk) 06:00, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. Ambiguous and likely to cause confusion (Sweater, Marinière, Dennis the Menace, Where's Wally?...) Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 16:02, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete Overly generic, unlikely to be an encyclopedic topic. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 18:22, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Gallic nationalist

• Gallic nationalist → Irish nationalism  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Delete. Gallic has nothing to do with Ireland, Gallic describe ancient Gaul (Latin: Gallia), roughly corresponding to the territory of modern France. If not delete, then retarget to French nationalism. Somerby (talk) 18:09, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

• Weak retarget to French nationalism. This is an old redirect, going back to July 2005. Results for "Gallic nationalism" -wikipedia are a mixed bag of nationalist currents in actual ancient Gaul and contemporary French nationalism (e.g., the WSJ's "Gallic nationalism has always been at least a partial factor driving France's promotion of European integration..."). Calling the former "nationalism" feels anachronistic (from Nationalism: "Scholars frequently place the beginning of nationalism in the late 18th century or early 19th century..."), even though clearly it's something other scholars have done. --BDD (talk) 21:33, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget per BDD to French nationalism. I imagine "Gallic" here comes from a mis-hearing of ""Gaelic", the two are homophonous in some parts of the island of Ireland to my personal knowledge (not RS of course). "Gallic" has always meant "French". Gaelic nationalist and Gaelic nationalism target Irish nationalism, this is not quite WP:SMALLDETAILS but might deserve a hatnote at each target.85.67.32.244 (talk) 04:31, 7 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:45, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to French nationalism only if the proposed target mentions contemporary Gallic nationalism (per User:BDD), or provides context, such as Gallic pride. Vercingétorix monument says Napoleon III saw Vercingetorix as a symbol of Gallic nationalism, but this could be WP:OR probably because the inscription mentions "nation", and I have tagged it for a citation needed. Although the redirect stayed for 15 years, I would suggest to delete as a case of a redirect that makes no sense any more and a novel or very obscure synonym. Jay ^(Talk) 10:02, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

  If the verdict is delete, also delete Gallic nationalism created by nom 2 days back, and which targets to French nationalism. Jay ^(Talk) 10:07, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:08, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment there's also the option of targetting Gaullism, as a {{R from typo}} for both Gallic nationalism and Gallic nationalist -- 64.229.90.53 (talk) 01:43, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

October 13

MiniTV

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 22#MiniTV

Get Stickbugged LOL

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

No legged

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

R.Smilodon

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Commonwealth kingdom

• Kingdom of Australia → Monarchy of Australia  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Kingdom of Canada → Name of Canada  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Kingdom of New Zealand → Realm of New Zealand  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

We need to discuss what to do with these redirects. Now they all have different targets. Is it OK, or should we have a common policy for them? I suggest to redirect to articles about the countries themselves, with the exception of New Zealand, since the Realm of New Zealand also includes two associated states except for New Zealand itself. I did already the same with all 16 Commonwealth realms. But I don't know if this is the best solution? I want to listen to the opinions of more experienced colleagues. Somerby (talk) 15:38, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

• Hmm. I think you have the right idea. I'm tempted by the "Monarchy of" articles, just because they're more specific, but ultimately, a kingdom is a place, and a monarchy is an institution. So the right targets are the geographic areas corresponding to the realms, which in all cases but one are coterminous with the country. --BDD (talk) 21:26, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
• Somerby, you have only just created Kingdom of New Zealand. I'm curious – why did you create it? Nurg (talk) 10:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

  Nurg, this term is used in sources, where it denote the geographic area corresponding to the Realm of New Zealand. Thus I redirected it to the Realm of New Zealand. if you think that the target should be different, then let us discuss your proposal. Strictly speaking, the state is headed by a female, but there is no such word Queendom --Somerby (talk) 11:09, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

  Thanks Somerby. Could you give references to two of those sources please. Nurg (talk) 20:40, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

  No references have been provided for "Kingdom of New Zealand" so I am unable to verify what they might be referring to. In fact, I am left with the suspicion that "Kingdom of New Zealand" is just a name made up on Wikipedia. In that case such a redirect is not needed. If it is kept, it might as well redirect to Realm of New Zealand, in the absence of any information about the name. Nurg (talk) 07:34, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

  There is a United Kingdom of New Zealand group, I'm not sure exactly what it is but it isn't anything recognised by the rest of the world. The sentence "The Kingdom of New Zealand also includes the self-governing autonomous states of the Cook Islands and Niue, and Tokelau." appears on many of the different websites operated by flagtheory.com which seems to be a private organisation dealing with small businesses wanting to do business internationally. Other than that I can't find any other uses of the term. Thryduulf (talk) 10:42, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

  Thanks Thryduulf. We can ignore the UK of NZ one, as that is not the redirect term. I hadn't found the flagtheory.com use in my own searches so thanks for that one. They appear to be mistakenly using "Kingdom of New Zealand" when they mean "Realm of New Zealand", so that redirect is ok as it is. Nurg (talk) 02:27, 12 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:59, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

• WP:TRAINWRECK; each one of these is different and there's no point in discussing them together. The only really common element is that these are colonies of the British Empire which acquired responsible self-government in the 19th century while maintaining allegiance to the British Crown, but Britain used the term Dominion to purposefully avoid calling them Kingdoms. But since we're already here:
  • Keep Kingdom of Canada, and refine section per 85.67. That section best explains the origin and use of the term, and why it didn't become the name of the country. A see-also could be made there to Monarchy of Canada for interested readers but there really isn't a lot there on the "Kingdom of Canada" name.
  • Keep Kingdom of Australia. There is a Name of Australia article but the word "Kingdom" appears there only once, and as you would expect that instance is immediately preceded by "United"; that is, there is no information there and no apparently prominent uses of the term "Kingdom of Australia", except I did come across an anti-government and anti-vaccine Kingdom of Australia group on Facebook.
  • Neutral on Kingdom of New Zealand. This appears to be a situation like the Kingdom of Denmark redirects that came up recently, where the sovereign country consisting of the North and South islands is called "New Zealand", but there are related partially-self-governing territories which rely on the Monarchy of New Zealand for defense and foreign relations, as described in the Realm article. But I find that confusing and don't really want to give an opinion. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 15:27, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Westchester Borough, New York

