Deletion discussions |
---|
|
Articles |
Templates and modules |
Files |
Categories |
Redirects |
Miscellany |
Speedy deletion |
Proposed deletion |
V | Mar | Apr | May | Jun | Total |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CfD | 0 | 0 | 87 | 99 | 186 |
TfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
MfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
FfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | 5 |
RfD | 0 | 0 | 2 | 16 | 18 |
AfD | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 12 |
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?
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
You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met (but note also the exceptions listed below this list):
- The redirect page makes it unreasonably difficult for users to locate similarly named articles via the search engine. For example, if the user searches for "New Articles", and is redirected to a disambiguation page for "Articles", it would take much longer to get to the newly added articles on Wikipedia.
- The redirect might cause confusion. For example, if "Adam B. Smith" was redirected to "Andrew B. Smith", because Andrew was accidentally called Adam in one source, this could cause confusion with the article on Adam Smith, so the redirect should be deleted.
- The redirect is offensive or abusive, such as redirecting "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" to "Joe Bloggs" (unless "Joe Bloggs is a Loser" is legitimately discussed in the article), or "Joe Bloggs" to "Loser". (Speedy deletion criterion G10 and G3 may apply.) See also § Neutrality of redirects.
- The redirect constitutes self-promotion or spam. (Speedy deletion criterion G11 may apply.)
- The redirect makes no sense, such as redirecting "Apple" to "Orange". (Speedy deletion criterion G1 may apply.)
- It is a cross-namespace redirect out of article space, such as one pointing into the User or Wikipedia namespace. The major exception to this rule are the pseudo-namespace shortcut redirects, which technically are in the main article space. Some long-standing cross-namespace redirects are also kept because of their long-standing history and potential usefulness. "MOS:" redirects, for example, 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:.)
- If the redirect is broken, meaning it redirects to an article that does not exist, it can be immediately deleted under speedy deletion criterion G8. You should check that there is not an alternative place it could be appropriately redirected to first or that it has become broken through vandalism.
- If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. In particular, redirects in a language other than English to a page whose subject is unrelated to that language (or a culture that speaks that language) should generally not be created. (Implausible typos or misnomers are candidates for speedy deletion criterion R3, if recently created.)
- If the target article needs to be moved to the redirect title, but the redirect has been edited before and has a history of its own, then the title needs to be freed up to make way for the move. If the move is uncontroversial, tag the redirect for G6 speedy deletion, or alternatively (with the
suppressredirect
user right; available to page movers and admins), perform a round-robin move. If not, take the article to Requested moves. - 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:
- They have a potentially useful page history, or an edit history that should be kept to comply with the licensing requirements for a merge (see Wikipedia:Merge and delete). On the other hand, if the redirect was created by renaming a page with that name, and the page history just mentions the renaming, and for one of the reasons above you want to delete the page, copy the page history to the Talk page of the article it redirects to. The act of renaming is useful page history, and even more so if there has been discussion on the page name.
- They would aid accidental linking and make the creation of duplicate articles less likely, whether by redirecting a plural to a singular, by redirecting a frequent misspelling to a correct spelling, by redirecting a misnomer to a correct term, by redirecting to a synonym, etc. In other words, redirects with no incoming links are not candidates for deletion on those grounds because they are of benefit to the browsing user. Some extra vigilance by editors will be required to minimize the occurrence of those frequent misspellings in the article texts because the linkified misspellings will not appear as broken links; consider tagging the redirect with the {{R from misspelling}} template to assist editors in monitoring these misspellings.
- They aid searches on certain terms. For example, users who might see the "Keystone State" mentioned somewhere but do not know what that refers to will be able to find out at the Pennsylvania (target) article.
- Deleting redirects runs the risk of breaking incoming or internal links. For example, redirects resulting from page moves should not normally be deleted without good reason. Links that have existed for a significant length of time, including CamelCase links 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.
- Someone finds them useful. Hint: If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways. Evidence of usage can be gauged by using the wikishark or pageviews tool on the redirect to see the number of views it gets.
- The redirect is to a closely related word form, such as a plural form to a singular form.
Neutrality of redirects
Just as article titles using non-neutral language are permitted in some circumstances, so are such redirects. Because redirects are less visible to readers, more latitude is allowed in their names, therefore perceived lack of neutrality in redirect names is not a sufficient reason for their deletion. In most cases, non-neutral but verifiable redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term. Non-neutral redirects may be tagged with {{R from non-neutral name}}
.
Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:
- Articles that are created using non-neutral titles are routinely moved to a new neutral title, which leaves behind the old non-neutral title as a working redirect (e.g. Climategate → Climatic Research Unit email controversy).
- Articles created as POV forks may be deleted and replaced by a redirect pointing towards the article from which the fork originated (e.g. Barack Obama Muslim rumor → deleted and now redirected to Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories).
- The subject matter of articles may be represented by some sources outside Wikipedia in non-neutral terms. Such terms are generally avoided in Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. For instance the non-neutral expression "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
|
II. | List the entry on RfD.
Click to edit the section of RfD for today's entries.
|
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. 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
June 21
Condah swamp
- Condah swamp → Condah (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at target. This is a separate locality. Swampland is mentioned at Lake Condah but that is further south than this locality. Delete. A7V2 (talk) 02:43, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
June 20
List of berries
Template:Euphoria
- Template:Euphoria → Template:Euphoria (American TV series) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Current redirect is not main topic ★Trekker (talk) 17:42, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. There are indeed at least three templates that this title can refer to, but ambiguity like this can be resolved by pages even in template space. The precedents for that along with the long (and confusing) edit history make a disambig page seem like the best option to me. I've drafted one already. Glades12 (talk) 20:17, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep or disambiguate - Keep, or disambiguate per Glades12. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:33, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:36, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
The erased emperor
- The erased emperor → Macrinus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target. The few uses of this phrase on Google Scholar suggest that other emperors may have been known by this moniker. Deletion seems appropriate unless evidence of unambiguous use can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 19:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as vague. I think Damnatio memoriae is the closest target article which discusses the erasure of Emperor Geta's memory. However it is really a very long stretch for a retarget. --Lenticel (talk) 03:22, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Manifesto Politik
- Manifesto Politik → Perhimpoenan Indonesia#History (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target. Google scholar search results suggest that this is just Indonesian for "Political Manifesto" and is not predominantly associated with any particular group. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 19:12, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Amin Hafeez
- Amin Hafeez → Geo News (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, likely independently notable (see: [1]), delete to encourage article creation. signed, Rosguill talk 19:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Amin al-Hafiz where Amin Hafez and Amin Hafiz also redirect. Jay (talk) 03:07, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Bhagavath Singh
- Bhagavath Singh → Bhagat Singh (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This was tagged for speedy deletion to make way for the film article Bhagavath Singh (film), however the redirect creator didn't think it appropriate for the film title to be moved to the title. Bhagat Singh was not known as Bhagavath Singh, and there is no mention at the target, so it is unclear why the redirect exists. Jay (talk) 17:30, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: No mention of Bhagavath at Bhagat Singh's article. The creator may have misassumed that the revolutionary's proper name was Bhagavath since Bhagat is a derivative from it. Kailash29792 (talk) 17:41, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
All of Creation
- All of Creation → Axion Estin#Hymns in place of Axion Estin (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
A Google search shows that All of Creation (song) is clearly the primary topic and therefore should be the target. Veverve (talk) 09:33, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget with hatnote to current article. According to target article this is a partial title match of "All of Creation Rejoices in Thee" but it is still a plausible search term for it. --Lenticel (talk) 21:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. There's already a hatnote placed at current target article which solves any ambiguity. No need to retarget anywhere else; and I'm not sure if the song is notable enough for it to be considered the primary topic. CycloneYoris talk! 08:21, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs decision on primary topic.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 09:51, 20 June 2022 (UTC)- @CycloneYoris: a Google search clearly shows the pop song is the primary topic, not the liturgical one. Veverve (talk) 22:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Draft:Joint Opposition
- Draft:Joint Opposition → Joint Opposition (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Years after draft promotion, would anyone ever need this? Joy [shallot] (talk) 09:35, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Neutral, but we do usually keep the draft redirects around just because they're cheap and there's no benefit to deleting them. Anarchyte (talk) 10:29, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- I noticed this one after disambiguating the title. Should we move the draft title accordingly? It seems cheap, but this seems like more waste of volunteer time... --Joy [shallot] (talk) 12:53, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- That's an essay based on an RFC from 2016. This is becoming increasingly arcane :) --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:29, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
If the discussion here is on theJay (talk) 17:37, 20 June 2022 (UTC)Years after draft promotion
part, then yes it helps to keep the edit history right from the first edit, regardless of number of years.- Ok, I now get the point about the potential overhead of keeping the draft title in sync with the mainspace title over different moves over the years. It did take some time figuring out the page history of this case, since the mainspace article underwent a move without redirect. I may revise my vote depending on any strong opinions coming in. Jay (talk) 17:48, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- That's an essay based on an RFC from 2016. This is becoming increasingly arcane :) --Joy [shallot] (talk) 14:29, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. The draft that was at this title is the article now at Joint Opposition (Sri Lanka), so if it is kept it should be pointing there due to the "help article authors find their draft" rationale that pops up by the keepers of these redirects. However, the draft was accepted over five years ago and any benefits from this redirect have long since expired. Couple that with the title mismatch which makes it a bit more confusing to keep it around, so it should be deleted. -- Tavix (talk) 14:48, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep WP:RDRAFT maybe Retarget to Joint Opposition (Sri Lanka). As something that WOULD HAVE been an {{R from avoided double redirect}} (but obviously dont tag as such since it isnt.) Happy Editing--IAmChaos 02:16, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
List of current Worcester Tornadoes players
- List of current Worcester Tornadoes players → Worcester Tornadoes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The team disbanded in 2012, so there haven't been any "current" players in 10 years... Fram (talk) 08:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Natalie Mariduena
- Natalie Mariduena → David Dobrik (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
David Dobrik is a separate person who, although being associated with Mariduena, is not Mariduena. If a Vlog Squad page existed this would make sense, but such page does not exist. Gtag10 (talk) 05:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as unhelpful and misleading. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:43, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 11:24, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Refine to David Dobrik#The Vlog Squad as it is the best place for the Vlog squad in the absence of a separate article on the squad. Jay (talk) 08:24, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:41, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Template:NYCS stations
- Template:NYCS stations → Template:NYCS station (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Template was deleted as part of a TFD on 28th May. But was recreated as a redirect to another template on 29th May. The redirect is still unused, so should be deleted. WOSlinker (talk) 07:35, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. The redirect was created so the link at Wikipedia:WikiProject Trains/Rail succession templates will work since Template:NYCS station does the same thing as the "x stations" templates. Without this redirect, this template won't appear on the list. Gonnym (talk) 08:57, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Gonnym, the template doesn't even work with the succession templates such as {{S-line}} as that passes over the "line" and "station" parameters rather than using a numbered "1" & "2" parameters, which NYCS station uses. -- WOSlinker (talk) 15:17, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:06, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Unsecret
- Unsecret → Sam Tinnesz#Biography (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
There is a brief mention at target. There is another at Roman Sadovsky, and searching WP shows a few others. None is any better than the others. Probably best to just delete. MB 06:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. and possibly WP:REDYES. Veverve (talk) 09:36, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, retarget or create article - Keep, retarget to a more suitable target, or create an article. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:49, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:05, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Admiral Johnson
- Admiral Johnson → Alfred Wilkinson Johnson (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Having just created Admiral Johnson (disambiguation), I doubt that Alfred Wilkinson Johnson is the primary topic of this title-and-name combination. There have been numerous other admirals with the surname Johnson, some of higher rank. I would move the disambiguation page over this redirect. BD2412 T 00:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Template:School
- Template:School → Template:Infobox school (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete redirect as there are no current transclusions. –Aidan721 (talk) 00:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
June 19
Wikipedia:DuSable Black History Museum and Education Center
- Wikipedia:DuSable Black History Museum and Education Center → DuSable Black History Museum and Education Center (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Fixed from a bad page move; unnecessary redirect that doesn't meet G14 or R2. Iseult Δx parlez moi 19:22, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as bad cross-namespace redirect. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:28, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
DuSable Museum of African American History
Sibcestual
- Sibcestual → Adelphogamy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Neologism I doubt anyone uses. Very unlikely search term. ★Trekker (talk) 17:48, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Geouf
- Wikipedia:Geouf → Geo (microformat) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Another cross-namespace redirect, yes, it has existed for quite a while but the only links to this page are from two User space subpages. And I also can not find the term "Geouf" any where on the target space, as either a word or acronym. Liz Read! Talk! 14:04, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as incomprehensible. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:23, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as confusing --Lenticel (talk) 00:27, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Wikipedia:WikiProject Microformats#Geo. "uF" is an abbreviation of microformat, as it is easier to type than "μF". 82.132.184.38 (talk) 23:22, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Failing Flesh
- Wikipedia:Failing Flesh → Eric Forrest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Because of the nature of this page title ("Project: Failing Flesh"), this page is also classified as Wikipedia:Failing Flesh which is confusing. The only links to the page are from User space. I suggest either deletion or removing the colon from the page title so that this doesn't appear to be a cross-namespace redirect. I'll just add that on the target page, Eric Forrest, the term appears several times as "Project Failing Flesh", without a colon. Liz Read! Talk! 13:59, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- I think this was a technical workaround. The band's name is Project: Failing Flesh, which leads to the nominated page. Because of the technical limitation, the article about the band was at Project Failing Flesh until it was merged in 2020. - Eureka Lott 14:55, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Project: Failing Flesh is the correct name of the band which had an article for 11 years, so a redirect for that title is highly useful even if it messes with our namespace system. The redirect page explains why "Project:" becomes "Wikipedia:" here, which clears up the confusion for any reader who noticed the change in the first place, and we editors aren't harmed by this type of technical quirk. Glades12 (talk) 21:20, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. The band is attested as "Project: Failing Flesh" per [2]. -- Tavix (talk) 14:51, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:American Heritage Dictionary representation
- Wikipedia:American Heritage Dictionary representation → Phonetic notation of the American Heritage Dictionary (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This redirect is the result of a page move discussed at MfD here. It was discussed previously at this RfD five years ago. It was kept because of concern about existing links to this project page but the ones that exist now are from archived User or MOS talk pages or from pages that track cross-namespace redirects. Since the MFD, the target page, Phonetic notation of the American Heritage Dictionary, has had several other moves so I think that whatever rationale existed in 2017 is no longer pertinent. Liz Read! Talk! 13:45, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom.; the main space an the rest of WP should be kept separated. Veverve (talk) 06:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Oversight
- Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Oversight → Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I propose deleting this unlinked-to redirect because it gives the impression that Oversight can be as easily requested as right such as AutoWikiBrowser (Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/AutoWikiBrowser). NotReallySoroka (talk) 06:38, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep anyone following the redirect to the target will understand how difficult it is to request the Oversight permission. feminist (talk) 08:01, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Helpful, as it does legitimately point people to how they can get oversight permissions. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 20:27, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Paengi
- Paengi → Flammulina filiformis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Target says "in Korean, it is called paengi beoseot (팽이버섯) which means "mushroom planted near catalpa". Paengi doesn't appear to be a stand alone term for the mushroom. Wiktionary has paeng'i as a term for a spinning toy top. Plantdrew (talk) 03:02, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Shep Unplugged
- Shep Unplugged → Shep Messing (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
During Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shep Unplugged, the nominator repeatedly rebutted comments by other users because none of the sources provided are simultaneously reliable and support the name of the talk show. I was likewise unable to confirm this title. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:49, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Close per WP:RENOM. The AFD was closed eight days ago. There's no sense in re-litigating this now. If you have an issue with the closure, please bring it to WP:DRV. - Eureka Lott 14:32, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, does not qualify as a WP:RENOM and doesn't need to be dragged to DRV. LaundryPizza03 and I were 100% unable to prove that "Shep Unplugged" even so much as exists. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:23, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Pinging Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shep Unplugged participants who have not commented already: Mrschimpf (talk · contribs), Oaktree b (talk · contribs), Star Mississippi (talk · contribs), Kvng (talk · contribs), Skynxnex (talk · contribs), Sammi Brie (talk · contribs), Starship.paint (talk · contribs), and Dream Focus (talk · contribs). Cunard (talk) 07:38, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion#Reasons for not deleting ("They have a potentially useful page history", "They aid searches on certain terms", and "Someone finds them useful"). Here are three comments in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shep Unplugged that support retention of this redirect:
- From Skynxnex: "The evidence I've found is a New York Red Bulls fan blog post from April 2008 that mentions it, [3](archive: [4]):
MSG.com's Video Library (Check out Shep Unplugged, a recap of the Revs match, and more)
. Sadly, it appears that MSG Networks pretty completely have lost/scrubbed basically all content from before ~2018 but the original Wiki article seems earnest enough plus the non-Wiki sourced blog post makes it seem to have existed." - From Sammi Brie: "There's definitely enough circumstantial evidence to prove that this thing existed, but at no time should it have ever been labeled as notable, and the fact it falls in the 2000s (the pre-social-media, few-live-websites-today "dark ages" for this type of search) does not do any favors. I submit a forum post from 2008:
He has also been the lead analyst for the MetroStars and the re-branded New York Red Bulls of Major League Soccer for several years. During these broadcasts, Shep hosts a segment during halftime entitled Shep Unplugged. Shep is usually outspoken during this segment about league issues and global soccer news.
" - From Dream Focus: "I found him mentioned here http://voices.washingtonpost.com/soccerinsider/2007/07/conflict_of_interest.html with a comment statement about his "unplugged" segment. I believe it was a real thing. Not enough information for a standalone article so just redirect it."
- From Skynxnex: "The evidence I've found is a New York Red Bulls fan blog post from April 2008 that mentions it, [3](archive: [4]):
- Close per Eureka Lott (WP:RENOM), and if not, Keep per Cunard. starship.paint (exalt) 09:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete same reasons as above. Oaktree b (talk) 11:34, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Cunard for the ping. I think the redirect should remain as sites confirmed that this segment existed. Thanks, Cunard, for aggregating those links that were presented in the AfD. The RBNY post is a blog, but the link is to the network's own site. I wasn't able to access a media site on the internet archive, but it's possible one of the other archive sites would have it. If offline sources are (and should be) OK, there's no reason to penalize a pre-social media show whose web format didn't archive well. The segment was by no means notable, which is why no one at the AfD was arguing for a keep, but it makes sense to help the reader learn more about Messing's career. This is not a BLP issue.
- @LaundryPizza03
the nominator repeatedly rebutted comments by other users
because nearly every !voter disagrees with him doesn't make him repeating himself and utterly bludgeoning the discussion have more weight. I'm not sure who you're so against a redirect existing @TenPoundHammer when we know Shep Messing had a broadcast career that included the MSG halftime show. It helps the reader and doesn't harm Wikipedia for this to exist. Star Mississippi 11:49, 20 June 2022 (UTC)- So a blog pointing to a link that isn't in the Wayback Machine is considered sufficient evidence? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- The link is in the wayback machine. The media content is not. Star Mississippi 15:36, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- So a blog pointing to a link that isn't in the Wayback Machine is considered sufficient evidence? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:33, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep Nine people said to redirect it, two said to delete it, it was closed as redirect. Dream Focus 11:54, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Conditional delete unless content on this subject is added to the article. As of now, if I were to be seeking specific information on "Shep Unplugged" I would not be able to find it at the place I was redirected to, which is problematic. -- Tavix (talk) 15:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Unreasonable force
- Unreasonable force → Police brutality (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This could apply to things besides law enforcement. Delete as too vague. MB 00:49, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- delete, also a possible synonym for disproportionate force as a war crime. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 01:53, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Why not disambiguate, then? BD2412 T 02:21, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, or possibly DABify if a good DAB draft is shown. Veverve (talk) 06:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep or Disambiguate if there are other uses. Search results only find examples. Excessive force and disproportionate force are similar, and the words are not ambiguous in meaning, only the context; could these be explained in use of force or a similar article? 82.132.184.38 (talk) 23:15, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Question would it be better retargetted to Right of self-defense which where reasonable force is currently pointing to as a Redirect from antonym --Lenticel (talk) 02:23, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
June 18
Walter Engelmann
- Walter Engelmann → Germany at the 1912 Summer Olympics#Gymnastics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Fails WP:R#DELETE #1. It makes readers it unreasonably difficult for readers who are seeking the character by the same name in Frau Margot to find that article. BilledMammal (talk) 13:21, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate: Seems like the best way to resolve this where they are both redirects is to create a WP:DAB page. Hatnotes could work as an alternative, but we'd need a WP:PT. TartarTorte 13:25, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep meets WP:R#KEEP #1, as well as WP:ATD, WP:PRESERVE and WP:CHEAP. User has previously recommended a redirect on articles after they added a prod ("I do not mind if you remove the prod and redirect the article"), so I'm unsure why they feel so strongy that they MUST delete the page instead. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 15:16, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- In the same post, I also say that if I disagree with a redirect, we can then discuss that at RFD or an RM. BilledMammal (talk) 00:21, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- I fail to see why this remark is not WP:OTHERSTUFF. NotReallySoroka (talk) 22:01, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Move to Walter Otto Engelmann without redirect. Recreate Walter Engelmann as redirect to Frau Margot and hatnote the gymnast. Jay (talk) 21:04, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:47, 18 June 2022 (UTC)- Delete to allow for search. NotReallySoroka (talk) 22:01, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Johannes Buder
- Johannes Buder → Germany at the 1912 Summer Olympics#Gymnastics (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Per WP:R#DELETE #1. Another Johannes Buder is mentioned at University of Wrocław Botanical Garden. They appear to be different people; the Olympian studied philology, while the other Johannes led the Botanical Garden.