• Westchester Borough, New York → Westchester County, New York  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Nassau Borough, New York → Nassau County, New York  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Suffolk Borough, New York → Suffolk County, New York  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Westchester Borough → Westchester County, New York  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Nassau Borough → Nassau County, New York  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Suffolk Borough → Suffolk County, New York  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Implausible redirect; there is no borough named "Westchester", "Nassau" or "Suffolk" in New York state. Per Borough (United States), the only boroughs in New York state are the boroughs of New York City. Epicgenius (talk) 23:28, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

• Keep - I disagree that these are implausible. Given their proximity to NY City, I think it is highly plausible for someone to mistake these counties for boroughs of the city, especially given Westchester and Nassau contain parts of the Metropolitan area of the city. A7V2 (talk) 08:48, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

  They are implausible because people searching for them will generally look for "Westchester, New York", "Nassau, New York", or "Suffolk, New York". Per WP:RFD#DELETE point #2, the redirects might cause confusion; they are all deliberately incorrect, so they should not be linked at all. Furthermore, they are even longer to write out than the more common terms that I just listed.

  To refute the point that "it is highly plausible" for these search terms to be confused, these redirects have had 45 hits total from May 25, when they were created, to September 26, before they were nominated for deletion. Most of these redirects have zero hits on any given day and, except for the date of their creation, none have had more than one hit on a single day. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:22, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

I agree that these should not be linked to, nor was I claiming they should be. Will all people search in the way you propose? Is that a reason to exclude those who don't search in that way? Perhaps the argument holds for the three which include "New York" but I don't agree for the second three. I'm not seeing how they are confusing, and being incorrect doesn't make something confusing, given that the intended target is unambiguous. If you believe that being "deliberately incorrect" is a reason to delete a redirect perhaps you should nominate the 40,000+ redirects in Category:Redirects from misspellings alone? A7V2 (talk) 04:15, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

perhaps you should nominate the 40,000+ redirects in Category:Redirects from misspellings alone? - I never said I wanted to do that, nor did I indicate it was necessary. As per WP:RFD#KEEP point #2, misspellings are actually an acceptable reason to keep a redirect. That was a slippery slope argument that is irrelevant to my point.

What I said was the redirects might cause confusion; they are all deliberately incorrect, i.e. they aren't accidental misspellings or misnomers, but terms that can actually confuse people. Like Tavix says below, the term "Westchester Borough" can be confused with West Chester, Pennsylvania, which is an actual borough with almost the same name (just a space between "West" and "Chester"). "Suffolk Borough" can be confused with boroughs of some place named Suffolk. "Nassau Borough" is the only non-confusing one, but it still is very, very unlikely to be searched or used in any form, given the lack of search results for that term and the corresponding lack of views for that redirect. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:59, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

I can only read what you've written, and my reading of it was the primary reason you were advocating deletion (at least in your nomination) was that they were incorrect. RFD Keep number 2 includes "by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term" as something which would reduce accidental linking and duplicate articles as well as possibly being of benefit to the browsing user. I disagree with you and Tavix that these are implausible but consensus doesn't require everyone to agree. All that said, so points you and Tavix have raised are very good ones: I would now suggest retargeting Westchester Borough to West Chester, Pennsylvania and delete Suffolk Borough as ambiguous. But when there are no ambiguity issues I don't see a reason to delete as they could be useful. A7V2 (talk) 06:41, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep per A7V2, we do not require readers to be familiar with the intricacies of the topic before being able to find what they are looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 15:37, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. For {{R from incorrect name}}s, we should have some evidence of incorrect use for them to be plausible, and I'm just not seeing it. When searching for "Nassau Borough", I only get 400 hits, and the hits I thumbed through are in a list or grouping (eg: ...Nassau, Borough of Queens,... or a sports article with Nassau vs. Borough of Manhattan). Westchester Borough gets considerably more hits, but they related to West Chester, Pennsylvania. Suffolk has results related to Suffolk, Virginia#Boroughs and Ipswich, borough of Suffolk, England. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:03, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. These are part of the wave of bluntly incorrect names as redirects created en masse by the same user that are being discussed below regarding train stations. oknazevad (talk) 00:55, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 21:12, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:59, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete redirects 1-3 and 5-6. They don't appear to be a reasonable spelling mistake or misnomer. Retarget redirect 4 (Westchester Borough) to West Chester, Pennsylvania, which seems to be a natural redirect because West Chester is actually a borough. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 00:44, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Eyewitness News 5

• Eyewitness News 5 → KSTP-TV  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This exact branding has never been used by KSTP-TV (it's actually "5 Eyewitness News"). At least three other stations have used this exact title (KOCO-TV, WLWT, and WTVH; none of those do so currently); there is always the risk of ambiguity with other channel 5 stations that have used the Eyewitness News name as well. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:56, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete and do not retarget. We really don't need a dabpage for this. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 16:23, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Eyewitness News. Given that three stations have used this and it's a plausible mistake for at least one other we really shouldn't have this as a redlink but take people to the best content we have. That content is the page for the general topic (which will be what some people looking for this are interested in) and which also contains links to just about every station that has ever used the name. Thryduulf (talk) 22:36, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:47, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Eyewitness News which can be improved if necessary. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:00, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

October 12

Department of Administration

• Department of Administration → Nevada State Department of Administration  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

I was surprised to end up here - I was expecting a disambiguation or list featuring various different departments with similar names. A quick search suggests that multiple US states including Minnesota, Kansas, North Carolina and Indiana have a Department of Administration, Nepal has a Central Department of Public Administration, Regions of Norway suggests that country also has such a deparment but it isn't linked, there are probably others. I suggest disambiguation. Thryduulf (talk) 00:03, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

• Support change to disambiguation Just going by article titles alone, : Indiana Department of Administration, Minnesota Department of Administration, Wisconsin Department of Administration, Kansas Department of Administration...going to stop there. We need a disambiguation page.

Schazjmd (talk) 00:10, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:XY. If we can't say anything about it, we should say so: let the search engine do its job. We did until six months ago: the Nevada article was created on 8 July by User:Rtelly12 with the ES "Started a new page.... but the title is wrong.". It was moved the following day. This R is the ghost of that move, no more. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 19:53, 13 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:50, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

  Eh? We have things to say about over half a dozen organisations that will be commonly referred to by this name. Thryduulf (talk) 00:49, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

We have nothing to say about "Department of Administration". We only have things to say about instances of departments of administration. The first sentence of an article about it would start "A Department of Administration is a...". Most of these articles start "The X Department of Adminsitration" or similar. Six is an underestimte, my Wikipedia search led me to at least twenty articles that could be called plausibly departments of administration, and on top of that you have the Department of administrative affairs. To direct to any of them is unlikely to satisfy readers seeking the other nineteen.

What's the point of having a search engine if it is forever being circumvented by redirects that do not say what they mean? I'm all for redirects, I think they are a great way to get readers where they want to be, for that we have to make intelligent guesses. A DAB will simply be populated with "the stuff I found on Wikipedia's search engine": so help the search engine do its job, don't circumvent it. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 12:09, 14 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:50, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

What would be here would not be an article but a disambiguation page, "Department of Administration may refer to...". This is the exact usecase for a disambiguation page, so that readers do not have to hunt through search results that contain irrelevant colocations, may be several clicks/taps away (depending on how they are searching/browsing, what device they are using, whether they have permission to start a new article, etc) and may not even contain the article they are looking for. Thryduulf (talk) 14:59, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Malphite

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Catalan.wikipedia.com

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Amumu

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Jhin (League of Legends)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

SuWiki

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 20#SuWiki

Caileeolitt/sandbox

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Procedural close, both the R and its target have been deleted. (non-admin closure) by 85.67.32.244 (talk) 17:36, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Depictions of sexual activity

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Asian Sambo Championship

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

1975 World Sambo Championships

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Howling abyss

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Florida, Florida

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 19#Florida, Florida

Kansas, Missouri

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 19#Kansas, Missouri

File:NCT 127 - Favourite.jpeg

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

IMix

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 19#IMix

October 11

Den lille havfrue

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget both

The disabled

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 19#The disabled

Munich Air Disaster 1958

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Sarah Lawrence College: Campus

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Buffalo Football Team

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 19#Buffalo Football Team

Mission to Kala (Q3316862)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

James while John had a better effect on the teacher

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 18#James while John had a better effect on the teacher

Volcano warning

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Matt McGlothlin

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Just Another War in Space

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 19#Just Another War in Space

Bhachau news

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

Reaver (StarCraft)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Burcdeshnaft

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Fire danger

• Fire danger → Firefighter  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Seems like an odd target choice. There are dangers associated with firefighting, but also many types of fires in general. Wildfire danger is tracked according to established levels of risk. Not sure what the best target would be. Sangdeboeuf (talk) 04:38, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Wildfire per nom. Another option is National Fire Danger Rating System per [20] but that might be too localized to United States. This is different from Fire class / Fire protection which has to do with rating types of fires in dwellings. Can also hatnote to Fire in general AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 15:43, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Fire safety. This would be consistent with Fire hazard, which redirects to that topic. The article's introduction specifically addresses fire hazards. I would also add the redirect category {{R from related topic}}. Coastside (talk) 18:03, 26 September 2021 (UTC).
• Delete. This is a vague expression with no unambiguous meaning. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:25, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per Shhhnotsoloud. Winston (talk) 23:41, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to National Fire Danger Rating System (with a possible redirect hatnote to McArthur Forest Fire Danger Index)? Clarityfiend (talk) 23:55, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
  • That's certainly better than deleting it. The redirect has been around since 2003. Per WP:RFD#KEEP and WP:RFD#HARMFUL it should be preserved. Coastside (talk) 00:09, 27 September 2021 (UTC) Also, I found an article by the National Park Service titled "Understanding Fire Danger" that describes the National Fire Danger Rating System as a way to assess Fire Danger. Coastside (talk) 00:15, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

    Perhaps "Fire Danger Rating" would be a valid redirect to National Fire Danger Rating System, but I don't think "Fire danger" alone is valid since the term is too generic. Which WP:RFD#KEEP reason are you using? Despite being old, the redirect has exactly 3 links from mainspace (one from the article National Fire Danger Rating System itself), and only the link in Coconino National Forest is probably meant to link to National Fire Danger Rating System since it mentions the ratings "very high" and "extreme". The others refer to the general concept of fire danger. NFDRS is also only used in the United States. Winston (talk) 03:04, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

  Regarding reasons to keep, everything in WP:RFD#HARMFUL, including edit history, breaking links from elsewhere (even outside wikipedia), delete only if harmful or recent; from WP:RFD#KEEP, aid in searches, such as if someone didn't know the name of the NFDRS. Good point about NFDRS being US only, but it wouldn't be harmful, just limited. If there were international versions of such programs, then someone might later think to redirect to "List of international fire danger rating systems" if they saw it was a link to the US-only system. Point is there is a strong bias to keep vs delete in the guidance. Coastside (talk) 12:55, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Fire. Someone searching for this is most likely looking for information about the dangers of fire in general, not the dangers associated with one kind of fire (such as wildfires), a system for determining how dangerous a fire is, how people stay safe in fires, or people who put out fires. The best starting point for finding information on the dangers associated with fire in general, and in fact many other fire-related topics, is the article about fire. Evil Sith Lord (talk) 03:28, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Fire per above (fires in general). MB 18:29, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Wildfire for now and add a {{redirect}} hatnote to Fire safety. While vague and non-specific, I think this term is usually used in the context of wildfire danger rather than other types of fires. The current target clearly leaves something to be desired, fire is far too broad, fire safety does not discuss wildfires at all, and the various rating system articles (linked from wildfire in the See also) are too specific. Ideally, someone would turn this into a set index article, which I may give a go at some point, but for now let's find the most appropriate redirect target. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:09, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to Fire per Evil Sith Lord. While the term is commonly used for wildfires it is not exclusively used for that and can refer to the danger from any sort of fire. Thryduulf (talk) 15:34, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:09, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