WP:REDLINK may also apply, as it is possible that the other Johannes is notable. BilledMammal (talk) 13:33, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep meets WP:R#KEEP #1, as well as WP:ATD, WP:PRESERVE and WP:CHEAP. User has previously recommended a redirect on articles after they added a prod ("I do not mind if you remove the prod and redirect the article"), so I'm unsure why they feel so strongy that they MUST delete the page instead. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 15:16, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- In the same post, I also say that if I disagree with a redirect, we can then discuss that at RFD or an RM. BilledMammal (talk) 00:20, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed they two Johannes Buders are different people. The more notable one is de:Johannes Buder, so the ideal outcome would be an article about the botanist with a hatnote for the gymnast. I suggest to move the history under this redirect to Johannes Buder (gymnast) when the article about the botanist is created (which I could do in a few days if there is interest). —Kusma (talk) 07:45, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Or move to Johannes Erwin Buder. Jay (talk) 21:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Vivicam3915
- Vivicam3915 → Vivitar#Current products (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This camera was never mentioned by name in the target article, even when the redirect was initially created. Unused otherwise. Streetlampguy301 (talk) 20:04, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- It is a real product, and two other models ar elisted on the target page (idk why those two and not this one) And one of them was linked as a WP:SELFRED (which I just removed.) I suggest either Add to list and keep or bundle other redirect and delete Happy Editing--IAmChaos 02:26, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 23:14, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep and tag as a {{R from file metadata link}}. It's used in exif data on Commons - see images in C:Category:Taken with Vivitar ViviCam 3915. - Eureka Lott 15:19, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There has been no updation at the target, so do we bundle the two other models here?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 22:29, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Rob Derbyshire
- Rob Derbyshire → Full Flava (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Propose retarget to John Derbyshire (swimmer), four-time Olympic swimmer, gold medalist, and coach featured in International Swimming Hall of Fame, where he is called "Rob Derbyshire" see (International Swimming Hall of Fame and Olympedia). (In fact, I propose to also rename John Derbyshire's page to "Rob Derbyshire" and have "John Derbyshire (swimmer)" redirect to "Rob".) Cielquiparle (talk) 10:03, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- It was created as a redirect to the swimmer and this stayed for close to 3 years before being retargeted to present target. Disambiguate or hatnote from the primary target. Jay (talk) 20:52, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:29, 18 June 2022 (UTC)- Retarget to John Derbyshire (swimmer) as his alternative name. NotReallySoroka (talk) 22:00, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
David's
- David's → David's Supermarkets (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Highly highly ambiguous as the possesive form of a very common name. I don't think a chain of 25 supermarkets in Texas is what most people would be expecting to find if they searched for this. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 19:34, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 21:45, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate, which is the recommended solution when something is "highly highly ambiguous". The supermarket and David's Bridal are the only ones I can find that popularly go by "David's", but a see also to David (disambiguation) and St. David's should cover the common "possessive of David" use. -- Tavix (talk) 00:46, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Dabify per Tavix. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 03:25, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:26, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget over to 'David (disambiguation)' or perhaps do something else, but otherwise don't delete this. It's useful. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:41, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget over to 'David (disambiguation)' per reason above. It is reasonable that someone might be searching for the supermarket chain but also possible they'll be searching for something else. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 20:44, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to David (disambiguation) as the possessive of the word "David". NotReallySoroka (talk) 21:59, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep If someone is searching for David's and not David, they are unlikely to be looking for the name so the disambiguation page is not helpful. Mark's is an article and similar redirects such as John's don't exist; Matthew's is automatically redirected to Matthew S when using the search button. This company is usually known as David's and the only reason it is not the article title is that the company has other brands, whereas the other is not usually referred to just as David's in sources. There can be a link to the disambiguation page.82.132.186.43 (talk) 22:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Usze 'Taham
- Usze 'Taham → List of Halo characters#Usze ‘Taham (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned in the target article. Has two namedrops in Halo 3, but I'm unconvinced that there's enough content there to be worth redirecting to. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 17:18, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Halo 3. Note that the curved quote redirect Usze ‘Taham already redirects to Halo 3#Characters, a section that does not exist, and has to be corrected. Jay (talk) 21:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:25, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
N'tho 'Sraom
- N'tho 'Sraom → List of Halo characters#N’tho ‘Sraom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned in the target article. Has two namedrops in Halo 3, but I'm unconvinced that there's enough content there to be worth redirecting to. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 17:19, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Halo 3. Note that the curved quotes redirect N’tho ‘Sraom already redirects to Halo 3#Characters, a section that does not exist, and has to be corrected. Jay (talk) 21:23, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:25, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Autonomy for East Pakistan
- Autonomy for East Pakistan → History of East Pakistan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I saw no section at the target about autonomy. I am not sure what this redirect is refering to. What do you think should be done? Veverve (talk) 20:37, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Bangladesh Liberation War#Background This is the most comprehensive section I have found on Wikipedia about the aforementioned topic; however, if someone else finds something better I am open to a new target. TartarTorte 12:19, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 22:25, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
🫤
- 🫤 → Frustration (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Described here, "Face With Diagonal Mouth", ambiguous facial expression. Delete, retarget to Emoji, or to its unicode block. signed, Rosguill talk 18:30, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm going to go literal with this one and say retarget to Diagonal. -- Tavix (talk) 01:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep the emoji redirect. A better target might be appropriate, if one is proposed, please ping me. Oppose redirecting to Diagonal as I doubt anyone using this emoji is meaning that. Gonnym (talk) 14:13, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:25, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Emoji or delete, per nom. Veverve (talk) 00:01, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Symbols and Pictographs Extended-A, instead of the main emoji article; a description can be added. https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2020/20219-face-with-diagonal-mouth-emoji.pdf explains. List of emoticons would be an alternative, as it is already described there although grouped with others and not individually. 82.132.184.38 (talk) 22:37, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
🫥
- 🫥 → Invisibility (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Described here, "Dotted Line Face", ambiguous emoji that should be deleted, retargeted to Emoji, or pointed at its unicode block. signed, Rosguill talk 18:31, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Weak keep as perhaps the primary topic. I considered being literal with this one, but Dotted line isn't very helpful. I thought the Emojipedia entry had a cool fact:
An established comic book trope, dotted lines around a character can represent someone that is invisible or hidden.
There doesn't seem to be a good landing spot for hidden or hide so that leaves invisibility. -- Tavix (talk) 01:25, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep the emoji redirect but target to a better target. This isn't an invisibility emoji and as can be seen here not all versions of this emoji is white. Gonnym (talk) 14:10, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 22:25, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Emoji, or delete, per nom. I do not see what this emoticon is supposed to mean. Veverve (talk) 00:03, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Symbols and Pictographs Extended-A, a description can be added there– https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2020/20223-dotted-line-face.pdf is already in the references. 82.132.184.38 (talk) 22:42, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
R.O.S.E
- R.O.S.E → ROSE Online (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
There is a similarly titled target R.O.S.E. which is an album by Jessie J. Not sure why the redirect exists without the period at the end. Delete. Not a plausible search term. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 22:23, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, retarget if the current target is not considered appropriate then. I created it because I had seen it in Google search results without the period the end; I would not have done so if I had not seen it, but as it was years ago, I'd be damned if I could find it again. There are plenty of acronyms where periods are left off the end letter but kept only between the letters; S.O.S for instance is one; U.S is another. It's a bit of a stretch to say it's "not plausible" when some readers clearly type acronyms like this, hence similar redirects. Ss112 22:30, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- It is, as always, hard to Google for a punctuation variant, but this forum thread from 2006 does suggest that this punctuation is not-unheard-of. So I'd say keep as a WP:SMALLDETAILS distinction from R.O.S.E.. If the article is deleted before this RfD closes, I'm undecided as to whether the redirect should go too (it would be speedied G8 if not for the active RfD, after all), or whether it should be retargeted to the album. I lean toward deletion in that case, absence evidence that this punctuation variant has been used to refer to the album. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 22:57, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- IMO both R.O.S.E. and R.O.S.E should be redirected to Rose (disambiguation). The inclusion / exclusion of the period is so small and minor it could easily be missed particularly as R.O.S.E. the album is likely to attract a different audience to R.O.S.E the game. ≫ Lil-Unique1 -{ Talk }- 20:42, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Bear children
- Bear children → Human reproduction (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Another bad redirect from UserTwoSix. Humans are not the only species to bear childern. This should either be deleted or retargeted to something more general (Reproduction? Pregnancy?) 192.76.8.78 (talk) 19:20, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 21:45, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Retargetto Bear#Reproduction and development. -- Tavix (talk) 00:54, 12 June 2022 (UTC)- Retarget to Childbirth per Tamzin. With my previous !vote, I was throwing something at the wall to see if it would stick. It did not. -- Tavix (talk) 16:42, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- I actually think this is a pretty reasonable redirect to exist, since "bear children" is a phrase someone could easily hear, not know, and search Wikipedia for. In which case the question is what the phrase usually refers to. We usually don't call other animals' young children. The article Childbirth is about just birth in humans, for that reason. And I think that's the right logic here, so retarget to Childbirth. Hatnote to Tavix' proposed target (which is also the target of Bear cub):
{{redirect|Bear children|bear cubs|Bear#Reproduction and development}}
-- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 01:47, 12 June 2022 (UTC) - Keep, or Retarget to Childbirth per Tamzin. I found this RfD from the first paragraph of Dwarfism, a use case which would best lead to Childbirth or the current target, either of which is perfectly reasonable. I think it is incorrect to say that other species "bear children", so a more general redirect is unnecessary and would likely break many existing wikilinks. Redirecting to Bear is ridiculous, bordering on humorous, as I have never, ever, heard someone using the phrase in that sense; bears have cubs, not children. Hence, I support the current target, Human reproduction, or Tamzin's suggestion, Childbirth, but I oppose deletion and the other suggested retargets. Toadspike (talk) 13:26, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Childbirth, per Tamzin. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 22:25, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 22:20, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Childbirth per above. The phrase bear children is usually applied to humans; other species are more often said to bear young. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 07:41, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Initially I thought this was a Neelix redirect because it certainly sounds like one. However, it is too ambiguous whether it is referring to bear children or bearing children, therefore it should be deleted to let the search engine actually do its job. Redirects that interfere with the proper functioning of search shouldn't be allowed to stand. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 18:54, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
(Off-topic ... bear with me) Note that Bear arms (disambiguation) has a See also to Bear#Morphology. Jay (talk) 20:19, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Childbirth. The possibility of someone using this phrase to search for the children of bears or for carrying children seems vanishingly remote. BD2412 T 02:23, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- I prefer [Bear # Reproduction and development] over childbirth. I think it is a bit WP:SURPRISE ing to go to humans when you type the word bear. I get that it is a verb, but it seems quite implausible for everyday speech. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 02:10, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Samuel-034
- Samuel-034 → List of Halo characters#Spartans (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not included in the list of characters and not mentioned anywhere else on the site. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 18:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Definitely add Samuel-034 to the list of characters. It seems the reason why it wasn't their on the first place it's because there was a stand alone article for Samuel-034 on the site and was taken down with the order of merging it with the List of Halo characters what the latter was never done. ImAbetastico (talk) 19:32, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- It wasn't merged because the regular contributors to the "list of halo characters" article decided the content in the page history wasn't worth merging, see The discussion here. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 20:01, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: See relevant discussion Talk:List of Halo characters/Archive 2#Merge of Samuel-034.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 22:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Private Jenkins
- Private Jenkins → List of Halo characters#Wallace Jenkins (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned in the target article. There are a bunch of games with characters called "private Jenkins" in reference to Leeroy Jenkins, and a few real people. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 17:55, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 21:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Leeroy Jenkins § Other appearances, preferably after expanding the section and improving its referencing. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 23:00, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Macedonian Catholic Eparchy of the Blessed Virgin Mary Assumed in Strumica-Skopje
- Macedonian Catholic Eparchy of the Blessed Virgin Mary Assumed in Strumica-Skopje → Macedonian Catholic Eparchy of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary in Strumica-Skopje (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Very broken English translation of "Beata Maria Vergine Assunta in Strumica-Skopje" (source). It is very unlikely to help the reader. Therefore, it should be deleted. Veverve (talk) 21:39, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Corporal Perez
- Corporal Perez → List of Halo characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned in the target article. Has a name drop in the article of the actor that voiced the character. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 17:40, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that content was merged to the target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 21:35, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Sergeant Banks
- Sergeant Banks → List of Halo characters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned in the target article. We have 3 mentions of someone called "Sergeant Banks" that I can find - a mention in the article on the actor that voiced this character, a mention of someone who fought in the Irish civil war, and George L. Banks (soldier) 192.76.8.78 (talk) 17:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that content was merged to the target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 21:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Friedrich Linde
- Friedrich Linde → Fedor Linde (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Used in two articles. In both instances it redirects to the wrong subject, whose Germanized name was also "Friedrich Linde". However, the subject is never referred to by this name, being a Russian of German descent. Jay D. Easy (t • c) 20:18, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Oshkosh International Folk Festival
- Oshkosh International Folk Festival → Oshkosh, Wisconsin (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete Not mentioned in target article. UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:03, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Sarah Halley Finn
- Sarah Halley Finn → Marvel Cinematic Universe (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Sarah Finn → Marvel Cinematic Universe (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target. Is mentioned at Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., where her role as casting director for the MCU is noted, and even more briefly at a handful of other pages. My sense is that until substantial information is included at Marvel Cinematic Universe (and it may not be DUE to do so), deletion to allow for uninhibited search results seems most helpful to readers. signed, Rosguill talk 19:35, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- I believe that, given the subject is mentioned at the AoS article for casting, that it should be redirected there, unless it is expanded at a more suitable article. I understand the rationale for deletion, but I think having the redirect is useful to navigate readers to a direct bit of information on the subject. Trailblazer101 (talk) 00:37, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- — Note to closing admin: Trailblazer101 (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this XfD. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:31, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep since the current target is the place where there is the most information about her, and the MCU page is the most intuitive place to link it to. NotReallySoroka (talk) 21:58, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by this since there is no information about her currently at Marvel Cinematic Universe? A7V2 (talk) 06:00, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and per reason to delete number 10 (WP:RFD#D10). Not mentioned at current target, only mentioned in passing at Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.. Second preference redirect to Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.#Casting where mentioned (in passing). A7V2 (talk) 05:59, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- I feel that if any information is going to be added about her, it should be at Marvel Studios, but there ain't any yet. She's involved throughout MCU films, not just Agents of Shield. Neocorelight (Talk) 06:11, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Marvel Studios#Key people and add info on Finn there since that would be most appropriate for the info on her. Would also support deleting the redirect per reason to delete number 10 (WP:RFD#D10). - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:05, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Marvel Studios § Key people. InfiniteNexus (talk) 00:29, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Marvel Studios#Key people. As the creator of the redirects, they were initially pointed to this target where I had added information, but it was removed previously under the rationale that Finn was not an employee of the company itself, but rather a frequent casting director. I believe the info can be added back and adjusted as such to address that concern. Trailblazer101 (talk) 04:08, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
New Jeans
- New Jeans → Hybe Corporation#HYBE Labels (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, internet search results suggest that the formation of a Hybe girl group by this name is still just a rumor. signed, Rosguill talk 19:31, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Army of Holland (France)
- Army of Holland (France) → Batavian Republic (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Armée de Hollande → Batavian Republic (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, based on Google Scholar search results, Armee de Hollande appears to be a military grouping of the French forces during the Napoleonic Wars, but isn't currently mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia except in a list at French Revolutionary Army. Unless someone can find a due place to add information about it on Wikipedia, deletion seems like the best option, although redirecting to French Revolutionary Army could also work. signed, Rosguill talk 19:07, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Royal Antigua and Barbuda Coast Guard
- Royal Antigua and Barbuda Coast Guard → Antigua and Barbuda Defence Force (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Entirely made-up term. Not used anywhere other than Wikipedia. Peter Ormond 💬 14:05, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Royal Antigua and Barbuda Defence Force
- Royal Antigua and Barbuda Defence Force → Antigua and Barbuda Defence Force (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The Defence Force of Antigua and Barbuda doesn't use "Royal" as prefix in its name. Peter Ormond 💬 13:47, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I couldn't hit the ABDF web site to see what they say about their history, but a Google search finds nothing (except for Wikipedia mirrors and other user-created sites) showing that they were ever called the Royal ABDF. —C.Fred (talk) 14:01, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per WP:RFD#K4. Article appears to have been at this title from creation in 2002 until April 2022, 20 years (there's some mess in the history due to a histmerge and some vandalism, certainly uninterrupted since 2009 at the very least). So we run the risk of breaking links, in particular external links but in this case many internal talk page links as well. There is also no requirement for redirects to be correct. Also certainly a plausible search term given that other commonwealth defence forces have similar names with "Royal", and the police force is known as the Royal Police Force of Antigua and Barbuda for example (which is correct). A7V2 (talk) 06:10, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- I have nothing to do with this redirect, so please keep me out of this. I did not create it. CROIX (talk) 21:52, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Peter Ormond CROIX (talk) 21:58, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Noble Consort Mei
- Noble Consort Mei → Noble Consort Wen (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Consort Mei was a disambiguation page with two entries - Jiang Caipin and Noble Consort Wen - but has been redirected to Jiang Caipin by @Yinweiaiqing:. Noble Consort Mei is a redirect to Noble Consort Wen. Is this correct? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:53, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Chongqingbei Railway Station Station
- Chongqingbei Railway Station Station → South Square of Chongqingbei Railway Station station (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The names of Chongqing North railway station, Chongqing North Station North Square station and South Square of Chongqingbei Railway Station station are confusing enough without retaining this redirect from a 2013 move Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:31, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: This is not a great redirect and I am unsure of its utility, but the "Station Station" part to me would imply it could only refer to South Square of Chongqingbei Railway Station station as that is the only station of the three that contains the string "Station station". TartarTorte 14:41, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Chongqing North Station North Square station is also a "station station"; that article could equally well be called North Square of Chongqing North Station station. (In Chinese the two metro stations have identical names except that one is "north" and the other is "south".) —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 07:36, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as too ambiguous for a single target and too unlikely a search term for a disambiguation page. If it is not deleted, Chongqing North railway station (the main station in this mess) is probably the best target, and that article mentions the other two stations in the "Metro" section. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 07:36, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Balochki language
- Balochki language → Saraiki language (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Balochki → Saraiki language (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, zero hits on Google Scholar, seems more likely to be a misspelling off Balochi language than anything else, but I may be missing something due to lack of familiarity with the topic. First choice is retarget to Balochi language, pending other arguments. signed, Rosguill talk 18:19, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Balochi language per nom. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 18:36, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- It can be seen from Google Books results that this is an obscure and obsolete term has been used for both Saraiki and Balochi. This means that the options for us to choose from are deletion and disambiguation. (I'm adding the related Balochki to the nomination). – Uanfala (talk) 19:29, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:18, 11 June 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:26, 18 June 2022 (UTC)- Retarget to Balochi language per nom. NotReallySoroka (talk) 19:12, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Fools' Day
- Fools' Day → April Fools' Day (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Fools Day → April Fools' Day (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Foolsday → April Fools' Day (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Retarget to Fool's Day, or delete altogether: Whereas it only takes moving the apostrophe to go from "Fools' Day" to the song, the April Fools' Day page does not state that the day is simply known as "Fools' Day". Also, the redirect is unlinked to. Thank you. NotReallySoroka (talk) 07:25, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep or retarget all to Fool's Day (disambiguation) but do not retarget to the song. Not sure how retargeting to an obscure song (that likely the vast majority of readers haven't even heard of) would be considered helpful. CycloneYoris talk! 07:45, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Leaning towards retarget to the DAB page Fool's Day (disambiguation) since these seem like reasonable search terms for April Fools Day but also reasonable slight mis-spellings of the songs. If kept I think a hatnote should be added from April Fools' Day to Fool's Day (disambiguation). A7V2 (talk) 10:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Fool's Day. I don't think an apostrophe should make the difference in this case, especially since the article is about a song (typically listened to, so readers searching for it may not be sure what the punctuation should be). In response to CycloneYoris's point, if the song is too obscure to be the primary topic, then it should be moved to Fool's Day (Blur song); in that case, all of these redirects and Fool's Day can target either the disambiguation page or April Fools' Day. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 10:46, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. April Fools' Day (April Fool's Day) of course can be simply called "Fools' Day" or its variants. It's so apparent that it does not need to be stated in article April Fools' Day. A proof is that even Fool's Day (Blur's 2010 song), which the nominator proposes retargeting these redirect pages to, is actually talking about April Fools' Day (see its lyrics: "...On the first day of April..."). --Neo-Jay (talk) 22:47, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Wouldn't the Day be more often called "April Fools" instead of "Fools Day"? NotReallySoroka (talk) 21:56, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Even though the Day is more often called "April Fools" than "Fools Day", it does not mean that "Fools' Day" and its variants should not be redirect pages to April Fools' Day. They are still the Day's alternative names.--Neo-Jay (talk) 23:30, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:25, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
n-C Hydrocarbon Redirects
- CCCCCCCC → Octane (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- CCCCCCC → Heptane (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- CCCCCC → Hexane (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete as an implausible redirect that is humorous but not useful to people who know chemistry and bewildering to everyone else TartarTorte 01:02, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. CCCCC do not exist, but CCCC does as a disambiguation page. 2405:9800:BA20:AB7A:4D0A:8D01:E8B2:16A9 (talk) 05:03, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Weak retarget to List of compounds with carbon number 8, List of compounds with carbon number 7, List of compounds with carbon number 6, respectively. I agree with the nom that these likely have limited usefulness and Deletion would be appropriate in my opinion as well. Mdewman6 (talk) 19:49, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. Unlikely to be useful. UnitedStatesian (talk) 20:04, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Libyan Government
- Libyan Government → Government of National Unity (Libya) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Libyan government → Government of National Accord (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Government of Libya → Politics of Libya (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not sure if either target is appropriate. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:18, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Politics of Libya, as it is the norm, and for the sake of consistency. MarioJump83 (talk) 07:23, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Politics of Libya, both the GNA and GNU are ephemeral, provisional governments which are planned to dissolve when the country adopts a constitution and holds a general election. Further the GNA no longer exists, having merged with the Tobruk government to form the GNU. Both governments have struggled to establish their legitimacy over parts of the country. I think the politics of Libya article better covers this complicated situation than the articles on the provisional governments and is less likely to need retargeting if a general election occurs or if the unity government breaks up.--Cincotta1 (talk) 17:25, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
AN/PVS-8
- AN/PVS-8 → AN/PVS-4 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- AN/PVS-20 → AN/PVS-4 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Deletion of this redirect (PVS-8 to PVS-4) as well as the PVS-20 to PVS-4 redirect. The redirects were made 10 years ago and the AN/PVS-4 page mentioned that the PVS-8 is "a large-objective-lens version of the PVS-4", mainly because they use the same image intensifier tube. Which is kinda like saying two computers are related because they have the same CPU. I already removed those claims from the PVS-4's page since they just don't make any sense. Overall, the redirect is just wrong and misinforms the reader. Jasonkwe (talk) (contribs) 23:57, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- The PVS-20 page had been tagged, but not included here. Done now. Also the RfD notice meant for the talk page was inadvertently added to the redirect page. Moved it. Jay (talk) 07:10, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I would suggest another 7 days because of the late redirect listing corrections. Jasonkwe, would you want to add AN/TVS-5 as well to this nomination?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:13, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:AFDAY
- Wikipedia:AFDAY → Wikipedia:Rules for Fools (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Retarget to Wikipedia:April Fools. "AFDAY" explicitly identifies April Fools' Day so no point in having it target a page whose purpose is to outline the Day's rules. Thank you. NotReallySoroka (talk) 06:51, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Micheal Corner
- Micheal Corner → Dumbledore's Army#Michael_Corner (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned in the target article. No search results on en wiki. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 17:13, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Dumbledore's Army#Members where Michael Corner redirects, and tag as {{R from misspelling}}? Jay (talk) 19:38, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:17, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Thomas Fleetwood (1661–1717))
- Thomas Fleetwood (1661–1717)) → Thomas Fleetwood (1661–1717) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Thomas Fleetwood (1661-1717)) → Thomas Fleetwood (1661–1717) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
After the hyphen variant was deleted at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 7 § Dave Cummings ((pornographic actor)), AnomieBOT recreated it as a variant of the en-dash title. I was going to just delete the en-dash one in the spirit of the previous RfD, but then I noticed that it's an {{r from move}}, so I guess this should have a second RfD. Pageviews on the en-dash one were weirdly high for a while, but have dropped off since 2019; on the hyphen one, they've been consistently high, but I assume that's due to the link at Martin Mere, which I've just removed. So I think both are safe to delete. Also we should block AnomieBOT for edit-warring.[Joke] -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:51, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete both - These both appear improper. I concur. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:03, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete both. NotReallySoroka (talk) 21:57, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
List of Home Along Da Riles guest stars
- List of Home Along Da Riles guest stars → Home Along Da Riles (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
AfD closed as delete, now only exists as a WP:SELFRED Happy Editing--IAmChaos 02:42, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. @SBKSPP: Why did you create this redirect when no one else at the AfD supported that, it was closed as delete, and there was no relevant content at the target article? -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:57, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per the AfD discussion. It already ruled as delete by RL0919 resulted for the reason "moved from draftspace" by the original page creator twice, however despite the three Delete votes and the only Redirect voting on its discussion, the author instead recreate it by simply turned into a redirect for Home Along Da Riles just six hours after its article deletion. When the majority has spoken, just hereby accept the results. CruzRamiss2002 (talk) 12:37, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Even aside from the recent AfD result, there is nothing resembling this list in the target. A7V2 (talk) 06:19, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Anti-Colonialism
- Anti-Colonialism → Anti-imperialism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Anti-colonialist → Anti-imperialism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Anticolonialist → Anti-imperialism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Anticolonialisms → Anti-imperialism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Anti-colonialisms → Anti-imperialism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Anticolonial → Anti-imperialism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Anti-colonial → Anti-imperialism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Anti-colonisation → Anti-imperialism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Anticolonialism → Anti-imperialism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Anti-colonialism → Anti-imperialism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Should this redirect to our Decolonization article, as anticolonial movements currently does? QueenofBithynia (talk) 08:30, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget per nom, seems like a better target. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 13:56, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget - It's more fitting than the current redirect. --BirdCities (talk) 21:24, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:39, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Should these redirects also pointing to the same target be bundled? Anti-colonialism, Anticolonialism, Anti-colonisation, Anti-colonial, Anticolonial, Anti-colonialisms, Anticolonialisms, Anticolonialist, Anti-colonialist. Pinging the corresponding creators/redirectors Pharos, Esperant, Lapaz, Tazmaniacs. Jay (talk) 09:10, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to bundle per Jay.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 01:59, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Bundled all. If anyone does think the current target is preferable, they might want to also bundle Anticolonial movements -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 02:06, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget all - I agree that these should all go to 'decolonization'. Seems like a logical change. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 03:02, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep unless all 300 or so incoming wikilinks are first examined and piped as necessary. Many of these redirects have pointed to anti-imperialism since their creation in 2006 or 2007 and it's possible that editors linked them with the intention of readers getting to the anti-imperialism article. Station1 (talk) 04:24, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Create an article specifically on "Anti-Colonialism" at this title. BD2412 T 20:03, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
June 17
Purely transcendental extension
- Purely transcendental extension → Field extension#purely transcendental (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Purely transcendental → Transcendence degree (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
These should redirect to the same article. 1234qwer1234qwer4 10:46, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- (Yes, this is definitely problematic.) I would say both should redirect to transcendence degree, though, ideally, there should be a standalone article on transcendental extension. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TakuyaMurata (talk • contribs) 13:09, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect both to Field extension#purely transcendental. Both redirects refer to purely transcental extensions, which are a special type of transcendental extensions. Presently, Transcendental extension is a redirect to Field extension#Transcendental extension, and this section contains an anchor "purely transcendental". The target Transcendence degree must be avoided per WP:LEAST, since the transcendence degree is another subtopic of Transcendental extension that is otherwise not really related to purely transcendental extensions. So, both targets must be either Field extension#Transcendental extension or Field extension#purely transcendental, which link both to the same section. The redirect to the anchor must be preferred as more specific (WP:LEAST again).