• (As nominator) Retarget to Wildfire and add a disambiguation link to Fire safety, with no prejudice toward creating a set-index or broad-concept article later. I think the term is most often used for weather conditions favorable for wildfires, while fire hazard is more often used for a specific situation that increases the risk of a fire. NFDRS and similar systems are too specific IMO. --Sangdeboeuf (talk) 23:49, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget to fire safety per User:Coastside, although I'd categorise it as {{R from antonym}}. Other suggestions are too specific. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 07:41, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 11:00, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per Shhhnotsoloud. This not an established phrase so does not need a redirect; search results should do. As discussed above there is no clear target, with relevant content split across Fire, Fire safety and Wildfire, among others. User:GKFX^talk 18:39, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Str crop

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

"dick helicoptering"

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

Green fungus

• Green fungus → Aspergillosis  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not mentioned at the target, GScholar results suggest that "green fungus" more commonly refers to visibly-green fungal growths, including but not limited to Aspergillus. As the term isn't discussed in depth anywhere on Wikipedia, deletion seems like the way to go for now. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 19:15, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

• I have no objections to deletion of this redirect. There was some COVID19-related news in the Indian press where the term was used a couple of weeks ago, around mid-June, but I don't see anything to suggest that it ever became a sufficiently notable topic to warrant a redirect. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vexations (talk • contribs) 19:21, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

  Are you referring to Black Fungus? Jay ^(Talk) 05:52, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

  Sorry, I didn't see the link you mentioned in the redirect's edit summary. Jay (talk) 03:36, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete The term is used generically to describe what appears to be a green-colored fungus-like thing growing on something. Lichen and green molds are sometimes incorrectly referred to as "green fungus". It's not a topic per se. I did find another technical exmple, Ellobiopsidae, referred to as "green fungus", but even there I think it's more of a descriptive term than an alternative common name.Coastside (talk) 19:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
• Keep and mention in target per [21] and [22] and others - the top hits when I search for this term. MB 04:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

It's a bit ironic that the first article you mention has this to say about the naming: "While the scientific name for this fungal infection is Aspergillosis, Green Fungus is merely a name that has been attributed to it. This biological fungus has been in existence for very long and we often see patients presenting symptoms for the same. It is imperative that we start referring to these fungal infections with their correct scientific name to avoid chaos."Coastside (talk) 05:08, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 22:11, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:19, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete if this is a term recently invented by the media or doctors talking to media. If it has a reliable medical basis, then we need a mention at the target. Jay (talk) 03:35, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Big Black: Stand at Attica

• Big Black: Stand at Attica → Attica Prison riot  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This is the title of a book about the prison riot, but is not mentioned at the target. Delete unless a duly sourced mention can be added. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 15:25, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Mentioned at Eisner Award for Best Reality-Based Work but that's not a suitable target. If it becomes notable, the article will replace the redlink. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:29, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
• Here's something that can be added to the Books section of the article. I'm not adding it because I was involved with running Best Graphic Novels for Adults list (and because I'm bad at formatting references, so the New York Times review reference probably needs to be expanded.) Thematthewmurray (talk) 20:45, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

A non-fiction graphic novel entitled Big Black: Stand at Attica was released in 2020 and was co-written by Frank "Big Black" Smith, who had been an inmate during the riot. The graphic novel was included on the American Library Association's Graphic Novels and Comics Round Table's 2020 list of Top Ten Best Graphic Novels for Adults. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thematthewmurray (talk • contribs) 20:46, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

References

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 21:52, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:19, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Foreman Spike

• Foreman Spike → Characters in the Mario franchise#Foreman Spike  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

The character that the redirect goes to on the article Characters in the Mario franchise is no longer on the article, proving the redirect pointless. Delete the redirect or have it go to the correct place if the character now goes by a different name on the article. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:27, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

• Redirect to Wrecking Crew (video game)#Gameplay {{R from fictional character}}Coastside (talk) 14:40, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
• Keep - the character was just recently confirmed for the upcoming Super Mario film. So I imagine the best option would just be to create an entry for the character on the list. Sergecross73 msg me 15:27, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

  The page is already a mess as is. There's really no list criteria however I'm not sure if Foreman Spike would fit there anyways, being featured in only one game (and now being in the new film that's in production). ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:31, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

  @Sergecross73: pinging ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:07, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

  If there was inclusion criteria, and it failed it, I could see how that would be an issue. But I'm not following how a lack of inclusion criteria is somehow a roadblock. Sergecross73 msg me 17:43, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

  @Sergecross73: I started a discussion on the talk page about adding one because a lot of the character's on there were basically only in one game. If we were to add it and that discussion suddenly gain traction then there would be an issue. ― Blaze The Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:35, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

• There is no need for deletion here if the discussion currently on the charter page results in a consensus to mention the character the redirect should stay where it is and if there’s a consensus not to mention him there we should instead retarget to to Wrecking Crew (video game)#Gameplay since the character is mentioned there and it relevant to the section in question.--65.92.245.188 (talk) 03:43, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:04, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:14, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Next Labour Party (UK) leadership election

• Next Labour Party (UK) leadership election → 2020 Labour Party leadership election (UK)  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• Next Labour Party deputy leadership election → 2020 Labour Party deputy leadership election  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Redirect to Leader_of_the_Labour_Party_(UK)#Selection and Deputy Leader of the Labour Party (UK) respectively. Most recent, but misleading to call either the "next". Unknown Temptation (talk) 15:27, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete due to a lack of information on when the next leadership election would be. Leader of the Labour Party (UK)#Selection gives the how, not the when. Deputy Leader of the Labour Party (UK) does not mention future election(s). -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:23, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Procedural relisting, Next Labour Party deputy leadership election was not properly tagged.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:05, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

October 10

Reclaiming of nigger in African American Vernacular English

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

School of Thought

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Polyvalent vaccine

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

What Goes Up...