As this seems very clear,I'll bodlyretarget Purely transcendental to Field extension#Transcendental extension (schrinked because this must be done by the closing editor). If 1234qwer1234qwer4 agrees, this discussion can be speedily closed per WP:SNOWBALL. D.Lazard (talk) 12:46, 10 June 2022 (UTC)- No, this cannot speedily be closed given the first comment in the discussion. 1234qwer1234qwer4 18:40, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- The trouble is that, while transcendence degree is a subtopic, many examples of transcendental extensions appear in the transcendence degree; i.e., the article name does not quite match the actual content. (Note also the article trans deg article has more extensive discussion of transcendence basis.) So, contrary to the article title, redirects to transcendence degree makes more sense. In any case, the proper thing is to do turn transcendence degree into a transcendental extension article (and this can be done with no much efforts). It is simply weird that there is an article on trans deg while there is no article on trans extension (and this is the reason why we get this weird redirect situation). —- Taku (talk) 05:05, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- In fact, if there is no objection I would be turning transcendence degree article to transcendental extension article. —- Taku (talk) 05:47, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: @TakuyaMurata: I assume there is no objection in turning transcendence degree article to transcendental extension.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 21:46, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
GreatAgain
- GreatAgain → Presidential transition of Donald Trump (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I suggest this should be deleted, alongside Great Again as the redirects are unhelpful and vague. —QueenofBithynia (talk) 20:31, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- I think there's some merit to those redirects. Even though "make america great again" is so overused and could refer to a number of different things, "greatagain" and "great again" do kinda make sense.
- GreatAgain as one word can refer to that webpage. I'd suggest redirecting to the "Beginning of transition process" section as the website actually is mentioned there.
- Great Again as two words kinda is related to the Crippled America page because at the top, it mentions that the book was republished as paperback and titled "Great Again: How to Fix Our Crippled America". Whether anyone actually refers to his book as just "Great Again", I dunno.Jasonkwe (talk) (contribs) 00:27, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 21:40, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
The Gryffindor Chasers
- The Gryffindor Chasers → Dumbledore's Army (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Quiddich redirect that ended up pointing to a nonsense target following a series of mergers and deletions. There is an unsourced stub in the page history, but it wouldn't survive an AFD. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 17:21, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 19:56, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete – I can't find a suitable target for this redirect. It's probably too narrow and fancrufty a topic for us to cover. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 23:30, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Veverve (talk) 06:13, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Conservative Resident
- Conservative Resident → Conservative Party (UK) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, doesn't appear to be a formal term based on internet and Google Scholar searches, as results are just about residents who are conservative in various contexts. Delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 16:36, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- The links suggest this was a local branding used by Conservative council candidates in Croydon in the era when you could use whatever variation you felt like, possibly with some eye to the various Residents' parties that used to be more prevalent though whether this was a local merger or just a more voter friendly branding I'm not sure. Timrollpickering (talk) 18:06, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yes there is quite a lot of history here. It seems to have largely been used in Croydon (where Residents candidates and Conservative Candidates where closely aligned). Quite a strong history of candidates elected as indpendents in 1964 and 1968 being re-elected as Conservatives in 1974 (Bensham Manor comes to mind). The candidates in Norbury stood as "Conservatives" in 1964 and "Conservative Residents" in 1968 - and were members of the Conservative Group on the Council for that whole time - other sources also count "Conservative Resident" candidates as Conservatives - like here from Rallings and Thrasher: http://www.electionscentre.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Croydon-1964-2010.pdf Trimfrim20 (talk) 08:34, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I believe the discussion is incomplete.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 18:39, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Tim and Trimfrim. It seems to be an actually attested name for certain groups of Tories. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 22:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Java Edition
- Java Edition → Minecraft (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Java edition → Java (software platform)#Platform (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
A few searches doesn't suggest to me that there is a significant differance in meaning between these two capitalisations, so I think they should be syncronised to point at the same place. From a few searches the overwhelming primary topic here seems to be minecraft. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 16:11, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 18:34, 17 June 2022 (UTC)- Retarget per nom to MC Happy Editing--IAmChaos 02:02, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Triple threat (entertainer)
- Triple threat (entertainer) → Performing arts#Triple threat (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The subsection covering "triple threat" was removed in April by @Drmies, and the article now makes no mention of this term. ––FormalDude talk 14:56, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Sonic Chrono Adventure
- Sonic Chrono Adventure → Sonic: After the Sequel (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Misleading. The redirect only receives two mentions in the article. LBWP (talk) 23:30, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. The nom literally gave the reason why this redirect should stay. CaptainGalaxy 12:11, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - Only mentioned in passing, anyone searching this would be confused why they have been taken to this article, and would be unlikely to find what they were looking for. Would be best if a section could be added to List of unofficial Sonic media, however. A7V2 (talk) 01:25, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- If it is added to that list, we can always retarget it there. But until then, a little bit of information is better than none. Regards SoWhy 10:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- There isn't really any information though. It is just a passing mention, the kind that would warrant a link if this had an article. Someone searching this would be left confused as to why they came to this page, and shouldn't have to waste their time reading the whole article (or using ctrl+F) to find why they were taken to the target. If this was deleted, then search would turn up the current target but with the added context about this being a sequel right there in the search. A7V2 (talk) 02:57, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- If it is added to that list, we can always retarget it there. But until then, a little bit of information is better than none. Regards SoWhy 10:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 03:22, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per A7V2. The search results page is more helpful than the redirect in this case. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 15:57, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:28, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Refine to Sonic: After the Sequel#Development and release where its place in the series is made clear. Jay (talk) 03:04, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go…
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:43, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Coastal waters
- Coastal waters → Territorial waters (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
marine coastal ecosystems is a better option for this redirect (under 'overview' in para 2 it talks about coastal seas). Territorial waters is not appropriate as they can stretch out dozens kilometers away from the shore into the pelagic. EMsmile (talk) 08:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Coast. I think marine coastal ecosystems is a bit too specific for this rather general redirect, there are all sorts of other properties of coastal waters that are not related to either it's ecology or the country that owns it. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 19:58, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Coast is entirely about land, so I don't agree with that as a target. MB 22:41, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think Coast would be my second choice as a redirect. It could work. I don't think that "coast is entirely about land". See the lead of coast which says "as the area where land meets the ocean, or as a line that forms the boundary between the land and the ocean or a lake". Therefore, coastal waters is the water close to the coast, right? Another option could be Continental shelf. But marine coastal ecosystems would work quite fine, I think. EMsmile (talk) 23:43, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I agree Marine coastal ecosystem may be a bit too specific. I can't seem to identify a clearly good target. Options include Littoral zone and Continental shelf. Littoral zone is probably more on point, but the Continental shelf article is a little broader in content. Mdewman6 (talk) 00:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The biggest problem here is that there is no clear meaning of the term. See this. The best solution would be for someone to write a short article explaining this, a WP:BCA. MB 15:59, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:37, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 07:18, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi User:Joy, Mdewman6 and User:MB: The disambiguate might be a good solution. So we could say that coastal waters may refer to territorial waters, coast, marine coastal ecosystem, Littoral zone and Continental shelf - without actually expressing a preference. There are not that many articles that link to coastal waters yet, see here. Those wikilinks would have to be adjusted then? EMsmile (talk) 21:24, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, and that is fine, if we have articles for various more specific meanings, and there references are indeed to them, then they should be pointed there. It's also possible to create helper redirects with disambiguation markers, like e.g. coastal waters (some topic) if that will help the disambiguation process in the articles. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:07, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Another definition by coastal water in the EU is here (for what it's worth): "Coastal waters represent the interface between land and ocean, and in the context of the Water Framework Directive coastal waters include water, that has not been designated as transitional water, extending one nautical mile from a baseline defined by the land points where territorial waters are measured.". EMsmile (talk) 21:29, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi User:Joy, Mdewman6 and User:MB: The disambiguate might be a good solution. So we could say that coastal waters may refer to territorial waters, coast, marine coastal ecosystem, Littoral zone and Continental shelf - without actually expressing a preference. There are not that many articles that link to coastal waters yet, see here. Those wikilinks would have to be adjusted then? EMsmile (talk) 21:24, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The term coastal waters is fluid (no pun intended) in the sense that it means somewhat different things according to the context in which the term is used. It has specific meanings in the context of commercial coastal shipping, and somewhat different meanings in the context of naval littoral warfare. Oceanographers and marine biologists have yet other takes. Some of these differences are mentioned in littoral zone. Coastal fishermen focused on catching coastal fish and the need to construct coastal fishing boats have another perspective on what they mean when they refer to "coastal waters". Tourist operators focused on beaches and seaside resorts, as well as coastal property developers and coastal engineers no doubt have other perpectives. Researchers interested in things like transitional waters (as mentioned in EMsmile's comment immediately above), water pollution or sewerage disposal will have other takes. There are also legal and international views on what the term means or should mean. I agree with MB that the term is a broad concept, and warrants an article of its own rather than a straight disambiguation page. — Epipelagic (talk) 22:34, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Because this discussion is at RFD, the main point here is whether we should have a redirect or not. The finer details of what the article should be - are a separate content issue and can be resolved later. For example, you can have a disambiguation page or a list article first, and then develop it into a broad concept article eventually. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:07, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Joy - does that mean the discussion above about a disambiguation page is equally inappropriate? Very well, I withdraw my input, though that shouldn't be interpretated as support for replacing the redirect with a disambiguation page. As to whether there should be a redirect or not, I favour both options. If there is to be a redirect then it should be to a section in Coast called "Coastal waters" (which will need to be created to deal with the actual issues). If there is not to be a redirect then coastal waters should have it's own article (which will also need to be created to deal with the actual issues). — Epipelagic (talk) 21:02, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, I didn't mean to imply anything was inappropriate, just that we can streamline this discussion if we can get a more rough consensus that would make progress, even if the ultimate solution is still not written. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:08, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Joy - does that mean the discussion above about a disambiguation page is equally inappropriate? Very well, I withdraw my input, though that shouldn't be interpretated as support for replacing the redirect with a disambiguation page. As to whether there should be a redirect or not, I favour both options. If there is to be a redirect then it should be to a section in Coast called "Coastal waters" (which will need to be created to deal with the actual issues). If there is not to be a redirect then coastal waters should have it's own article (which will also need to be created to deal with the actual issues). — Epipelagic (talk) 21:02, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Because this discussion is at RFD, the main point here is whether we should have a redirect or not. The finer details of what the article should be - are a separate content issue and can be resolved later. For example, you can have a disambiguation page or a list article first, and then develop it into a broad concept article eventually. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 08:07, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 10:41, 17 June 2022 (UTC)- Thanks, Epipelagic very useful inputs. If we have good references for the content that you have proposed then this would speak for a new stand-alone article for "coastal waters" (or like you poposed: initially a redirect to a section called "coastal waters" within the coast article). I think we have reached consensus that the current status quo where "coastal waters" redirects to territorial waters needs to be changed. I suggest we either start off with a disambiguation page for now or a list type article until someone has time to develop some new text along the lines that Epipelagic has proposed. At that point it could be fleshed out inside of coast and then later into a sub-article (if there is enough content). EMsmile (talk) 10:36, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Internet Explorer 12
- Internet Explorer 12 → Microsoft Edge (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I think this redirect page is wrong. Is Internet Explorer 12 called 'Microsoft Edge'? Microsoft Edge is a Chromium browser and Internet Explorer is a HTML browser. So, Internet Explorer and Microsoft Edge are very different browser. So, it needs to delete. Hajoon0102 💬 08:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: There is no browser called Internet Explorer 12. ––FormalDude talk 14:59, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Internet Explorer 12 simply did not exist. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, no such version exists. -- Tavix (talk) 18:58, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Boonwurrung (disambiguation)
Dde highways
- Dde highways → Interstate Highway System (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No uses/links. Short for "Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways". Seems unlikely anyone would search on this, especially with this capitalization. Google search finds one similar hit on "DDE's highways" in a railfan blog post. Delete. MB 05:13, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete—per nom, this is not something in use nor potentially useful. Imzadi 1979 → 09:51, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete -per nom. When I saw the notice placed on WT:USRD I honestly had no clue what Dde meant. Dave (talk) 01:57, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
U.S. Route 78 in Georgia and South Carolina
June 16
Family buisiness
- Family buisiness → Family business (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Implausible typo. Only received 910 views in the past 7 years, and not linked on any article. InfiniteNexus (talk) 23:49, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, per nom. MB 00:30, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom --Lenticel (talk) 00:46, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, even excluding the two day bump, that's a lot of views. This redirect seems to aid navigation (also note RHARMFUL). J947 † edits 00:54, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- There was an eight-day bump for mysterious reasons (maybe someone accidentally linked this on a live article?), and that yielded 775 views. Excluding this unusual anomaly, there have only been 135 views for the past seven years. "Buisiness" is hardly a common typo, it's not even on this list. InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:55, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Serves me right for not investigating further. Of course, that doesn't invalidate my argument. J947 † edits 06:54, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- There was an eight-day bump for mysterious reasons (maybe someone accidentally linked this on a live article?), and that yielded 775 views. Excluding this unusual anomaly, there have only been 135 views for the past seven years. "Buisiness" is hardly a common typo, it's not even on this list. InfiniteNexus (talk) 02:55, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, I'm not quite followoing that this is an unreasonable typo to make. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 10:45, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep A plausible typo. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Holy Catholic Apostolic Church
- Holy Catholic Apostolic Church → Catholic Apostolic Church (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No mention anywhere that this expression is used to refer to this group or movement. Therefore, I think this redirect should be deleted. Veverve (talk) 19:51, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. See [5] for historical usage. Charles Matthews (talk) 04:26, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
:The historical usage given in your source is '(Holy) Catholic Apostolic Church', not 'Holy Catholic Apostolic Church'.It appears there are two instances where the expression 'Holy Catholic Apostolic Church' is used in the book to refer to the denomination (I cannot access those parts of the preview directly). Veverve (talk) 06:11, 17 June 2022 (UTC)- Keep per Charles. The term in fact exists. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 18:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Holy Catholic Church of Japan
- Holy Catholic Church of Japan → Anglican Church in Japan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No mention anywhere that this name is used to designate this organisation. Therefore, this redirect should be deleted. Veverve (talk) 19:46, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - This specific labeling is used by some religious communities, it seems, with examples including in this online article. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 20:17, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Query - I'm not sure I follow. As evidenced by the very first words of the article, that's literally what they call themselves. Of course in Japan they speak Japanese, and one sees it translated variously as Holy Catholic Church of Japan, Japanese Holy Catholic Church, or Japan Holy Catholic Church. None of these translations is official AFAIK and we can certainly create redirects for the others if they don't exist yet, but I'm not clear on what grounds deletion is being proposed. If it's simply that the body of the article fails to mention them that's easily rectified. Carolynparrishfan (talk) 17:21, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Thriller (Michael Jackson album
- Thriller (Michael Jackson album → Thriller (album) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Delete; no need for redirects for titles where someone forgot a single character. Would have R3'd but for some reason that's only for recently created redirects. ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 11:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- The recently created clause is a good one. Anyway Delete Happy Editing--IAmChaos 02:12, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - This appears to be useless. I agree. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:30, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I think Discord and some other clients have trouble telling when a right parenthesis should be part of the URL or not, so the parenthesis is dropped from the link. Even though the article now uses less disambiguation, there is a clear use IMO. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 22:29, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:22, 16 June 2022 (UTC)- @Brainulator9: Well in that case in my opinion it's the fault of those platforms. Closing brackets are perfectly fine characters in URLs. I don't think we have to create many, many thousands of redirects to solve those clients's problem. Also, even if that is a good idea, it doesn't apply here, because the article is at Thriller_(album), not at Thriller_(Michael_Jackson_album). ―Jochem van Hees (talk) 16:42, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. 162 etc. (talk) 12:57, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as a misbracketed disambiguation. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 15:55, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
List of law books
- List of law books → Legal bibliography (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- List of books about law → Legal bibliography (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This doesn't seem to be a good search term for Legal bibliography. I was expecting a list of articles on books about law when I searched for the term. SL93 (talk) 11:48, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Bibliography of law, which should better meet expectations. - Eureka Lott 13:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment. I went ahead and bundled these discussions. They weren't quite identical, but I can't imagine them having different results. -- Tavix (talk) 13:49, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget per Eureka. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 15:55, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
El Fantasma (wrestler)
- El Fantasma (wrestler) → Santos Escobar (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- El Fantasma (luchador) → Santos Escobar (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Deletion. Not the subject. El Fantasma is another wrestler, the father of Santos Escobar. El Fantasma is notable for his own article.. Also nominating El Fantasma (wrestler) HHH Pedrigree (talk) 08:34, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: I've added "El Fantasma (wrestler)" which wasn't nominated initially by the nom. CycloneYoris talk! 08:45, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Split into new article. Hansen SebastianTalk 08:46, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete to encourage article creation --Lenticel (talk) 00:47, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Split if El Fantasma is notable. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 15:56, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- About the Split, the article only mentions El Fantasma once (His father was a professional wrestler, known as the enmascarado "El Fantasma"). I would prefer the deletion to encourage the article creation, as Lentice said. Sadly, Mexican lucha libre is not my field. --HHH Pedrigree (talk) 13:43, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Astronomical event
- Astronomical event → Time-domain astronomy (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
As with the verdict for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celestial event, this phrase is too nebulous (snark) to be of any worth. Its current redirect target has a different, more precise meaning. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:54, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- The term Astronomical event could include things like moonrise, apogee, planetary conjunction. I was thinking Astronomical event could be a redirect to astronomical calendar, but that itself is a redirect. Perhaps it could redirect to Almanac or Astronomical Almanac (even that last is not generic). (And don't redirect to Nebula!) It could even refer to a Star party. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:54, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete As noted by Mu301 (talk · contribs) at, Category:Astronomical events also includes events that are outside of this subfield, such as Hypernova. He recommends deleting Transient astronomical event for the same reason. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 13:48, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The term is vague and sources uses it in a variety of ways. There is no coherent and consistent way to define it. I would also suggest a discussion on deleting Transient astronomical event which is really being used in the sense of "Transient astrophysical phenomena" which is at least well defined.[6] --mikeu talk 19:17, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Phenomenon#Science. Praemonitus (talk) 01:00, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Redirect to Category:Astronomical events and tag as {{Redirect to category namespace}}. Jay (talk) 07:08, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 08:20, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
TEN10
Template:Testcases
Jewish community