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

The Living End (Huesker Due album)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Latin civilisation

• Latin civilisation → Western culture  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not mentioned at the target, doesn't unambiguously refer to it; a GScholar search suggests that this term often alternatively refers to the Roman Empire, the sphere of influence of the Roman Catholic Church, and/or the southwestern European region of Romance-language speaking countries and their colonies. In the absence of a clear target, deletion seems like it may be the best option. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 16:03, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

I personally made the page in reference to the work of the polish historian Feliks Koneczny, who used the term in his theory of civilisations, with the latin civilisation being characterised through its legal, ethical and cultural heritage gained from the Roman Empire and the Catholic Church (note: Koneczny did not view civilisation as inherently tied to religion, he did view it as being fundamentally tied to it. He viewed England as a country that kept much of its former Catholic heritage even when it became protestant.). His usage of the term aligns with what one would call the 'Western civilisation', with it being commonly synonymous in Poland. It also has a Polish Wikipedia page. Nonetheless I see that I failed to consider other usages of the term, as such I would propose to convert the redirect into a disambiguation page. Kanclerz K-Tech (talk) 22:10, 10 October 2021 (UTC) :

I'm liking the idea of a disambiguation page - it very clearly is an ambiguous term with multiple meanings. A disambiguation page would mean also that the reader would get some context about why they should be going to the western culture article (assuming that is where they wanted to go), even if nothing is added to that article. --Xurizuri (talk) 09:32, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

I agree that there is no obvious target (unlike, say, Arabic civilisation, which would clearly go to Arab world). Western culture would be defensible, as would be Legacy of the Roman Empire (probably the closest to the sense Kanclerz describes). As would Roman Empire/Ancient Rome. Yeah, a most logical solution would be to have short disambig page with a longer than average write-up to explain the concept, and then links to the plausible targets. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 00:29, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Side channels

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 18#Side channels

Varase

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

Border, San Diego, California

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

The Border Battle

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 15#The Border Battle

Yuritemp

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

Stuart Scheller

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

QWERTY effect

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Channel 13 Eyewitness News

• Channel 13 Eyewitness News → WTHR  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

KTRK-TV has also in the past called its newscasts "Channel 13 Eyewitness News" (and even now still calls them "ABC 13 Eyewitness News"), so there is some ambiguity. Google searches for most variations of this title are dominated by KTRK, even when "ABC" (which wouldn't apply to the NBC-affiliated WTHR) isn't included. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:44, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

• We do not need another laundry list of "stations on channel X using news branding Y". Delete and do not retarget. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
• Disambiguate with all stations that have used this branding. Eyewitness News has a list, but it is not easy to pick out the Channel 13s from it. -- Tavix ^(talk) 12:06, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Eyewitness News which can be improved if necessary. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:43, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Channel five eyewitness news

• Channel five eyewitness news → KPIX-TV  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

While KPIX-TV is probably the largest station to have titled its newscasts anything like this (albeit as "Channel 5 Eyewitness News"), this could just as easily refer to KSTP-TV, which has also branded its news as "Channel 5 Eyewitness News" in the past, and even now is still "5 Eyewitness News" (whereas KPIX has not used the Eyewitness News name in any form in nearly a decade). There have been other stations on channel 5 that have used the "Eyewitness News" name in the past as well, so there's some possible ambiguity, but it's worth noting that Google searches for anything close to this term are dominated by KSTP-TV, not KPIX-TV. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:34, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

• Disambiguate at Channel 5 Eyewitness News with all stations that have used this branding. Eyewitness News has a list, but it is not easy to pick out the Channel 5s from it. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:32, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
• We do not need another laundry list of "stations on channel X using news branding Y". Delete and do not retarget. Too many stations that have used this now or in the past: KPIX, KSTP, KSDK, WTVH, KENS all occur to me off the top of my head. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Eyewitness News which can be improved if necessary. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:44, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
  • ... and retarget 5 Eyewitness News there too. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:46, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Channel 3 Eyewitness News

• Channel 3 Eyewitness News → WFSB  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

While WFSB is probably by far the largest station to title its newscasts as "Channel 3 Eyewitness News", this is also the branding for the newscasts on WRCB, so there is some potential ambiguity. (On top of that, KIDK also used this title in relatively recent times when it still aired local newscasts; even now, a subchannel of KIFI-TV is branded as the similar "Eyewitness News 3".) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:26, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Eyewitness News, which lists all the stations that have used this moniker. - Eureka Lott 01:47, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep, but add a hatnote on WFSB that links to Eyewitness News, which says something along the lines of "Channel 3 Eyewitness News redirects here. For other uses, see Eyewitness News." Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:30, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
• Disambiguate with all stations that have used this branding. Eyewitness News has a list, but it is not easy to pick out the Channel 3s from it. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:28, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
• We do not need another laundry list of "stations on channel X using news branding Y". Delete and do not retarget. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 02:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Eyewitness News which can be improved if necessary. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:47, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

October 8

Pencak Silat Hall

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Borders

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Degeneration

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Highlands

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Iraqi National Counter-Terrorism Force (INCTF)

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

Celtic Orthodox Church in the United States

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 16#Celtic Orthodox Church in the United States

Trump conspiracy

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Unfulfilled religious prophecies

• Unfulfilled religious prophecies → Unfulfilled Christian religious predictions  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

See Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2016_December_2#Unfulfilled_religious_predictions; the current target is much too narrow. Hog Farm _Talk 02:01, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

• I'm not seeing the problem with keeping the redirect around unless/until someone creates an article about unfulfilled prophecies in other religions. If someone, in fact, has created an article about unfulfilled prophecies in other religions, then this page could be turned into a disambiguation page. (I would have held the same view of the other link as well.) --B (talk) 11:11, 1 October 2021 (UTC)
  • The counterargument would be that the redirect should not exist if there is no suitable target, and the only possible target is too narrow to be suitable. Better that users see the search results than be WP:ASTONISHED. Mlb96 (talk) 05:20, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:35, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• Note that there were three incoming links and all were from See alsos. I have replaced them with the current Christian target. Jay (talk) 13:02, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. There's a rather well-known as-yet unfulfilled prophecy which is certainly not Christian - Messiah in Judaism. Narky Blert (talk) 17:03, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Then ... make it a disambiguation page? --B (talk) 14:52, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: This redirect's target displays one of our inherent biases. It could also be expanded into its own article. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 18:43, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

  @Susmuffin: There's certainly room for an article, though it might need heavy moderation to maintain NPOV. I can think of at least two groups which have prophesied multiple dates for the End of the World, all of which have come and gone without anyone noticing any difference. RationalWiki is by no means RS, but it could be a good place to locate examples and citations. (My rare contributions there have been sourced to enwiki standards; some of my accompanying polemic could get zapped here for various good reasons.) Narky Blert (talk) 20:01, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Chinese drama

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Ꜵ and its doppelgänger

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget one, delete (former Unicode lowercase)

PDM University Modern Industrial Estate metro station

• PDM University Modern Industrial Estate metro station → Modern Industrial Estate metro station  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• PDM University Pandit Shree Ram Sharma metro station → Pandit Shree Ram Sharma metro station  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

Deletion reason: The official name was Modern Industrial Estate metro station. PDM is the title sponsor, but not the official name. PDM has used this page for advertisement. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AkshayKakkar (talk • contribs) 05:34, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment. After the nom moved the page to the new target, he removed mention of the old name. Question to AkshayKakkar: wasn't the station known as PDM University Modern Industrial Estate metro station at one time? See image for reference. And it's now known as PDM University Pandit Shree Ram Sharma metro station? See image for reference. Jay (talk) 15:49, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment. As mentioned, the nom moved the page on 17 September, two weeks before this RfD, to Pandit Shree Ram Sharma metro station. The nomination is technically malformed (lists the wrong target). 85.67.32.244 (talk) 16:11, 8 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep as {{R from former name}}, if the station were known as this, officially or not. We have Emirates Stadium for example, even though "Emirates" is the name of a sponsor, and the stadium goes by other names for some purposes. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 16:09, 8 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Thats not how it works for Delhi metro. Title brand gets the rights to put on ads at the metro station. For example Sikanderpur metro station has Bank of baroda as title sponsor [23]. The official name is still Sikanderpur metro station. List of official names can be found here: [24]. Even the audio announcement is Sikanderpur metro station, and not Bank of Baroda Sikander metro station [25]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AkshayKakkar (talk • contribs) 14:26, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

  As per this article, outdoor and indoor advertisement space, painting of the station in a brands’ colour, prefix/ suffix to the existing name of the station are the key areas offered to the licensees. However, the renamed station is not made a part of the Metro’s announcement systems inside trains or at stations. Some of the prominent stations that have been renamed are MG Road, Huda City Centre, Noida City Centre, ITO, Janpath among others. Jay (talk) 15:41, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

As I said, Keep... if the station was known as this, officially or not. See WP:OFFICIALNAME. My !vote was and is a qualified keep; if no evidence can be shown that this name is common, it can be deleted. We still have Ally Pally targeting Alexandra Palace, though that has never been its official name. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 17:11, 9 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:35, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Comment for Deletion since there are as many as 50 metro stations with a title sponsor, but none of them are known with their sponsor name. Even the news articles call them without their sponsors name [26] Akshay (talk) 15:58, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep. Apart from anything else, the pages were at these titles. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 18:28, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
• The bigger discussion that should happen (perhaps at Talk:Delhi Metro) is what should be the outcome for the other re-branded stations in the case they start having redirects. There are 250+ station articles listed in List of Delhi Metro stations and I have not checked to see how many of them have sponsor redirects. Articles with mention of the sponsor name (even though unsourced) are potential sponsor redirects. See Honda 2 Wheelers Delhi University North Campus, Dabur ITO, Wave City Center, etc. The Delhi Metro website has published this advertiser's list where 53 stations and their sponsors are listed under SEMI NAMING/CO-BRANDING. This TOI article mentions Wave Noida City Center, Jagran Vaishali, ONGC Shivaji Stadium, Vodafone Belvedere Towers, IndusInd Bank Cybercity, and Micromax Moulsari Avenue. These are sources enough for inclusion in the respective articles, unlike the current redirect under discussion, where we have only photographic evidence (which is probably good enough for this redirect). Jay (talk) 19:20, 10 October 2021 (UTC)

Iraqi terrorists

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget both

Iraqi terrorism

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget both

Yasaul

• Yasaul → Hovuni  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

There is no mention of the subject at the target, or any other indication that they are the same place or otherwise related. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:23, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

• Comment the article formerly mentioned "Yesaul" as an alternative name, but it was removed from the target in August by an IP editor whose entire contribution history consists of removing alternative names from about 100 other Armenian villages on the same day. That said, even if the IP's edits were rolled back, I think Yesaul rather than this tiny village would be the WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 10:33, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:48, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget to Yesaul per IP as an {{R from alternative spelling}}. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:39, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