- Jewish community → Judaism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Is Jewish diaspora a better target? - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 04:53, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Neither is ideal, but of the two, Judaism is likely better. I believe "Jewish community" generally refers to the community of Jews in a specific place/time/context; Jewish diaspora has a specific and distinct meaning. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 05:11, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Jews per RC below – more connected to the concept of Jewish community than Judaism or Jewish Diaspora. ezlev (user/tlk/ctrbs) 16:46, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Jews, I think this is the most suitable target as "Jewish community" applies to it accurately. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 05:48, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: I don't think there is an article on wikipedia that accurately encapsulates the concept "Jewish community". Jewish diaspora I would argue is not appropriate as it excludes Jews not in the diaspora. I also don't think that the articles Jews or Judaism are the same topic. Delete per WP:REDYES and lack of appropriate target. TartarTorte 15:21, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. We have articles on Shtetl and Kibbutz and other types of Jewish communities, but nothing that even attempts to provide an overview of Jewish neighbourhoods, Jewish towns, etc. in general. 49.198.51.54 (talk) 21:48, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Jews – that is our article about the topic people mean when they say "the Jewish community". Compare Black community (redirects to Black people) and LGBT people (redirects to LGBT community). —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 09:43, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Muslim community and Islamic community both redirect to Ummah. Christian_Community (note capitalisation) is about a specific group. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 23:50, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 05:20, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment As far as I know, I do not believe that Judaism has a direct counterpart to the idea of Ummah, correct me if I'm wrong. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 01:12, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Jews: it is what commonly designates the expression "Jewish community". Otherwise, delete. Veverve (talk) 06:17, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:CONTEST
- Wikipedia:CONTEST → Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Wikipedia:Contest → Wikipedia:WikiProject Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons/Contest (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Retarget to Wikipedia:Proposed deletion#Objecting because the BLP Contest has long concluded, and its page currently receives no page views. This redirect The redirects also receives little incoming links. Thank you. NotReallySoroka (talk) 04:55, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Advancer
Given the numerous senses of Advance on that disambiguation page, I doubt that "Antler" is the primary meaning of the word "Advancer". BD2412 T 22:07, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Weak keep, otherwise delete. I was about to close this as an unopposed retargeting nomination, but I've noticed that there's nothing on that DAB page that this redirect could directly refer to. It's ambiguous and unhelpful in my opinion, and it would be best to let search results handle this one. CycloneYoris talk! 23:44, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I would say that the first three results on the disambiguation page are directly relevant. One who makes an advance in sports, or in a payment, or of a royalty, is an advancer. I think that any of these are more relevant than the rather obscure use of the term to refer to a part of an antler. BD2412 T 00:26, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:24, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support the retarget to Advance, ortherwise delete. Per nom. and CycloneYoris. Veverve (talk) 02:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Advance because "advancer" -> "advance" is more intuitive. A note can be added at the dab page for antler. NotReallySoroka (talk) 05:00, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete altogether. No notable subject to truly redirect to. Hansen SebastianTalk 08:48, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Dabify (draft available below the redirect). This can be a technical term in both contact bridge and in deer-hunting. Don't delete because we do have relevant content onwiki, and don't retarget to the other dab because that can't have anything specific enough. – Uanfala (talk) 21:17, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
June 15
Wikipedia:CRITERIA
- Wikipedia:CRITERIA → Wikipedia:Article titles#Deciding on an article title (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This is a widely used redirect so I don't love bringing it to RfD, but I think that it's come to be relatively confusing that WP:CRITERIA specifically means the criteria for deciding an article title. There is a {{redirect}} hatnote that links to Wikipedia:Criteria (disambiguation); however, I think this should retarget Wikipedia:Criteria (disambiguation). TartarTorte 21:22, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment this is likely worthy of discussion, but the proposal would involve moving Wikipedia:Criteria (disambiguation) to Wikipedia:Criteria, so maybe an WP:RM discussion would be a better venue? Probably needs wider input than Rfd usually musters. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:33, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I agree that an RM may be in order. But no matter which venue, count me as a support. We will need to note that this was the longstanding target. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:58, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. I just looked at the first 20 links on the WhatLinksHere page, and all of them use criteria in reference to article titles - removing this would both likely cause a significant amount of confusion in the short term, and make older discussions harder to read. BilledMammal (talk) 02:30, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. While I agree that the term is technically ambiguous, this redirect is so well established that changing it can only create additional mess. Policy shortcuts are a project-internal thing that should only be changed when there is a demonstrable problem, and I don't see one here. No such user (talk) 07:17, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support. I have long thought it silly that WP:CRITERIA redirects to a section on article titles that doesn't even use the word rather than what is by far the primary topic for criteria, WP:CSD. However, it's "established" so disambiguation would have to be the best solution. I disagree that this would cause confusion. If reading archives regarding an article title, the entry regarding article titles would clearly be what was meant. -- Tavix (talk) 12:45, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per No such user. In the WP world CRITERIA has referred to title decision-making long before the short cut was created. This proposed change would only create problems without solving any. —В²C ☎ 04:05, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Aroostook County Jane Doe
- Aroostook County Jane Doe → List of unidentified murder victims in the United States#Aroostook County Jane Doe (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Thanks to overzealous trimming of the target page, this now leads nowhere. This case is recently back in the news, so maybe a proper article is in order. Or at least an entry at the target. Sumanuil. 19:41, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Content was removed from the target article due to the core policy of WP:No original research. Not convinced that this is a notable topic warranting inclusion in that list or in its own article. As such, there is no need for a redirect. Routine news coverage does not make a topic encyclopedic per WP:NOTNEWS. We need evidence from secondary and tertiary sources other than the media to prove notability. Further Aroostook County has multiple Jane Does in their cold case files stretching back decades, so the naming of this topic is problematic. 4meter4 (talk) 20:27, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- You're the one who removed the target section. Does anyone not involved in this mess have an opinion? Also, if anything in "the media" doesn't count as a secondary source, then 99% of Wikipedia is OR. And WP:NOTNEWS does not invalidate the use of news outlets as sources. Sumanuil. 20:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sumanuil This is not the place to have this discussion as it is only tangentially related to dealing with this redirect. I am happy to discuss the issues with you on the relevant talk page, but please do not de-rail this nomination with side issues. The use of news sources on Wikipedia is permissible, but should be done with following the policies at WP:Verifiability, WP:NOT, WP:OR, and WP:SUSTAINED. In this instance, the topic lacked multiple independent secondary sources as required by those policies, and the use of those sources (some primary sources in addition to one secondary reference) was pieced together in a way that violated the no original research policy on wikipedia (i.e. original synthesis). If you wish to discuss this further, please do so at Talk:List of unidentified murder victims in the United States. Best. 4meter4 (talk) 22:51, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- You're the one who removed the target section. Does anyone not involved in this mess have an opinion? Also, if anything in "the media" doesn't count as a secondary source, then 99% of Wikipedia is OR. And WP:NOTNEWS does not invalidate the use of news outlets as sources. Sumanuil. 20:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Ok then. Not right now, though. Maybe later. Anyone else want to weigh in on this? Sumanuil. 07:09, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete If it's not at the target then there is no reason for the redirect to exist. If this jane doe stuff gets added back to the target then we can bring back this redirect. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 01:21, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Create wikipage
Assembly of Guiana
- Assembly of Guiana → Assembly of French Guiana (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Vague target: we're assuming that, when someone searches 'Guiana' that they mean 'French Guiana'. This ignores similar names in Guyana and Guinea. Iseult Δx parlez moi 05:20, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Guinea should not be relevant to this discussion, since correct spellings should always take precedence over incorrect spellings when deciding redirect targets. However, Guyana was called British Guiana up until independence, and the lower chamber of its legislature was the House of Assembly (British Guiana). I see some printed sources ([7]) referring to an earlier governing body (the Combined Court?) as the "Assembly of Guiana" too. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 07:50, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - I think that maybe we should just let people use the search engine. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:07, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Disambiguate between the current target and House of Assembly (British Guiana).Jay (talk) 08:21, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:09, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. If we disambiguate this, then we should disambiguate every "X of Guiana" page, and it's just not viable. "Guiana" is largely an outdated name, so in the unlikely event someone types "Assembly of Guiana" (has anyone ever?) we should not guess what they meant; let them use the search engine. No such user (talk) 07:25, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
חורבן אייראפע
- חורבן אייראפע → The Holocaust (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Khurbn eyrope → Names of the Holocaust (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Churban Europa → Names of the Holocaust#Khurban and destruction (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- חורבן אײראָפּע → Names of the Holocaust (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
All of these redirects have virtually the same name. I think it should be retargeted to one of them QuickQuokka [talk • contribs] 16:28, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I would say Retarget all to The Holocaust, seems like the most likely target. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:27, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- How is anyone going to know what the redirects mean? If you redirect to a long article with no way to explain to the reader why, what good will that do? I found an alternate meaning of "Churban" and it is explained at Names of the Holocaust#Khurban and destruction.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 17:57, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget all to Names of the Holocaust#Khurban and destruction: The section on the page Names of the Holocaust both lets the reader know that Khurban Eyrope is the Yiddish name for the Holocaust and will also provide context that is helpful as to the significance and history of the name. TartarTorte 21:28, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- That works for me.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 13:21, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete the Hebrew alphabet terms, people on the English Wikipedia are unlikely to be searching in non-Latin scripts. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 01:27, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- It doesn't seem to violate WP:RLOTE and in my view there is a reasonable chance someone could come across either of the Yiddish terms spelled in Yiddish alphabet. With a wide, wide variance in transliteration of Yiddish into English due to vast differences in the pronunciation of certain words, having a Yiddish spelling allows for some who comes across Ḥurbn eyrope would have difficulty finding the concept but with only one Yiddish spelling (חורבן אייראפע being the unpointed version of חורבן אײראָפּע are essentially the same spelling), there is an inherent ease in finding those versus the countless possible transliterations of the term. TartarTorte 14:35, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Fat land parrot
- Fat land parrot → Kākāpō (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Turkey parrot → Kākāpō (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Does not appear to be an in-use alternative name, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 18:05, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete seems like a joke. It does match the bird's description though --Lenticel (talk) 05:05, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete but admittedly, it did give me a good laugh. Schwede66 09:45, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. And Turkey parrot, created by the same user around the same time and also a redirect to Kākāpō. Nurg (talk) 11:36, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I'm the OP and I had never heard of this amazing and highly endangered creature. When seeing the "fat land parrot" and the "turkey parrot" on TicToc, I truly thought it was a joke. NOBODY used the obscure official name, Kākāpō. Perhaps if people were more aware of this rare and almost-gone species (fewer than 200 individuals left), it could help the threadbare preservation effort. The poor bird is so obscure that the very obscurity contributes to its rarity so to speak. None of the young crowd would even know the term Kākāpō to try to look it up. With the nicknames "fat land parrot" and "turkey parrot" redirecting there, well some will find the scholarly info. Best wishes. Cramyourspam (talk) 14:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Can you provide any examples of RS that use this phrase? signed, Rosguill talk 15:00, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- What's more, see WP:RFD#KEEP: Keep #3 and #5. Cramyourspam (talk) 15:05, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- The problem is that unless we have evidence of use in an RS, or evidence of very broad use outside of RS, there's a good chance that we will inadvertently provide users with misinformation if there are other birds that could be referred to by these terms. If the TikTok videos that you are referring to don't use the term "kakapo", how do you know that they are referring specifically to this bird? signed, Rosguill talk 16:11, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- res ipsa it clearly is this odd bird; there is nothing like this deeply weird creature --unless someone dips a woodchuck in green feathers. I had to dig and dig to fin the official name. Heck, by the time the New York Times runs a feature article about them and also in the same story happens to drop the young crowd's nickname for them, they'll be extinct. Cramyourspam (talk) 21:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Risk of misinformation? For reals? Pfft, prove *that* --there's no mistaking this oddity. It's just that nobody knows or uses the official name. Redirects are cheap and harm nobody. And again: #3 and #5 under WP Keep. Cramyourspam (talk) 21:58, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- res ipsa it clearly is this odd bird; there is nothing like this deeply weird creature --unless someone dips a woodchuck in green feathers. I had to dig and dig to fin the official name. Heck, by the time the New York Times runs a feature article about them and also in the same story happens to drop the young crowd's nickname for them, they'll be extinct. Cramyourspam (talk) 21:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- The problem is that unless we have evidence of use in an RS, or evidence of very broad use outside of RS, there's a good chance that we will inadvertently provide users with misinformation if there are other birds that could be referred to by these terms. If the TikTok videos that you are referring to don't use the term "kakapo", how do you know that they are referring specifically to this bird? signed, Rosguill talk 16:11, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- This is a joke, right? Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 22:02, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- A species going extinct NOW is funny to you? Laugh it up. Cramyourspam (talk) Cramyourspam (talk) 22:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: relisting to include similar redirect Turkey parrot
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 16:09, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I think the OP is trolling us. "Kākāpō" and "kakapo" are terms in extremely common usage and "fat land parrot" and "turkey parrot" are clearly jokes (Google brings up these redirects as the top results, Google trends shows minimal/no searches for either). Cheers, Chocmilk03 (talk) 22:26, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Note There are no mentions of either term on TikTok, either. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 01:35, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete I am saddened to know that this animal is near extinction but, unfortunately, we are not a WP:SOAPBOX, which @Cramyourspam has admitted to attempting in above messages. I also suspect this guy may be trolling us but we have to assume good faith and all that. It would be unusual for this guy to be trolling, given his user contribs show a history of legitimate editing. If you're legitimately concerned about this, contact some wildlife foundations and the New York Times or something. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 01:31, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, good point, I shouldn't have jumped to assuming trolling. Apologies, OP. (Although, I don't quite follow the logic as to why retaining these terms as redirects could possibly contribute to the kākāpō's conservation; I also note that there is extensive and well-publicised conservation work ongoing in New Zealand, as outlined in the article.) Chocmilk03 (talk) 07:32, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
2019 FIBA 3x3 Europe Cup
- 2019 FIBA 3x3 Europe Cup – Women's tournament → 2019 FIBA 3x3 Europe Cup (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 2019 FIBA 3x3 Europe Cup – Men's tournament → 2019 FIBA 3x3 Europe Cup (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- 2019 FIBA 3x3 Europe Cup qualification → 2019 FIBA 3x3 Europe Cup (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No mention in the target page. Pelmeen10 (talk) 14:10, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Leaning keep. Target page needs improvement, but it does mention that there were separate men's and women's tournaments, and it is intuitive that there would be some means of qualification. BD2412 T 22:31, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep 1&2 - Neutral on 3, its not mentioned at the target - will let others decide. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:45, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- comment the only links to these pages are on {{FIBA Europe 3x3 Championships}}, so from navigation perspective it'd be better if they are red links. Pelmeen10 (talk) 10:06, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 14:10, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Dansou
During the last RFD in 2020, content about this Japanese term was added to the target (which discusses a related but non-synonymous phenomenon). Consensus was established that the Japanese term is WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT over Alois Dansou. However the added content was removed in 2021 as the sole source cited in support was WP:SPS. Also there's now another article about a person with this surname (Marc Dansou). Either better sources should be identified to add this topic to the target (or a different target where it would fit better), or this should be turned into a disambiguation page or WP:SETINDEX. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 09:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Pinging participants in the last RFD: @Rosguill, AngusWOOF, CycloneYoris, and Tavix. (I was the IP participant 59.149.124.29 in that discussion). 61.239.39.90 (talk) 09:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:32, 8 June 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Note that there has been no addition to the target. A disambig draft will also help in the discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 14:05, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I would support a SETindexify per nom between the two surnames, as two relists have failed to come up with anything at the current target. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 00:40, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- I have drafted a set index for the surname. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 00:10, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Dodge Avenger Concept
- Dodge Avenger Concept → Dodge Avenger (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No mention of the concept on the article only the production models are mentioned Qwv (talk) 13:57, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - Created as an article [8] by Bavaria about the Dodge Avenger before the exact content was added to Dodge Avenger ([9]) (which itself had been a redirect to that point) by an IP 3 minutes later, presumably Bavaria logged out as a further two minutes later Dodge Avenger Concept was BLARed to the current target. Bavaria then made many further edits to Dodge Avenger. So then perhaps it would be necessary to perform a histmerge before deletion but the redirect itself is unhelpful as no concept cars are mentioned. A7V2 (talk) 10:23, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Weak keep - The article mentions a "concept" in passing in the second section. There was also a Dodge Avenger concept car in 2003 which the production car seems to share some styling cues with. That said, it's a tenuous link and only a passing mention with no additional detail, and "Concept" probably shouldn't be capitalized. --Sable232 (talk) 23:07, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 14:01, 15 June 2022 (UTC)- Delete per A7V2. I will leave the histmerge decision to those who are smarter than myself about the technicalities behind the wiki. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 00:38, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Shell Cottage
- Shell Cottage → Places in Harry Potter#Shell Cottage (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
ambiguous, there are a load of real places called "shell cottage" too, see for example Carton House#Shell Cottage or Cullenstown. I don't think a set index would really work well here as a lot of the mentions are in other articles, so I am proposing deletion to reveal the search results. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 22:29, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate WP:DAB: potential article title is ambiguous, most often because it refers to more than one subject covered by Wikipedia, either as the main topic of an article, or as a subtopic covered by an article in addition to the article's main topic -- this would be a subtopic disambiguation page -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 04:37, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 05:59, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: A disambig draft will help in the discussion. There are a lot of mentions in other articles per nom.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 13:59, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Make disambiguation per nom and anon. Hansen SebastianTalk 08:50, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Tony Cornhole
- Tony Cornhole → Tony Kornheiser (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I can't find any significant usage related to this person, other than as an insult. Probably why the entry .*corn[- ]?hole
(titles ending with cornhole) is on the title blacklist. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 11:32, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Stress relieving
- Stress relieving → Annealing (materials science) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
From reading the annealing page it seems that annealing != stress relief but annealing can relieve stress.. "The amount of process-initiating Gibbs free energy in a deformed metal is also reduced by the annealing process. In practice and industry, this reduction of Gibbs free energy is termed stress relief.". The heat treating page includes a dedicated stress relief section.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_treating#Stress_relieving Wallby (talk) 07:47, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - The concept of getting relief from some stressor is an extremely broad one. Seems like no specific article currently exists that would be right to go to. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 08:10, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Stress relief could mean what it does with regard to metal, but also (only increasingly) with human stress. I say let search do its work. Happy Editing--IAmChaos 01:42, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom and per WP:ASTONISH --Lenticel (talk) 07:09, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Stress relief (disambiguation), which I have just created for the purpose of retargeting this term there. BD2412 T 05:42, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 08:43, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to stress relief (disambiguation). — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 16:01, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Ohrid mantle
- Ohrid mantle → Archbishopric of Ohrid (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This name seem vague, almost nonsensical to me: I have no idea what it is supposed to mean. It certainly does not refer to any religious group, from what I found via a Google search. All I could find is the desription of this very small image (whose details cannot be distinguished). The description is unsourced apart from a mention of the "National Historical Museum of Bulgaria", but I found nothing about this on the museum's website. I see no good retarget.