List of burial places of Islamic figures

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

October 6

Striped Sweater

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 14#Striped Sweater

Psychofreaks

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

VTAK

• VTAK → VTAC  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

• V-tak → VTAC  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ]

The target, a disambiguation page, previously listed a single entry spelled "VTAK", the film A View to a Kill. I have removed this entry because it failed WP:DABACRONYM: the film article does not use the acronym VTAK (let alone VTAC), nor could I find any reliable sources which use it either [27][28]. The only acronym sometimes used for the film is AVTAK [29] English Wikipedia discusses nothing else called VTAK either (not counting the WP:PTM Vták Ohnivák, which would not be an appropriate target; wikt:vták just means "bird"). Suggest deletion. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 02:30, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. --Asmodea Oaktree (talk) 12:46, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
• Delete for now. This could be a weak spelling for VTEC or VTAC, but there aren't really any entries worth digging up. There's Applied Research Associates as Virtual Tactical Assault Kit (VTAK) as mentioned in this press release [30]. There's also the Foreign Trade Arbitration Commission in USSR [31] but even then the VTAK and later ICAC don't have articles here. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 18:52, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
• Keep or retarget to Ventricular tachycardia as a plausible phonetic mispelling. This could apply to any of the entries, but in particular "V-tach" gets thrown around constantly in medical dramas, and its spelling is non-obvious. Someone could easily think there's a "k" in there, especially with the term often appearing near "EKG". Given that it's linked from the dab, no strong preference between keep and ret. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 05:28, 29 September 2021 (UTC)
• Delete VTAK: no article and obscures search. Retarget V-tak to Ventricular tachycardia: good idea Tamzin. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 10:17, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
• Delete VTAK as per above. Redirect V-TAK (and Retarget V-tak) to Ventricular tachycardia. I agree with the logic (per Tamzin), but if someone already thinks "tach" they would likely consider it an abbreviation, so they would search for "V-tach" or "V tach", and indeed, there already are redirects V tach and V-tach to this article. If someone think it's "tak", they are hearing it as an acronym that is pronounced as a word (like "NATO"), which should be capitalized "TAK". Because the first letter "V" is heard as an initialism, it is sensibly hyphenated initialism-acronym, i.e., V-TAK. I wouldn't add V-tak with lower case since acronyms should be capitalized, but since it already exists, I would also redirect it to Ventricular tachycardia as per Shhhnotsoloud. Coastside (talk) 17:42, 30 September 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: As things stand, I see consensus to delete the first, but that could change as discussion continues on the second.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 15:39, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete: This is an obscure search term. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 17:49, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

  @Susmuffin: With respect, I don't think that really addresses the arguments that have been made to keep/retarget. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 19:41, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete first and retarget to Ventricular tachycardia second as a plausible phonetic mispelling. --Somerby (talk) 18:50, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Kingdom of Grenada

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Lauren King

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Wanasur

• Wanasur → Banasura  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• Wanasura → Banasura  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

Not mentioned at the target, no relevant results on GScholar or DuckDuckGo as far as I was able to see. Delete unless a justification can be provided. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 17:20, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

I was asked by a wikipedian on my talk page to help disambiguate an article where Wanasur was used. There are many online results for Vanasur/a see [32]. Wanaur/a is a plausible alternate spelling and search keyword. So it should not be deleted, unless there is a conflict and/or better target. Venkat TL (talk) 17:35, 19 September 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:19, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

• Weak keep per Venkat TL. If this is simply an alternate form of the name, I can live with the {{R without mention}}. The only current use of either one of these on the English Wikipedia (Waneshwar Mahadev Temple) is indeed refering to Banasura. --BDD (talk) 20:21, 4 October 2021 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 06:45, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

English republicanism

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Refined the first and retargeted the second

Eyewitness News 5

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 13#Eyewitness News 5

Draft:Playhouse Disney (Asia)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

October 5

Macapagal Avenue

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Deleted as WP:G7 (non-admin closure) by 85.67.32.244 (talk) 04:45, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Deograves Asuncion

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

𐓈 (former Unicode lowercase)

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

Gallic nationalist

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 14#Gallic nationalist

Centimeter

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

Men seeking men

• Men seeking men → Same-sex relationship  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate redirect; as far as I can tell from the wikilink (and the context I've usually heard the term in), this is usually about men seeking men for often one-off hookups, rather than men seeking a relationship with another man. Men who have sex with men might be a better redirect? AFreshStart (talk) 17:37, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

• Retarget. A man who is seeking a man is not necessarily looking for a relationship. There's also the semantic issue of sex vs. gender, but that's probably more an issue with the target article's title, given that that article exclusively discusses same-gender relationships. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 18:51, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

That article is not at all focused on transgender topics, and as such is overwhelmingly about people whose sex and gender are the same. For better or worse, "same-sex relationships" is the WP:COMMONNAME in the sources; analogous to "same-sex marriage". Crossroads ^-talk- 19:58, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