Therefore, I think this redirect should be deleted. Veverve (talk) 07:36, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Veverve, I think it is about the Mantle (monastic vesture) which should represent the bearer's authority on that particular church body. With that said, I think this is still an obscure synoynm at best, confusing at worst redirect so Delete. --Lenticel (talk) 00:56, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
ھنھدھ
Youssef Zidan
- Youssef Zidan → Kunal Nayyar#Career (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This is a weird case. This redirect refers to a fictional character, but points to the actor's article. List of NCIS characters and NCIS (season 4) do not mention the character, either. I'd rather redirect to the former, but I imagine some people would want it gone as the article doesn't mention the character by name. -BRAINULATOR9 (TALK) 16:07, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Certainly not what Nayyar is known for, and, in the context of NCIS, a minor character who only appeared in one episode. GrindtXX (talk) 16:23, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment n.b. the current target does mention the Youssef Zidan role, not sure I see the harm in keeping at the moment. signed, Rosguill talk 20:35, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Minor fictional character. Instead retarget to Youssef Ziedan as {{R from misspelling}} and remove the hatnote from there to avoid self-redirect. Jay (talk) 09:29, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:55, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
ꑭ
- ꑭ → wiktionary:ꑭ (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Per WP:SSRT and per just ... why? It's a word in a different language, just like there are millions of words. Fram (talk) 07:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Due to the ongoing Siege of Mariupol (where fighters of the Azov Battalion have been surrounded by the Russian Armed Forces), ꑭ has become a recent Twitter trend, and there's no applicable Wikipedia article for it, so I thought it'd probably be of benefit to create a soft redirect to Wiktionary in case curious readers came looking for it. That's the full extent of my rationale, essentially. --benlisquareT•C•E 07:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- For some extra info, see Ідея нації and Wolfsangel#Post World War II symbolism; people are using ꑭ to represent that symbol in text as it looks similar. It is for sure a plausible search term, though I don't know much about wiktionary redirects so I'll leave it to someone else to !vote on what the appropriate action is. Endwise (talk) 08:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- (ec)If you created this because people might be looking for Wolfsangel but mistakenly, somehow, use the Yi character instead, then why not change this Wiktionary redirect into a redirect to Wolfsangel? Your reasoning seem to be that people are looking for this, using this symbol as a search term (as it is a Twitter tag), and then you would deliberately send them to a Wiktionary page they have no interest in? That makes no sense or at least isn't reader-friendly. Fram (talk) 08:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Of course, a redirect to Wolfsangel could potentially work as well. The Unicode Consortium doesn't consider ꑭ a wolfsangel, however; it fits within the Sichuan Yi Syllables codeblock at codepoint U+A46D. I'll leave it up to everyone else to decide where the redirect should go (or whether it should be redirected at all). I've considered amending wikt:ꑭ to add a short mention regarding the Azov usage, however ultimately opted not to because the rule of thumb provided at wikt:Wiktionary:Criteria for inclusion is minimum of one year of attested usage, and ꑭ has not been used for more than a month in the Azov sense. --benlisquareT•C•E 08:15, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Yi_script#Modern_Yi as a character in that script, with a {{distinguish}} hatnote to Wolfsangel. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 09:55, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment seems to me that this is a Neologism, so WP:NEO is the appropriate guideline. Clearly there are hundreds of twitter posts with the hashtag, but only 12 hits in google news (and none in English), so a redirect somewhere content-related is clearly in order. Stuartyeates (talk) 20:21, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 01:17, 25 May 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete it seems likely that most people searching for this character on en.wiki are looking for Wolfsangel, but it appears that there hasn't been enough usage to meet wiktionary standards, so my conclusion is that we're not prepared to host a redirect of this character yet. signed, Rosguill talk 23:07, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One last try for a clearer consensus...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:54, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Mr. Beast
At least two editors, 71.237.21.218 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and Praxidicae (talk · contribs), disagree on the proper target of this redirect. The IP wants to retarget this to the YouTuber MrBeast, who receives vastly more pageviews than the album Mr Beast. It is also possible that the correct solution is to disambiguate. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 03:52, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Peter John Ramos started using "Mr. Beast" as his ring name earlier this year (though at only 46 page views per day [10], he has basically no impact on any discussion of whether there's a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT here or not). 61.239.39.90 (talk) 04:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- The YouTuber is pretty frequently referred to as "Mr.Beast", "Mr Beast", or "Mr. Beast", even by newsmedia. I kind of wonder if this is a situation where even "Mr Beast" is a PRIMARYREDIRECT over the album. That would take an RM though, I guess. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 05:59, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- The YouTuber is surely more well known than the album. So retarget or disambiguate, yes, and it's probably best to move Mr Beast to Mr Beast (album), so we can create a disambiguation page or PRIMARYREDIRECT. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 10:36, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate, per Mx. Granger. BD2412 T 20:27, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Move Mr Beast to Mr Beast (album) and Retarget Mr. Beast and Mr Beast to MrBeast. The YouTuber is the primary topic. -- Tavix (talk) 21:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Move & Retarget - I agree with Tavix completely. It's the most logical thing to do. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:51, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. MrBeast is most likely the PT for "Mr. Beast", making it a good target for the term in quotation marks. However, the album is also a plausible target for the term as an R from punctuation. NotReallySoroka (talk) 04:50, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- 'Disambiguate Mr. Beast, point Mister Beast there, move Mr Beast to Mr Beast (album) and repoint that name to the dismabiguation page, that would contain the YouTuber, the album and Peter John Ramos -- 64.229.88.43 (talk) 14:23, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Creating a draft DAB is needed for closing this...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:53, 15 June 2022 (UTC)- No, a (draft) dab is not needed. There is a primary topic, the YouTuber, and one other topic, the album. Per WP:ONEOTHER, we can simply hatnote to the other topic without using a disambiguation page. -- Tavix (talk) 15:35, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Target Mr. Beast per above. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 01:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
The most remarkable formula in mathematics
- The most remarkable formula in mathematics → Euler's formula (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- The Most Remarkable Formula In The World → Euler's formula (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
I think that which one is "the most remarkable formula in mathematics" depends on the person, so I suggest delete the redirect. SilverMatsu (talk) 09:10, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Felix QW, Tamzin, Chatul, Mgnbar, CRGreathouse, and PatrickR2:, and 192.76.8.78. Thank you for your comments. I add "The Most Remarkable Formula In The World" to the list.--SilverMatsu (talk) 06:56, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment The redirect presumably goes back to a Richard Feynman quote, who termed Euler's formula "the most remarkable formulas in mathematics" on page 10 of Chapter 22 of his Lectures on Physics. Felix QW (talk) 10:19, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as an {{r from quote}} / {{r non-neutral}}, unless someone can show evidence that this has been used to refer to more than one formula (in which case we should either hatnote or setindexify). -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 10:21, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment I've seen Euler's identity referred to in those terms, but it's just a special case of Euler's formula. --Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul (talk) 12:31, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete unless more than the Feynman source can be found. Absent reliable sources, an article with this title would be a gross POV violation, right? Well, a redirect is basically an article with a different title. Mgnbar (talk) 14:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: I do think that this may be the most remarkable formula in mathematics, but I don't think that Wikipedia should adopt this stance by keeping the redirect. It's an NPOV issue. - CRGreathouse (t | c) 14:32, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: Euler's formula is indeed remarkable, but declaring it "the most remarkable" is an opinion and not a fact. Feynman himself may have said it in jest, or just to emphasize the importance of the formula. Just as when one says "this player is the most remarkable player ever." Please delete. PatrickR2 (talk) 19:38, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Euler's identity or Keep, perhaps specifically the section "Mathematical beauty" which directly mentions this phrase. This is a well known quote about this identity, and it does not appear to be ambiguous with anything else. Redirecting famous quotes about X to the article on X is not a NPOV violation even if the original quote is not neutral, see WP:RNEUTRAL. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 20:04, 7 June 2022 (UTC) Updated to "retarget or keep" 192.76.8.78 (talk) 23:41, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Your comment itself illustrates that there is no consensus on what "the most remarkable formula in mathematics" would be. Feynman was referring to Euler's formula and not Euler's identity. (Still not a reason to keep it as is either.) PatrickR2 (talk) 23:03, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- On the equation Vs identity point I have no strong preference, they are essentially two sides of the same coin and the phrase does seem to be used/quoted in reference to both of them. Have a look at any search engine and you'll find that this phrase is used to describe basically nothing except Euler's Identity/Formula, e.g. google books. You'll find all kinds of textbooks quoting this phrase, e.g. [11] [12] allways in relation to this equation/identity. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 23:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Your comment itself illustrates that there is no consensus on what "the most remarkable formula in mathematics" would be. Feynman was referring to Euler's formula and not Euler's identity. (Still not a reason to keep it as is either.) PatrickR2 (talk) 23:03, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment Another reason to not keep this is that this redirect is currently not used in a meaningful way from any other article (just two private draft pages and a bookkeeping page it seems). I don't think mathematicians among us want to encourage the use of this turn of phrase as it is subjective and open for debate. See https://www.livescience.com/57849-greatest-mathematical-equations.html for example, which mentions other candidates, for example the Pythagoras theorem (a^2+b^2=c^2), or Euler's formula for polyhedra (V-E+F=2), but does not mention the other Euler formula? PatrickR2 (talk) 23:17, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Please do not leave multiple bolded !votes in the same discussion. Any extra comments you wish to make should be left as comments without the bolded vote. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 23:21, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Nowhere in that article is the phrase "The most remarkable formula in mathematics" used. Redirects exist to link search terms to articles where readers will find content they are looking for. They do not have to be neutral (WP:RNEUTRAL). They do not get deleted because editors think the praise/criticism in them is misplaced (WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS). This is a well known and widely quoted phrase from a well known scientist, it is a completely appropriate redirect. No one here has shown that this phrase is used anywhere outside of quoting Feynman, so it is no one has actually demonstrated that it is ambiguous. And no, coming up with lists of other "remarkable formulas" isn't what I'm referring to, I'm looking for instances where people have referred to another formula with the exact phrase "The most remarkable formula in mathematics" and demonstrating that such uses are numerous enough that there is a good chance that readers are searching for something other than the Feynman quote. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 23:39, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment If the redirect were deleted, then searches would still find the Feynman quote in the Euler's formula article, probably at or near the top, correct? That seems an adequate solution for people looking for the phrase, without the ambiguity/POV problems identified with the redirect. (There should be no internal links to this redirect, I think.) --Trovatore (talk) 18:53, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete the second one, abstain on the first one. "The Most Remarkable Formula In The World" is substantially different from Feynman's quote. -Apocheir (talk) 21:27, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep the first, since it represents a Feynman quote. However, delete the second since it mis-represents him (mathematics =/= world) NotReallySoroka (talk) 14:33, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment 2 There seems to be an author who calls Euler–Maclaurin formula "one of the most remarkable formulas of mathematics".[1] --SilverMatsu (talk) 08:36, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
References
- ^ Alabdulmohsin, Ibrahim M. (7 March 2018). Summability Calculus: A Comprehensive Theory of Fractional Finite Sums. ISBN 9783319746487.Lampret, Vito (2001). "The Euler-Maclaurin and Taylor Formulas: Twin, Elementary Derivations". Mathematics Magazine. 74 (2): 109–122. doi:10.2307/2690625. JSTOR 2690625.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: too ambiguous and biased. The fact one or two author(s) have called this formula this way does not mean such a redirect should be created for it. Veverve (talk) 08:26, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete It's impossible to measure how "remarkable" a math equation is, so it's not a matter for redirects. In my opinion, the quadratic equation is the most unremarkable equation but we don't have The Least Remarkable Equation in Mathematics redirecting to it. (JayPlaysStuff | talk to me | What I've been up to) 01:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
June 14
Terry Pearce
- Terry Pearce → List of Test cricket umpires (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Ambiguous redirect. Many other non-notable people with the same name exist and are mentioned at Hampstead Scientific Society#Hampstead Observatory, 2016 World Masters Athletics Championships Men#M60 2000 metres steeplechase, Australia at the 1992 Paralympic Games for Persons with Mental Handicap#Futsal, and 2015 Bracknell Forest Borough Council election.
A disambiguation page is not suitable; the search function will be more useful and maintainable if readers are looking for one of these individuals. BilledMammal (talk) 00:24, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Notcharizard, Schwede66, NealeWellington, Sammyrice, Wjemather, NZFC, NiklausGerard, Rugbyfan22, No Great Shaker, Ficaia, Alvaldi, StickyWicket, and Rhododendrites: Ping AFD participants, in line with this notification. BilledMammal (talk) 07:50, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose While the AfD said that there was "no clear consensus on a redirect", WP:COMMONSENSE would support the redirect over the other people with this name, none of whom have an article either. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 07:32, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Can you explain why the redirect should go here, rather to other people with this name? BilledMammal (talk) 07:43, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose any change I think, partly because I don't really understand what's up for discussion here. The incoming links seem clean to me. Blue Square Thing (talk) 07:41, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Because there are many other equally valid targets. Readers searching for one of them will be astonished to end up at List of Test cricket umpires. BilledMammal (talk) 07:43, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose per Lugnuts and Blue Square Thing. Terry Pearce was a Test cricket umpire so the target page is entirely appropriate. We don't have any other articles about anyone with this name (or Terence Pearce) so, as Lugnuts says, the current solution is the common sense one. I fail to see how this can be an issue. Thanks for the ping, btw. NGS Shakin' All Over 10:10, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support deletion, as there are several other "Terry Pearces" mentioned in different articles, and I don't think this particular Terry Pearce is any more notable than the others. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 16:30, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose Subject was the main Terry Pearce article, there was a suitable list article to redirect to too save the article history per WP:ATD. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 18:00, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't believe we can go from now having no article about the person to now not even having a redirect from them. There is other Terry Pearce out there but they didn't previously have an article and we should be saving the history of the previously created one.— NZFC(talk)(cont) 20:10, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Given that this individual is not notable, why does previously having an article mean that they should have a redirect when it risks astonishing readers looking for the builder, the runner, or the politician? I also note that preserving this redirect will not preserve the history - that has already been deleted. BilledMammal (talk) 01:07, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. There's no need for a disambiguation page between people without articles, but given this is ambiguous it should be deleted. A7V2 (talk) 02:37, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as ambiguous, or create disambiguation page. It is unsurprising that some members of the cricket project would want the redirect to go to a cricket article, but none of the people mentioned in WP articles are sufficiently notable for a standalone article and there is no evidence to suggest this umpire should be the primary topic and that readers would be looking for him above any of the others; indeed most readers may be surprised to find themselves looking at a list of umpires. Arguments about article history are invalid since the article was deleted at AFD, confirming the lack of notability of the umpire; and the incoming redirects are there due to the deleted article, so they have no relevance either. A redlink is preferred in these situations. wjematherplease leave a message... 06:24, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate. Don't see why not; a dab page between non-articles is okay. — J947 ‡ message ⁓ edits 06:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - I supported a redirect in the AfD, but if there are other lists that include non-notable individuals by the same name, that we've recently decided this Terry Pearce isn't notable isn't a good reason to declare this Terry Peace more notable than the others. No opinion on disambiguating -- other people have a better sense of the style rules around dabs than I do. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 17:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per WP:DABMENTION. -- Tavix (talk) 17:28, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:50, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per consensus at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 April 22#Arthur Harley. Strong oppose keeping, as it makes no sense; there's no reason to make one non-notable target more prominent than other equally valid and equally non-notable ones. eviolite (talk) 13:29, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per eviolite. Also, aside from the two other non-notable individuals with this exact name, there's also two articles for people with homophonous names (Terry Peirce and Terry Pierce) who should go in the WP:DABSEEALSO section; seems to be too much for a hatnote at the current target, and is more helpful to readers than deletion given that the homophonous names won't show up in search results. 61.239.39.90 (talk) 23:21, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There is equal support for Keep, Delete and Disambiguate. Creating a disambiguation draft will also help in the discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 06:47, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete No clear primary target, and there is no need for disambiguation when there are no articles. As per nom, the search function is enough. Avilich (talk) 22:36, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate or Keep; now two entries and likely misspellings, more useful than search results. There should at least be a redirect/hatnote/disambiguation entry for the cricket umpire (considered notable for most of the time Wikipedia has existed[14][15] and will be again on Wikipedia or whatever replaces it), but not for the election candidate, who has never been notable according to guidelines (redirects for candidates who are elected as councillors are usually deleted); I'm not sure about the coach, if there would typically be an article or redirect there. A865 (talk) 23:13, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:39, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Angzar
- Angzar → Miscellaneous Technical (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Angzar → Angzarr (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, delete unless a justification can be provided. signed, Rosguill talk 16:36, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Noting that the redirect has now been moved to Angzarr, but I don't see how this addresses my concern. signed, Rosguill talk 17:24, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, I moved Angzar to Angzarr which is the more common spelling. It is the shorthand for "right angle with downwards zigzag arrow" and I have noted that at the Miscellaneous Technical page. Best, Btyner (talk) 17:29, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Rosguill: I'm a bit worried by this speedy closure, because Btyner shoe-horned it into the target page, which has no natural home for it. (Being unaware of this discussion, I reverted. If it is to stay, a proper home needs to be found for it.) ANGZARR is not the name of the glyph, it is a shorthand nick-name ("entity name" in Unicode.org terminology. Specifically, http://unicode.org/L2/L2003/03440-sc34-0433.pdf (p2) says
Tens of thousands of graphic characters are used in publishing text, a large proportion of which have been defined in ISO/IEC 10646. Even where standard coded representations exist, however, there may be situations in which they cannot be keyboarded conveniently or accurately, or in which it is not possible to display the desired visual depiction of the characters.
To help overcome these barriers to the successful interchange of SGML and related documents, this part of ISO/IEC TR 9573 defines character entity sets for some widely used special graphic characters regularly used in the production of scientific and mathematical documents.
- This is not to question Btyner's good faith or your logic in speedy closure, but rather that the assurance on which you based the closure was inadequate. If Btyner can integrate it properly (recognising that there are 100+ glyphs that will need to be given the same treatment and by which time I have to ask have we drifted into WP:NOTGUIDE territory), then I see no objection. But our timing shouldn't be driven by a word trending on Reddit.--John Maynard Friedman (talk) 20:10, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Fair enough, reopening the discussion. At this point, I'm satisfied by the confirmed assertion that people do refer to a symbol on this table as Angzarr and therefore might be looking to find its entry in the unicode block, so I'm neutral on the redirect itself. signed, Rosguill talk 20:18, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I would support the deletion of Angzar which appears to be a misspelling of Angzarr. As for the latter, an alternative redirect target could be List of XML and HTML character entity references. Best, Btyner (talk) 14:20, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, that is a sensible redirect target for Angzarr. The entity is already listed there with the correctly spelled name, and it provides visitors with the broader context. The obvious solution, IMO. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:03, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- I would support the deletion of Angzar which appears to be a misspelling of Angzarr. As for the latter, an alternative redirect target could be List of XML and HTML character entity references. Best, Btyner (talk) 14:20, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Fair enough, reopening the discussion. At this point, I'm satisfied by the confirmed assertion that people do refer to a symbol on this table as Angzarr and therefore might be looking to find its entry in the unicode block, so I'm neutral on the redirect itself. signed, Rosguill talk 20:18, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget Angzarr to List of XML and HTML character entity references per Btyner and John Maynard Friedman. Retarget Angzar also to List of XML and HTML character entity references and tag as {{R from misspelling}}. Jay (talk) 03:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:37, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Black anther
- Black anther → Melanthera (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This is just a translation of "Melanthera", and is not used as a common name for the plant Plantdrew (talk) 18:31, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete partial title match at best for the black anther flax lily (Dianella revoluta and Dianella admixta). I'm thinking of it as a misspelling for Black Panther but I think that's a very long stretch. --Lenticel (talk) 07:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep or make the correction at the target article. If it is not a common name, why does the target say
The generic name means "black anther."
? Jay (talk) 20:41, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:58, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - noting that in scientific literature black anther most commonly refers to Black anther disease, a likely notable topic whose symptom is the development of a black anther, but does not appear related to the Melanthera genus. signed, Rosguill talk 19:51, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 21:36, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The term "black anther" has, as noted above, a different main use. An English translation of a scientific name is not a "common name" unless there is evidence that it is actually used as a vernacular name. I see no such evidence in this case. The danger of leaving it is that it spuriously creates an English name. Peter coxhead (talk) 08:37, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Even if the translation were completely correct, this wouldn't be a viable redirect: the literal New Latin meaning of a scientific name is not normally itself a name in use. – Uanfala (talk) 21:05, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Vandalism-only account
- Vandalism-only account → Wikipedia:Vandalism-only account (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Redirect from article namespace to project namespace. FAdesdae378 (talk) 21:00, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - Vandalism is a broad topic generally unrelated to Wikipedia. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 21:35, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. –Novem Linguae (talk) 21:36, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: Unneeded WP:XNR TartarTorte 00:24, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per above. Could have been a useful redirect if Vandalism#Cybervandalism has more cited info about it. --Lenticel (talk) 00:59, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Grec ancien
- Grec ancien → Ancient Greek (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
WP:RLOTE. There is no specific connection between ancient Greek and the French language. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 19:03, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 20:00, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - I agree. This doesn't seem worth keeping. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:49, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 05:24, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. I foresee this popping up from time to time in English-language sources and potentially confusing readers who don't recognize it. Redirects are cheap, and apparently this one isn't needed for anything else, so there's no benefit to deleting it. P Aculeius (talk) 14:12, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Please name some occasion where this term is used. NotReallySoroka (talk) 04:55, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Since it's a French term, Google search results (even set to English) are swamped with French results. But I can see a number of citations in English language books or journals to French works with this in the title, as well as in the name of one or two works of modern art executed in the style of ancient Greece. Just as English speakers might expect to encounter ancien régime from time to time, classical scholars or even, it seems, art scholars might encounter Grec ancien. Is it really necessary to prove that this occurs 'X' number of times in published English works in order to preserve a redirect? It seems to me that a redirect that is unneeded for any other purpose needs nothing more than to be a plausible search term for someone who does not know or is not certain what it refers to. Unlike most easy targets for deletion, this is not misspelled, does not have non-standard capitalization, spacing, or malformed brackets. If the term is encountered at all, this is how it will likely appear. And there is absolutely no cost to Wikipedia for keeping it around—it occupies precisely 27 bytes, literally the amount of memory required to type "#Redirect [[Ancient Greek]]". Your question plus ~~~~ requires twice as much memory. P Aculeius (talk) 10:38, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Please name some occasion where this term is used. NotReallySoroka (talk) 04:55, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per P Aculeius. BD2412 T 22:36, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete since the redirect fails to meet WP:RLOTE#Examples. NotReallySoroka (talk) 14:28, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per P Aculeius. Also per WP:RFD#KEEP number 5. Seems like it might be a plausible search term and no clear benefit comes from deletion. A7V2 (talk) 11:06, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 19:56, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Eeweman
Fat land parrot
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 15#Fat land parrot
Hangkong Gongsi
- Hangkong Gongsi → Airline (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
No affinity for romanized Chinese. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:14, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Dumbest Member of Congress
- Dumbest Member of Congress → William L. Scott#"Dumbest Member of Congress" (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The target article says Scott was characterized as such by the NYT in 1974. I don't know it the NYT 10 dumbest list continued in subsequent years, but I would expect this redirect to take me to something more contemporary. Delete. MB 04:42, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- New Times (magazine), not the New York Times! Easy mistake to make. No opinion on the merits of this redirect, but more information can be found through searches and the linked page. J947 † edits 05:09, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- If you look at the source, its not that he just happened to be on top of a regular poll one time, its that he was overwhelmingly considered such by other members of congress and the media. Similar to Dana Rohrabachers nickname as "Russia's Favorite Congressman". So the redirect is for a nickname specific to one person, not the name of a regular poll. Theres a bit more context in the article of the person who wrote that one-off poll for the New Times. There is no other article on Wikipedia mentioning the same phrase, so I think the redirect is fairly unambiguous. jonas (talk) 05:13, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Small Laptop Computer
- Small Laptop Computer → Netbook (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Odd redirect to Netbook that does not uniquely refer to what counts as "netbooks". All sorts of computers could be called a small laptop computer. DemonDays64 (talk•contribs) 04:08, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: There seem to be several products with this phrase in their name, but it does not refer to a specific category of devices. - CHAMPION (talk) (contributions) (logs) 07:19, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - This is, as stated above, a generalized label that doesn't specifically refer to certain products. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 21:36, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as a vague term --Lenticel (talk) 01:00, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
June 13
Nanzhou Passenger Station (metro)
- Nanzhou Passenger Station (metro) → Nanzhou station (Guangzhou Metro) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Deletion: this redirect is for the wikipedia policies ill-formatted (Stations capitalized and metro disambiguator). ZandDev (msg) 12:13, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Cheap and harmless. BD2412 T 17:38, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: While the capitalization is odd, I would note that the disambiguator itself isn't a problem as there is both Nanzhou station (Guangzhou Metro) and Nanzhou railway station. TartarTorte 17:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:42, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Survival arms
- Survival arms → Varmint rifle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Survival arm → Varmint rifle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Survival weapon → Varmint rifle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Survival gun → Varmint rifle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Survival rifle → Varmint rifle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Aircraft survival weapon → M6 Aircrew Survival Weapon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Not mentioned at the target, usage on the internet, Google Scholar, and Google Books does not suggest that the term is equivalent to the current target. The most common results are false-positives such as ...survival. Arms...
and medical literature where this is a term of art for clinical outcome patterns. Within the field of firearms, it still does not appear to unambiguously refer to a varmint rifle, with most results either being about companies named Survival Arms or descriptions of "aircrew survival arms" that are not limited to this sort of rifle. Survival weapon, meanwhile, again primarily seems to refer to "aircrew survival" contexts, and appears to refer to a wide range of light weaponry not limited to a varmint rifle ([16], [17]). In the absence of evidence that the search term refers to any target in particular, deletion seems appropriate, although many of these would be appropriate redirects to Aircraft survival weapon, a likely notable topic. signed, Rosguill talk 17:57, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete in the absence of a reliable source. I am unaware of any widespread use of these terms to refer to the type of rifles typical used for varmint shooting. Thewellman (talk) 23:36, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. I'm also confirming nom's findings of "survival. arms" and the company "Survival Arms" hits. --Lenticel (talk) 06:30, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to M6 Aircrew Survival Weapon, or a similar article like Armalite AR-5. 53zodiac (talk) 20:11, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Per the investigation I detailed in the initial nomination, the M6 Aircrew Survival Weapon does not appear to be the only aircrew survival weapon, and my sense is that the topic is better served by a general article covering the category of weapon rather than redirecting to a specific model. signed, Rosguill talk 20:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Also, please don't remove tags from redirects or change their targets while discussion is ongoing: it makes it much more difficult for additional participants to join the discussion, and the current state of discussion does not suggest that you currently have a consensus for the change of targets you implemented. signed, Rosguill talk 20:50, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Per the investigation I detailed in the initial nomination, the M6 Aircrew Survival Weapon does not appear to be the only aircrew survival weapon, and my sense is that the topic is better served by a general article covering the category of weapon rather than redirecting to a specific model. signed, Rosguill talk 20:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: relisting to include Aircraft survival weapon
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
I'm starting a disambiguation article for Aircrew survival rifle, with the potential to expand in the future. Survival rifle, survival weapon and survival arm should redirect there. 53zodiac (talk) 21:04, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Aggregate state
- Aggregate state → State of matter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
"Aggregate" doesn't appear anywhere in the target, so a reader who searches for this isn't given any clues to its meaning. An inquiry at the talk page hasn't indicated any interest in adding a mention. The phrase is used in a handful of other articles, but none strikes me as a good alternative target. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:34, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
HZM Line 1
Novgorod cross
Realistically
- Realistically → Realism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This seems like a bit of a WP:SURPRISE. I think a soft redirect to wiktionary would be possibly worthwhile or otherwise deletion. TartarTorte 17:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete A cross project redirect seems a little unneeded, delete it. | Zippybonzo | Talk | 17:27, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed. Realism is a big disam page, with none of the entries likely to be any help. Just delete. Johnbod (talk) 17:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as nothing useful at the dab page. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 18:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - I don't think that this should go to anything, really. Better to simply let people use the search engine. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:55, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Move to something like Realism (concept). Under the redirect there's the history of the article that existed at the title of "Realism" between 2002 and 2013 (when it got redirected and moved to this strange title). I'm not sure if the title Realistically should continue to have a redirect or not: I don't see consistency with regard to redirects from adverbs (e.g. Boldly exists, Falsely doesn't), but there are instances in articles of the string "realistically" being linked [18], which can be taken as a hint that this may be a plausible search term (the views – an average of one per day – also point in this direction). I'd rather err on the side of keeping. As for a wiktionary redirect, there's no need to create one if it's an everyday English word. – Uanfala (talk) 16:28, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 17:31, 13 June 2022 (UTC)- Delete realism is not what the word realistic means. Immanuelle 💗 (please tag me) 22:23, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Move per Uanfala to preserve the history at the title. - Eureka Lott 15:12, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Move, noting that this addresses delete-!voters' concerns as well. signed, Rosguill talk 19:43, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Hrvatska metropola
Mali Beč
Glavni grad Hrvatske
Curdled Milk
All of Creation
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 20#All of Creation
Template:NYCS stations
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 20#Template:NYCS stations
Palandri District
Unsecret
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 20#Unsecret
Natalie Mariduena
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 20#Natalie Mariduena
Tiquan Forbes
- Tiquan Forbes → Chicago White Sox minor league players#Ti'Quan Forbes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 November 10#Ti'Quan_Forbes Joeykai (talk) 03:00, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- The problem is that Forbes is no longer part of the White Sox, thus making the redirect useless. So, the redirect should be to his current team, which is the Arizona Diamondbacks, in a section could be written, or previous bio could be restored and revised. Cherrell410 (talk) 22:41, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- I can make the section under the page Arizona Diamondbacks minor league players that is about Forbes, if needed. Cherrell410 (talk) 22:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Please do not. These pages are not meant for just every minor league player. Just notable ones and Forbes is in no way notable to be on there.-- Yankees10 01:22, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- I can make the section under the page Arizona Diamondbacks minor league players that is about Forbes, if needed. Cherrell410 (talk) 22:42, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Useless re-direct.-- Yankees10 01:22, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Arizona Diamondbacks minor league players#Double-A where he is mentioned. Jay (talk) 07:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 21:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Special:Search/Ti'Quan Forbes. I'm being mildly facetious here, but that is arguably a better option than rolling a die to choose one of six targets, or leading readers to this uselessness. J947 † edits 22:16, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 02:02, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Middlesborough in the 2010 general election
Mustard sauce
June 12
Faithfully flat
Miller Genuine Draft (beer)
Settings in Battlestar Galatica
- Sagittaron → Battlestar Galactica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Sagittaron (planet) → Battlestar Galactica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Sagittaron(planet) → Battlestar Galactica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Tauron (Battlestar Galactica) → Battlestar Galactica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Aerelon → Battlestar Galactica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Canceron → Battlestar Galactica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Virgon → Battlestar Galactica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Picon (planet) → Battlestar Galactica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Aquaria (planet) → Battlestar Galactica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Aquaria (fictional planet) → Battlestar Galactica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Libran → Battlestar Galactica (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Various planets and/or settings in the Battlestar Galatica universe that are not mentioned in the target article. It seems they all were previously redirects towards the former article Twelve Colonies, but there was consensus to redirect it to Battlestar Galatica per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twelve Colonies (2nd nomination). At this point, without mention in the target article, readers attempting to locate specific information about the subjects of these redirects will be left with virtually nothing. Steel1943 (talk) 20:06, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete "Sagittaron(planet)" incorrect disambiguation format -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:04, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget "Aerelon", "Virgon", "Tauron", "Sagittaron", "Gemenon" to Dirty Hands (Battlestar Galactica) where it is mentioned. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget "Picon" to Battlestar Galactica: The Plan where it is mentioned -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
- Convert "Libran" to a disambiguation page, there are people by this name with articles. -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 05:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: There has been only one participant, and some entries have not been covered.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:31, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete almost all. These are very minor settings, and the proposed targets for some of them don't give enough information to warrant redirects. There's a bit of an WP:XY issue as well: for Gemenon, why Dirty Heads and not Flesh and Bone (Battlestar Galactica), Number Six (Battlestar Galactica), Caprica, Leoben Conoy, or Kara Thrace? Libran is a different situation and I have drafted a name index below the redirect. -- Tavix (talk) 00:05, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Tavix: trying to understand what is almost all. Is your vote same as LaundryPizza03 which is "Delete all except Libran"? Or did you want to delete only those redirects whose proposed targets don't give enough information? Of which you have mentioned only Gemenon, which isn't even part of the nomination. Jay (talk) 06:53, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:49, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete all per Rosguill (talk · contribs) as acceptable default, except for disambiguating Libran, but especially the one with the malformatted disambiguator. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:15, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more go... since consensus is still slightly unclear.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:24, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/pure junk
United States Senate special election in South Carolina, 1972
List of highest U.S. counties
😕
- Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 March 2 § Emoticon or Emoji? – provisionally retarget to Emoji without prejudice against retargeting to an article about the specific concept represented
It seems clear to me that this emoji does not represent confusion but disconfort or being upset. Therefore, the redirect should either a) be retargetted to Comfort as it is the same place where Discomfort leads and also because "uncomfortable" and "discomfort" are in bold in the lede, b) be retargeted to the Wiktionary entry 'upset', or c) be deleted if no good redirect is found. Veverve (talk) 12:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
- Just noting that "Confused face" is the official Unicode name for this. See [19]. Gonnym (talk) 12:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
- I do not know who gave it this name, but this face does not look confused to me. Emojis (see the table at Emoji#Unicode blocks) seem to redirect to what they represent, not to the name given to them (WP:SURPRISE). Veverve (talk) 12:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. Just to make sure my comment has a clear !vote associated with it. I'll also repeat what I said in a few other emoji related RfDs - deletion should never be a valid option. Gonnym (talk) 14:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. As Gonnym said, this is the confused face emoji, and will appear differently depending on a user's platform. Its current target is consistent with how we treat similar emojis.- Eureka Lott 15:10, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. "Confused face" is closest to Confusion. -- Tavix (talk) 16:25, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget or Delete - I agree with the nomination - on many devices, this makes little sense without further context or explanation. Sergecross73 msg me 20:20, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as it's officially known as "confused face" so the current target appears suitable. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 12:15, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment/query. While WP:UCRN is about article titles and not about redirects, I think the spirit of that policy is relevant here. In other words, just as we don't choose article titles based on "official names" of things, we shouldn't redirect emojis based on their "official names" but rather (1) based on how they're actually used, and (2) what's most likely to be of use to the reader. The problem is, I have no idea how this is actually used or what readers who search for emojis on Wikipedia are looking for. @Veverve: when you say the emoji represents discomfort or upset rather than confusion, are you speaking about how the image appears to you or how you've seen it used by others? The latter would be a good case for retargeting, especially if examples can be found; the former not so much. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 12:49, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Arms & Hearts:
when you say the emoji represents discomfort or upset rather than confusion, are you speaking about how the image appears to you or how you've seen it used by others?
: I would say yes to both. However, I found no Pew Research Center study on how this emoji was perceived, so the way I saw this emoji being used remains an anecdotal evidence. - None of the RSs discussing it are of any help:
- Dictionary.com states the emoji "expresses confusion but also a range of other emotions, including bafflement, displeasure, disappointment, mild sadness, and self-pity. All of that can be earnest … or it can be ironic, you decide."
- The Reader's Digest states: "We were surprised to find out that this emoji is called 'confused face,' but on further reflection, it does have an aura of bewilderment."
- Veverve (talk) 13:06, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks Veverve. The fact we're bound to rely on anecdotal evidence here makes me lean towards deleting, but I'll wait and see if anyone else can offer any clarity. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 16:52, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Arms & Hearts:
- As with @Arms & Hearts:, I am definitely sympathetic to the idea that it should perhaps reflect the most common meaning rather than just a redirect based on the name. However, if we don't have a single obvious meaning, perhaps a short disambig page would be practical? "😕 ("confused face") is an emoji which has multiple meanings, and may be used to refer to: confusion ; disappointment; sadness..."
- This would let us cope with the moderately ambiguous ones which don't rise to the level of needing a full article like 😂, and it avoids giving a strange result for the readers who do think it means confusion. Andrew Gray (talk) 19:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - how this appears in different font schemes is irrelevant. Unicode defines characters so that they have a universal set meaning upon investigation. That definition is generally what we follow; WP:EMOJI. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 23:21, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:28, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as the intended meaning. Do not disambiguate as such a page would be predicated entirely on original research. eviolite (talk) 11:41, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Arguments for keeping boil down to "it's the official name", which I find unconvincing for reasons laid out above, and I don't see any significant harm in deleting. Deleting also seems much more closely aligned with WP:EMOJI, which says redirects from emojis
are often kept if the character has a clear and definite meaning ... The outcome is usually deletion if the glyph is unclear
. There's no alternative target that would be obviously preferable to the current target, and I agree with Eviolite that a disambiguation page wouldn't be appropriate (so keeping would be my second choice). – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:16, 23 May 2022 (UTC) - The current redirect isn't very useful. Despite its official name, it doesn't look very much like a confused face in my browser. Moreover, by landing at Confusion, the reader isn't keyed in on the fact that it even has an official meaning -- the redirection feels like an OR choice by a random editor. Unfortunately, by deleting the redirect we fail to provide even that information. This case would be best served by some kind of list of emojis, or a soft redirect to wikt:😕. Daß Wölf 23:47, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete while the official name may be confusion, the expressions it is actually used for are much broader. signed, Rosguill talk 06:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to Wiktionary wikt:😕, where readers can identify the emoji's official name. CycloneYoris talk! 23:41, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Can't see how this is useful. Segaton (talk) 17:47, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: 😕
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 1234qwer1234qwer4 00:04, 12 June 2022 (UTC)- Keep since several online websites state that 😕 represent a confused face. NotReallySoroka (talk) 06:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep as is. Just because some people are confused about its correct meaning (lol) doesn't mean that this emoji is not specifically defined as a confused face. oknazevad (talk) 15:29, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- soft redirect to the wikitionary entry, as for many devices 😕 does not look like a confused face (https://emojipedia.org/confused-face/), and so readers learn about the official name per cycloneyoris. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい 13:38, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
June 11
Vivicam3915
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Vivicam3915
Template:+l
Autonomy (Eastern Christianity)
template:+rb
Autonomy for East Pakistan
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Autonomy for East Pakistan
Template:Rfs and Template:RFS
Bottomless
D und D
David's
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#David's
Cold oatmeal
Bear children
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Bear children
Samuel-034
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Samuel-034
🫥
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#🫥
🫤
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#🫤
🫣
🫢
S.P.A.R.T.A.N
🫠
My computer can't even render this one, but based on the other alchemical redirects created by this editor (see below), I imagine that it is likely an alchemical sign. Delete unless evidence can be found that this sign unambiguously refers to melting. signed, Rosguill talk 18:22, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Rosguill According to a google search this emoji is a "melting face". 192.76.8.78 (talk) 18:24, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the correction, I see it here as well. I guess it's relatively unambiguous, but it still doesn't seem particularly useful to readers and would lean towards deletion, redirecting to Emoji, or redirecting to a unicode block. signed, Rosguill talk 18:26, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- I would agree that deletion is probably the best outcome per WP:REMOJI. "someone's face melting" is not an actual encyclopaedic topic and it's rather ambiguous, the current target isn't really a good fit, I imagine most people would use it to refer to warm weather, hyperthermia or something similar. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 18:35, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the correction, I see it here as well. I guess it's relatively unambiguous, but it still doesn't seem particularly useful to readers and would lean towards deletion, redirecting to Emoji, or redirecting to a unicode block. signed, Rosguill talk 18:26, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. This looks like a good fit. -- Tavix (talk) 00:59, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Don't keep. How does a "melting face" emoji relate to the physical process of melting? Faces are not literally undergoing a change in state from solid to liquid. Seems like an inappropriate target to me. Delete or retarget. Mdewman6 (talk) 04:03, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- The emoji is showing a representation of a face undergoing a change in state from solid to liquid as if it were an ice cube. I mean, there's a puddle around the partially-melted face... -- Tavix (talk) 11:31, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- And someone would be seeking the content at Melting by using this emoji? It's only mainspace links are from articles about Emojis. Based on the external links, it is being used figuratively, to suggest someone is hot, or some other feeling, not the literal physical process. In terms of actual processes, could possibly also mean Dissolution. Mdewman6 (talk) 20:30, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Taking the examples of past Rfds linked at WP:REMOJI, we keep redirects from emojis for which there is an article about the specific thing depicted by the emoji, and otherwise we tend toward deletion. We do not have an article on Face melting or Melting face or similar (nor should we be expected to). Mdewman6 (talk) 23:54, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- The emoji is showing a representation of a face undergoing a change in state from solid to liquid as if it were an ice cube. I mean, there's a puddle around the partially-melted face... -- Tavix (talk) 11:31, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. The emoji is a melting face emoji so Melting seems like a good target. If a better one is proposed, please ping me. Regardless of target, emoji redirects should never be deleted. Worst case, redirect to Emoji or to the specific block. Gonnym (talk) 14:17, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - inherently foolish, if we start looking things up by emojiis I don't want to live on this planet any more. --Wtshymanski (talk) 22:01, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Too ambiguous to merit redirecting. Arbitrarily0 (talk) 22:01, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Tavix and Gonnym. I also think that Melting is a good target for this emoji, and contrary to what both editors above have stated, I don't see any problem with keeping this as long as it redirects to the current target. CycloneYoris talk! 23:13, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Alchemical copper
Alchemical iron (🜞)
Alchemical mercury
Orna 'Fulsamee
Christocephalous
Survival arms
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 13#Survival arms
Private Jenkins
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Private Jenkins
W.A. Jankins (Halo)
Captain Carol "Foehammer" Rawley
Template:Euphoria
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 20#Template:Euphoria
Corporal Perez
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Corporal Perez
Sergeant Banks
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Sergeant Banks
Fleet Admiral Harper
N'tho 'Sraom
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#N'tho 'Sraom
Usze 'Taham
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Usze 'Taham
Society 5.0
Major Pawel Czernek
Johannes Buder
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Johannes Buder
Walter Engelmann
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Walter Engelmann
Rob Derbyshire
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Rob Derbyshire
Surf beach
Ephiel tower
Balochki language
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Balochki language
Fools' Day
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Fools' Day
Polymer impregnation
n-C Hydrocarbon Redirects
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#n-C Hydrocarbon Redirects
HTC Prague Open
June 10
AN/PVS-8
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#AN/PVS-8
Draft:Tropical Depression One
GreatAgain
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 17#GreatAgain
Athletics at the 2022 Commonwealth Games – Mixed 4 x 100 metres Universal Relay
Athletics at the 2022 Commonwealth Games – Men's 20 kilometres walk
List of Minor Ravenclaw Characters
Minor Harry Potter characters in Hufflepuff
Minor Huffelpuffs
The Gryffindor Chasers
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 17#The Gryffindor Chasers
Dai Llewllyn
Micheal Corner
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 18#Micheal Corner
Miss S. Fawcett
Students in Harry Potter's year
- Students in Harry Potter's year → Dumbledore's Army (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- Students in Harry Potter's Year → Dumbledore's Army (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
The target article isn't about students in Harry Potter's year. Many of the entries on the list do not fit this description. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 17:06, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Rubbish computer (Ping me or leave a message on my talk page) 17:35, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. If the consensus is not to delete, then redirect to List of Harry Potter characters. --LoЯd ۞pεth 17:00, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Per Talk:Students in Harry Potter's year#AfD decision the AfD decision was to merge and redirect but that was never done. Jay (talk) 19:16, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
C. Warrington
Urquhart (Harry Potter character)
Gryffindors in Harry's year
Conservative Resident
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 17#Conservative Resident
Minor Slytherin characters
Java Edition
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 17#Java Edition
Purely transcendental extension
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 17#Purely transcendental extension
June 9
Real vampires
Dendrobaena veneta
≬
Another pointless Wiktionary symbol redirect. The wiktionary target here is useless, consisting of a single word (the unicode character name) with no attempt at explaining what this symbol actually means or when it is used. This also fails the conditions for soft redirection laid out at WP:SSRT, this is neither a commonly wikified words or a page that has been repeatedly recreated. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 17:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep. All single unicode characters should be blue links, and Neel.arunabh has expanded the target at Wiktionary so that it gives an explanation of the meaning and how it is used. The WP:SOFTSP guideline is not a set of requirements that every soft redirect must meet, but a guideline that lists the most common situations where one is appropriate. Thryduulf (talk) 20:11, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete Per nom, it serves no purpose. Zaathras (talk) 13:09, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. I also think a WP:REDLINK-type deletion would be beneficial because I'm surprised that I can't find a good article for this to target. -- Tavix (talk) 15:42, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Tavix: What else, other than the definition that now exists at Wiktionary, is there to say about this character? Thryduulf (talk) 20:24, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- The concept of between in mathematics. -- Tavix (talk) 21:04, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- Which, if there is enough to sustain an article (my research has failed to find anything that suggests there is) would be at a title like Between (mathematics) and contain nothing about this character other than a definition. Iff that article is written the by all means retarget it there, but until such time we do people a disservice by dropping people (sometimes after several clicks) into a search results page that will contain no relevant information other than, possibly, a link to the Wiktionary entry we could have taken them to directly and conveniently. Thryduulf (talk) 03:24, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Knock it off with the exaggeration. If you search this character, there is a box on the right side that says
Results from sister projects
with a link to the Wiktionary page. It's one click from the search page and it's one click via a soft redirect. There's no difference. Also, if your research fails to find anything worthwhile, then it's not going to be a plausible search term and would thus fail the criteria for soft redirects to Wiktionary. -- Tavix (talk) 03:35, 9 May 2022 (UTC)- Firstly every individual unicode character with a defined meaning is a plausible search term, this is widely established (otherwise we would routinely link them in the tables of unicode characters or routinely keep them here. Secondly, there is no exaggeration - search results are not guaranteed to contain links to Wiktionary, nor are they always immediately presented to a searcher (what they see depends what device they are using, how they are navigating and whether they can start new articles; for example someone following a redlink on desktop will be invited to search and/or create an article first and have to choose to look at search results), so even if someone does see the sister projects box, and does immediately recognise that it's the only useful thing they will see from the internal search results, then it's not always just a single click away. Thirdly, I didn't say that my research found anything worthwhile - the internal search engine found nothing relevant, external search engines found content suitable for Wiktionary but not for Wikipedia.
- Finally, not a single benefit of deletion over a soft redirect has been established - even if the Wiktionary article were always one click away after deletion (which it wouldn't be) then it would still offer no advantages over the soft redirect. Thryduulf (talk) 09:54, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Knock it off with the exaggeration. If you search this character, there is a box on the right side that says
- Which, if there is enough to sustain an article (my research has failed to find anything that suggests there is) would be at a title like Between (mathematics) and contain nothing about this character other than a definition. Iff that article is written the by all means retarget it there, but until such time we do people a disservice by dropping people (sometimes after several clicks) into a search results page that will contain no relevant information other than, possibly, a link to the Wiktionary entry we could have taken them to directly and conveniently. Thryduulf (talk) 03:24, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- The concept of between in mathematics. -- Tavix (talk) 21:04, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Tavix: What else, other than the definition that now exists at Wiktionary, is there to say about this character? Thryduulf (talk) 20:24, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep I fail to see what is accomplished by deleting this. WP:R#D10 doesn't apply here since nobody would create an article at the Unicode character, and the target does provide significant information on this character. * Pppery * it has begun... 16:58, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:11, 13 May 2022 (UTC)- Keep; seems to have an appropriate explanation. 1234qwer1234qwer4 13:31, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment - Should all single Unicode characters have an extant page where there is a single reasonable target? That is a good question which cannot be litigated here where through discussions on individual items. Perhaps a wider community discussion on the matter might be a good idea. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 23:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
- Consensus here has long been that individual unicode characters (outside the private use area) are plausible search terms - every time the evidence of page views etc is presented it's clear that people do look up these characters on Wikipedia (and frankly why wouldn't they?). There is no disagreement that when there is a single reasonable target the characters should redirect to that. The disagreement here is over whether there is a reasonable target or not. The other type of disagreement about single characters are over (1) which of multiple reasonable targets is best; and (2) whether a red link/search results are better than (one or more) target(s) that are alright but not great. Thryduulf (talk) 03:06, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 17:55, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Do not close prematurely. The example currently used in Wiktionary does not make any sense and is not attested anywhere; likely just a (misguided) attempt to apply the name "between" literally. See wikt:Wiktionary:Tea room/2022/May#≬. Right now, it seems that we are redirecting to a page that consists of nothing but the Unicode character name and unverifiable, likely factual errors; I'm not comfortable having the discussion end before a conclusion on what the symbol actually means (if it does mean anything standard). eviolite (talk) 13:25, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For final reconsideration following changes to content at the redirect's wiktionary target.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:30, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
🐱🚀
The World’s 10 Worst Dictators (PARADE magazine)
Athletics at the 2022 Commonwealth Games – Women's 20 kilometres walk
Britain’s worst terrorist atrocity
Editing a protected page
No return
Ning'an Railway
Thriller (Michael Jackson album
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 16#Thriller (Michael Jackson album
Astronomical event
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 16#Astronomical event
Gilman Hot Springs, ca
Jewish community
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 16#Jewish community
TEN10
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 16#TEN10
June 6
Adventures with Purpose
Niko Defense League
Realistically
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 13#Realistically
Nanzhou Passenger Station (metro)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 13#Nanzhou Passenger Station (metro)
Edgelord
This redirect does not in any way get mentioned in the article. Perhaps an article for "Edgelord" would be better suited. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 02:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - I don't know if the generic concept of being an 'edgelord', as partially distinct from being a 'troll', is worth an article. It may be, though. At any rate, the current redirect isn't appropriate. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 15:32, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as can't see a suitable target. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 12:28, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- There's a song on the album My Agenda that has this name, perhaps a disambiguation page between the current target, the song and a link to the Wiktionary definition would be reasonable? This has been getting a lot of page views (100+/month) so we should probably have something at this title. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 20:20, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 05:49, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per 192. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 01:26, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not sure Poseur, the current target, would bear mention at such a dab, which leaves the song (which most readers are probably not looking for) and the wiktionary entry. Edgelord appears like it might be in-itself notable (per [20], [21], [22]), so I would lean towards deletion to encourage article creation. signed, Rosguill talk 19:55, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Levelized
WPHR (AM)
KCAQ (AM)
Draft:TheWikiholic
Vivian Wright (One Life to Live)
Black anther
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 14#Black anther
June 5
Qoi fish
Left-wing fascism
- Left-wing fascism → Fascism#Position in the political spectrum (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Red fascism exists, and the section Fascism#Position in the political spectrum does not cover what one would expect by typing "Left-wing fascism". I feel maybe the redirect should be either retargeted to Red fascism, or turned into a DAB with Red fascism and Fascism#Position in the political spectrum. Veverve (talk) 12:15, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete The original article was deleted because there is no body of literature to explain the notability of the expression. Basically, six authors had written "left-wing fascism," but they all meant different things and did not refer to one another. It's like the term large fish. Each person using the expression will have a different meaning and there is no notable topic. TFD (talk) 21:16, 12 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete because it has different meanings? What? I don't understand how anyone could have a problem with Left-wing fascism redirecting to Fascism. Where else would the reader learn about what "left-wing fascism" is (and its various meanings) other than the article Fascism? Delete because there is no notable topic? Double what? Since when do redirects need to be notable? I mean, kind of the point of redirects is that they're used for search terms that don't have a notable topic... like left-wing facism... Are you new to RFD? :-P Levivich 16:37, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - "Left-wing fascism" is discussed at the target, "Fascism#Position in the political spectrum" (search for "fascist left"). It is not discussed at the proposed new target, "Red fascism". As far as I know, it's not discussed at any other potential target except the current one. Readers who want to know what "left-wing fascism" is will find out by reading about it at the article "Fascism". I don't understand what the problem is. Also note the nom has been TBANed from "Russia" at AE. Levivich 16:37, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 15:02, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, in line with the decision of the latest AfD: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Left-wing_fascism_(4th_nomination). --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:07, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
- ...delete per the AFD where two out of four delete voters suggested a redirect, which is why I created this redirect? Levivich 04:26, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
- The outcome of the discussion was "delete", not "delete & redirect". --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:37, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
- "Delete" does not mean "delete and do not redirect", and no one objected to redirecting. Redirect was suggested partway through by one voter, and the only other voter to vote afterwards agreed. We could ping everyone who voted and see what the think. I'm still baffled that anyone would want to delete this redirect. Why erase this term from the encyclopedia, it's an obvious search term, and readers should be pointed to somewhere that explains what it is (and isn't). "Cuz the AFD" is a pretty poor argument. What is your substantive objection to this redirect? Levivich 05:22, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
- Pinging the participants in the AFD in case they want to comment here: MjolnirPants, DanielRigal, Inadvertent Consequences, Slatersteven, Cdjp1, and Generalrelative. Levivich 15:44, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. I have commented below. --DanielRigal (talk) 17:29, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- The outcome of the discussion was "delete", not "delete & redirect". --K.e.coffman (talk) 04:37, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
- Now that we have Daniel and Slater's comments below, we can say that out of the 4 delete voters in the AFD, only 1 says this redirect should be deleted. That doesn't determine the outcome of this RFD, but I think it negates the "in line with the decision of the latest AfD" rationale. Levivich 03:23, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- ...delete per the AFD where two out of four delete voters suggested a redirect, which is why I created this redirect? Levivich 04:26, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as it seems a bit forkey, a way of keeping "left-wing fascism" by hook or by crrok. I am also unsure the target mentions it. Slatersteven (talk) 15:56, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- When the reader searches for "left-wing fascism" or clicks that link the first thing they see when they're brought to the target is
Most scholars place fascism on the far right of the political spectrum.
, which is exactly what they should see when they search for "left-wing fascism". Do you not want to educate readers that the mainstream view is that fascism is not left-wing? We don't accomplish that by censoring the term, by removing it entirely from the encyclopedia. Hook or crook my foot. You seriously think I'm trying to say fascism is left wing? Ffs, SS. Levivich 16:04, 26 April 2022 (UTC)- I have no real idea what you want, what I do know is this has been an issue in the past. I suspect that if this redirect is kept it will be an issue again, for exactly the reason you state "I wanted to find out about the truth behind "left-wing fascism". If we said something about it in the target (as in "experts agree fascism is not left wing" (or some such)), the fact is we do not. So we are (in effect) invot9iomg people to add something about left wing fascism. Slatersteven (talk) 16:14, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- What problems? This redirect has existed for a year, we've had no problems. And the target does say fascism is not left wing, I just quoted it. Sheesh, how is "fascism is right wing" not the same as "fascism is not left wing"? There's a whole section in the fascism article called "position on the political spectrum", which is the target of this redirect. I honestly don't know what you're talking about when you say the target doesn't talk about it, when there's a whole section devoted to it. Levivich 16:54, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- I have no real idea what you want, what I do know is this has been an issue in the past. I suspect that if this redirect is kept it will be an issue again, for exactly the reason you state "I wanted to find out about the truth behind "left-wing fascism". If we said something about it in the target (as in "experts agree fascism is not left wing" (or some such)), the fact is we do not. So we are (in effect) invot9iomg people to add something about left wing fascism. Slatersteven (talk) 16:14, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- When the reader searches for "left-wing fascism" or clicks that link the first thing they see when they're brought to the target is
- NOT delete. I know this is not one of the normal options but my !vote really is "NOT delete". There are multiple arguable options here, including the status quo, but deletion is not one of them. My "tentative delete" vote on the AfD was based on the awful state of the article that was proposed for deletion not a desire to expunge the term completely. In fact, I said that
"it may be that there is scope for a valid article on this subject"
. If somebody searches for the term then we need to give them what they want. The problem is working out what that is. Some may be chuds, or those bamboozled by chuds, looking for anything to support the idiotic belief that fascism is left wing. For them, the current target is perfect. It explains where fascism really lies in the political spectrum. Far from legitimising this silly phrase, anything we can do to funnel people searching for it towards the truth of the matter is worthwhile. (There is a lot to be said for deliberately making redirects so that anybody searching for edgelord terminology gets pointed towards accurate information that will help to deflate whatever misconceptions caused them to do that specific search.) Others may be looking for something more specific without knowing the correct term to search for e.g. Red fascism or Strasserism. I don't think we can guess which of those they want so a retargeting to Red fascism would be arbitrary and almost certainly unhelpful to more people than it helps. I am not against a disambiguation page but it absolutely must prioritise the current target as the main item if it is to be valid. It would also need careful watching to prevent anybody morphing it back into anything like the awful mess that got deleted, as well as to keep an eye out for general POV pushing. Maybe it is more trouble than it is worth? I'm not sure so I'm not going to advocate a specific outcome here. I just want to be clear that my delete !vote on the AfD was specific to that AfD and does not carry over to this discussion. --DanielRigal (talk) 17:29, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:01, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete, probably The term is highly problematical and I'm not sure that a satisfactory article on the topic could ever be written. The target doesn't actually mention or explain it. Also, note in passing the article about a book called Liberal fascism which in its lead says: "...the mainstream view among historians and political scientists that maintains fascism is a far-right ideology" . I'd lean towards delete, else add more content at the target plus a redirect hatnote to Red fascism and Liberal fascism. Laterthanyouthink (talk) 13:24, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Not delete Keep. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is getting a reputation for left-wing bias and when students, researchers and the general public discover that articles offering counterarguments to Wikipedia’s ‘perceived wisdom’ are being deleted irrespective of their merits they will assume bias and be correct.Inadvertent Consequences (talk) 11:22, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think I have ever seen anybody talk themselves into the right answer for wronger reasons. ;-) DanielRigal (talk) 17:36, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete or redirect to Fascism#Fascist as a pejorative, that section does talk about fascism in regard to communist states. - LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 22:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Levivich and DanielRigal, the information at the target is informative to a reader searching this term, as it both explains the RS consensus perspective of where fascism is positioned on the political spectrum, and provides additional context on the use of fascism as a pejorative for non-rightist authoritarians. signed, Rosguill talk 20:40, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. I think Levivich and DanielRigal's arguments are very compelling but ultimately founder on the the question of utility to the reader in the absence of a mention in the target. Redirects don't have to be mentioned in the target in absolutely every case, but I struggle to think of a case where it wouldn't be necessary, or wouldn't lead to avoidable confusion, for the name of a political concept to point to a target where that concept isn't directly discussed. This is compounded by the fact that there is a body of scholarship on "left-wing fascism" unrelated to right-wing both-sides-ism or Jonah Goldberg-type nonsense (I'm thinking mostly of work by Jürgen Habermas), which could be covered in the encyclopaedia but isn't; given we don't have any encyclopaedic coverage of that topic or related topics, we're better off making the reader aware of that rather than pointing them to something tangentially related and without a mention of the term. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 19:08, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete. Agree with the nom and TFD that this is an ambiguous subject. Keeping the redirect at the current target will not help readers reach Red fascism, although refining to Fascism#Fascist as a pejorative (one of the proposed targets) will. Agree with Laterthanyouthink and Arms & Hearts that the current target does not mention or explain the subject, and is more problematic than useful to the reader. While I agree with the spirit of DanielRigal's NOT delete, the alternate option of disambiguation does not arise as none of the potential targets (including Fascism#Fascist as a pejorative or Fascist (insult), which was also the suggestion of the 2nd AfD) have a mention of the term. Delete so it can come back as a possible broad concept article. Jay (talk) 15:14, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous relists have been productive so I'm hopeful one more relist can wrap this up.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 19:16, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - While "red fascism" as a conceptual label for radical authoritarian socialism (particularly types associated with militant nationalism) is something that's intellectually valid, I think (and I strongly disagree with the notion that the label is just a political slur), the redirect as it stands shows the reader a place with serious information discussing how fascism in general fits in the broader left-to-right political spectrum. I'd rather expand that article than otherwise change things. Deletion is the wrong call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:00, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete per arguments above. The topic isn't covered in this section so a redirect elsewhere (maybe Red fascism) is probably more appropriate. The "Fascist left" spoken about is very context specific aspect of Italian fascism and is not what most people would be looking for when searching this term. Vladimir.copic (talk) 03:54, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep - A valid search term for those who are confused about the definition of fascism, probably due to the perjorative sense. This redirect properly informs such a person that "left-wing fascism" is an oxymoron. I definitely wouldn't disagree with the redirect being pointed towards Fascism#Fascist as a pejorative instead (as I noted, I think the term would be searched by those encountering the perjorative version), but as this is the very next section after the current redirect section target, I don't think there's a problem. Both targets are clearly visible, and I think the higher target is more informative. Fieari (talk) 07:25, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Keep, second choice retarget to Red fascism. Both pages address the (real and alleged) interaction of fascism and left-wing ideologies. While having the term "left-wing fascism" mentioned at target would be preferable, the important thing with a non-neutral redirect is to point the reader somewhere that explains that term's non-neutrality (and if applicable its factual wrongness), and both of these targets do that (again, the current better than the alternative). There are many other non-neutral, problematic, and misleading terms that have been kept at RfD in the past, and I do not see this one as exceptional. And to address a few other arguments made: On the delete side I don't see it as relevant that this page was deleted at AfD when it was an article, since the concerns are totally different for a redirect; while on the keep side I don't think we should be making decisions based on what Fox News thinks of us. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 01:56, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - This seems like an exercise in righting great wrongs, and it could go in either direction. Either it's an attempt by right-wing sympathizers to spread the notion that fascism isn't only connected to right-wing ideologies, or it's an attempt by left-wing sympathizers to fight back against disinformation attempts by right-wingers trying to change the definition of fascism. Or maybe it's both at the same time. Either way, it's a useless, pointy redirect. We don't typically create redirects and point them to things that they're not, so that we can educate people about common misconceptions. Like, we wouldn't create a redirect for Carnivorous vegetarian → Vegetarian in the hopes that the reader sees that "vegetarians are people that don't eat meat" and clears up any confusion. That's just not what redirects are for. —ScottyWong— 01:55, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
Crossgates,seamer
Satyrus of Elis
Satyrus of Athens
File:Ghani (2021 film).jpg
Sonic Chrono Adventure
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 17#Sonic Chrono Adventure
Musical Genres/Hip
Atatürk's socialism
Angzar
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 14#Angzar
Immigrant racism
Faithfully flat
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 12#Faithfully flat
Cyanide gas
Social unit
- Social unit → Level of analysis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
This was merged to level of analysis, but over the years, any mention of the term 'social unit' was removed from the target. The merge discussion (see talk page of both mentioned articlsS) was not attended - only the proposer suggested it and then carried out the uncontroversial merge. My query is inconclusive on whether this topic deserves its own entry, and as for the merger, I think unit of analysis would be better. Anyway, I am not sure what do; the current redirect is pointless (again, the target doesn't mention it), but deleting it would result in a loss of a past article without an AfD. Redirecting to unit of analysis is not ideal as that article also doesn't mention this. The old article did have some reliably referenced content, and I am frankly tempted to suggest restoring this pre-merge version, which could be AfD if anyone so desires. In either case, this redirect is currently not sustainable. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 09:05, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:22, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete: extremely vague expression. Veverve (talk) 08:42, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- Restore pre-merge/redirect version. (The link given by nom is wrong though, it gave me an error: "This site is only available in Mainland China.") Second option, Refine to Level of analysis#Analytical levels in social science and tag as {{R without mention}}. I found it useful as it lists the social units present at different levels of society. Jay (talk) 09:28, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 20:53, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - The term is simply so vague and general that I can't see making anything useful out of it. Deletion is the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 19:34, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to wikt:social unit. Searching on Google Scholar, I wasn't able to find any literature analyzing the usage of the term social unit, which means that the best we can do is redirect the reader to a dictionary definition. signed, Rosguill talk 06:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Soft redirect per Rosguill (talk · contribs). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 02:17, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 06:43, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Restore Special:Permalink/475960620 and send to AfD. That venue is better suited to decide whether this should be an article, interwiki redirect, redlink, or something else. This was only ever redirected as part of a merger, and if none of the merged content survives, then the solution ought to be to restore. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 01:16, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
History of institutions
L'Affaire Lafarge
June 4
San Jose
Ytterbium dodecaboride
Mustard sauce
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 13#Mustard sauce
Vivicam3915
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 11#Vivicam3915
1-Phenazinecarboxylic acid
Old Catholic Confederation
Peculiarities of the genocide of the Tutsis in regards to other genocides
Anna Mamalat
Gideon Richards
Calvis Harris
5o Cent
Middlesborough in the 2010 general election
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 13#Middlesborough in the 2010 general election
Parmotrema tinctorum
Polymer impregnation
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 11#Polymer impregnation
Green state
- Green state → Robyn Eckersley#The Green State (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Ambiguous term. I've seen "green state" to refer to states where the Green Party has control, states that are environmentally friendly, or states where cannabis is legal. Given the wide variety of uses I've seen for the term, this does not seem to be the ideal target. Either delete or cross-redirect to Wiktionary. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:12, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete as vague and ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 14:53, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to wikt:green state, which lists two of the nom's definitions. People may search "green state" here, but they might be WP:ASTONISHed to end up at the target. Regards, SONIC678 05:09, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 00:59, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Retarget toKeep at Robyn_Eckersley#The_Green_State where the term green state is described. --Lenticel (talk) 06:54, 29 April 2022 (UTC)- Delete as per Shhhnotsoloud and WP:SSRT. Veverve (talk) 06:55, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Steel1943 (talk) 00:15, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- Green state should become an article or be redirected to Green politics Loremaster (talk) 23:02, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete - it does appear to be ambiguous, and I also found an article using it in the political science sense that predates the 2004 article at the target [23]. signed, Rosguill talk 20:52, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- If it's ambiguous there can be a disambiguation page. Until another use is added it can be a redirect. 86.141.247.208 (talk) 18:11, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- The Green party and cannabis contexts don't really lend themselves to dab entries, but are nevertheless possible as search terms; allowing for internal search results is thus preferable, IMO. signed, Rosguill talk 18:24, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- It is when there is nothing with the title. "Green state redirects here, for other uses see wikt:green state" is possible. There is nothing about cannabis in search results or in wikt:green state so is there something that can be added? 86.141.247.208 (talk) 18:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- The Green party and cannabis contexts don't really lend themselves to dab entries, but are nevertheless possible as search terms; allowing for internal search results is thus preferable, IMO. signed, Rosguill talk 18:24, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- If it's ambiguous there can be a disambiguation page. Until another use is added it can be a redirect. 86.141.247.208 (talk) 18:11, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate between the current target to which The Green State redirects, and Eco-nationalism to which Green nationalism redirects (and which also covers green politics). Deletion to aid internal search results does not help as there are thousands of entries, all pointing to Bowling Green State University. Could not find a reference of the term in context of cannabis legalization on enwiki. Jay (talk) 06:53, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For further consideration of the late disambiguating proposal.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 03:47, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Soft redirect to wikt:Green state, seems plausible. Rubbish computer Ping me or leave a message on my talk page 17:28, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate - The idea of some area being "a green state" is a general one that can relate to multiple articles. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 05:04, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
June 3
Fienberg-Fisher Elementary School
Itali-Slavs
Balochki language
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 11#Balochki language
Ooh, it's am
2022 Russian invasion
HM The King & HM The Queen
- HM The King → King (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- HM King → King (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- HM The Queen → Queen regnant (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- HM Queen → Queen regnant (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
These terms are not mentioned in the target article, leaving it unclear why they target their current target. For reference, HM The King has also targeted Monarch and Monarchy during its history. For the two terms at search terms on third party web sites, "HM King" returns results for Henrietta King and "HM The King" returns results for a probably unnotable scotch/whiskey blend. Steel1943 (talk) 20:04, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- Weak Retarget to Majesty, which explains this manner of address and the abbreviation. 192.76.8.77 (talk) 20:14, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- Comment: Should HM The Queen and HM Queen be added to this discussion? They both target Queen regnant. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 20:39, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Mx. Granger: Sounds like a plan to me, so I've added them. In regards to why I chose to add them, it's the same reason as my response to the "weak retarget" comment above: WP:XY issues between Majesty and Queen regnant. Steel1943 (talk) 20:47, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep the Kings; Retarget the Queens to Queen because "Queen" is ambiguous. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 09:15, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- Keep HM The King and HM The Queen (while retargeting the latter to Queen), because they are in fact titles that are used when referring to various European (and in some instances non-European) monarchs and their consorts. Delete both HM King and HM Queen as they are both grammatically incorrect. Keivan.fTalk 04:58, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 11:41, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget HM The King to Majesty. A search for this term is almost certainly looking for an explanation of the HM component. The "King" component is likely understood by all, but in any case is linked early in the proposed target. Delete HM King per Keivan.f. Likewise for the Queen redirects. SpinningSpark 22:39, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Spinningspark: can you elaborate on what you meant by "likewise"? Do you want to go with Keivan.f for the Queen redirects? Jay (talk) 06:59, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- No, I meant repeat everything I already said but with "Queen" substituted for "King". That is, retarget HM the Queen to Majesty and delete HM Queen. SpinningSpark 08:18, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Spinningspark: can you elaborate on what you meant by "likewise"? Do you want to go with Keivan.f for the Queen redirects? Jay (talk) 06:59, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 18:00, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One last try. There is no consensus on any of the 4 entries.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 10:36, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget all to Majesty; a reader who searches for any of these terms is presumably looking to find out what "HM" means in this context or learn about royal forms of address. If a reader wanted to read about kings or queens in general they would more likely search for "king" or "queen". The fact that some of the redirects may be grammatically incorrect is irrelevant; they're still plausible search terms. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 11:46, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Monomaсh's Cap
Draft:Gay men flags
Thomas Robb (activist)
MOS:IBID
Ephiel tower
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 11#Ephiel tower
Stirrer (cooking)
- Stirrer (cooking) → Mixer (appliance) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Vague redirect. There are several items related to "cooking" that could be used to stir, and neither the current target or any other target (to my knowledge) could specifically be called a "stirrer". Steel1943 (talk) 19:34, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
- Delete there are automatic pot stirrers which are not mixers/eggbeaters/dough kneaders -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 04:18, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- keep. I came to this word when processing food and drink data (for the Europeana food and drink project). It's a legitimate food related term. The best target that exists is the current one. The page Mixer (appliance) seems to describe any food mixer, its not limited to egg or dough mixing. I suggest to the previous poster to add a section about pot stirring. Furthermore, "stirring" and "mixing" are synonymous in this context. The only other page mentioning "stirrer" is Magnetic stirrer, which is clearly not appropriate for food. --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 07:04, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, I noticed the fact that Stirrer and Stirrer (cooking) both existed prior to making this nomination, as well as the fact that the target of Stirrer has no {{Redirect}} hatnote on it, which it should since Stirrer (cooking) exists. In all honesty, there's probably no WP:PRIMARYTOPIC redirect target for the phrase "Stirrer" in the first place, and the base page probably needs to become a disambiguation page, deleted, or converted to a set index (in that order). However, in regards to the use of the "(cooking)" disambiguator: My initial concern still stands since there are whisks and several spoon-related topics which could also be referred to as "stirrers" since they can be and/or are used to stir. Steel1943 (talk) 17:52, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 23:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Turn Stirrer into a disambiguation page and delete Stirrer (cooking) as unnecessary. The term is too general to ever have a meaningful redirect target. SpinningSpark 12:11, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 09:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting in order to close out the May 24 page. Also a disambiguation draft for the base Stirrer will help in the discussion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:17, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- I've thrown together a dab page at Stirrer (it may need some more vigorous checking). I believe Stirrer (cooking) should, in principle, redirect there: it's a plausible search term and "stirrer" has several uses that can be seen as related to cooking. – Uanfala (talk) 18:34, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Terry Pearce
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 14#Terry Pearce
Latin Portuguese
May 26
"beIN Sports Xtra"
MAGA
World's Most Wanted
English Clasico
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 2#English Clasico
Surf beach
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 2#Surf beach
Kalimna
Ukrainian Genocide
One-Eyed Jack (murder victim)
DNA experiments
- DNA experiments → Scientific method#DNA-experiments (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
- DNA experiment → Experimentum crucis#DNA, experimentum crucis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ] Added. -- Tavix (talk) 16:25, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
The current target of this redirect is rather surprising/astonishing since it's not about the actually subject of "DNA experiments", leads to a subject named "DNA experiment", or a list of experiments using DNA. I would have to believe there's a better target, but I'm not sure what. Steel1943 (talk) 20:00, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- Nominator comment: For reference, a search for the term "DNA experiment" (DNA experiment doesn't exist) returns several examples of experiments that utilize DNA. In regards to an actual retargeting option for this redirect, what seems to be the best option I found is List of experiments#Biology, but even that does't seem to be good enough since the section includes several experiments not directly related to DNA. Possibly deletion would be the better option here so the search results are not hidden by an existing redirect forwarding readers to a specific page. Steel1943 (talk) 20:54, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
Information posted by redirect creator. (Collapsed for simpler discussion reading, and to clarify that this was all one comment.)
|
---|
References
|
- ...Umm, not sure how that addresses any part of my concerns with the redirect, but okay, thanks. Steel1943 (talk) 21:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- Also, this redirect targeting where it does reminds me of a RFD I started a few years back for a redirect titled "Other liqueurs". (See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 26#Other liqueurs.) The redirect targeted the section List of liqueurs#Other liqueurs, which was essentially just the name of a section header in List of liqueurs, but not about a subject called/named "Other liqueurs". I feel the same is the issue with this nominated redirect: It targets a section titled "DNA-experiments", but it's not actually about the topic of the redirect, but rather the term's use in respect to the subject of the article where the section is placed ... which is unhelpful if a reader is attempting to locate information about the subject of the redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- So the RFD idea/purpose is not about the significance of the term in a context, but about the term per se? Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 21:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Ancheta Wis: From my understanding over the years, that's the goal in most cases. (Editors' opinions may vary.) I added a bit to my nomination rationale that may goes a bit further into this reasoning; I fault myself for not being clearer with my rationale initially. Steel1943 (talk) 21:52, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- I found a short article which has a context section: Shot/reverse shot#Context Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 11:26, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) @Ancheta Wis: From my understanding over the years, that's the goal in most cases. (Editors' opinions may vary.) I added a bit to my nomination rationale that may goes a bit further into this reasoning; I fault myself for not being clearer with my rationale initially. Steel1943 (talk) 21:52, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- I thought a redirect was supposed to aid in finding a topic. For example if Soldiers have an informal name for an Army topic, wouldn't it be helpful to create a redirect for the informal name? Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 21:49, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- So if a redirect to a page such as DNA experiment (scientific method) would satisfy the requirement? I could then create an anchor to the appropriate place in Scientific method. Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 21:52, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- If any content were to be added anywhere to satisfy a basic helpful functionality for this redirect (with as little effort possible), it would probably be to add a subsection at List of experiments#Biology by separating the ones listed there which involve DNA, and possibly even add some more "DNA experiments" to that subsection that are not currently listed at List of experiments#Biology (if more are known). Steel1943 (talk) 21:57, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- Actually I saw some of the experiments from the DNA story in this list. DNA is the seed topic for whole industries now. Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 22:15, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- (edit conflict) ...And in regards to a page named "DNA experiment (scientific method)", that is disambiguation. One of the basic assumed requirements of a disambiguated title is that the version of it without disambiguation exists, and presently, DNA experiment doesn't exist. Steel1943 (talk) 22:01, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- If any content were to be added anywhere to satisfy a basic helpful functionality for this redirect (with as little effort possible), it would probably be to add a subsection at List of experiments#Biology by separating the ones listed there which involve DNA, and possibly even add some more "DNA experiments" to that subsection that are not currently listed at List of experiments#Biology (if more are known). Steel1943 (talk) 21:57, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thus "List of experiments in biology" resembles a disambiguation page, but might actually describe the arc of a narrative? Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 21:58, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- I hope the following answers your question: If a redirect named List of experiments in biology was created to target List of experiments#Biology, that would make sense since the redirect is targeting a location where the subject of the redirect is located. Steel1943 (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- So how does this redirect case RFD differ from DNA#History? What if DNA experiment were to become a disambiguation page to List of experiments on DNA; Scientific method; DNA#History ?--Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 01:56, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- I can see how concerns about the redirect to a crucial experiment would cover up search results, but wouldn't a disambiguation page (sample above) handle this? Why can't I just start writing such a dab page? Is the rationale for this page meant to include other editors? --Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 02:28, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- So I ran the Nominator's search for DNA experiment: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&search=DNA+experiment&ns0=1&ns9=1&ns11=1 , and found a useful list which could be exploited (it's actually the first time I have found the Wikipedia Search to be usable): What I refer to is the type of Narrative paradigm called a crosscut, itself a disambiguator page. There is a sport on the Internet called the Wikipedia game, in which every article in the encyclopedia seems to have a root page: philosophy. This game has led to some users to actually edit encyclopedia articles, to keep the Narrative alive. In turn, other editors intervene, to break the chain to philosophy, in a battle between good and evil, an infinite game, or the conflict continuum#Competition continuum, or the Wikipedia:Manual of Style. Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 09:02, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- I hope the following answers your question: If a redirect named List of experiments in biology was created to target List of experiments#Biology, that would make sense since the redirect is targeting a location where the subject of the redirect is located. Steel1943 (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- So the RFD idea/purpose is not about the significance of the term in a context, but about the term per se? Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 21:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- Also, this redirect targeting where it does reminds me of a RFD I started a few years back for a redirect titled "Other liqueurs". (See Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2015 August 26#Other liqueurs.) The redirect targeted the section List of liqueurs#Other liqueurs, which was essentially just the name of a section header in List of liqueurs, but not about a subject called/named "Other liqueurs". I feel the same is the issue with this nominated redirect: It targets a section titled "DNA-experiments", but it's not actually about the topic of the redirect, but rather the term's use in respect to the subject of the article where the section is placed ... which is unhelpful if a reader is attempting to locate information about the subject of the redirect. Steel1943 (talk) 21:34, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Genetic engineering. I can't make sense of the above discussion or the current state of the Scientific method article, but genetic engineering, to me, seems like the obvious topic someone who entered "DNA experiments" in the search box would be looking for. Tevildo (talk) 17:19, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
- Proposed Retarget: Added genetic engineering, and additional links, to a new target, a section Experimentum crucis#DNA, experimentum crucis, as an application of the new understanding opened up in succeeding decades, after its discovery by the scientific method. Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 07:06, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 08:24, 27 April 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to add DNA experiment to this discussion. It was created during the course of this discussion and I would think it should have the same home as the plural form.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Tavix (talk) 16:23, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to History of molecular biology, which has the most in-depth information I can find on various experiments relating to DNA. -- Tavix (talk) 16:33, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to genetic engineering. When I saw the phrase "DNA experiment", genetic engineering was exactly what I thought of. Minkai (boop that talk button!-contribs-ANI Hall of Fame) 00:45, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to History of molecular biology, as examples have been given of DNA experiments that do not involve genetic engineering. Deletion would also be ok in my opinion. signed, Rosguill talk 20:53, 17 May 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Participants have yet to decide which target is best. Is it Genetic engineering or History of molecular biology?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:54, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget - I would also take this to 'history of molecular biology' given that scientific research on the practical side into DNA has preceded what we tend to think of as specific 'genetic eingeering'. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 13:58, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- Delete both. "DNA experiment" is simply too ambiguous to be a good redirect. It could refer to many different types of methodologies/techniques as well as numerous historically important results. Disambiguation doesn't make sense because "DNA experiment" isn't really a specific term that could refer to multiple specific things, instead it is a plausible search term, and we should let the search function do its job, as a disambiguation page could never be exhaustive. That said, since the discussion is trending toward retargeting somewhere, History of molecular biology seems like a superior target to Genetic engineering, as genetic engineering is much too specific (lots of scientific work, past and present, that could be described as a "DNA experiment" is outside the context of genetic engineering). Mdewman6 (talk) 01:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Delete DNA experiment which was created as part of this discussion to aid as a disambiguation page, but which wound up as redirect to another target (a new unreferenced section). Delete DNA experiments as a term that can potentially target multiple targets. Both Genetic engineering and History of molecular biology are too broad. If retargeting, I would have preferred refining to Genetic engineering#Research. Jay (talk) 04:02, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Duck Ponds
Hölder conjugates
Functional analyst
Extreme porn
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 2#Extreme porn
Extreme cold
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 2#Extreme cold
Extreme heat
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 2#Extreme heat
Betting odds
Tiquan Forbes
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 June 2#Tiquan Forbes
Chairman of the Board of Veterans' Appeals
May 1
Spit kingdom
Bob Vylan
N.A.A.M. Brigade
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 9#N.A.A.M. Brigade
Sister Isle
Several redirects to Gold as an investment
Urban division
File:Kathputli (1971 film).jpg
Joe D. Foster
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 9#Joe D. Foster
Red Line (MNRR New Canaan Branch)
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 9#Red Line (MNRR New Canaan Branch)
Blue Line (Staten Island Railway)
Chakwood
Chernihiv breadline massacre
2022 Chernihiv breadline massacre
164th Division (1st Formation)(People's Republic of China)
Mana (Anglo-Saxon)
La Nueva
Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 30#La Nueva
G.I. Jane II
Kav Kav
Stopid
Inbound marketing
Supreme Leader of Myanmar
Wikipedia:S
- Wikipedia:S → Help:Searching (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: (@subpage) ]
Retarget to Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Sources, which is possibly the most important resource for newcomer content writers. Currently, WP:S is basically unused, way under the shadow of the main shortcut H:S. Excessive numbers of shortcuts defeat the benefit of shortcuts.
In contrast, Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Sources is probably the most important, undervalued section in the whole of the project for new content writers, and it has shortcuts that are hard to remember. This would be a much better use for WP:S.
If this is not shot down for a reason I don't expect, I will advertise this discussion on the relevant pages. SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:27, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- Convert to disambiguation page. A section of a subpage is too specialized for a one-letter shortcut. WP:S could mean a lot things and a cross-namespace redirect to Help:Searching is not the most natural. WP:S has a lot of incoming links but nearly all of them are from alphabetical lists of all one-letter WP shortcuts without saying where they go, so changing it doesn't break those uses. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:44, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- Making a disambiguation page out of something that is essentially never used is just silly. Is the aim to make sure that such a high value shortcut remains unused?
- A section of of a subpage may sound "specialised", but this is part of the point. It is not "specialised" but centrally important to the most basic editor function on the project, writing content. This section, currently WP:RSPSS, is way out of balance in terms of how important it is to the prominence of its location. A single-character shortcut may be sufficient to fix that, and will certainly help. I considered suggesting WP:RSPSS be spun out to its own page, but decided against this, because, despite its standalone usefulness to content writing, its maintenance is extremely detailed and it should be boldly edited by newcomers without reading the extensive context present above.
- WP:S could mean a lot of things, but current doesn't. And what better meaning to give it than Sources for content? -- SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:11, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- If we pick a Sources target then it should be the same as WP:SOURCE and WP:SOURCES, meaning Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources. I'm fine with that. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:36, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- I had looked at that and gave it some thought. In terms of Policy, WP:SOURCES is the root of policy on sources, but it is extremely limited to policy-wonk-thought, and it is not very good, notably in how it fails to adequately cross reference WP:PSTS (Primary, secondary and tertiary sources). Limited to Policy theory that is not immediately practical. It is a partial blurb on the theory that undies the source rules. In contrast, WP:RSPSS is the end result list that edits should consult.
- The shortcuts are not meant to be a content guide, but quick reference memorable shortcuts. Editors on the ground do not a quicker reference to the non-practical section of WP:V. They need it to get to the sources cheat sheet, WP:RSPSS.
- Also, having multiple catchy shortcuts pointing to the same thing is another waste of catchy shortcuts. SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:41, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- If we pick a Sources target then it should be the same as WP:SOURCE and WP:SOURCES, meaning Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources. I'm fine with that. PrimeHunter (talk) 04:36, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- Keep since this redirect has targeted the current page (or a redirect towards it leftover from page moves) since 2007. At this point, due to targeting the current page for about 15 years, there's too much potential for links in edit summaries to be broken in the event the redirect is retargeted. If necessary to disambiguate "S", Wikipedia:S (disambiguation) could be created, but that may be overkill; it may be better to just add a hatnote for 1–2 other possibilities that "WP:S" could refer to, and call it a day. Steel1943 (talk) 16:47, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
- While I could not check ancient edit summaries, I did check many incoming links, and they are basically all junk. This shortcut was made without much thought, and never given any use. More than half seemed to be complete mistakes. If a future wikiarcheologist (like me) wants to discover what was going on with an odd talk page pipe, then it will be facilitated by the edit to the redirect including a link to this discussion. Archaeology doesn't mean "preserve everything", it is good enough to keep records.
- Putting a hatnote on pages that WP:S could point to, or has ever pointed to, is completely nutty if you note the pageviews. Nobody uses WP:S. Hatnotes make clutter in the prime real estate of the page. SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:30, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
- disambiguate per Prime Hunter -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 22:43, 26 March 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:03, 28 March 2022 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay (talk) 07:20, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- Keep per Steel1943 and Do not disambiguate as that makes the shortcut useless for everybody. I've spot-checked a number of the incoming links and they either refer to the current target, WP:SOURCE (which is not the proposed target) or are part of a list. Thryduulf (talk) 15:41, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
- User:Thryduulf. Agree, "Disambiguate" makes it useless for everybody, but "Keep" keeps it useless for everybody (a never used redundant option to the better H:S)
- I spot checked many incoming links, and many are mistakes, many are to an old ~2007 target, and all are unimportant. There basically never was any editing where people had a reason to write the wikilink WP:S as a shortcut to the help page for searching, it was silly then, and has been silly for many years. There are certainly far far more mistaken incoming links than intended proper uses (I found none).
- What is your desired outcome? That WP:S is forever junk? SmokeyJoe (talk) 04:22, 7 April 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate - the existing incoming links suggest that the current target is not particularly useful. signed, Rosguill talk 22:20, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate (draft available below the redirect). I've checked about a dozen incoming links: a third of them seemed to intend WP:SOURCE, a few were for Help:Search and the rest were for either WP:Summary style or WP:Synthesis. Definitely no prospect for a suitable target here. As for the objection that dabifying will make the shortcut useless for everybody: whatever target is otherwise chosen, the majority of uses will be wrong, and that's worse than being simply useless. SmokeyJoe, for the list of perennial sources, won't it make more sense to instead usurp WP:LPS or WP:PSL, or use WP:S/P (for Sources/perennial)? – Uanfala (talk) 21:21, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
- User:Uanfala, the point about draftifing making it useless for everyone is that it keeps it useless, as in "unused". No one will benefit a disambiguation because no one uses it. Of the incoming links that you checked, did you note how old they were, and where they were coming from? From around 2007, and from fairly confused talk threads, which I think was mostly because WP:S was never a recommended shortcut for anything, and the only uses it got were from people being careless. I checked a lot more than a dozen.
- It is currently available with no modern baggage. SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:14, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- Here are all the existing uses where the shortcuts is piped [24] and where it's used on its own [25]. – Uanfala (talk) 12:13, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources because I like the idea of syncing it up with WP:SOURCES. I agree with Rosguill that the current target is not particularly useful, but I also agree with Thryduulf that disambiguating at this title would make it useless for everybody because it would no longer function as a shortcut. I do like Steel1943's idea of creating Wikipedia:S (disambiguation) which would catch the incorrect linkages and those who guess wrong. -- Tavix (talk) 01:35, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- User:Tavix, Wikipedia:Verifiability#Reliable sources already has WP:SOURCES, and that section is not particularly useful, unlike my proposed target, which is very useful, should be used by every newcomer, and lacks a good shortcut. SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:18, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate, don't retagret as that will mean links for searching in discussion pages will end up at the wrong place. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:12, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 00:53, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Strong keep - Projectspace shortcuts are ambiguous by their very nature. This long-standing single letter redirect should not be tampered with through retargeting or made to lose its function through disambiguating. This shortcut has pointed to content regarding searching since c. 2007. — Godsy (TALKCONT) 23:53, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
- Retarget to Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry. Probably the most common search term. The others don't seem that common. interstatefive (talk) - just another roadgeek 23:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Disambiguate per the drafted dab. Entries may be added or removed subsequently. Although I too find a shortcut dab "silly", doing this will address the unfairness of using a one-letter shortcut for something that has not been too useful. Oppose the usurping of the shortcut for perennial sources. It already has WP:RSP and WP:RSPS (and I would have liked WP:PERENNIAL to also point there). Regardless of whether the shortcut is new or from 2007, change is good, and if it's not too detrimental, we can make it more useful than it already is. Jay (talk) 17:41, 9 June 2022 (UTC)