• Delete. Any number of equally plausible targets, none of which mention the phrase to my knowledge, such as same-sex relationships, men who have sex with men, homosexuality, etc. Not every turn of phrase needs to be a redirect. The original creator of the redirect is indeffed for sockpuppetry, by the way. Crossroads ^-talk- 19:58, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
  • @Crossroads: Why is the creator relevant? Many users that get banned have in the past made genuine contributions. That user's sockpuppetry is also unrelated to this subject matter; their sock account was mostly editing stuff about san francisco, not creating redirects about sexuality. Further, redirects don't need to be directly referenced in the text of the article, and just because there are multiple possible targets doesn't mean that this isn't a term worth redirecting. --Xurizuri (talk) 21:50, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
• Leaning delete per Crossroads. Another possibility is Homoeroticism, where Same-sex love redirects. The syntax of this redirects calls to mind a personal advertisement, which does have some discussion of men seeking men. FWIW, I've heard the term "Achillean" to express a similar concept, but that would likely fail WP:NEO (it's the male equivalent of what's described as "Sapphic love" at the disambiguation page Sapphic). --BDD (talk) 21:07, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
• Redirect to Men who have sex with men This is a phrase which dating services use to connect men to other men. Usually but not always that means for sex, and usually this is for gay products but sometimes people who are not gay use them. In the LGBT+ space we require extra redirects and more variation of terms because word choice in this space varies so much by region, changes so quickly by time, and because writers of citable sources are sensitive to labels and often use many terms to refer to slightly different concepts which Wikipedia treats as the same. We need more flexibility here and this is a phrase with some use and which we need to keep as an option. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:13, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Agree with this. And to repeat, this is a genuinely used term and because it is commonly used on boards/dating services (e.g. either as the full term, MSM, or M4M), it is one that someone may use to try to find an article. Ideally, the article would be expanded to include something about this, but not technically necessary as I reckon people can figure out how its related. As it's a term most frequently applied to hook-ups or casual sex, I think Men who have sex with men is the right article to redirect to over Same-sex relationship. Homosexuality also doesn't fit, because that article is a broad overview of same-sex/-gender attraction, rather than specifically sexual and specifically men. Homoeroticism could work, except that's more an article about historical conceptualisations of, and art/literature about, homosexual attraction than it is about men having sex with men (look, if we're gonna be honest, it's about ancient porn). --Xurizuri (talk) 21:50, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete for the reasons stated by Crossroads, plus the fact that this is an unlikely target for search (or wikilinks). Edit: But my second choice would be to retarget to Men who have sex with men. Colin M (talk) 16:35, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
  • The term is used within wikilinks, and doesn't appear that uncommon; there are a number of Wiki-noteworthy services that advertise themselves as for "men seeking men" or who have that as a section. —AFreshStart (talk) 19:43, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
    • Ah, you're right. Of 3 mainspace wikilinks, 2 are referring to the Craigslist section, which is certainly the service most strongly associated with the term. The other one was specifically used as a replacement for text that used to refer to "gay and biseuxal men". Colin M (talk) 15:10, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete: The meaning of "seeking" is unclear. There are simply too many potential targets. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 17:35, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
  • I disagree slightly. Yes, the term is definitely ephemistic, and may confuse the reader – which is why I would argue that the redirect should stay – but all of the results I could find from Google scholar are pretty clear that the term "men seeking men" is always used to refer to men seeking other men for sexual purposes in personal ads (as mentioned above), akin to how men who have sex with men is a commonly used term in medical literature and social research: [33] [34] [35]. No results for the term are about 'seeking' anything else... —AFreshStart (talk) 19:43, 7 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget per Blue Rasberry. Technically ambiguous, but has a widely used euphemistic meaning that it should be retargeted to point to. ---- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 16:59, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
• Retarget per Blue Rasberry. Commonly used search term by various dating services which clearly has proven useful for readers, no need to delete. CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:15, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Republicanism in Northern Ireland

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 October 14#Republicanism in Northern Ireland

Zanjabil

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Template:Reimprove

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Wikipedia Library

• Wikipedia Library → Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 
• The Wikipedia Library → Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library  (talk · links · history · stats)     [ Closure: (@subpage) ] 

This seems to de facto meet WP:R2; I'm not sure if there's some particularly good reason for an exception (hence why I'm not just tagging for speedy deletion); unless someone can convince me there's actually GNG for this topic and it should be made in an article (which seems unlikely from a quick search) RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 03:38, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep, directs readers to the page they are looking for, thus serves its purpose. Unambiguous and helpful. Linked from many pages as well. It doesn't qualify for R2. Related for posterity. — J947 ‡ ^{message ⁓ edits} 04:12, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete. This is an unnecessary cross-namespace redirect, and I can't find a mainspace article that discusses the subject. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 06:56, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep per J947 until mainspace content is written. It would be a different matter if there was a mainspace article/section, but given that there is only passing mentions at present but lots of references, the cross-namespace redirect is much better than search results which wont (because of those references) list the project space content until beyond page 2, a red link would be significantly inferior for readers. Thryduulf (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
• Comment The Wikipedia Library should be added to the nomination as well, since the same reasons for deletion (or non-deletion) apply. I've linked to this before in the |via= citation parameter, the same way one might link to ProQuest or Newspapers.com. I think it's somewhat helpful for that purpose because it points readers to a place where they can verify the citation... it does look like I'm one of the only people doing that, though. Spicy (talk) 13:00, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

  Bundled. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she/they) 18:55, 5 October 2021 (UTC)

I fill in citation parameters fairly fully in articles I butcheredit, but the via parameter isn't very useful, bordering harmful. Who cares, as a reader, that a reference was found this way or that? There's also agency=... should I add "My local library" as the via? It could suggest that it's the only way to find the source. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 02:25, 8 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:46, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

• Keep both. They are cross-namespace redirects from reader-facing pages to a reader-facing page. Totally acceptable. 85.67.32.244 (talk) 08:18, 7 October 2021 (UTC) WP:STRIKESOCK. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:46, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep: These redirects are the only references in the mainspace to the Wikipedia Library and need to be maintained in order order to direct readers to the wikispace page that explains what it is. ––FormalDude talk 08:09, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:REDLINK to encourage creation of an article about the Wikipedia Library, a notable topic. Readers looking for an encyclopedia article about the Wikipedia Library won't find it here, and instead will be WP:ASTONISHed to find instructions for editors on how to use the library. In a related comparison: JSTOR is an article about the digital library; Wikipedia:JSTOR is usage instructions for editors. Ivanvector's squirrel (^trees/_nuts) 14:58, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
• Keep. I have just come to this discussion through the first of the redirect pages, thus proving to me that at least one of them is useful. WP:R2 says "except the ... Wikipedia: [etc] namespaces". These are redirects to Wikipedia: namespace, therefore WP:R2 is not a reason to delete them. Keep at least one of them. Nurg (talk) 23:09, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

The TeXbook

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget