Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion

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

WP:RFDWP:RFD

XFD backlog
v
t
e
V	Oct	Nov	Total
CfD	9	49	58
TfD	6	34	40
MfD	0	0	0
FfD	0	2	2
RfD	0	11	11
AfD	0	2	2

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

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

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

Current and past redirects for discussion (RfD) discussions

Current discussions

Redirects that have been nominated for discussion are indexed by the day on which they were first listed.

Old discussions

After 7 days, RfDs nominations that have finished their discussion period are eligible to be closed following the deletion process.

Before listing a redirect for discussion

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

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

The guiding principles of RfD

Shortcut

WP:RGUIDEWP:RGUIDE

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

When to delete a redirect

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

Shortcuts

The major reasons why deletion of redirects is harmful are:

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

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

Reasons for deleting

Shortcut

WP:RFD#DELETEWP:RFD#DELETE

You might want to delete a redirect if one or more of the following conditions is met:

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

Reasons for not deleting

Shortcut

WP:RFD#KEEPWP:RFD#KEEP

However, avoid deleting such redirects if:

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

Neutrality of redirects

Shortcut

WP:RNEUTRALWP:RNEUTRAL

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

Non-neutral redirects are commonly created for three reasons:

Articles that are created using non-neutral titles are routinely moved to a new neutral title, which leaves behind the old non-neutral title as a working redirect (e.g. ClimategateClimategate → Climatic Research Unit email controversy).
Articles created as POV forks may be deleted and replaced by a redirect pointing towards the article from which the fork originated (e.g. Barack Obama Muslim rumorBarack Obama Muslim rumor → deleted and now redirected to Barack Obama religion conspiracy theories).
The subject matter of articles may be represented by some sources outside Wikipedia in non-neutral terms. Such terms are generally avoided in Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. For instance the non-neutral expression "AttorneygateAttorneygate" is used to redirect to the neutrally titled 2006 dismissal of U.S. attorneys. The article in question has never used that title, but the redirect was created to provide an alternative means of reaching it because a number of press reports use the term.

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

Closing notes

Details at Administrator instructions for RfD

Nominations should remain open, per policy, about a week before they are closed, unless they meet the general criteria for speedy deletion, the criteria for speedy deletion of a redirect, or are not valid redirect discussion requests (e.g. are actually move requests).

How to list a redirect for discussion

Shortcut

WP:RFDHOWTOWP:RFDHOWTO

STEP I.

Tag the redirect(s).

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

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

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

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

STEP II.

List the entry on RfD.

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

Enter this text below the date heading:

{{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName|target=TargetArticle|text=The action you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for that action.}}

~~~~

For this template:
- Put the redirect's name in place of RedirectName, put the target article's name in place of TargetArticle, and include a reason after text=.
- Note that, for this step, the "target article" is the current target of the redirect (if you have a suggestion for a better target, include this in the text that you insert after text=).
Please use an edit summary such as:
Nominating [[RedirectName]]
(replacing RedirectName with the name of the redirect you are nominating).
To list multiple related redirects for discussion, use the following syntax. Repeat line 2 for N number of redirects:

{{subst:Rfd2|redirect=RedirectName1|target=TargetArticle1}}

{{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectName2|target=TargetArticle2}}

{{subst:Rfd2|multi=yes|redirect=RedirectNameN|target=TargetArticleN|text=The actions you would like to occur (deletion, re-targeting, etc.) and the rationale for those actions.}}

~~~~

If the redirect has had previous RfDs, you can add {{Oldrfdlist|previous RfD without brackets|result of previous RfD}} directly after the rfd2 template.
If appropriate, inform members of the most relevant WikiProjects through one or more "deletion sorting lists". Then add a {{subst:delsort|<topic>|<signature>}} template to the nomination, to insert a note that this has been done.

STEP III.

Notify users.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Current list

Shortcuts

November 21

Children of Israel (disambiguation)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Completionism

Completionism → Obsessive–compulsive personality disorder (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

It seems unclear why this redirect exists and why it redirects to OCPD. When looking it up, I do not see it clearly having anything to do with OCPD. BlockArranger (talk) 01:29, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Glossary of video game terms#completionist. Note that Completionist (an album) has a hatnote to OCPD for some reason as well, but there's no indication why...this certainly shouldn't point there. (This !vote is a little on the weak side I'd say...having the "-ism" form is a little implausible, but whatever). –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 07:09, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bogdator

Bogdator → Antares (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Boegdator → Antares (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. Bögdator was deleted in 2009 as a "Recently-created, implausible redirect", but these two bot-created redirects from the same term without diacritics still exist. SevenSpheres (talk) 00:43, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete, G6, in line with what these were auto-created to mirror. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 07:05, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chinese Muslims

Chinese Muslims → Islam in China (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect has attracted "controversy", and has pointed to Islam in China (the current target), and also Hui people. In addition, it got converted into a disambiguation page recently with these 2 articles listed. Bringing to RFD to get a clearer consensus. Natg 19 (talk) 00:14, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are 10 ethnics groups in China that are majority Muslim. While the Hui people are the largest, there's barely more Hui people in China than there are Uyghurs. The current target is a far more comprehensive view. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 01:42, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand Alliance

New Zealand Alliance → Alliance (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

New Zealand Alliance was a temperance movement based off the United Kingdom Alliance https://teara.govt.nz/en/1966/new-zealand-alliance

Should be returned to red to encourage article creation. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:09, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Teritory of Rapid Support Forces

Teritory of Rapid Support Forces → Government of Peace and Unity (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Incorrect spelling, was at this title for 45 minutes Thepharoah17 (talk) 23:09, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Territory of Rapid Support Forces is not the same as the Government of Peace and Unity. MarketFruit (talk) 00:02, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think after the incorrect spelling is fixed it should stay. MarketFruit (talk) 00:09, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move without redirect to Territory of Rapid Support ForcesTerritory of Rapid Support Forces and retarget to Territory of the Rapid Support Forces. Left guide (talk) 03:36, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't work because of WP:MOVEREDIRECT, so I created the redirect you suggested directly instead. As for the current one, delete as the nom suggests. Duckmather (talk) 04:58, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Any further thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:03, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 20

Mimi Lieber

Mimi Lieber → The Thing About My Folks (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This page has multiple incoming links from Lieber's other projects. If she is indeed not notable, then this redirect should just be deleted, as she is clearly not only known for this film (and if anything, her role in it seems fairly minor). — Anonymous 23:10, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Restore article and send to AFD. Geschichte (talk) 12:26, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Restore article and consider AFD for proper assessment. The article was recently BLAR'd (May 2025). It was getting >700 monthly pageviews pre-BLAR and continues to get ≈400 views per month post-BLAR. Quite possibly just an artifact of being linked in a few high-traffic articles. Linking to a random movie she appeared in doesn't make any sense. Even if this is her most high profile role, the article (appropriately) contains zero biographical information and doesn't even discuss her performance. If found non-notable at AfD this should not be made to redirect back to the film. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:11, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
or Delete per my comments below, post-relist. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:26, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ugh... delete and do not restore unless someone actually thinks the sources are usable. as is, citation 1 is a filmography and not usable for notability, citation 2 only mentions her in passing in the context of one random episode of friends where she's one of two actresses for the same character, citation 3 only mentions her in passing in the context of a one-off appearance in seinfeld, and seems to be from a blog, and i have to wonder what the hell citation 4 is doing there because it seems to be nothing but the headline followed by a picture of her and who i'm assuming is her husband. as is, i found some seemingly usable sources for her, but they're not in the article, so a closer would be restoring a filmography with effectively one source that doesn't prove notability, meaning she unambiguously doesn't meet gng as is, and if an article were to be made from those sources, it would be under wp:tnt, whether the creator wants that to be the case or not. honestly, people saying that it should be taken elsewhere without actually assessing the stuff they want taken elsewhere should stop, since it only actually means they want someone else to deal with a potentially really simple case consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 22:37, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 11:53, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, mwwv ^converse∫_edits 15:19, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator comment: Geschichte, Myceteae, consarn, any chance the three of you could work out your differing stances? As the nominator, I'm neutral between restoring and sending to AfD and just deleting, but without further engagement, this will end up being closed as no consensus and kept as a redirect, which doesn't seem to be an outcome anyone wants. Thanks. — Anonymous 19:04, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer deletion over keeping. I think it's inappropriate to BLAR articles that don't have a suitable redirect target and that have some content worthy of evaluation at AfD. That said, I agree that this the content and sourcing in the history is essentially unusable so either she is not notable of this is WP:TNT and can be deleted either way. I will also amend my bolded !vote above. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:24, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i could dump some of the aforementioned sources i found, if that'd help with creating an article in the future, but as is, i still don't think there's anything worth restoring in there consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 20:17, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@An anonymous username, not my real name: without further engagement, this will end up being closed as no consensus and kept as a redirect This is not true; the competent experienced closers (and all the admin ones at least) know better per WP:NCRET and will close a "no consensus" with a functional outcome of the prevailing non-delete option if there is no consensus to delete. If a closer does what you describe, please ask them to modify or vacate their close, and if that fails raise it at WP:DRV whereby it will almost certainly get overturned. There's no reason for a redirect to be kept if no one votes to keep it. Left guide (talk) 16:59, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Restore article and send to AfD. Deleting the now-redirect would be tantamount to bypassing AfD; don't just turn articles into redirects and then delete them using RfD. CapnZapp (talk) 21:58, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Having a redirect titled Mimi Lieber would be fine if we had an article actually discussing her. I agree The Thing About My Folks isn't that article; it contains only a trivial mention with no details. Still, that doesn't mean we should delete this redirect because it used to be an article which received no AfD. CapnZapp (talk) 22:01, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

here we go again...

@CapnZapp please cite a policy, guideline, or even essay that says blars have to go to afd despite the lack of arguments that there's something worth restoring consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 01:42, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Restore or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:51, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Skipiti Toilet

Skipiti Toilet → Skibidi Toilet (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

R3 misspelling but nearly six months old, so recent is questionable. Nothing with this spelling shows up on google. Happy Editing -- IAm Chaos 21:43, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Plausible phonetic spelling. Ca ^{talk to me!} 03:42, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:11, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep plausible spelling. microTato^{(🗯️) (✍🏻)} 01:57, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Camp Bragg

Camp Bragg → Camp Bragg (Arkansas) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

It isn't right that this redirect should point to a disambiguated title. Fort Bragg was first called "Camp Bragg". The disambiguator at Camp Bragg (Arkansas) would seem to indicate it is not the primary topic, so retarget Camp Bragg to Fort Bragg and put a hatnote there. (If the Arkansas place really is the primary topic, the article about it should be moved to the base name instead). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 21:42, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move Camp Bragg (Arkansas) to Camp Bragg per WP:PRECISE. The WP:COMMONNAME for Fort Bragg is exactly what it currently is, and I've never heard it referred to otherwise (in recent times) by reputable third party sources. Adjust the hatnote on the current target article after the move. Steel1943 (talk) 22:37, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 21:42, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yup bro

Yup bro → Chav (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This phrase is not mentioned anywhere in the target article. Z. Patterson (talk) 21:42, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Visioneers

The Visioneers → Zay Harding (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I do not see a mention of this title in the target article. Z. Patterson (talk) 21:24, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Edmonton International Airport Transit Centre

Edmonton International Airport Transit Centre → Edmonton International Airport#Ground transportation (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I do not see a mention of this anywhere in the target article. Z. Patterson (talk) 21:12, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adobe Photoshop 25.5 (Macintosh)

Adobe Photoshop 25.5 (Macintosh) → Adobe Photoshop (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Nowhere in the article do I see a mention of Adobe Photoshop 25.5. Z. Patterson (talk) 21:07, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural keep, case of {{R from file metadata link}}, which is an intentional redirect as per WP:RPURPOSE: Links auto-generated from Exchangeable image file format (Exif) information (Adobe Photoshop CS Windows redirects to Adobe Photoshop). Shazback (talk) 22:31, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Marubeni Copper Holdings Limited

Marubeni Copper Holdings Limited → Marubeni (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Nowhere in the target article do I see a mention for copper, let alone Marubeni Copper Holdings Limited. Z. Patterson (talk) 21:04, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

6/8 time

6/8 time → Time signature (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
6/8 Time → Time signature (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

this isn't about deletion, more so a matter of "don't keep but what do ?? ?"
i wanted to just retarget to triple metre, but as it oddly singles 6/8 out as "not REAL triple meter", so... uh... make an anchor at the compound time signature list and refine to it, or just to #beat and subdivision, where it's first explained? definitely don't retarget to duple and quadruple metre, though, as i don't think that article could survive an afd consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 16:55, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, there's plenty of discussion of this time signature at the current target so there's no need to find a fancier target. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:33, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 20:49, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Metre (music)#Compound metre, which goes into greater detail about 6/8 as compound duple meter. I would oppose retargeting to triple metre, as that would be inaccurate: 6/8 indicates "two beats per measure, subdivided into thirds" whereas triple meter is defined as "three beats per measure" (3/4 is simple triple, 9/8 is compound triple); the article on metre also resolves this potential confusion. Failing that, refine the current redirect with an anchor in the relevant section or table entry. ^Complex/_Rational 21:42, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Huang, michael

Huang, michael → Michael Huang (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

See Template:R from sort name's documentation. R from sort name automatically adds redirects to Category:Printworthy redirects. A miscapitalisation is an unprintworthy redirect. So this redirect is categorised as printworthy and unprintworthy. I propose deleting because there's no way this is useful. --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 20:45, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soccer Team

Soccer Team → Soccer Team (band) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Malplaced redirect. Retarget to Football team or move? ArthananWarcraft (talk) 17:15, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would retarget to Football team. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 22:53, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Soccer Team" doesn't appear in the current target so wouldn't at least a DAB (maybe move the band to the base name) make sense per WP:SMALLDETAILS. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:36, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DABify per User:Crouch, Swale. Both are reasonable targets for the term. Blue Sonnet (talk) 10:49, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move Soccer Team (band) to the base title per WP:MISPLACED, WP:DIFFCAPS, and WP:TWODABS. The article already has a hatnote that directs readers to the football team article. - Eureka Lott 17:23, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move Soccer Team (band) to Soccer Team per Eureka Lott. Mdewman6 (talk) 21:51, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:42, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move Soccer Team (band) to Soccer Team per others. Primary topic of the capitalized title. Natg 19 (talk) 00:29, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sexy times with Wangxian

Sexy times with Wangxian → Archive of Our Own#Tags (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in target. QuicoleJR (talk) 18:58, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No opinion on outcome; just noting mention in target was removed in July. Tol (talk | contribs) @ 20:50, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Meg

Princess Meg → Meghan, Duchess of Sussex (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I see no evidence that this term is used to commonly refer to Meghan Markle. It appears to be a horse: [1][2]. DrKay (talk) 08:10, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was used to refer to Princess Margaret in her day. Perhaps redirect to the correct page or make a dab page? —msh210℠ 11:50, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Seems to be nothing more than fancruft. Unless sources can be put forward to show that this term was used to refer to Princess Margaret, it should be deleted. Keivan.f^Talk 22:32, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: "Princess Meg" is used in one of the references in the Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon article. She is also referred to as "Princess Meg" in references in February 1960 and John Turner. "Princess Meg" is listed as a nickname for Megumi Kurihara. Search results are a bit mixed but I did also find this 1982 Washington Post article about Princess Margaret calling her "Princess Meg" in the headline. I'm not totally convinced yet but maybe retarget to Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon with hatnote to Megumi Kurihara and *maybe* a {{confuse}} hatnote to Meghan, Duchess of Sussex. I did find a couple social media posts calling Meghan Sussex "Princess Meg". —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 00:10, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- That ignores the Disney princess, The Spanish Princess character, the Family Guy trope and the horse, all of which feature in searches as frequently as Margaret. I'm not seeing any evidence for primary topic. DrKay (talk) 09:16, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  A dab page with Meghan, Duchess of Sussex under 'See also' would also work. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:16, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DAB as there are several possible targets for this term. Blue Sonnet (talk) 11:05, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. There seems to be a number of Princess Megs. Moondragon21 (talk) 23:27, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ^Complex/_Rational 18:02, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Dakarai Larriett

Draft:Dakarai Larriett → 2026 United States Senate election in Alabama#Democratic primary (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This was never a draft article, so a cross-namespace redirect should not be necessary. Unclear reason for creation Yoblyblob (Talk) :) 16:39, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spider-People

Spider-People → List of Marvel Comics characters: M#Spider-People (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Clicked this from the link in Spider-Man: Beyond the Spider-Verse, expecting something about Spider-Man variants or the Spider-Society. I think it should probably go to Alternate versions of Spider-Man, with a hatnote to the current target. 9ninety (talk) 14:23, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spider-Verse also links to this, with the expectation of Spider-Man variants. 9ninety (talk) 14:27, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Alternate versions of Spider-Man per nom as primary topic expected by the reader. TNstingray (talk) 15:36, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Alternative versions of Spider-Man per nom. There is only one mention of "Spider-People" at the Spider-Island article for the comic the group is initially referred to. That group is more commonly known as "Man-Spiders" or "Spider Creatures", and most are minor characters, so pointing to a broader article for this subject makes sense. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥^{(discuss · contribs)} 15:41, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed your Spider-Island link, if you don't mind. 9ninety (talk) 03:37, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adventure camp

Adventure camp → Camping#Adventure camping (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I don't think this redirect is particularly helpful as it is not discussed at the target page. I could see reason retargeting it to Summer camp or potentially Adventure Camp. Golem08 (talk) 13:51, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Car liver

Car liver → Camping (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

While car camping is a thing, 'liver' suggests something more long term. Perhaps a better target would be Van-dwelling, where it also mentions living in cars. However there is no redirect for Van liver, and 'car liver' seems an unusual term with little to no common usage so I think it may be better to delete. Golem08 (talk) 13:36, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unhelpful, I read "liver" as in the organ, so the homonym could be confusing to the reader. TNstingray (talk) 15:35, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unclear / ambiguous, could be referencing homelessness, a car livery, a car licensed for taxi livery, something to do with CAR T cells or constitutive androstane receptors and the liver (there appears to be at least one such relevant term, as noted in this study on xenobiotic receptors PXR and CAR in liver physiology)... Until the term is more common and has a clearer target I feel this falls under WP:NEOLOGISM. Shazback (talk) 22:24, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague. I have to double take and ensure that it wasn't pertaining to an organ --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:01, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Temp

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Temp → Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unnatural title without significant history, so maybe delete? Duckmather (talk) 22:55, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm rather inclined to keep because it isn't doing any harm and may well be useful for something or contain history that doesn't look valuable but in fact is. Almost certainly it isn't useful, but I don't see any danger in keeping it around. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 01:12, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It looks like the sum total history is "With Wikipedia:Votes for deletion currently broken -- no one seems to have a way to add edits, see Village Pump for discussion -- I have set up this page as a temporary location for the usual work of Wikipedia:Votes for deletion. I've made a remark to this effect on the Village Pump. Once WP:VFD is fixed, all this should be merged." over 20 years ago, with the following edit turning it back to a redirect with the summary "oops". No incoming links. If someone digs up an actual reason to keep this I have no objections, but might as well clean up whatever this old mess is. I somewhat concur with Cremastra's assessment that this is harmless, but since it's up for discussion let's mop it up. Rusalkii (talk) 23:13, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 08:32, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Boeing 797X

Boeing 797X → Middle of the market (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I'm mainly proposing that this redirect be deleted; or if not, retargeted to Boeing New Midsize Airplane as a second option. On one hand, one secondary source actually called the NMA a "797X" in 2017 ([3]) - this is likely what led to the creation of this redirect in the first place, considering the date of its creation is the same as the date of that article. On the other hand, the NMA is now widely referred to as the "797" today, so this is outdated/incorrect. Plus, it's not even known if the next version of the 797 is going to be called the "797X". WP:CRYSTALBALL, basically. 797X is not mentioned in the current target or the suggested target that's for sure. — AP 499D25 (talk) 08:03, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Boeing New Midsize Airplane, in sync with Boeing 797Boeing 797 (though I wouldn't object to deletion). The "797X" name was never confirmed (that source finishes with the words details about the 797X must soon follow – starting with the confirmation of the programme's name) and the NMA project appears to have been abandoned. The redirect might need to be revisited if Boeing ever launches an actual 797, but for the time being it is harmless. Rosbif73 (talk) 08:43, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Boeing New Midsize Airplane. It's a plausible redirect, and people thinking of the NMA will likely think of it as 797/797X. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:25, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:01, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WAST (defunct)

WAST (defunct) → WAST (Ohio) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This disambiguator is itself ambigous; WAST-LP is also defunct. (This is a large part of why "defunct" is no longer used as a disambiguator for broadcast station articles.) This may need to be retargeted to WAST as an {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:53, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 06:37, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per nom or delete. One of the biggest reasons we got rid of this disambiguator. Worse yet, there are non-radio uses of "WAST" that are defunct, not always the case with a call sign title. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 07:10, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

President of the United Kingdom

President of the United Kingdom → Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
United Kingdom President → Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
British President → Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
President of United Kingdom → Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
UK President → Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
PotUK → Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
POTUK → Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
British president → Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
PresidentOfTheUnitedKingdom → Prime Minister of the United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete as unnecessary (I would like to believe no one would search for these) and created by a now-blocked user. We don't have Prime Minister of the United States, etc. for a reason. I₂Overcome ^talk 06:21, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Or apparently we do, but I don't think we need that either. I₂Overcome ^talk 06:25, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed: Delete all. Bazza 7 (talk) 09:12, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep for President of the United Kingdom, United Kingdom President, British President, President of United Kingdom, UK President and British president, mainly on the basis of WP:CHEAP, but also because they are unambiguous and (reasonably) understandable searches for someone unfamiliar with the UK's political structure. Delete for PotUK, POTUK and PresidentOfTheUnitedKingdom as these are just on the other side of this "understandable search" bar as calques of POTUS or for someone with a broken keyboard... Shazback (talk) 22:09, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete all (including Prime Minister of the United StatesPrime Minister of the United States) per WP:PANDORA, strong delete for PotUK, POTUK and PresidentOfTheUnitedKingdom per Shazback. Also, why target the prime minister rather than the head of state? Rosbif73 (talk) 07:33, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish genocide

Kurdish genocide → Kurds (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This currently redirects to Kurds. I was going to change it to Anfal campaign, but wisely (or stupidly) looked at the history to see its been long battled over, and used to be a disambiguation page. I think it ought to point to something more relevant, but there have been a number of events that might be called a Kurdish genocide. I also consider anti-Kurdish sentiment. It might be worth restoring the dab. It also may be worth looking at mentions in scholarly literature, but I have not done so yet. ← Metallurgist (talk) 04:18, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 04:36, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Home by Rite Aid

Home by Rite Aid → Rite Aid (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Nowhere in the page, other than in {{Rite Aid}} at the time I posted this request, do I see a mention of Home by Rite Aid. Z. Patterson (talk) 03:03, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Inaccessible Island nighthawk

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

Marlon Barber

Marlon Barber → Marion Barber (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Marlon Barber III → Marion Barber III (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Implausible typoes Thepharoah17 (talk) 03:11, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Their names are Marion not Marlon. There is no common misspelling of their names this way. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 03:20, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Considering that Marlon is a real name that is more common than Marion, it's very likely that someone will believe that these people are named Marlon and not Marion. Not a likely typo, but a likely misreading of the name. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 17:19, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Casablanca Rock. I don't find these typos, misreadings, or misspellings plausible and the extremely low pageviews for both show a lack of use. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:19, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:53, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agudela

Agudela → Graciela Agudelo (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unclear why Agudel-a redirects to Graciela Agudel-o (emphasis mine), as there are no mentions of "Agudela" in the target article. Redirect should be deleted as it appears to be a typo but WP:R3 is not applicable as the redirect has been in place for over 12 years. Shazback (talk) 03:59, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment one of the two sources in the article (the dictionary of composers) reads "Graciela Agudela", but this is likely to be a typo (perhaps someone who thought Spanish surnames are gendered?)

Possibly redirect to Matosinhos, as there is a beach there with the name "Praia da Agudela" [4] that can be added to the article, but I'm not sure if it would fit anywhere on there. Katzrockso (talk) 05:04, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think this could be an ok option. Information about beaches in Matosinhos could be easily added either in the Geography section or under Attractions. See link below from the municipality’s webpage.

Beaches in Matosinhos FilipeMRGouveia (talk) 14:03, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:22, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate Agudelo and make this page a redirect to that. As User:Katzrockso stated above, this is a very reasonable misnomer for someone who thinks that Spanish surnames are gendered. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:58, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A disambiguation page has been made at Agudelo (disambiguation), pending outcome of this discussion it can be moved / amended / completed Shazback (talk) 19:27, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Vague as a misspelling of the composer's last name or Agudelo grapes or a correct spelling for the Portuguese beach. The misspelling for her name does appear in two en-wiki articles: List of women composers by birth date and List of women composers by name (I will correct these). It's also seemingly misspelled in another person's name in the references at Freddie Records. "Graciela Agudela" has just 318 hits on Google, including, I think, en-wiki mirrors or sites that may otherwise be influenced by the misspelling on a couple of pages here. The misspelling also appears in a citation on her es-wiki page which is a clear error (I plan to fix this, too). The beach, Praia da Agudela, is mentioned at List of beaches in Portugal § Porto metropolitan area. Redirects from last names are not standard but are sometimes justified. The fact that this is a misspelling, which I find to be rather uncommon, makes it less likely to be useful. We do have Graciela Agudela but the correct spelling of her lat name, Agudelo, redirects to Godello. I have updated the hatnote at Godello to include the composer. Search results will reveal the correct page Graciela Agudelo, via the Graciela Agudela redirect, as well as the Portuguese beach and any other uses that might sneak in. The full-name misspelling gets more traffic although both are low. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 20:23, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:53, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20th-

20th- → 20 (number) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I don't think the hyphen at the end serves any purpose. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 16:42, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to a separately created disambiguation page at Twentieth, and also retarget 20th there (both currently redirect to 20 (number), including:
- 20th century; 20th Army; 20th Brigade; 20th Avenue; 20th Street; etc.
All of these things are susceptible to be referred to just as the "20th", and at hyphenation is common in referring to "20th-century" at least. Compare Fifth, Ninth, Tenth, Twelfth. BD2412 T 16:49, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, of no use, especially with the hyphen in place. There's nothing to disambiguate, as anything would be a mere WP:PTM, not referred to by just the ordinal in any standard way. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 18:05, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I utterly disagree with the assertion that there is "nothing to disambiguate". A large number of numerically designated things can be referred to by their ordinal number alone. What century precedes this one? The 20th. What street is after 19th? 20th. These are common usages. BD2412 T 15:16, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - 20th, yes. 20th-, no. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:56, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The dash makes it an unlikely search term for retargeting or elsewhere. Steel1943 (talk) 22:58, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or retarget?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:52, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Links from nowhere, and the dash means if you're typing it out you get "20th" first... - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:56, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cinquante

Cinquante → 50 (number) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete per WP:FORRED, no affinity to French. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 16:50, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:54, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per RHARMFUL and K5: well-used. Not sure how any of the muddled reasons given at WP:FORRED are applicable to this situation. This word is mentioned many times on Wikipedia, primarily in references. Giving a definition is therefore reasonable, and clearly a superior option to showing irrelevant search results. J 947 ‡ ^edits 02:45, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This should really redirect to a page about French numbers. In the mean time, keeping this seems harmless. –jacobolus (t) 06:30, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:FORRED: Numbers have no affinity to any language. Steel1943 (talk) 07:14, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:FORRED. This does not meet any of the appropriate use cases there. I disagree with the appeal to WP:RHARMFUL. The edit history is entirely trivial—redirect creation and retargeting from Fifty (number) to 50 (number) in 2013. Although it is old, there is no evidence of use. There are zero links in articles or even discussion pages and the sees virtually no traffic. The fact that it appears in the titles of works cited is not compelling. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:37, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:52, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:FORRED. The claim that the word appears in references is irrelevant: individual words in the titles of references are not normally linked, whatever language they are written in. Rosbif73 (talk) 09:53, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I !voted for retarget with Quatre-Vingt at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 23#Quatre-Vingt because it is a good demonstration of the Vigesimal numbering system; however, cinquante shows no affinity to any page. As it is also in the decimal counting system, it is not notably different and Wikipedia does not serve as a translation dictionary. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 04:00, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A.s.l.

A.s.l. → American Sign Language (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Is this a common abbreviation for the target? Might be more appropriate to redirect to above sea level or ASL (disambiguation). 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 16:51, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to ASL (disambiguation). Could refer to a variety of topics but I see no reason to delete. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:52, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as an avoided double redirect to ASL. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:53, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - It's not the most common abbreviation but it is used. And as noted above, we don't need a double redirect. I see no harm in keeping it. Sundayclose (talk) 22:08, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as harmless and consistent with the current target being the primary topic for ASL. Some readers might reasonably insert periods even though it's less common. People often search all lowercase and a.s.l. automatically converts the first letter to a capital. I don't think we need this redirect—I would not have created it—but it's here now and is unproblematic. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:35, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Part of my argument was that it is probably more likely to refer to "above sea level". See also m a.s.l.m a.s.l.. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 04:43, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Gotcha. I did see your original suggestion but did not realize there was an explicit argument that lowercase a.s.l. is substantially more likely to have this meaning. The use in a small number of articles tells us something but is not definitive for usage or search behavior. WikiNav for ASL (disambiguation) shows that 50% of traffic comes from American Sign Language and all outgoing traffic goes to American Soccer League and Age/sex/location; none goes to Above sea level or any of the other locations on the dab page. WikiNav for American Sign Language shows that ASL (disambiguation) is not among the top 10 pages readers navigate to. Clicks and traffic aren't necessarily definitive for primary topic/WP:SMALLDETAILS but overall this does not indicate a navigation problem. a.s.l. gets about 7 views per month; I suspect most come from clicks in articles but some may be typed. The current use of m a.s.l. in articles is inappropriate per MOS:NOFORCELINK—meters above sea level should be spelled out on first usage rather than using an abbreviation and forcing readers to click a.s.l. for a definition. The abbreviation can be defined on first usage if it is going to be used again, e.g. meters above sea level (m a.s.l.). My solution is to fix the current usage in articles, maybe update the {{Redirect}} hatnote at American Sign Language to explicitly address a.s.l., and maybe monitor WikiNav and Pageviews for a few months to see if there is any indication that this redirect needs to be revisited. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:22, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Height above mean sea level. That is the meaning currently used by all 4 articles linking to this redirect. I note that it is also the meaning used by 2 of the 3 links coming to AslAsl (the third, which does refer to American Sign Language, includes the markup [[Asl|ASL]], which could be effortlessly changed to [[ASL]]). Mgp28 (talk) 12:45, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notified Talk:Height above mean sea level and Talk:ASL (disambiguation) of this discussion. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Further thoughts on Mgp28's retargeting proposal?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:52, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Height above mean sea level (avoiding the double redirect from above sea levelabove sea level) per Mgp28 and WP:DIFFCAPS, and add "a.s.l." to the {{redirect}} hatnote there. Rosbif73 (talk) 10:04, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also bundle A.s.l * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 20:29, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2000s internet

2000s internet → Y2K aesthetic (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

General term which could refer to many properties of the 2000s internet other than the aesthetic (my first though was Web 1.0/Web 2.0). I don't think this would be a useful dab, though I'd prefer that to this target. Rusalkii (talk) 19:33, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to 2000s in science and technology#Information technology. Left guide (talk) 20:00, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. This redirect in my opinion is much better and showcases events in personal computing and the internet during the 2000’s much more clearly. Y2K is a design language and aesthetic of the early 2000’s but doesn’t explain the whole picture about the 2000’s internet and computing. Dylan240 (talk) 06:28, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My second choice would be to retarget to Timeline of computing 2000–2009. Left guide (talk) 21:06, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly oppose this redirect. Conflating "2000s internet" (a chronological/technological period) with "Y2K Aesthetic" (a specific design style) is historically inaccurate and fails the fundamental purpose of a descriptive redirect.

As an editor heavily involved in documenting aesthetic history on other platforms (like the Aesthetics Wiki), attempts to define an entire decade's internet culture as a single "aesthetic" have proven vague and inevitably inaccurate. Redirecting to just "Y2K Aesthetic" ignores the later, equally dominant half of the decade and will mislead readers searching for the general historical or social context of the 2000s online experience. The redirect should either be deleted as too broad ¡or targeted at a high-level historical page. Miiversal (talk) 21:39, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What about "2000s internet culture" or is that too broad? I was gonna make pages on these topics later on Aradicus77 (talk) 00:04, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague. Everything proposed so far is at least plausible-ish (the current target being by far the worst) but the intended meanings are too numerous to count. What comes to mind for me first is the rise in social media and changes to news and media consumption but I am in no way suggesting there is a primary topic here. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 01:54, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to History of the Internet. There are sections for 1990–2003 and then 2004 onward so it could probably be refined to the earlier one. -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:09, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This target is less precisely specific to the 2000s compared to the one I suggested above. I disagree with retargeting this title to a section that starts at 2004, or encompasses 1990–2003. Left guide (talk) 23:24, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 02:45, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Xpose Uncensored

Xpose Uncensored → Trans7 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No longer mentioned at target page. Delete per WP:REDLINK as encourage article creation. Also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xpose Uncensored from October 2025, each resulting in redirect. ~2025-34997-81 (talk) 01:36, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blockbuster (film)

Blockbuster (film) → Blockbuster (2018 film) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Could also refer to Blockbuster (entertainment). I am RedoStone (talk) 01:06, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Blockbuster#Arts and entertainment as {{R from incomplete disambiguation}}. Mdewman6 (talk) 01:50, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Blockbuster (entertainment). Right now Blockbuster (2018 film) is malplaced, but this should be retargeted regardless because it is far likelier a reader is looking for information about the concept than a specific film by that name. However, if kept, Blockbuster (2018 film) should be moved to Blockbuster (film). Casablanca 🪨^(T) 01:52, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not so sure about that, since "Blockbuster (film)" is ambigious with "film that is a blockbuster". - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 11:59, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Blockbuster (entertainment) as the primary topic. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:53, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget the generic meaning has 7,345 views compared with only 72[[5]] for the specific film. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:45, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 19

Steroid stack

Steroid stack → Ergogenic use of anabolic steroids#Steroid cycle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Steroid stacking → Ergogenic use of anabolic steroids#Steroid cycle (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Targets a section that was removed long ago and the term is no longer mentioned at target and is not mentioned anywhere else on enwiki. There is content in the history of steroid stack but it is unsourced and certainly wouldn't be kept at Afd. Mdewman6 (talk) 23:42, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful Merodon Hoverfly

Beautiful Merodon Hoverfly → Merodon (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Created as a redirect to Merodon clavipes, which has never had an article, then retargeted to genus. The only Google result I get for this a Wikipedia database report; it doesn't appear to be used as a common name at all, and the originally intended target doesn't exist Plantdrew (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

hydrocortisone brand names

Lanacort → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Basan-Corti → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Beta-hc → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
CaldeCORT Spray → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Colocort → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cort-Dome → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cort-Quin → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cortanal → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cortenema → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cortesal → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Corticreme → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cortifan → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cortolotion → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cortonema → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cortoxide → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cortril → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cremesone → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cremicort-H → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cutisol → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Dermacort → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Dermocortal → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Dermolate → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Dioderm → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Domolene-HC → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Dricort → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
EF corlin → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Efcorbin → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Efcortelan → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Efcortelin → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Eldecort → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Eldercort → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Epiderm H → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Esiderm H → Cortisol (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Retarget to Hydrocortisone or delete. Cortisol and hydrocortisone are two different names for the same molecule; "hydrocortisone" is the name used for pharmaceutical products. These are valid {{R from trade name}}'s but most are obscure and get very little traffic. Retargeting should be uncontroversial and I've already spent hours verifying these and manually retargeting dozens of ~~them~~ others. Deletion is a reasonable option as many of these are obscure and receive virtually no traffic. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:01, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all as unneeded or redirect to hydrocortisone at the very least. I₂Overcome ^talk 01:03, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Delete? Or retarget to hydrocortisone?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 21:41, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UdaJeet

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

Extremely unlikely to ever be searched for as a term, even by show fans. Rambling Rambler (talk) 20:16, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Red rubber grease

Red rubber grease → Grease (lubricant) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

this is a particular type of grease that's technically shown in the target (even if not named beyond the color), but that wikipedia doesn't seem to have info about. from some admittedly quick research, it's got a couple of distinctions from other types of grease that would make this a suboptimal target, more or less (definitely less) in the same vein as having bacon as a redirect to pork consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 19:48, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The only type of "red" grease I can see at the target is an image of wheel bearing grease, which is not the same as rubber grease, Nevertherless, red rubber grease exists and it is a lubricant grease; hard to imagine a better target. Lithopsian (talk) 21:03, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added a section at the target article. Lithopsian (talk) 22:00, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good work.

R-to-subtopic is a thing (bacon -> pork if not notable is normal). Widefox; talk 13:27, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Zealand,

New Zealand, → New Zealand (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete, unnecessary comma at the end which makes it WP:UNNATURAL. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 19:44, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, harmless. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:51, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per WP:UNNATURAL pcuser42 (talk) 20:35, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per WP:UNNATURAL and precedence with similar discussions. Steel1943 (talk) 23:05, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. as with Wikipedia., although it has existed since 2010 its always been a redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 23:08, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New.Zealand

New.Zealand → New Zealand (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete as periods instead of spaces are unlikely. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 19:43, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, harmless. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:51, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per WP:UNNATURAL pcuser42 (talk) 20:36, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete.per WP:UNNATURAL and precedence with similar discussions. Steel1943 (talk) 23:06, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete although its existed since 2009 its always been a redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 23:09, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New+Zealand

New+Zealand → New Zealand (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 6 § Titles with "+" instead of spaces – delete

Delete per linked discussion for similar redirects, pluses instead of spaces are unlikely. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 19:42, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, harmless. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:51, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per WP:UNNATURAL pcuser42 (talk) 20:36, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete+per WP:UNNATURAL and precedence with similar discussions. Steel1943 (talk) 23:06, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete although its existed since 2009 its always been a redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 23:10, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sex.

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

Delete. Unnecessary period at the end which makes it WP:UNNATURAL. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 19:30, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, harmless. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:51, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. per WP:UNNATURAL and precedence with similar discussions. Steel1943 (talk) 23:07, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. although its existed since 2009 its always been a redirect and this one is probably more likely than others to refer to a more specific topic with this title. Crouch, Swale (talk) 23:11, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MySpace.

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

Delete. Unnecessary period at the end which makes it WP:UNNATURAL. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 19:29, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, harmless. The website being myspace.com lends extra affinity for the period. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:51, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete per WP:UNNATURAL and precedence with similar discussions. I'm "weak" since I swear I've seen the target's name stylized with a period at the end before (but maybe I have it confused with Facebook?) Steel1943 (talk) 23:09, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. although its existed since 2009 its always been a redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 23:12, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chlorate.

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

Delete. Unnecessary period at the end which makes it WP:UNNATURAL. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 19:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, harmless. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:51, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. per WP:UNNATURAL and precedence with similar discussions. Steel1943 (talk) 23:07, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. although its existed since 2009 its always been a redirect. Crouch, Swale (talk) 23:13, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A J Stewart

A J Stewart → Ada F. Kay (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
AJ Stewart → America's Next Top Model season 7 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These should have the same target. My naive searching suggests that Ada F. Kay is primary, but I haven't attempted to correct for personalised results (and a British writer about whom I've just watched a short video is far more likely to be targetted to me than an American model and reality TV show contestant I didn't know existed). While other people with this name clearly exist, as far as I've found these are the only two who get mentions on the English Wikipedia, so unless I've missed some I think a dab page is probably unnecessary. Thryduulf (talk) 18:28, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, they should both redirect to Ada F. Kay. What is this short video? PatGallacher (talk) 20:24, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The video was a 1972 edition of the BBC's Nationwide "Has King James IV Been Reincarnated?" that I watched on the BBC Archive YouTube Channel. https://youtube.com/watch?v=kf9gXMmWWzE Thryduulf (talk) 02:19, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oddly, the fountain at Linlithgow Palace she encounters in this video was built during the reign of James V of Scotland. PatGallacher (talk) 01:28, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extreme North

Extreme North → Far North (Russia) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I don't think there's a primary topic for the term "Extreme North". In addition to Far North (Russia), there's also Far North Region (Cameroon), and also google search reveals that it's the title of several books as well. I initially tried retargeting, but then User:Altenmann reverted me, so per WP:BRD here's an RfD instead Duckmather (talk) 17:10, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is primary topic: who cares about Far North Region (Cameroon)?

Anyway, this has nothing to do with wrong redirect I reverted: only a few of Far North called Extreme North. Yu may want the disambig page, Extreme North (disambiguation). --Altenmann >talk 19:03, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. A quick look, does suggest that the current target is the the primary topic (although I absolutely do not endorse "who cares about Cameroon"). I've added a couple of things to the Extreme North (disambiguation) page, which should be linked in a hatnote from the Russian region if this redirect is kept. Thryduulf (talk) 19:11, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- re: "who cares": <sigh> sadly, the West has little attention to genocide in Cameroon (by the way, in the discussed area) and in Africa in general. I dont see students' protests similar to these about Gaza or Ukraine. --Altenmann >talk 19:19, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Far North where Cameroon may get the extra attention it deserves. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:05, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- You cannot retarget to the term which is vastly different. YOu failed to notice Extreme North (disambiguation), where "Cameroon may get the extra attention it deserves" and has no redundant content. --Altenmann >talk 21:05, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  - "Far North" and "Extreme North" are simply translation differences, they aren't "vastly different". I didn't fail to notice Extreme North (disambiguation), you created it after this discussion began (and can be redirected to Far North). -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:34, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    - There is some overlap between the Far North and Extreme North disambiguations, but whether merging the disambiguation pages (note not simply redirecting) would be better than two separate ones is a matter of opinion. Thryduulf (talk) 21:11, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      - In case I didn't make it obvious: I am opining on the matter. -- Tavix ^(talk) 22:41, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gaza massacre (2012)

Gaza massacre (2012) → 2012 Gaza War (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The First Gaza War of 2008 has been called the Gaza massacre. However, this is no reason to refer to subsequent wars or attacks in Gaza as massacres with year-parenthesized titles. The 2012 target article doesn't call the war as a massacre. The images from a news site of a family of four, that were circulated, were later found to be from Syria. Political leaders and human rights advocates called the Al-Dalu family killing event a massacre, however that article doesn't call it so. First choice, Delete because of the overly generic title. Second choice, Retarget to the Al-Dalu family killing as a specific event, instead of representing the entire war, with attacks from both sides, as a massacre. Jay 💬 14:47, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This is not called a massacre in RS, and thus keeping this redirect is a violation of NPOV. Nehushtani (talk) 06:56, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Common pig

Draft:Common pig → Pig (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

doesn't seem to have ever actually been a draft, even at common pig, so it wouldn't meet rdraft consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:01, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this was the creator's only edit Thepharoah17 (talk) 13:25, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, seems a simple Delete, hard to imagine what else could be done with it and it's not a specially plausible redirect target either. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:55, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Outlawry in Lancashire Act 1491

Outlawry in Lancashire Act 1491 → Outlaw (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

an aggressively british and honestly kind of redundant act mentioned and linked in the list of acts of the parliament of england from 1491... in passing. seemingly created just so one specific link wouldn't be red (as all others that i checked were never created), so i don't see the point in targeting an article that doesn't mention this oddly specific act, lancashire, or 1491. it seems the best bet would be deleting to match the others, as the only two uses it currently has would just be circular, which is a really odd thing to be able to say about two separate articles consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:48, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1Sa.

1Sa. → Books of Samuel (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Seems implausible, unnatural as search term, and if anything, a web search of it turns up other targets. Currently only other redirects and some obscure hatnotes direct here. Iskandar323 (talk) 08:49, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: My guess here is that the redirect is intended to be a {{R avoided double redirect}} for 1 Samuel. We also have redirects "2Sa.", "2 Samuel" and "2nd Samuel", but no "1st Samuel". (I currently have no opinion on the nominated redirect.) Steel1943 (talk) 16:52, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amargi

Amargi → Ama-gi (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete per WP:RETURNTORED. Amargi is a notable Turkish social collective and former feminist magazine, plus also a new media website (theamargi.com) and album by music group "The Sympathy of All Things". (the latter two likely aren't notable, yet). This redirects to an alternative transliteration of a Sumerian word, that while the probable origin of these other names, is not the most notable version of it. Katzrockso (talk) 07:52, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. "Amargi" is a common orthography for the Sumerican concept of Ama-gi. Its edit history's edit summary showed this usage in the New York Times. The redirect's existence does not preclude articles about other notable concepts by the same name. czar 23:47, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gaza's hunger games

Gaza's hunger games → Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2025 November 18 and consensus that the speedy was contested. I am neutral and this is a procedural nomination as DRV closer. Star Mississippi 03:02, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should be Speedy deleted, fairly offensive as is. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 03:33, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Bluethricecreamman: can you explain what is offensive about this? VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 07:19, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A comparison to a fiction book when there is suggestion this is fact, suggestion that the conflict and allegations are just games, etc.

If the term had caught on in media perhaps the value would outweigh the weirdness. I have never heard of this set of words though outside of this redirect. User:Bluethricecreamman (Talk·Contribs) 13:44, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as offensive without encyclopedic value. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:01, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as offensive. BlookyNapsta (talk) 07:02, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep—WP:Wikipedia is not censored and it’s a valid redirect with RS noting that it has been referred to as such. إيان (talk) 07:11, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and redirect to 2025 Gaza Strip aid distribution killings. The use of the term "hunger games" in relation to Gaza has appeared in many reliable sources:[6][7][8][9] and is also used by Jean-Pierre Filiu [10] (who is a historian that specializes in the History of the Gaza Strip). WP:RNEUTRAL says "In most cases, non-neutral but verifiable redirects should point to neutrally titled articles about the subject of the term." The redirect here is non-neutral, but definitely verifiable and should point to a neutrally titled article like 2025 Gaza Strip aid distribution killings.VR _{(Please ping on reply)} 07:19, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. إيان (talk) 07:21, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2025 Gaza Strip aid distribution killings per VR's WP:RNEUTRAL argument. It's the farthest thing from being neutral and it is certainly offensive, but given it has been referenced in reliable sources it can stay. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 08:18, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for the following reasons:

There are four citations in the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation article that have "hunger games" in the title. There are also a fifth citation present in the 2025 Gaza Strip aid distribution killings. The first four appear in the lead for Gaza Humanitarian Foundation & all five appear in the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation § Killings and other access incidents section due to the inclusion of the other article by using {{Excerpt|Rafah aid distribution killings|hat=no}}.
1. Reiff, Ben (2025-06-20). "'The Hunger Games': Israel's aid death traps for starving Gazans". +972 Magazine. Archived from the original on 2025-06-20. Retrieved 2025-09-17.
2. "A Real-life "Hunger Games" is Unfolding in Gaza Before the World's Eyes". UNICEF Gulf Area. 2025-08-28. Archived from the original on 2025-09-16. Retrieved 2025-09-17.
3. "'The Hunger Games' in Gaza". Le Monde. 2025-07-08. Archived from the original on 2025-08-07. Retrieved 2025-09-17.
4. Al-Wawi, Taqwa Ahmed (2025-06-29). "In Gaza, the Israelis are staging Hunger Games". Al Jazeera. Archived from the original on 2025-06-29. Retrieved 2025-09-17.</ref>
5. "Israel's aid distribution program being run like the Hunger Games, says whistleblower". www.aa.com.tr. 1 August 2025. Retrieved 17 September 2025.
- None of these sources use the phrase "Gaza Hunger Games". The couple of places that I have been able to find it online are editorials.
- Three of the sources, & the article itself, put hunger games in quotes. To quote the scare quotes article, Writers use scare quotes for a variety of reasons. They can imply doubt or ambiguity in words or ideas within the marks, or even outright contempt. They can indicate that a writer is purposely misusing a word or phrase or that the writer is unpersuaded by the text in quotes, and they can help the writer deny responsibility for the quote. (Omitting references from that article)
Since there is no reliable source using the phrase "Gaza Hunger Games", we can conlude that it is a neologism. The Wikipedia policy on neologism states Articles on neologisms that have little or no usage in reliable sources are commonly deleted, as these articles are often created in an attempt to use Wikipedia to increase usage of the term.
The editing guideline governing Reasons for deleting states 8. If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name that is not mentioned in the target, it is unlikely to be useful. "Gaza Hunger Games" is certainly novel & is not listed in the article.
The Neutrality of redirects editing guideline states 3. The subject matter of articles may be represented by some sources outside Wikipedia in non-neutral terms. Such terms are generally avoided in Wikipedia article titles, per the words to avoid guidelines and the general neutral point of view policy. I would argue that "Gaza Hunger Games" is not neutal as the phrase is not found in any reliable source.
I had tagged {{Db-g10}} before the redirect was speedily deleted & then subsequently revived because of the contest of the deletion. Since Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is a humanitarian organization that has been accused, but not proven, of complicity in the 2025 Gaza Strip aid distribution killings, the Gaza Hunger Games redirect arguably fails WP:G10 as an attack on an organziation. It certainly fails Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking#Intuitiveness as the Israel Army is directly responsible for the killings, not the GMF.

Peaceray (talk) 22:53, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Peaceray. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:39, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Disparaging to GHF; exact terminology not used in citations/article. — ERcheck (talk) 05:25, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

T'en va pas comme ça"

T'en va pas comme ça" → Don't Make Me Over (song)#Other versions (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target and implausible due to the random quotation mark at the end. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 01:15, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete due to unlikely misspelling --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:54, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to the unnatural quotation mark Duckmather (talk) 04:03, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete" per nom. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 14:52, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hindu marriage

Hindu marriage → Marriage in Hinduism (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hindu Marriage → Hindu wedding (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These redirects should probably have the same target, although I'm not sure which one would be more appropriate. मल्ल (talk) 21:47, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@मल्ल: perhaps bundle Hindu view of marriage or do you see that as distinct? That one currently targets Hindu wedding. ~~I would target all to Marriage in Hinduism.~~ While "wedding" and "marriage" can be ambiguous I would send the "marriage" redirects to the "marriage" article unless there is some other qualification. Both articles have hatnotes to the other and weddings are discussed extensively at Marriage in Hinduism. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 ( talk) 23:49, 30 October 2025 (UTC) Edited. Will update !vote in thread below. 20:29, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hindu view of marriage seems like it should much more clearly redirect to Marriage in Hinduism, while there is at least some contention at least for the other two. Thanks to your looking into it I agree that all three should target Marriage in Hinduism. I don't think deleting Hindu Marriage is that necessary per WP:CHEAP but I don't feel too strongly about it. मल्ल (talk) 17:07, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have retargeted Hindu view of marriage to Marriage in Hinduism. This one seems obvious. If anyone disagrees they can start a separate discussion. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:24, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are no pages that link to Hindu Marriage (#2). I propose we delete Hindu Marriage because there is no instance where that term would be a proper noun in a sentence.
Hindu marriage should point to Hindu wedding considering it is used on the pages of celebrities to indicate their style of ceremony. On Feminist theology, the link is "Hindu marriage ceremonies" (emphasis mine), indicating it is about Hindu weddings, just describing the term in a different way. Drew Stanley (talk) 01:31, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do see some discrepancy in how these links are used in articles but in many examples "marriage" is the more appropriate meaning and in some cases either one could work. Several articles used piped links [[Hindu marriage|Hindu wedding]]. I find the editors' actions frankly a little strange here but I realize people use wikilinks without checking where they point. Editor behavior does give us a clue towards usage but shouldn't necessarily dictate redirect behavior. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 02:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you give an example in which "marriage" is more appropriate? There are few enough articles that I am willing to just go in and make the fixes rather than use the redirects, when unnecessary.
Agree to delete Hindu Marriage, right? Drew Stanley (talk) 15:56, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Of the 11 uses of Hindu marriage in articles, Marriage in Hinduism is the best fit in 5:
Govender v Ragavayah:
The court noted that Hindu marriages were not recognised in South African law, which violated section 9 of the Constitution. Accordingly, the court ordered that the definition of “spouse” in section 1 of the Intestate Succession Act include the surviving spouse of a monogamous Hindu marriage.
This clearly describes the relationship between the legal and religious status of "marriage".

R. K. Narayan:
The concept of horoscope-matching in Hindu marriages and the emotional toll it levies on the bride and groom is covered in the second book.
This second one is interesting. "Bride and groom" suggests a meaning closer to "wedding" but the choice of "marriage" suggests that the "emotional toll" extends beyond the wedding day, impacting the rest of the marriage. That sentence should be reworded to "Hindu wedding" if the intended meaning is more restricted.

Sapinda describes a type of cousin marriage in Hinduism. Sapinda § Conditions for a Hindu marriage includes the following:
Section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act of 1955 laid down conditions for a Hindu marriage. A marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus, if the following conditions are fulfilled, namely […] Out of the five above conditions, this article refers to the condition stated under section 5(v), which states that if the Hindu bride and the Hindu groom are "sapindas" of each other, the marriage between the two cannot be solemnized by law and will be legally void.

Svayamvara:
Svayaṃvara (Sanskrit: स्वयंवर lit. 'self-choice') is a matrimonial tradition in ancient Indian society where a bride, usually from Kṣatriya (warrior) caste, selects her husband from a group of assembled suitors either by her own choice or a public contest between her suitors. […] Despite being closely associated with the epics, Svayaṃvara is not listed as a form of marriage in the Dharmaśāstra, a collection of Sanskrit texts on law and conduct.
Here, "form of marriage" is a piped link using the Hindu marriage redirect. This corresponds to the content of Marriage in Hinduism, especially Marriage in Hinduism § Types of marriages.

Yogic marriage is a poorly sourced stub. The usage here is potentially ambiguous. Although "consummation" typically occurs on the wedding night, whether or not the marriage has been consummated is a binary status that applies for the duration of the marriage. Overall, I read this as referring to a type of marriage where the features of the "wedding ceremony"/"act of marriage" (the chanting) is a defining feature.

The usage Hindu marriage ceremonies or Hindu marriage ceremony appears in two articles: Feminist theology and T. Ramaswamy Choudary. A better option here would be [[Hindu wedding|Hindu marriage ceremony]] or creating a Hindu marriage ceremony redirect to Hindu wedding. (Hindu marriage Ceremony does exist…) Or maybe the editors were deliberate about wanting to link to the "marriage" article and not the "(wedding) ceremony" article.

Three articles use the piped link [[Hindu marriage|Hindu wedding]] so that the Hindu marriage redirect shows up as "Hindu wedding" in the text: Parineeti Chopra, Parineeti Chopra, Raghav Chadha. This is an inappropriate use of redirects and piped links and these should be replaced with the direct link to Hindu wedding.

The only remaining article is Wedding of Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck and Jetsun Pema. Here, I would just replace Hindu marriage with Hindu wedding or Hindu marriage ceremony. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 17:42, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, reasonable to delete Hindu Marriage. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 20:31, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Hindu marriage redirecting to Hindu Wedding per Myceteae. As per Myceteae's comprehensive, and quite impressive, research, 'Hindu wedding' refers to the ceremony, or ceremonies. 'Hindu marriage', on the other hand, refers to the relationship. Keep Hindu Marriage redirecting to Marriage in Hinduism. If I've understood the arguments correctly, 'Hindu Marriage' refers to the relationship of marriage in the context of Hinduism. Katiedevi (talk) 15:01, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Katiedevi just to clarify, Hindu marriage is currently a redirect to Marriage in Hinduism and Hindu Marriage is a redirect to Hindu wedding. It sounds like you agree with my assessment, which would suggest we 'keep' Hindu marriage and 'retarget' Hindu Marriage to Marriage in Hinduism so that both redirects point to Marriage in Hinduism. What are your thoughts on deleting Hindu Marriage since 'Marriage' is not normally capitalized in phrases like this? —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 17:42, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Hindu marriage per discussion above. Do not keep Hindu Marriage—delete or retarget to Marriage in Hinduism. Yes, there is some ambiguity but we should align "marriage" with "marriage" here. Both articles have hatnotes to account for anticipated ambiguity. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 00:10, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the first, retarget the second so they're aligned, though deleting the latter wouldn't matter that much. --BDD (talk) 04:07, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Either delete both or delete neither per WP:SMALLDETAILS since it is just a capitalization difference. (Otherwise, I don't have an opinion where these target.) Steel1943 (talk) 22:42, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 19:13, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep "Hindu marriage" - agree with Myceteae analysis. and Delete "Hindu Marriage" - having different redirects is confusing to a reader and the capital M makes this look like a name - also don't see the capital M as plausible search term Asteramellus (talk) 13:12, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:46, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio Sea Grant

Ohio Sea Grant → Ohio State University (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned in the target article, making it unclear what this redirect refers to or what content we have about this subject. Steel1943 (talk) 22:02, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't even think it's enough for me to !vote weak keep, but it is the only school in Ohio that is a sea grant university according to National Sea Grant College Program. Alternatively, that might be a better target. Casablanca 🪨^(T) 23:33, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Casablanca's retarget suggestion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 19:18, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not mentioned at the current target and National Sea Grant College Program contains zero information about the program other than confirming Ohio State is a recipient. Adding meaningful content on the Ohio Sea Grant to either article would be undue—it's not clear that it is especially notable relative to other research programs at Ohio State nor relative to other Sea Grant recipients. Most of the university's grants, institutes, and special research programs are unmentioned, appropriately. Most of the coverage I can find is either not independent (from Ohio State or NOAA) or only includes passing mention the Ohio Sea Grant when describing a specific faculty member or research finding without giving a comprehensive overview of the program. The redirect can always be re-created if suitable content is added somewhere. The redirect has only 100 views since its creation in Feb 2018 and no incoming links so it can safely be deleted.—Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 20:57, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:45, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Myceteae. Zzz plant (talk) 12:31, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When it's done

When it's done → Development of Duke Nukem Forever (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not a plausible redirect, too generic and not particularly associated with the topic to need it. Go D. Usopp (talk) 00:29, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom (maybe even speedily). Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:35, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i just put this because this phrase is used in other games to spoof the period Trollface 2006ALT (talk) 02:19, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete as vague, with mild opposition to speedying. while i have been seeing the phrase get used a lot in the context of game development... yeah, that's exactly it. devs of games other than dick dickem's babe-abandoning hour have been using it. this essentially means "delete per creator", which is kind of funny consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:58, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as vague. This is a common phrase with no specific referent. Not suitable for a dab page, either. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:05, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as vague --Lenticel ^(talk) 01:24, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not necessarily associated with Duke Nuken, as shown in this source. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:57, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
maybe appear on 2006 topic but i don,t know :( Trollface 2006ALT (talk) 22:06, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Video game publisher#Business risks where this specific phrase is discussed. It's not brilliant but it's better than search results IMO. J 947 ‡ ^edits 03:28, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note that this entire section, along with discussion of the phrase, was removed in Special:Diff/1321942923. I am not convinced this was a good edit but haven't yet decided to restore it. Rusalkii (talk) 06:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:44, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as not sufficiently specific / associated with any one given topic. The quote in the context of Duke Nukem's development is memorable but I don't think so much that it's either the primary topic for this phrase nor clear that the user would almost certainly be searching for this information. Shazback (talk) 21:16, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Judas hatch

Judas hatch → Peephole (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

There is no explanation on the target page of what a "Judas hatch" is or any mention of this elsewhere on Wikipedia either. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:00, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I must have added the redirect when I found it on the web. Examples of use:

https://www.theunmutual.co.uk/inverlair.htm

>Richard reveals who might have been held in Room 13 with its sliding Judas hatch, and the infamous SOE trainer who left the bullet holes in the staircase.

https://digitalcommons.colby.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3440&context=cq

> In a poem for Paul, "Stilts," the carpenter who comes from another town to manufacture "playthings for the soul" has a kinship with

> St. Joseph. In the last poem in this book he watches himself, his own worst enemy, through a Judas-hatch.

https://parliament.nt.gov.au/business/tabled-papers/13th-assembly/13th-assembly-2016-tabled-papers/october-2016/79.-Office-of-the-Childrens-Commissioner-Northern-Territory-Own-Initiative-Investigation-Report.pdf

page 24

>22 Judas hatch - a hatch within the cell door which folds down to allow things to be passed through the hatch without the need to open the cell door. 84user (talk) 01:16, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like it would be welcome on Wiktionary, regardless of whether the redirect is kept. lp0 on fire () 14:47, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Examples of usage given above describe something very different than a peephole. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:35, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 00:44, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to wikt:Judas-hole? Katzrockso (talk) 08:09, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I cell

I cell → Inclusion-cell (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Should this target I-cell or Enteroendocrine cell#I cell? TNstingray (talk) 00:39, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Enteroendocrine cell#I cell and update hatnotes/rcats. Consistency with other lettered cell types at Enteroendocrine cell. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:53, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget per Mdewman6. "I cells" are enteroendocrine cells found in the small intense, "I-cells" are abnormal cells containing inclusions. Why they had to make it so similar, who knows. Katzrockso (talk) 08:06, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget as above comments --Iztwoz (talk) 08:42, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The current target is Inclusion-cell, not I-cellI-cell, which is a redirect to Inclusion-cell. I have updated the nomination template. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:28, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Enteroendocrine cell#I cell per Mdewman6, WP:DIFFPUNCT. Add hatnote. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:29, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Department of Mathematical and Computational Sciences

Department of Mathematical and Computational Sciences → Computer science at the University of Toronto#Department of Mathematical and Computational Sciences (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Ambiguous. Google search reveals several universities - most notably Stanford - have a department with this same name. Zzz plant (talk) 00:09, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination, there are many universities with this department. Katzrockso (talk) 08:03, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. We do have List of academic computer science departments but that doesn't list the exact names so search results are likely to be more useful. Thryduulf (talk) 19:01, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as overly ambiguous and unclear if there is a valid redirect target. Search results are preferable to an overly specific (and therefore incomplete/wrong) redirect. Shazback (talk) 21:11, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 18

Juxta Crucem

Juxta Crucem → Epsilon Crucis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Fake star name that someone on Wikipedia made up. Appears as a line in the hymn Stabat Mater, possible retarget? Or just delete. SevenSpheres (talk) 21:25, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, the name is fake and the mention in Stabat Mater is very trivial. 21 Andromedae (talk) 21:58, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per 21. It looks like the article was actually created at this title and sat there for a few years as a stub before being moved away, but I can't find a shred of evidence for the claim made about its name, so I think that outweighs any concerns about being an R from move. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 22:37, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:54, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete WP:A11 and WP:G3 specifically {{Db-hoax}}. Pinging everyone in discussion @21.Andromedae @Deacon Vorbis @Lenticel and nom @SevenSpheres to see if they agree and want to change their vote.

Servite et contribuere (talk) 12:54, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with such a possibility. 21 Andromedae (talk) 16:51, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Imal

Imal → Delta Crucis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Typo of the star name "Imai", created by mistake. I see some other uses like people with the given name, but nothing with its own article (except Imal Liyanage, a disambiguation page listing two redirects). Could be disambiguated or just deleted. SevenSpheres (talk) 21:25, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RETURNTORED, "iMAL" is a likely notable art museum in Brussels [11]. Katzrockso (talk) 08:19, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Umbrium

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

Not mentioned at target. I rather expected to end up somewhere like Umbria. Cremastra (talk · contribs) 18:07, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, NIH lists "Umbrium" as one of many trade names for diazepam. Omphalographer (talk) 18:54, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. This is a standard {{R from trade name}}. Some drug articles have dozens of brand name redirects though, appropriately, only one or two prominent brand names will be mentioned in the article. I question the wisdom of creating all these redirects but it is an established practice. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 00:59, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 21:01, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TikTok Rizz Party

TikTok Rizz Party → Brain rot (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

per the previous rfd, though i'm not sure this would count as g4, since it's been a while consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 19:26, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom/rfd. Happy Editing -- IAm Chaos 21:43, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:55, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Billy Ray Cyrus Daughter

Billy Ray Cyrus Daughter → Miley Cyrus (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Miley is not the only daughter of Billy Ray. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 18:35, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Billy Ray Cyrus#Relationships and family where all his daughters are listed. -- Tavix ^(talk) 18:41, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, another WP:PANDORA case. "Person X family member Y" type redirects should be explicitly discouraged. On top of that, this one is an ungrammatical, oddly-capitalized juxtaposition of search terms rather than a plausible topic title -- another general type of redirect we should be discouraging. MW has a search feature for a reason. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 23:13, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Odd grammatically, Miley is not his only daughter, and not a common search term with a daily average of <1 pageview from 17 Nov 2024 to 17 Nov 2025. (I had thought Cyrus Family Tree could work, but that is about Cyrus the Great) Casablanca 🪨^(T) 23:54, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above. Might be problematic to start a precedent with. --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:59, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, erroneous grammar. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 05:07, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as this type of redirect is not appropriate / useful Shazback (talk) 21:03, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Make your own soap

Make your own soap → Soap (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

per the afd, it was an unsourced guide with seemingly user-generated "references". the target currently has no info on homemade or handmade soap beyond mentioning that it exists, and neither does soaper consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 14:37, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and AfD. Not a single participant in the 2007 AfD recommended a redirect. It was bafflingly redirected to Soapmaking which subsequently became a redirect to Soap. The article apparently contained content copied from Soapmaking but there's no indication that any content was merged to that article or anywhere else. This should be deleted now as it should have been almost 20 years ago at AfD. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:11, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i just realized this could've been a g6, assuming closures against consensus count. oops consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 18:26, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is a plausible interpretation of {{Db-xfd}} G6. Consensus was straightforwardly in favor of deletion and the closer gave no rationale for their decision to redirect instead. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:50, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
it's worth a try, i guess consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 23:20, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Meh, no harm in leaving it be a few more days instead of doing an experimental DRV-speedy. Don't necessarily take this as a precedent, but it does deserve a much broader discussion at WT:CSD if we want to go with that as a criterion. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 23:31, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i mean, this definitely wouldn't be the only case of a close against consensus that i could name as precedent, and it doesn't seem to be shaping up to be the only case of a subsequent discussion closing as delete at least partially per the first discussion's consensus. maybe it'll be the only case in which the first discussion was also old enough to consent at the time of tagging? the fact that this is a maybe should probably concern me, but i'm too lazy for that consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 23:36, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd definitely have declined such a CSD if I were the patrolling admin. It's not my responsibility as CSD-reviewer to second-guess another admin's closures - if you want to second-guess a closure there are separate processes for that. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 17:46, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PANDORA. Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:50, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
really, this pandora thing isn't helping much. it's as helpful a deletion rationale as cheap is a keep rationale consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 20:53, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Refine to Soap#Soapmaking which has the relevant content. WP:PANDORA makes absolutely no sense here. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:25, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: The mere existence of the discussion here is a strong indicator that G6 would be inappropriate. That said, delete or refine?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ^Complex/_Rational 18:18, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. PANDORA does actually apply here, despite the protestations, but so does common sense, that this is simply not a helpful search term. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 20:18, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unhelpful. I have doubts on how much this counts as a PANDORA but in any case this is a wrongful closure from eighteen years ago, a discussion that should have been closed as delete instead of redirect. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 08:00, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Star Wars bundle

Frozarns → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Frozarns (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Frozian → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Frozian (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gorith → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Gorith (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gwurran → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Gwurran (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Hallotan → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Hallotan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Ottarious → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Gorith (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Telbun → List of Star Wars species (F–J) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned on Wikipedia. Delete TNstingray (talk) 15:55, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Not mentioned at target. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:24, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Better served in Wookiepedia --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:55, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gossam

Gossam → List of Star Wars species (F–J)#Gossam (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Never mentioned in a Star Wars context on Wikipedia, but appears to be a name listed in a few different pages... not sure what the primary topic is here TNstingray (talk) 15:53, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Appears to be a name of various people mentioned on Wikipedia, but none of them have articles. I could see an argument to retarget to Emmersdorf an der Donau since Goßam is a subdivision of it and Gossam would be Anglicization of that, but that isn't mentioned in the article, so I'll still say to delete. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:27, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Emmersdorf an der Donau if the relevant information from its German Wikipedia counterpart is imported (since Gossam/Goßam is actually refered by name in that form), or to Melk District as the locale's name (as Goßam) is mentioned. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 08:10, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drall (Star Wars)

Drall (Star Wars) → List of Star Wars species (A–E)#Drall (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

not mentioned anywhere on Wikipedia, super obscure species that can probably be deleted as cruft TNstingray (talk) 15:14, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There's a mention at List of Star Wars planets and moons, so it can be retargeted there along with Drall (Star Wars species). -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:33, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of Star Wars planets and moons per Tavix. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:29, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dandilion Warrior

Dandilion Warrior → List of Star Wars species (A–E) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned on Wikipedia, appears to be an obscure plantoid race known by the Ewoks, called "Fftssfft", which itself is not mentioned on Wikipedia either. Delete as cruft. TNstingray (talk) 15:08, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, obscure and not mentioned at target. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:30, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete better served in Wookiepedia --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:56, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Baby wash

Baby wash → Detergent (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

weird case, oh boy. i thought this would've been a clear-cut retarget to shampoo#baby, where it's mentioned, but as it turns out, results were torn between pretty much everything but detergent. shampoo, liquid soap, machines you toss babies in to make them get clean (more like a car wash than washing machine, from the looks of it), the act of washing babies, several assorted products named "baby wash" whose only common trait is being extremely proud of how much they're not soap, etc. so uh... what do? consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:53, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as vague. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:12, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to baby shampoo as the primary topic. Wikipedia doesn't cover machines you toss babies in to get them clean so it's irrelevant from a disambiguation standpoint and the rest don't have baby-specific articles. The exception is Bathing#Bathing babies but I don't think that'd be the topic sought when searching "baby wash" (maybe "baby washing" or "washing baby"). -- Tavix ^(talk) 01:32, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:52, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to baby shampoo since that seems to be the primary topic. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:31, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to baby shampoo as plausible synonym --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:00, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

B Company, 2 MERICAN

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Deleted

Afronaut

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

Not mentioned at the target, aside from an external link to an article about music, which is only tangentially related to the actual subject. A better target seems to be Edward Makuka Nkoloso, which actually discusses the strange thing that is the 1960s Zambian space program. Renerpho (talk) 11:57, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Afronauts as a misnomer. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:32, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Afronauts and tag as R to plural (or more appropriate tags). --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:05, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Afronauts with a hatnote to Nkoloso for the actual space program attempt. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 05:08, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from nominator I have no issue with retargeting to Afronauts, as long as we actually put in the hatnote as Frank suggests. Renerpho (talk) 19:50, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget →to Afronauts with hatnote as suggested by Frank Shazback (talk) 21:08, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahillya Harjani, Yeoh Kay Ee

Ahillya Harjani → 2015 BWF World Junior Championships – Mixed doubles (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Yeoh Kay Ee → 2015 BWF season (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Search results will give more information on the subject than these redirect targets. zglph^•talk• 11:11, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep Deletion discussions on these two articles were recently closed with consensus to redirect. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:34, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Afd is a separate branch so i don't see how is it going to impact the outcome here. zglph^•talk• 19:02, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note from AfD closer: This was oddly raised at ANI, where the admin closer there suggested this as a possible way forward. As the closer of those AfDs, I have no issue with the value of the redirects being brought here for broader community discussion, since the delete vs. redirect debate isn't really what AfD is for. I'd be fine with whatever the result is here. Left guide (talk) 16:59, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
all you argue about is the "venue" for discussion when it is least of the problems. I just hope you listen to Salvio and don't do closes like that, leave it to the admins. zglph^•talk• 19:01, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am an admin @Zglph and I'd have closed this the exact same way @Left guide did. Please focus on the (lack of) merits to the redirect, not your opinion of whether the close was correct or not. Star Mississippi 03:22, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
better that way if an admin closes the Afd. Of course there are WP:SNOW cases as well, but it was clearly not the case here. So one can't say it was purely my opinion. zglph^•talk• 07:20, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both, it makes little sense to redirect people with a career (linked from multiple pages) randomly to one of these pages. E.g. Yeoh Kay Ee is redirected to the 2015 season where they are mentioned once in a table, but they are also mentioned the same way in 5 other articles. Now, when you click on their name in one of these articles, you seemingly at random get transported to another article where they are mentioned somewhere. This makes no real sense. Fram (talk) 12:43, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DWPM-FM

DWPM-FM → DWPM (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

False callsign. No such thing as "DWPM-FM" from NTC on the FM listing https://ntc.gov.ph/list-of-authorized-broadcast-stations/. ~2025-34478-28 (talk) 09:06, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Few search results, no indication that this is a common alternate name. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:35, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:56, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A DWPM-FM apparently existed, but it is not the subject of this article nor would it be likely to pass the GNG. Delete. Sammi Brie (she/her · t · c) 05:08, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 17

"Merrily We Roll Along" (DuPont Show of the Week)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Tagged G7

Ninja death star

Ninja death star → Shuriken (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

results mostly gave me assorted edgelords and ai slop based on that other death star, so it doesn't seem to be a likely synonym consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 20:44, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Age alone isn't a reason to keep a redirect, but this one goes back more than 20 years! The even older Ninja starNinja star seems a more common colloquial name. Are there other likely uses for this term, though? It seems (ironically) harmless. --BDD (talk) 00:47, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I don't feel like Googling "ninja death star" in public, and I've never heard shurikens referred to by this name, but BDD's comment makes me think that it might be a legitimate term. No mention on Wiktionary, but I don't feel like a lack of specificity is a good argument for deletion here. No opinion thus far, since I do not know if this is a legitimate term. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:39, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

the results i got imply that it definitely is a very slightly plausible search term... but only for the two oddly specific groups that are ai "clipart" companies (it's not clipart if it's an entire image, you boltbags!!) and people likely to pick usernames like XxX_-Death_Killer_666_Demon_Blade_Edge-_XxX on club penguin. and even then, most of the results actually referring to shuriken (that is, exclusively from the latter group) also had the text string "ninja star" nearby. that is to say, it's not even actually a plausible search term among the small and dwindling demographic to which it is actually a plausible search term consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 17:44, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Senbon

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

the term "senbon" (千本, a thousand long slender pointy things that you throw), not to be confused with the surname "semmoto" (千本), a territory formerly known as chimoto (千本), the other term "senbon" (千本, a thousand long slender pointy things that you do acupuncture with), the other other term "senbon" (千本, a thousand needles), or the other other other term "senbon" (千本, a thousand), but definitely to be confused with the term "senhon" (千本, senbon minus the rendaku), refers to throwing needles (but japanese), which, from my research, are not shuriken, even in the oddly specific instances where they categorically are. mentions of it on wikipedia and wiktionary that refer to its use as "throwing needle (but japanese)" are scarce, by which i mean there's exactly one on wiktionary and one in an image caption in the current target, without a source. this obviously means this should be deleted

...is what i would say, if it didn't have the aforementioned couple other meanings, of which some have articles. i'll be drafting a dab soon and technically using this rfd to workshop it, but i have to wonder whether the initial meaning this redirect refers to will even end up there by the end, because i couldn't find a good enough target for it

also, most of the results were related to naruto, which is annoying consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 19:11, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete seems to be alluding to its use in Naruto. Even it does, it doesn't translate into shurikens in-universe --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:04, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

got a little busy after this nom, accidentally slept an entire afternoon away, somehow didn't ruin my sleep schedule, worked on drafting the dab... couldn't do it. "senbon" and "千本" by themselves don't seem to be plausible search terms, and even wp-ja's dab is lackluster. i wanted to oppose deletion, but considering that i also oppose keeping, retargeting to wiktionary, and couldn't dabify, is there really any other option? consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:09, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

在日韓國人

在日韓國人 → Koreans in Japan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
在日朝鮮人 → Koreans in Japan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete as it's in an unknown language or not correctly spelled in any language. User:Cryptic thinks it's Japanese but 國 isn't used in modern Japanese and it uses " " not the Japanese "　". I think it's ko:재일 한국인, but MOS:HANJASPACES says that the Korean space shouldn't be used when Hanja is used. 172.97.220.91 (talk) 19:45, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. we dont allow these kind of redirects Harringstars ᐸ Talk
Contribs 21:15, 28 October 2025 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:24, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(國 is obsolete in Japanese, but only very recently so - just after WWII - and it's still in use in proper names.) I missed while assessing this for R3 that this form, including the space, appears in the target article's infobox as the South Korean Hanja spelling, where it's been stable since June of last year. Certainly not a speedy, and I'm not even sure it rises to normal deletion - I don't know enough about Korean to guess if this would normally appear in Hanja when in mixed script. —Cryptic 22:20, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I fixed the article per MoS and bundled the North Korean name. 172.97.220.91 (talk) 22:33, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep (perhaps as {{R from alternative spacing}} or something that more specifically identifies this as an error). English-language redirects for misspellings, alternative spacing, etc. are typically kept if the variant is deemed sufficiently plausible or common, even when it is a frank error. The fact that this spacing made its way into the article and, in particular, the fact that MOS:HANJASPACES has explicit guidance on this both suggest this type of error is one we should anticipate specifically for Korean terms written in Hanja. MOS typically addresses common errors and pitfalls. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:19, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep forgetting traditional Chinese? Those are valid strings in traditional Chinese. grapesurgeon (talk) 01:47, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, this is not Traditional Chinese. No type of Chinese uses spaces. 172.97.220.91 (talk) 13:01, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It wouldn't meet WP:RFOREIGN if it were just Chinese, either. —Cryptic 17:02, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I agree that Chinese is not a sufficient justification here. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:18, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BDD (talk) 03:30, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the bar for foreign language redirects should be high, and this requires multiple steps to even get to a plausible situation as per discussion above. Quick search doesn't show this as being a set phrase or otherwise particularly commonly used to such an extent that it would be needed on en:wiki. Shazback (talk) 06:05, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 19:01, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I think it's Kyujitai? Also, WP:FORRED doesn't apply due to the topic of the article. However, I don't speak Japanese nor do I know too much about the language, so take my opinion with a grain of salt. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:41, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's Korean. Besides being, yes, kyūjitai, the spacing makes it incorrect in Japanese. (Any kind of spacing - the full-width space suggested by the nominator, as in 在日　韓國人, resolves to the same title in Mediawiki.) —Cryptic 04:13, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

gotta say, i don't see how this of all traits would automatically give it any affinity considering that the target is currently not a blp, about or written for a small subset of japanese people who must be nearing their triple digits, or about or written for a subset of chinese people at around the same age that is only larger by virtue of china being a little larger than japan and both koreas combined. this isn't necessarily an opposition to keeping or deleting, just an opposition to this specific rationale consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 11:21, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

President Joe

President Joe → Joe Biden (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Very much a case of both United States Centric and Recentism. Most importantly note that Joe (president) was deleted at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 September 21#Joe (president). Yes, he is by far the most notable, but "President Biden" will definitely be a way more common term. Servite et contribuere (talk) 18:44, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. "He is by far the most notable" means this redirect target is appropriate. The other RfD was for an implausible search term. I₂Overcome ^talk 10:30, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the consensus reached on Joe (president). I don't know if WP:G4 applies here, since it is an oversight and not a recreation. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:43, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No ~2025-31416-56. It's a different article title, and if all redirects to Joe Biden were deleted, then redirects like Joseph Biden, Biden and [[Joseph Robinette Biden Jr. So definitely not eligible for WP:G4. Servite et contribuere (talk) 12:47, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Kleur groen

Draft:Kleur groen → Green (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

formerly an unsourced essay in german, which demonstrated the greenness of green with the greenest color of all: yellow. might've even been vandalism, considering the creator's username... consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 16:37, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep for now per WP:NDRAFT Duckmather (talk) 22:35, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ndraft doesn't actually apply here, since it wasn't merged, moved, or anything that would require preserving its (unusable) content consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:44, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: it was in Dutch not German as claimed in the nomination. Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:41, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
oops. also, i forgot to mention in the nom, but this was also ai generated, so ndraft really doesn't apply. or would it have been rdraft? consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 16:49, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:23, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails to meet WP:NDRAFT, possibly created as vandalism. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 16:44, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Exergue

Exergue → Coin#Modern features (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

only mentioned in passing, and without a source. used to be an equally unsourced stub until being "megred" in 2007. it does big numbers, though, so i'll suggest soft redirecting to wikt:exergue consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:53, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from its ambiguity, this redirect is fine. Wiktionary is hardly more sourced than us. I'm surprised so few of the pageviews are intended towards the well-viewed Exergue – on documenta 14 article. The trendline hardly moved a muscle after the February 2024 premiere of the movie. Nevertheless, I assume most of the readers who search this title up – rather than access the redirect via the many incoming links – are looking for the film. Clean up the links, replacing them with exergue (coinage), and retarget with hatnote to Exergue – on documenta 14? J 947 ‡ ^edits 03:56, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:22, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:FLOW

Wikipedia:FLOW → Wikipedia:Flow (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Target is outdated and another page makes the most sense. - Flower (she/her; Accounts) 15:29, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What specific other page? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:30, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
was replying to it but twinkle didn't let me preview formating so I opted to post it after - Flower (she/her; Accounts) 15:31, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to WP:Reading flow - As nom, this query shows that there is a lot of references to flow. It is not defined in WP:GLOSS though. - Flower (she/her; Accounts) 15:30, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose that retarget - you shouldn't hijack a decade-old shortcut to point to a page you just created. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 15:31, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is why I did a RfD, for consensus. I feel like the page is outdated and that the community uses the term Flow to reference a intelectually defined thing. The new page defines that but I would have put it on WP:Flow if it didn't already exist. - Flower (she/her; Accounts) 15:33, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as is per Pppery. I₂Overcome ^talk 10:37, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Pppery and WP:DIFFCAPS Servite et contribuere (talk) 12:49, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Extended content

Update the table now

This table is generated by querying the database replica by a bot.
Edits made within the table area will be removed on the next update!

page_title	comment_text	rev_page	rev_parent_id
Antisemitism in Christianity	improved flow	6728	77248
Logical formatting	debolding, linking, improved flow	55379	88137
Flour	improve flow	56232	91945
Drawing	copyedit, rearrange for flow	8544	90636
History of Palestinian statehood	Reworded to make text flow	48276	133554
USS Liberty incident	cocentrated description of events in one coherent flow	32071	137612
Easton's Bible Dictionary	reoredered paras for flow	68695	144378
Generations of Noah	para reordering for flow	71493	154729
Thermal conduction	link heat flow	72536	158773
Niccolò Paganini	mentioned that he is a violinist (minor oversight) + some minor reorg of sentences to improve flow	21511	41395
Liberal arts college	NPOV and moving LMS mod to restore flow	18612	265179
Wikipedia utilities/Page titles to be deleted	add discounted_cash_flow	33841	331424789
Auseklis Ozols	Edit for flow	102292	349750
Québécois (word)	edit for flow	25346	351330
Society for Creative Anachronism	edit for flow	28981	351449
Manifest destiny	Integrating views on manifest destiny to improve the flow	90664	316978
Christopher Moore (author)	edit for flow	93792	351466
Duct tape	edit for flow	43707	360316
Wagonway	edit for flow	100782	351320
Christianity and homosexuality	changed sentence to improve flow	7272	439470
Jörg Haider	small edits for flow	23772028	448639
Galileo Galilei	improved flow	29688374	450158
Henry I of England	piping link for better flow	14179	544706
Pol Pot	more logical flow	24326	549504
Evolution	some gross reorganization -- no change of content. The discussion of creationist appropriation of microevolution terminology still needs edition for flow	9236	571661
Raëlism	reorganizing for more coherence/flow	25915	580222
Main Page/Temp	better flow	142386	581853
Ligier	more logical flow	164082	596503
Jug band	prolly needs some wikifying and editing for flow	59019	600591
Fortune-telling	edit new material into main article flow	54116	81414
Windows 95	Re-ordered paragraphs for better flow	34064	611149
SQL Slammer	fix link to buffer overrun/overflow	174312	626287
Fatwa	edit for flow	11259	360322
Roger & Me	trying to neutralize wildly POV statements, both pro and con; attributing and/or expanding criticisms I know about, also working on grammar and flow	98164	677676
Telegraph key	Info on glass arm and sideswiper, more detail on bugs and keyers, minor reorg to improve flow	187553	697244
Blood	more about blood composition, blood flow	3997	746573
Exposure (photography)	more logical flow	166868	581982
Espresso	Reformatted for flow	47660	831202
Alternative hip-hop	editing for flow	23712589	844568
Sterling silver	Improved flow	221192	918725
Shadow	Comma stack overflow	217296	928149
Programmable logic controller	subsections and flow	24992	927610
Romance of the Three Kingdoms	rewrite for better flow	157837	1006317
United States federal government continuity of operations	editing paragraphs to improve flow	42366	1026287
Music sequencer	edit for flow	127510	1035805
Chess960	Reorganize, improve flow	68042	1118039
United States dollar	flow	18717338	1151992
Apostolic succession	work on clarification and flow	2257	1153787
Lever	rearranged for more logical flow	38857	1196795
Slug	Added slug as a unit of mass, slug flow	18619339	1189426

∑ 50 items | Query runtime: 2.09 s | Last updated: 20:41, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

End of auto-generated report.

Database report showing that Flow has been used within edit summeries for awhile. - Flower (she/her; Accounts) 20:46, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Retargeting a WP: shortcut is not something done lightly, as it suddenly changes the meaning of every previous link that uses the shortcut. This link is used by multiple pages to link to the ill-fated Wikipedia:Flow; altering it should not be done. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:40, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aiysh

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

what language is that even from? unmentioned, and it doesn't have a wiktionary entry either, so i really can't see any possible affinity consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:22, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~weak~~ keep ~~i dont know what language it comes from either, but name suggests romanisation of the word for bread from some obscure language~~ egyptian term for bread source1 source2 -- .nhals8 (puhLEASE ping when responding) 13:47, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@.nhals8 and does it have it affinity? the one mention of egypt is as an image's caption, in passing. this is a reocurring issue with redirects: a word existing in another language doesn't automatically make it a plausible search term in wp-en. it's what wp:forred is all about

as is, i think neither of the sources you mentioned would prove affinity. source 1 mentions it in passing as an example of a sentence (and as a translation of bread, which is no longer dough), and source 2... also only mentions it in passing in the general context of bread. as an example of why sources are needed to properly establish a concept as significant enough in any given culture (such as serviette), i could provide just as much evidence of ovo frito being a plausible redirect for fried egg with passing mentions, despite the usual lack of cultural affinity between fried eggs and portuguese-speaking places consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 14:05, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Consarn i'm thinking that this is an alternative spelling of eish (sounds like aiysh), which is largely popular in Egypt and might be a synonym for bread in general, hence explaining this redirect, though I think you can ask egyptian users to confirm -- .nhals8 (puhLEASE ping when responding) 14:26, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
eish baladi would definitely be a more plausible redirect... but it'd then be exactly as plausible as eish shamsi and eish fino. i don't think eish merahrah would be in that list, since it doesn't seem likely to survive an afd. i don't think this would be all that fit for a disambiguation either, but i will draft something later anyway, most likely at draft:eish consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 14:38, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, WP:FORRED. No special affinity between dough and Egyptian Arabic. Per discussion above it's not clear that this even is Egyptian Arabic. A Google search reveals mostly people with the last name Aiysh and a user-submitted recipe for something called "aiysh congealed poridge [sic]". An Eish dab page is uncalled for since we have only partial title matches and it's not at all clear that Aiysh should redirect there if it did exist. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:42, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:10, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No use. If this is a legitimate foreign term for bread it would violate WP:FORRED, and it's a possible hoax. Not enough to qualify for G3, but I see no reason to keep. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 15:19, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Egyptian cuisine#Bread which discussed what "eysh" means Sting Kipu (talk) 18:07, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:FORRED and that it appears to be a misspelling of the non-English term at that. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 04:41, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a misspelling just a different transliteration, that's why .nhals8 found it. Would seems to have an affinity with Egyptian bread. Sting Kipu (talk) 06:30, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rare coin values

Rare coin values → Coin#Value (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

not directly elaborated on or listed anywhere (that i could find) beyond "idk some people like them". used to be an unsourced essay that also wasn't actually all that helpful, as its definition (coins made of silver and gold) seems to conflict with others (coins that are rare) consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:49, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on the page history?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:09, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lean delete. I don't think there is any chance the content in the page history would be kept at Afd, and this doesn't have a clearly best target as a redirect, nor do we have redirects for rare coin or rare coin value or even coin value (though the latter would probably be a good redirect for Coin#Value). If kept, retarget to Coin collecting#Grade and value as a better target. Mdewman6 (talk) 03:42, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Case White (1943)

Case White (1943) → Operation Weiss (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

"Fall Weiß" (Case White) is the plan for the invasion of Poland 1939. The later "Operation Weiss" was not called "Fall" and is not a "Case". The redirect is misleading. KnightMove (talk) 10:03, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Case White is an English translation (a literal, but not a very common one) for Fall Weiss, the codename for the German invasion of Poland 1939. That's not ambiguous. The term „Fall“ is reserved for operational plans devised by the German General Staff like „Fall Gelb“ and so forth. There was no Fall Weiss in 1943, but, according to the German sources, an Unternehmen „Weiss“ (see, e.g., Shepherd, Terror in the Balkans, p. 325), i.e. Operation Weiss.----Assayer (talk) 10:25, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unlikely Redirects

Caio França de Gouvêa Gomes → Caio França (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Lúcia Massis Gouvêa de França Gomes → Lúcia França (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Very unlikely redirects even with what is typed in them. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 06:25, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep. those are their full names, so there's no problem. no opposition to taking caio's article to afd as fucking raw, though consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 16:33, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 08:23, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the first one, real, full names are perfectly plausible. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 09:22, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the second one as an apparent error. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 16:27, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Caio França de Gouvêa Gomes as a case of Category:Redirects from long names. Delete Lúcia Massis Gouvêa de França Gomes as the redirect is a malformed attempt at her full name (Lúcia Massis de Gouvêa França Gomes). Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 09:47, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Caio França de Gouvêa Gomes as appropriate {{R from long name}}. Readers may type these out and are also likely to copy-paste from online and digital sources. Even if this sees little usage, this is an established, appropriate use of redirects. Delete Lúcia Massis Gouvêa de França Gomes per DemocracyDeprivationDisorder ("Frank") and WP:RDEL#8 (at least in spirit). At first glance this is a plausible-ish error from a reader who misunderstands Portuguese names. A Google search for the name with quotes ("Lúcia Massis Gouvêa de França Gomes") turns up just 8 hits, all of which are Wikipedia pages linking to this discussion. Typically for misspellings or errors we require some evidence that the error is common, even in unreliable sources but we should not be inventing incorrect forms. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 17:02, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:40, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Both Per WP:CHEAP. Those are their full names. Unambiguous and harmless. Servite et contribuere (talk) 01:29, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Actually Weak delete second one Lúcia Massis Gouvêa de França Gomes. I do see a possible but unlikely misspelling, unless there is some sort of meaning behind this spelling. Servite et contribuere (talk) 23:42, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

actually, yeah, delete the second over the misplaced "de". should've caught that earlier, whoops consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:38, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cary Huang

Cary Huang → The Scale of the Universe (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Huang twins → The Scale of the Universe (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Cary and Michael Huang → Battle for Dream Island (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Battle for Dream Island, also created by Cary and Michael Huang, now also finally has its long-awaited own page. I am RedoStone (talk) 00:54, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am leaning towards either a full-fledged article (which is probably unlikely) or a set index article. AlphaBeta135 talk 00:59, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is something navigation pages proposed to do, but the community do not have consensus for such type of page. GZWDer (talk) 01:40, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, I was not aware of this. This would seem to address a recurring issue at RfD. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 02:31, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A similar (and perhaps even better-thought-out) concept is that of directory articles, which were proposed by Theleekycauldron. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 17:25, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Something like this, I'd say? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 17:40, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Battle for Dream Island has been nominated for deletion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Battle for Dream Island (2nd nomination). There's quite a history here. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 03:16, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- It was closed as "Keep". Paintspot Infez (talk) 00:18, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have added Cary and Michael Huang to the nonmination. FYI @User:AlphaBeta135, User:AlphaBeta135, User:GZWDer. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:55, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: combining some of the sources from BFDI and Scale of the Universe, I think it's possible that the brothers pass GNG on their own. Three of the sources in Scale of the Universe specifically mention them in the headline. I don't think it's a subject I can write about well, but if anyone wants to, creating a page is an option on the table. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 21:00, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - as mentioned by ArtemisiaGentileschiFan & AlphaBeta135 above, I also think a full-fledged article on "Cary and Michael Huang" OR a set index article could make sense. Paintspot Infez (talk) 23:04, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, y'all kind of salted all the draft pages about the brothers so its gonna be a bit difficult Trade (talk) 12:19, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose set index article. This makes no sense here. There is no set of items of a specific type that also share the name Cary and Michael Huang or Huang twins (yes, they are a "set" of twins but they constitute a single subject). Either there is enough for an article about the twins or there isn't. Deletion is a viable option when coverage of the subject is spread across multiple pages. Readers will see search results that lead with Battle for Dream Island and The Scale of the Universe and show other pages where the brothers are discussed. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:19, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect all to Battle for Dream Island as {{R from creator}} (or any more appropriate redirect category). --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 17:13, 3 November 2025 (UTC) Actually, theleekycauldron's directory as a first choice and my original !vote to redirect to BFDI as a second. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Not-cheesewhisk3rs (talk • contribs) 20:48, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Generally, if editors think an article should be written at a redirect title, they !vote to delete per WP:REDYES. RfD is not the place to discuss creating an article or whether a topic is notable.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 18:59, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all (without prejudice to an article being created) as XY with multiple possible targets and no reason to prefer any one of them over the others hence best left to search. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 19:02, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per Pppery. These do not fit the guidelines for a set index article (as described previously) or dab page and there is currently no community-wide consensus to create directory or navigation pages. Editors are free to suggest innovative solutions but !votes that go against P&G and accepted practice should be down-weighted if not dismissed entirely. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:20, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it should be a disambiguation page IF they do not have sources.

- Cary Huang, American-Chinese animator and educator, who created Battle For Dream Island and The Scale of the Universe

- 10003 Caryhuang, planet named after Cary Huang.

if we have sources, they get their own page.

N51 DELTA TALK 11:34, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have drafted a dab page at Cary Huang per the suggestion by @N51 Delta —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:52, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts on the Cary Huang dab page, @AlphaBeta135 @ArtemisiaGentileschiFan @GZWDer @I am RedoStone @MrPersonHumanGuy @Not-cheesewhisk3rs @Paintspot @Trade? —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:20, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why cant we just have a draft instead? Trade (talk) 18:21, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems fine as a DAB to me. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 19:33, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No opinion on the redirect being converted into a disambiguation page, but I've just started Draft:Huang brothers even though Draft:Michael Huang (animator) already exists. – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 19:39, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This thought just popped into my head: If Cary Huang isn't a redirect anymore, isn't there a way to somehow partially close this RfD so that the RfD tag can be taken off of Cary Huang whilst still keeping the tag on the other two redirects being discussed here? – MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 19:42, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MrPersonHumanGuy the dab page at Cary Huang is merely draft proposal. It is still a redirect in limbo. Consensus here will determine whether this gets published (converted to a live dab page aka "DABified") or the redirect meets some other fate. Editors frequently suggest converting a redirect to a DAB page. I drafted this and tagged participants to move the discussion along and give editors something specific to respond to. Editors are free to edit the draft dab, update !votes, and provide other input. Editors can suggest different fates for each redirect, like deleting some and converting another to a dab page. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:30, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, deciding on what to do with Cary Huang and the others now won't prevent updating the redirect target if a Huang brothers article is eventually published. If folks want to wrap this up to restore navigability while other drafts are worked on, the quickest path is probably for everyone to agree to delete Huang twins and Cary and Michael Huang and DABify Cary Huang, with the understanding that these can be recreated and retargeted to Huang brothers as soon as that goes live. So far, we mostly have comments and !votes for a type of page that doesn't exist (directory), which is likely to prolong this discussion… —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:37, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As I wrote above, I'm fine with theleekycauldron's directory article. In practice, that's similar enough to a disambiguation page, which I support. --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 20:00, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. To quote an eminent editor above, "Either there is enough for an article about the twins or there isn't". Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:37, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
DABify Cary Huang and delete Huang twins and Cary and Michael Huang. The last two should be deleted because there is no single target that is better than the other and a redirect obscures search results which help identify multiple pages where the brothers are discussed. If a standalone article is written on the brothers, Cary Huang can be retargeted there without discussion and the other redirects can be recreated to point there. The entry for Michael at the dab page Michael Huang can also be edited at that time to point to the new article but Michael Huang should not be converted to a redirect without a discussion at WP:RM. (forgot to sign) —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:45, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Battle for Dream Island which has more information about them. It doesn't really matter if you target one or the other though as both articles have a link to the other. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:28, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:37, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chaos carolinense

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Withdrawn

Nooroo, New South Wales

Nooroo, New South Wales → Nooroo railway station (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Assyrian Human (talk · contribs) took this redirect to AfD, but there is no current non-redirect history for this page, which was the original title for Nooroo railway station. Their explanation follows:

Somehow this page got redirected to a demolished railway station, which has been providing service for this locality. Theoretically, it could be deleted under WP:R#DELETE (10. If the redirect could plausibly be expanded into an article, and the target article contains virtually no information on the subject.), so I'm nominating it for deletion.
— User:Assyrian Human 18:03, 8 November 2025 (UTC)

Again, though, while this is a contested redirect it is not a contested BLAR — the article itself was rewritten and moved in May 2024 (its only-ever source was and is in reference to the railway station). I don't have an opinion on comment on that or anything else; this is a procedural nomination. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:57, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welp, guess I didn't notice that there's a whole article for discussing problems in redirects, sorry in advance. Thank you.

— /əˈsiɹi.ɪn/ /ˈhjuː.mən/ ( t | c ) 20:25, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and tag as {{R from related topic}}. This seems to be a real place, so there's always a chance an article could get written about it someday, even if it's not notable today. Duckmather (talk) 23:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:40, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Split history from before the move in May 2024. Even though it didn't have much content it is a census location. Crouch, Swale (talk) 20:16, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Peney (audio equipment)

Peney (audio equipment) → Peavey (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely misspelling of Peavey Electronics. Does not point to the correct target. Created by user blocked for disruptively creating implausible redirects. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:55, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete per nom. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:14, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:07, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sergey Gennady Burgers

Sergey Gennady Burgers → McDonald's (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely redirect. No hits on a search for this term. Created by user blocked for disruptively creating implausible redirects. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:53, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Thepharoah17 (talk) 04:17, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clearly a joke redirect Mikeycdiamond (talk) 11:52, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom --Lenticel ^(talk) 04:07, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 19:08, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Frozen desert

Frozen desert → Frozen dessert (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unsure if the typo for the food is the primary intended meaning for readers, or if it should instead point to something like Desert climate#Cold desert climates which discusses freezing that occurs in desert climates. What do others think? Left guide (talk) 05:57, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A reasonable question, but it seems much more likely that this is indeed a typo or misspelling. If "frozen desert" were the most common term for a specific type of desert, this would be a more difficult call. --BDD (talk) 02:37, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as vague. desert–dessert is a common mixup but I'm not convinced someone typing frozen desert is substantially more likely to mean frozen dessert than the content covered at Desert climate#Cold desert climates and Polar climate. A Google Scholar search for "frozen desert" turns up 1,320 hits. This is rather low but reveals at least some legitimate usage. Often this is used descriptively, as in "frozen desert soil"[12][13] but there are plenty of sources that describe, for example, Antartica as a "frozen desert". Wiki search reveals a mix of appropriate desert-related usage and errors where frozen dessert was intended. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:43, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have corrected the use of 'frozen desert' to 'frozen dessert' at VocalTec, Ola South Africa, and Yasso (food brand). The other 7 uses in article space refer to frozen deserts. Two of them are in references to a 1957 National Geographic article titled "Across the Frozen Desert to Byrd Station". —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:49, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 03:30, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pumpkin moonshine

Pumpkin moonshine → Jack-o'-lantern (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

while allegedly an archaic synonym, results gave me... pretty much everything else, mostly due to differing definitions of "moonshine". i also didn't get a whole lot of results, but that's besides the point consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:43, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It definitely was a synonym for jack o lanterns, there even was a kids booked named Pumpkin Moonshine ([14] limited pages on internet archive) from 1938. And I found some newspaper articles from before prohibition in the US referring to pumpkin moonshine decorations around Halloween ([15]). And of course there was also literal pumpkin moonshine made during prohibition. And apparently there as a moderately successful race horse in the late 1970s/early 1980s named Pumpkin Moonshine. I'm not sure if it is a common enough now for a redirect without a decent enough source to add a reference in the target. Hopefully will look more. Skynxnex (talk) 18:26, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:48, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I was almost going to suggest deletion, but there are a couple of other sources on internet archive that attest to the use of "pumpkin moonshine" as a synonym of "jack-o'-lantern" (not always very explicit individually however): a teacher's manual from 1915, a 1986 story, without explanation in a story in 1878, ambiguously in a 1901 bulletin, a 1904 dictionary. It definitely seems to be regional, but it's a good redirect for someone looking for this exact term. Could people be looking for moonshine made from pumpkins? I guess, but it's not really an established term than any other flavor? The horse doesn't meet WP:N (I believe). Shazback (talk) 05:47, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Shazback's sources?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 03:16, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, unmentioned at the target (nor should it be, given its obscurity). The other potential targets are equally unlikely. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 05:04, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Columbia Steel Company

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Withdrawn

The Dark Prince

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Thanga Magan (2013 film)

Thanga Magan (2013 film) → Thalaivaa (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned anywhere in the article. Kailash29792 (talk) 00:20, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 16

St Paul's Shipwreck

St Paul's Shipwreck → Collegiate Parish Church of St Paul's Shipwreck (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This is a partial title match which makes much more sense to be retargeted to Acts 27, where Paul's shipwreck redirects, since the church is certainly not more notable than the biblical story. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 15:22, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. WP:SMALLDETAILS distinguishes the church from the biblical passage. Put an explanatory {{redirect}} hatnote at both. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 19:40, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:SMALLDETAILS does not distinguish the church from the biblical passage, as the church is not known as "St Paul's Shipwreck" in short, even the article describes its short name as "Church of St Paul's Shipwreck".

In fact, WP:SMALLDETAILS actually states:

"And a well-known concept may still be the primary topic for a variant styling or incorrect spelling [emphasis added], even if a much less well-known subject uses that spelling"

As stated previously, the church (the "less well-known subject") is clearly less notable than the biblical event (the "well-known concept"). 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 19:47, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:44, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning disambiguate. There is also, by the way, the wreck of the SS Saint Paul (1895), and numerous historical shipwrecks associated with the various places named St. Paul. BD2412 T 00:49, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget - I think "Paul's shipwreck" and "St Paul's shipwreck" are similar enough (and the meaning reasonably clear for the former) that it's logical for them to lead to the same place. I'm not sure making it a dab page is the best option - the phrasing isn't how one would typically search for a wreck of a particular ship or in a particular location. --Sable232 (talk) 03:09, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1790s in fashion

1790s in fashion → 1775–1795 in Western fashion (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not all fashion is Western fashion, and in any event the target only covers half of the decade. I also am not thrilled by the implication that "fashion" means "Western fashion" from a WP:SYSBIAS standpoint. I recommend delete per WP:RETURNTORED. House Blaster (talk • he/they) 21:22, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Category:1790s fashion. It has links to 1775–1795 in Western fashion and 1795–1820 in Western fashion which are the most helpful articles on the topic that currently exist. It's also a catch-all for articles relating to fashion in this decade, including non-Western fashion (should such articles be created or categorized here). -- Tavix ^(talk) 16:00, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Category:1790s fashion per Tavix. J 947 ‡ ^edits 04:51, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Caccappolo

Richard Caccappolo → Daily Mail (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No longer mentioned at target, or anywhere else onwiki. PARAKANYAA (talk) 20:51, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to DMG Media where listed (as "Rich") as chief executive in the infobox. J 947 ‡ ^edits 04:53, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Body soap

Body soap → Soap (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Ambiguous, could also refer to shower gel. I₂Overcome ^talk 20:28, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to shower gel since bodywash redirects there. Someone searching for "body soap" is more interested in soap for the body than just soap in general. 𝔅𝔦𝔰-𝔖𝔢𝔯𝔧𝔢𝔱𝔞? 21:32, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that's a good solution since it can refer to either bar soap or shower gel. I think the only other option besides deletion for this title would be making it a disambiguation page, but it is not likely worth keeping. I₂Overcome ^talk 01:25, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. "Body soap" is not a common phrase as indicated by Ngrams[16][17] as well as pageviews[18] showing just 18 hits in the 6 months since this as created. The intended meaning is vague as to bar soap, other soaps, or shower gel. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:01, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as the current target is the broader article. Alternatively, retarget to Personal care products#Cleansing products which covers all products suggested so far. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:40, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 20:31, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dabify There is a dabified draft version, and I have refined it to include the RFD notice until consensus can be reached. (The notice was previously removed). Servite et contribuere (talk) 12:31, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Asriel D

Draft:Asriel D → Flowey (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I would say that this is a cross-namespace redirect but it technically isn't. At least not for being applicable for speedy deletion criterion R2.

Anyways, this is completely implausible. Zero views over however long. Also, going from draft namespace to article namespace is confusing. It's just unnecessary. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 17:50, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

actually, wp:rdraft details exactly when it's fine to have a draft redirect to mainspace. that said, delete per nom as an extremely implausible title that most definitely does not meet the exceedingly simple criterion for rdraft, especially without an according regular redirect consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:39, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of thNed's Declassified School Survival Guide episodes

List of thNed's Declassified School Survival Guide episodes → List of Ned's Declassified School Survival Guide episodes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unless there is some weird in-story joke that I don't know about (having never watched this show), I can't see any reason why this would ever need to exist. BD2412 T 17:39, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as an implausible typo. Even if this was an in-joke, it isn't mentioned in the target article, so it would also not be allowed. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 17:53, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as unlikely misspelling --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:14, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Susie (character)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Nesbitt, Minnesota

Nesbitt, Minnesota → Eden Prairie, Minnesota (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Original article was an apparent hoax; no such settlement existed. Minnesota does not have "boroughs" as the article indicated, and the supposed borders of the area can't exist as described. --Sable232 (talk) 16:30, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Nesbit Township, Polk County, Minnesota as {{R from misspelling}}. Reason for existing redirect is probably Nesbitt Preserve Park in Eden Prairie, but that's not a town. I₂Overcome ^talk 11:05, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nesbitt Preserve Park also isn't even mentioned at the current target. I₂Overcome ^talk 11:09, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I considered retargeting it to Nesbit Township, but given the hoax content, felt it would be better to delete the page entirely so that isn't hanging around in the history. --Sable232 (talk) 22:33, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Minneapolis-style hot dog

Minneapolis-style hot dog → Hot dog variations#Minnesota (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No such content at the target article. There was at one time, but it was removed in 2024 for poor sourcing. The article that was at the redirect in question did have one reliable source, the Minneapolis Star Tribune, but that article is about a "MPLS Dog" created by a marketing group for a single local restaurant in an attempt to create an "iconic" local hot dog. I can find no evidence that there is any such concept as a "Minneapolis-style hot dog" outside of this one eatery. --Sable232 (talk) 15:47, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I₂Overcome ^talk 10:57, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

y Sagittae

Y Sagittae → 14 Sagittae (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No mention of it in the article. There is also a variable star called Y Sagittae, but I’m not sure is it notable enough to be a stub. Another solution is retargeting to List of stars in Sagitta, but there is no entry of it, so it might require deletion. MisterSpacee (talk) 14:24, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mention added in the target article, with reference. There no longer seem to be any pressing need to delete this redirect. Lithopsian (talk) 15:37, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe turning it into a disambig would work too. MisterSpacee (talk) 14:09, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Except there is nothing to disambiguate. Also, dab pages with two entries are rarely useful; just add a hatnote to the (primary topic) redirect target if and when there is anything to confuse it with. Lithopsian (talk) 16:07, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep now that sourced info has been added to the target Shazback (talk) 19:58, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Malaysian State Route Redirection Leftover

Perak state route A11 → Perak State Route A11 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Perak state route A132 → Jalan Kampung Poh (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Perak state route A180 → Perak State Route A180 (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Perak state route A151 → Jalan Sultan Abdullah, Teluk Intan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

For road naming, should capitalise each words DiaoBaoHuaJian (talk) 12:15, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Malaysia Federal Route R-- → Malaysian State Roads system (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Malaysia Federal Route SA-- → Malaysian State Roads system (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The redirect is not following the Malaysia state roads naming format. The correct naming format is [State] State Route [Code][Number]. Refer to here DiaoBaoHuaJian (talk) 11:46, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the "Perak state route" redirects. Two of them are just redirects from an alternate capitalization, so they should be kept. (The nomination rationale is invalid on that basis.) The other two are alternate capitalization of alternate names, so they should be kept as well. Remember, redirects are cheap. As for the other two, I'm not sure that they are needed, so they can be deleted. Imzadi 1979 → 07:50, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all four Perak state route redirects - perfectly fine alternate capitalization redirects & as noted by Imzadi1979, WP:CHEAP (especially for redirects that are up to 15+ years old). Leaning Keep for the two Malaysia Federal Route redirects mainly because of WP:CHEAP for 15+ year old pages despite very low pageviews, and the fact that despite being technically incorrect, these redirects provide a good target to an unambiguous search. Shazback (talk) 20:08, 17 November 2025 (UTC) - Edited to replace "Oppose" by "Keep" for clarity Shazback (talk) 01:06, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please refer back to Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 10#Malaysia Federal Route Group 2, October 11 and November 6, the similar redirects are deleted. I have no problem for Perak State Route redirects, just only the Malaysia Federal Route redirects, In state route level, either Perlis State Route R-- or Sabah State Route SA-- are used commonly, they don't use Malaysia Federal Route naming for state route. DiaoBaoHuaJian (talk) 10:59, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all the "Perak state route" redirects as completely normal and harmless {{R from other capitalisation}} redirects. No opinion about the other two. Thryduulf (talk) 14:58, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Juan (Suikoden)

Juan (Suikoden) → Suikoden#The 108 Stars of Destiny (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This was once an article, which in 2007 SnowFire merged to List of characters in Suikoden IIIList of characters in Suikoden III, which, in turn, in 2015 Czar blanked and redirected to Suikoden III#Plot, which does not mention this character. Then a few weeks ago Homechallenge55 changed to the current target for want of mention, but the current target also does not mention this character. The original article would have no chance of being kept if restored and sent to AfD, and SnowFire rewrote the prose in the process of merging, so I don't think this is needed to preserve attribution of anything (and if it were needed, this could be moved to a talkpage subpage rather than left in mainspace). So, delete. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 10:15, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It's true that on merge, this became just one & a half sentences in the List article. I do not think it is likely that the full article for the list of Suikoden III characters is going to come back soon (the sourcing standards WP:VGC expects are stricter these days and it would require diving Japanese-language sources). By the standard many prefer of "must be mentioned at target", this should probably be deleted. I don't personally agree with said standard, though, and prefer WP:CHEAP and WP:RFD#KEEP 1. Even if the odds of the list article coming back with a mention of Juan are 0.1%, it's harmless to keep the redirect for merge attribution reasons. But I know that my opinion is not shared by many of those who show up at RFD, and it's true that the content was largely discarded anyway, so take it as you will. SnowFire (talk) 03:36, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Kovach

Michael Kovach → List of Hazbin Hotel and Helluva Boss characters#Angel Dust (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Subject has mentioned about not being apart of the Hazbin Hotel cast anymore, being replaced by Blake Roman, and already has another large role as Jax in The Amazing Digital Circus. Should make sense for 'Michael Kovach' to redirect to the Jax section in the TADC article rather than the Hazbin Hotel article. ConeKota (talk) 00:54, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nomination. I agree with your reasoning. ElToAn123 (talk) 07:52, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also fine with this redirect as well. I think the redirect target should be The Amazing Digital Circus#Main. Historyday01 (talk) 12:54, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nomination. Blubewwy (talk) 19:00, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Voice actor Michael Kovach is credited in multiple projects. A search for "Michael Kovach" reveals numerous articles where he is mentioned, as well as what I assume are different Michael Kovaches mentioned in Phragmipedium kovachii and Charlotte Eagles. None of the 20 or so mentions of the voice actor contain any significant biographical information, nor would such content be appropriate to the scope of these articles. Arbitrarily selecting one series he has worked on provides zero biographical information to readers and obscures search results which provide a more comprehensive overview of his career, as well as information about other people named Michael Kovach that some readers may be searching for. Additionally, if there is a possibility that he is notable, red links may encourage article creation per WP:RETURNTORED. To be clear, this should be deleted either way. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:22, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Thoughts on Myceteae's argument?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 08:23, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Myceteae. Additionally, I think we shouldn't redirect to only one role that he has. The Amazing Digital Circus is very popular, but so is Hazbin Hotel, and people trying to find his page will be confused when it redirects elsewhere. 🫀 Crash // Organhaver (talk to me, maybe?) 16:57, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right, though Michael hasn't been associated with Hazbin Hotel since 2019, seems unlikely. ConeKota (talk) 00:05, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like he deserves a page after all this time HaydenTCEM (talk) 20:25, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That is an argument to delete per WP:RETURNTORED. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:49, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

American Spanish.

American Spanish. → American Spanish (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

2015 May 10 § American Spanish. – retarget to American Spanish

Delete due to unnecessary period/full stop at the end Schützenpanzer (Talk) 02:15, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per nom and WP:UNNATURAL. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 05:18, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no need to have a dot-postfixed variant of every page as redirect. See also Nonsense.. Taylor 49 (talk) 12:05, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per precedent --Lenticel ^(talk) 02:14, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, it's harmless. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:55, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 15

Beszterce (disambiguation)

Beszterce (disambiguation) → Bistrița (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

At present, Beszterce redirects to Bistrița (disambiguation), though the spelling Beszterce is not mentioned at the target DAB. The only page that links to Beszterce is the 'See also' section at Bistrica, which names this as a Hungarian spelling. However, no Hungarian locales are listed at Bistrița (disambiguation). As such, I'm curious if this redirect makes sense. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 22:10, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe weak keep? There are two real disambiguation pages linked from Beszterce (Q340208), namely on dewiki and huwiki, and those seem (at least on a cursory first glance) to be pretty similar to our page Bistrița (disambiguation). Duckmather (talk) 22:45, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:35, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not a spelling match. Steel1943 (talk) 19:12, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of United Kingdom rail accidents by death toll

List of United Kingdom rail accidents by death toll → List of rail accidents in the United Kingdom (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

R from ATD after PROD; unlikely search term as longer than redirect "List of United Kingdom rail accidents". JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 22:31, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

replace with List of United Kingdom rail accidents then Oreocooke (talk) 04:43, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

keep no other feasible target for the redirect, and the table in List of rail accidents in the United Kingdom can be sorted by death toll. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 07:19, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Omoikane (Nadesico)

Omoikane (Nadesico) → Martian Successor Nadesico (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Minor character not mentioned at article. Marked as an R from merge, but it doesn't seem a merge actually occurred, and it was just a blank and redirect instead. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 19:59, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Lang-fr

Template:Lang-fr → Template:Langx (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This should not need another XfD discussion but the IP thinks it does. A long and full TfD took place over a year ago and almost all lang-xx templates were replaced and deleted, per the nomination and per the discussion. No new versions of these should be re-created as that goes entirely against that outcome. Additionally, this is a very bad redirect as users who use it think they are getting text surround by a lang template with the French language, which it doesn't do. It also hides incorrect usages as a red-link template appears broken in articles and also in database reports, where editors can spot and fix them. Gonnym (talk) 19:31, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the outcome of the TFD discussion. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 20:01, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the TFD and because it does not (and cannot) work as editors expect when copying text from other-language Wikipedias or remembering how the template worked in the past. – Jonesey95 (talk) 15:40, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Jonesey95. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:10, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Quirrel (Hollow Knight)

Quirrel (Hollow Knight) → Hollow Knight (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 19:17, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Not mentioned at the target, a virtually identical example to this discussion that was closed as delete. Fathoms Below (talk) 19:38, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Minor NPC with minor plot relevance, having a redirect is unnecessary. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 08:53, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OBJECTION! Zote, Cornifer, Last Judge, Savage Beastfly, and Sherma are also redirects that are not really mentioned in the articles! TalkTuahLunchly (talk) 19:17, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@TalkTuahLunchly please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Also, I don't think that those redirects should exist either since they aren't mentioned in the target (except potentially Cornifer, since he is mentioned in the target article, though when I examined it last the paragraph that the character was mentioned in failed verification from the cited source). Fathoms Below (talk) 22:05, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe keep. Other Hollow Knight characters that aren't too important to the plot of the games also have redirects. TalkTuahLunchly (talk) 19:22, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No. That's an argument that the other redirects you listed should also be deleted. casualdejekyll 20:33, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unmentioned at target. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 04:19, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Surface transportation

Surface transportation → Road transport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Surface transport → Road transport (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Surface transport is a broader category than just road transport. Here's the definition from Cambridge Dictionary (emphasis added):

the movement of people or goods by road, train, or ship, rather than by plane

What should we do? That's a good question. Land transport would definitely be an improvement over status quo, since it includes rail. It doesn't include maritime transport, but it seems to me like we don't have a better option since there is no article about the two concepts lumped together.

So I'd suggest retargeting to Land transport. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amberkitten (talk • contribs) 17:32, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support retargeting both to Land transport and retargeting Surface transit (another redirect to Road transport) in the same manner
If transit = transportation (as explicitly stated in introductions to related articles such as Public transport), and surface = land, then this should be retargeted as well. Surface transit currently has 14 article-space links that should probably be changed to Mass transit, which currently redirects to Public transport, or perhaps something else more specific/appropriate. Jdaloner (talk) 19:21, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Create dab page at Surface transportation, redirect Surface transport and Surface transit to that page, and link to various forms of surface transportation. Oppose retarget to Land transport because surface ≠ land. I₂Overcome ^talk 11:23, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Co-founder of Wikipedia

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Isha Malviya

Isha Malviya → Udaariyaan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous AfDs for this article:

Delete Search results will give a much better overview rather than just a simple snapshot of her career: [19]. And if notable, a red link would encourage article creation per WP:RETURNTORED. Servite et contribuere (talk) 14:22, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: And restore to article version. Most of the delete advocates are now blocked. Might have been the same user socking. --Kailash29792 (talk) 10:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we also ignore the keep votes from the IP and the blocked user, the rough consensus still remains delete. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 15:40, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:22, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Not necessary to delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OCDD (talk • contribs) 11:54, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Squash World Cup

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

The devil

The devil → Satan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
The Devil → Devil (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These should probably point at the same target as I don't think the capitalization makes a difference in meanings in this case. ArthananWarcraft (talk) 12:32, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If anything, the caps difference seems to make more sense the other way around, which is odd. In other words, having them swap targets would at least be better than the current setup imo. Left guide (talk) 13:05, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget both to Devil for consistency, and as a central hub for the user to then explore Satan, Lucifer, or any of the other topics they are specifically searching for. In this case, choosing one particular entity causes bias towards that religious system or moral philosophy. TNstingray (talk) 16:15, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Devil per TN, probably the most sensible option to just drop the article. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 06:43, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the first one; retarget The Devil to Satan. The "the" is important here. "The Devil" typically refers to Satan, and it is in boldface in the lead of that article. There is already a hatnote there that refers readers to Devil if they’re looking for the broader concept of a devil. I₂Overcome ^talk 11:57, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget The Devil → Satan. I agree that 'the' is meaningful here and makes Satan the primary target for both. (The capitalization is also meaningful.) The hatnote and wikilinks in the article are already in place to point readers to other uses. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:16, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cindyana Santangelo

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

在台ベトナム人

在台ベトナム人 → Vietnamese people in Taiwan (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

WP:FORRED, Japanese is not a common language in both Taiwan and Vietnam A1Cafel (talk) 08:32, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete G5, created by a particularly unpleasant WMF-banned LTA.GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 19:46, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:FORRED (i.e. per nom); the original phrase translates to "Vietnamese people in Taiwan" in Japanese. Duckmather (talk) 20:38, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Handegg championship

Handegg championship → Super Bowl (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Unlikely to be the primary referent and possibly confusing. This phrase is used to refer to a variety of events and not just gridiron football ones, but rugby football ones as well. What should we do with it? retarget to an existing DAB, DABify, or delete 204.111.137.106 (talk) 00:05, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Google makes it clear this is the primary topic as discussion of this name is always about the Superbowl. Joseph2302 (talk) 00:10, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did not search just google, but when I do the top hits all relate to angry birds. The top google result for me relating to American gridiron football refers to the AFC conference championship. 204.111.137.106 (talk) 00:15, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, utterly pointless. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 05:28, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is quite possibly the same user using 2 different IP addresses. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:07, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No they aren’t. Check their history and contributions. Thepharoah17 (talk) 21:43, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. As for other major gridiron football championships, the College Football Playoff National Championship and the Grey Cup come to mind. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:27, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: For a stronger consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:51, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 06:39, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Electrooptical Effect

Electrooptical Effect → Electrophoresis (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at current target. There is a separate article called "Electro–optic effect", which explains that the term encompasses various distinct phenomena. ~2025-32085-07 (talk) 06:28, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Electro–optic effect. A quick internet search shows that "electrooptical effect" returns only results associated with electro–optic effects. Not sure why this retarget would be controversial. Is there a reason we can't just go ahead and do it? Uhoj (talk) 17:08, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

At the time, I didn't feel confident enough to retarget it due to my lack of domain expertise and not knowing whether the "-al" suffix made any difference. I do suspect that retargeting is the correct decision.

By the way, the redirect Electrooptical effect is similar, and its edit history shows that it originally pointed to Electro-optic effect but was retargeted to Electrophoresis a year after its creation. ~2025-32085-07 (talk) 06:06, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's a snap

It's a snap → Bob's your uncle#Synonyms and variations (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Not mentioned at target. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 06:23, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of Happy Tree Friends episodes#ep22 to align this with It's a SnapIt's a Snap, and tag it as a {{r avoided double redirect}} and a {{r from miscapitalization}}. - Eureka Lott 17:14, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Index shifting

Index shifting → Shifter (bicycle part)#Index_shifting (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The redirect is, at the moment, rather confusing since there are several quite different kinds of indices which one might say are shifted, and several kinds of shifting that may be indexed. XabqEfdg (talk) 11:05, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Index shifting is a well-established topic for cycling and could plausibly be a primary topic, but this article doesn't really help someone looking for "index shifting" in its current state... Not sure what alternative targets are or if there's enough material to make a DAB / dedicated article. Shazback (talk) 04:38, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This was merged to the target and I have tagged it as an {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 15:57, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:21, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Antler sleeve

Antler sleeve → Axe#History (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

archaic meaning seemingly lost to results, since they were almost exclusively predictable mixes of antler-shaped stuff on sleeve-shaped stuff (and vice-versa). existed as an unsourced stub until 2008, and is unmentioned in the target now. has one incoming link of note, but it's mentioned in passing, undefined, and also unsourced consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:20, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, GothicGolem29 (Talk) 16:08, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This was merged to the target and I have tagged it as an {{R from merge}}. Jay 💬 15:50, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:20, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:BetaWiki

Wikipedia:BetaWiki → mw:Extension:Translate (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

2016 July 6 § Wikipedia:BetaWiki – retarget to :mw:Extension:Translate

I'm not sure why this points here. Wouldn't https://en.wikipedia.beta.wmcloud.org/ be the more expected destination? Not sure if it existed when this was last considered in 2016. Sdkb ^talk 19:19, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate between meta:translatewiki.net and https://en.wikipedia.beta.wmcloud.org/, I guess? Betawiki is the old (pre 2009) name of translatewiki.net but a search at WP:VP shows that in recent times people also use the term to refer to https://en.wikipedia.beta.wmcloud.org/ instead. Because the interwiki prefix betawiki: still works and leads to translatewiki: I think we should record the old meaning somewhere. Warudo (talk) 23:58, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:19, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fall Weiss (1943)

Fall Weiss (1943) → Operation Weiss (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Fall Weiss is the plan for the invasion of Poland 1939. "Operation Weiss" was not called "Fall". The redirect is misleading. KnightMove (talk) 12:09, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fall translates as “Case” and was used by the Germans for major campaigns, not a specific operation (Unternehmen) such as this. The redirect is not plausible and is confusing as Fall Weiss was the invasion of Poland in 1939. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:53, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fall Weiss is the codename for the German invasion of Poland 1939. That's not ambiguous. The term „Fall“ is reserved for operational plans devised by the German General Staff like „Fall Gelb“ and so forth. There was no Fall Weiss in 1943, but, according to the German sources, an Unternehmen „Weiss“ (see, e.g., Shepherd, Terror in the Balkans, p. 325), i.e. Operation Weiss.----Assayer (talk) 10:25, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fall Weiß (1943)

Fall Weiß (1943) → Operation Weiss (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Fall Weiss is the plan for the invasion of Poland 1939. "Operation Weiss" was not called "Fall". The redirect is misleading. KnightMove (talk) 12:09, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As above, Fall translates as “Case” and was used by the Germans for major campaigns, not a specific operation (Unternehmen) such as this. The redirect is not plausible and is confusing as Fall Weiß was the invasion of Poland in 1939. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:54, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As above, just different spelling.----Assayer (talk) 10:26, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fall Weiss (1942)

Fall Weiss (1942) → Operation Weiss (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Fall Weiss is the plan for the invasion of Poland 1939. "Operation Weiss" was not called "Fall". The redirect is misleading. KnightMove (talk) 06:17, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As above, Fall translates as “Case” and was used by the Germans for major campaigns, not a specific operation (Unternehmen) such as this. The redirect is not plausible for that reason but also because Operation Weiss was in 1943. It is also confusing as Fall Weiss was the invasion of Poland in 1939. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:58, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete That was a double redirect in the first place. Keeping it makes no sense at all. ----Assayer (talk) 10:18, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Corrido (song)

Corrido (song) → Capoeira music#Corrido (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Corridos are also a type of song, so a better title might be better. Tbhotch^™ (CC BY-SA 4.0) 05:51, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe move to Corrido (Capoeira song)? Crouch, Swale (talk) 22:59, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i don't think that'd work, since that title implies there's one specific song with this name that could be considered the primary target consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:27, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since there's a primary topic for this term, retarget to Corrido as a {{r from unnecessary disambiguation}} and add a link to Capoeira music#Corrido at Corrido (disambiguation). - Eureka Lott 15:49, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leftover Xiaolin Showdown redirects

Minor Xiaolin Showdown characters → Xiaolin Showdown (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Changing Chopsticks → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Known Shen Gong Wu → Xiaolin Showdown#Shen Gong Wu (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

2025 September 2 § Sheng gong wu redirects – delete

Delete these leftover redirects. Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:07, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Best songs of the decade

Best songs of the decade → 2000s in music (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

"The decade" probably meant 00s in 2009 when this was created, but now it's woefully ambiguous. "Best" also doesn't really describe the contents of the target either. casualdejekyll 04:23, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination. An opinion based on unexplained criteria that isn't what the target article is about. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 08:24, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom - ambiguous and subjective. BugGhost 🦗👻 10:38, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm rather surprised List of songs considered the best is a redlink (psst, leek, project for you?), but so long as it is, delete. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 11:45, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to actually click the redlink before posting this, so I'll note that that did once exist, but its deletion seems to have been mostly on copyright grounds; I expect that something structured similarly to List of video games considered the best would survive AfD. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 11:49, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~retarget to match cbat, obviously~~ delete as vague, essentially per nom consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 12:05, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pinacoteca Provinciale di BaRI

Pinacoteca Provinciale di BaRI → Pinacoteca metropolitana di Bari (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Delete for having an implausible capitalization of Bari. The article was originally created at this title, but has been histmerged to the target, so there is no longer an attribution issue. ^Complex/_Rational 04:13, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Russian invasion of Ukraine

Russian invasion of Ukraine → Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect was left behind when the article Russian invasion of Ukraine was recently moved to Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) as a result of this RM, which found consensus that it is incorrect to describe events beyond the initial attack as an "invasion" but rather a phase of the larger "war". Hence, the current redirect target contradicts this consensus, as the RM had explicitly rejected the characterization of the "war" as an "invasion", and defeats the corrective purpose of the move.

The other logical target would be 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, which was recently split from the main page after the RM, since it is the only article that bears the title "Russian invasion of Ukraine". However, it would only be a valid target if it were deemed to be the primary topic of "Russian invasion of Ukraine", in which case the article should simply be moved to remove the unnecessary qualifier per WP:TITLEDAB (only as much detail as is necessary to distinguish one topic from another should be used [...] if the article is about the primary topic to which the ambiguous name refers, then that name can be its title without modification) and WP:OVERPRECISE (titles should unambiguously define the topical scope of the article, but should be no more precise than that).

There was actually already consensus for this being the primary topic back in 2023, but editors argued that it had been nullified by the most recent RM, so a new RM was initiated. Unfortunately, that discussion has just been closed inconclusively, with the closer finding an absence of consensus here as to the primary topic of 'Russian invasion of Ukraine'. Hence, we must now disambiguate. Our options are:

InfiniteNexus (talk) 04:11, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've maintained throughout several successive RfDs that "Russian invasion of Ukraine" can refer to several major invasions historically and that it is recentist to treat the current one as primary. It's worth noting that "Russian invasion of Ukraine" is a partly disambiguated title (the base title being just "invasion of Ukraine"), meaning that there is a higher bar to consider any one invasion primary. While I respect that this argument failed at previous RfDs, the fact that we now have two articles on recent things that are both called the Russian invasion of Ukraine (the invasion proper and the ensuing war), not to mention earlier aspects of the war that also constituted Russian invasions of Ukraine, I think the case is even clearer to retarget to List of invasions and occupations of Ukraine, which disambiguates these and more. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 04:37, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retain the current target Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) – As the proposer discloses above, Russian invasion of Ukraine was recently moved to Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present). As a result, the vast majority of the myriad links to Russian invasion of Ukraine across the encyclopaedia are intended for the current target, Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present). Therefore, I oppose any change until this situation is remedied. Adopting any of the alternatives proposed here will result in a great inconvenience to the reader. Yours, &c. RGloucester — ☎ 04:37, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:DEADHORSE. InfiniteNexus (talk) 05:07, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The horse is very much alive. Take a look at the links. In any usual situation, I would support Tamzin's argument, and I agree that List of invasions and occupations of Ukraine is the most appropriate target. However, the link situation remains, just as it was a month ago, without any obvious evidence of amelioration. The onus is on the proposers of this change to take up the work of minimising any negative outcome for our readers. Until there is evidence that this problem will be addressed, I cannot support this change. Yours, &c. RGloucester — ☎ 06:52, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirecting to the war article is not a tenable position. As has been explained to you several times, the August RM was closed with consensus that it is not correct to call the war an invasion. Therefore, continuing to point the "invasion" redirect to "war" blatantly disregards that consensus. It has also been explained to you several times that the links are not a big deal because they can be fixed en masse. I will gladly mass-convert all the incoming links from Russian invasion of Ukraine to Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present), but the only reason I have not done so is that other editors have said that some links should point to 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine instead of Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present), which would necessitate a manual comb-through, but I do not have unlimited time to edit Wikipedia and there are currently 11,811 incoming links — impossible for one editor alone to inspect each and every of them. InfiniteNexus (talk) 07:27, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As you are most likely aware, we have Template:R from incorrect name. Redirects from 'incorrect', but commonly-used titles are common across the encyclopaedia. I am not going to comment on whether I think this specific use of 'Russian invasion of Ukraine' is incorrect, nor do I think this is a particularly useful argument to make in this specific case. All I ask is that you think of the reader. I am opposed to any mass-conversion without manual consideration, as this will also inconvenience the reader. Our most important goal in this endeavour is to make sure that our readers are directed to the article for which they are looking. If you do not have the time to perform the massive clean-up of nearly 12,000 links that will be required to implement this change, you should not be proposing it in the first place. Yours, &c. RGloucester — ☎ 08:22, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects from 'incorrect', but commonly-used titles are common across the encyclopaedia – If "invasion" were a common or acceptable name for the 2022–present phase of the war, then what was the purpose of the move? To create a needless headache for editors and confuse readers by having a separate article titled "invasion"? This logic doesn't add up; clearly, the consensus was that the war is not commonly called an "invasion".
If you do not have the time to perform the massive clean-up of nearly 12,000 links that will be required to implement this change – You are confused, the problem of some links to Russian invasion of Ukraine being intended for 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine and not Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) was created by the previous RM, not this RfD. There is already a present need to clean up those thousands of links, primarily to disambiguate between those two articles, and retargeting will not add to the burden.
I am opposed to any mass-conversion without manual consideration – Mass-converting all incoming links to Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) is equivalent to maintaining the status quo of pointing all links to the war article, so your opposition to such an action is inconsistent with your !vote. That said, I noted that I too do not think this is an ideal solution and only mentioned it because you demanded that all links intended for the war article be "fixed". Tamzin below has outlined ways to semi-automate the clean-up process, and I am sure there are other editors we can enlist to help.

InfiniteNexus (talk) 19:02, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is the point of this argument? I don't care whether 'Russian invasion of Ukraine' is a 'correct' name for anything, I only care that the reader gets to the right page. From your first proposal, you have continued to go on and on about the bureaucratic necessity for a change without any thought about how to implement it in such a way that does not negatively impact the reader. This is precisely the same mistake that was made by the RM proposer. All I have asked for was for a clear plan for resolving the obvious issue that exists. You never provided such a plan, but I am grateful to Tamzin for providing one below. Provided that we agree, here, to implement this solution, I will support retargeting the article per Tamzin. That means that you and other editors will need to help resolve this issue. Yours, &c. RGloucester — ☎ 21:40, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the links issue was created by the RM that moved Russian invasion of Ukraine to Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present). Contrary to what you have repeatedly suggested, neither this RfD to retarget Russian invasion of Ukraine nor the failed RM to move 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine will exacerbate the situation. In fact, disambiguating is more beneficial to readers because they will be able to find both articles, whereas pointing the redirect to one or the other will only benefit half. It's not out of a "bureaucratic necessity". InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:52, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The vast majority of existing links are clearly intended for the Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) article, not the new article about the 2022 military operation, irrespective of whether that article is truly the primary topic of Russian invasion of Ukraine. If there were evidence that half or even many of these links were intended to link to an article limited in scope to the military operation that took place between February–April 2022, then perhaps disambiguation might benefit the reader, but there is no such evidence. For this reason, disambiguating will not benefit 'half of readers'. I agree that retargeting to a de facto disambiguation page (List of invasions and occupations of Ukraine) will eventually be helpful when the link issue is solved, because I agree that there is no clear primary topic of Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, as Wikipedia decided to maintain an article about the 2022–present war at Russian invasion of Ukraine for many years, our existing articles are designed with the expectation that Russian invasion of Ukraine is the article about the war, i.e. what is now titled Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present). Any retargeting that does not take this fact into account can only be called shortsighted. Yours, &c. RGloucester — ☎ 01:30, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not at all sure it's correct that "The vast majority of existing links are clearly intended for the Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) article". I just scrolled down to an arbitrary point in that list and looked at a selection of twenty articles in a row:

Likud - target would be 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
Patti Smith - target would be Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) for first use, 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine for second use.
COVID-19 pandemic in Ukraine - either works
COVID-19 pandemic in Russia - either works
Joko Widodo - target would be Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present)
Edward Snowden - target would be 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
Playing card - can't tell immediately, would have to look up sources (currently unsourced)
Shanghai Cooperation Organisation - target would be Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present)
Catherine, Princess of Wales - target would be 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II - target would be Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present)
SBV Vitesse - target would be 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
University of Kent - target would be Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present)
Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation - target would be Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present)
Large Hadron Collider - target would be Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present)
Peak oil - can't tell immediately, would have to look for sources (currently unsourced)
Bernabéu Stadium - target would be Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present)
Russia–United States relations - targets would be both Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine (several instances of each)
Salvador Allende - target would be Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present)
2021–2023 global supply chain crisis - target would be Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present)
Armed Forces of Ukraine - targets would be both Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine (several instances of each)

A majority yes, but not a vast majority. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 07:55, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just on a technical note, if links are the concern, one thing I've done occasionally as a closer for RfDs like this is temporarily create a DAB at the title, dabfix all the backlinks, and then turn the DAB into a redirect to wherever there was consensus to target. It's a little hacky, but it gets the job done well. If the exceptionally large number of backlinks here means that that process takes a week or several instead of the normal hour or several, so be it; that said, there's a decent number of strings like 2022 [[Russian invasion of Ukraine]] and full-scale [[Russian invasion of Ukraine]] that could probably be blitzed in an AWB/JWB run, significantly speeding things up. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 10:18, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am much obliged for your response, and what you have proposed seems like a reasonable solution. I am ashamed to admit that I have no experience with such automated tools, but if there will be a collaborative effort to fix this problem, I should be happy to help in any manner that I am able. Yours, &c. RGloucester — ☎ 10:41, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Move+ extension also allows one to update links in fairly quick succession. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥^{(discuss · contribs)} 21:35, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to List of invasions and occupations of Ukraine per the arguments from InfiniteNexus and Tamzin, as there have been several historical Russian incursions into Ukraine. That target already has a hatnote for "Invasion of Ukraine" pointing to the current overall war, so there is no harm in expanding upon it with this redirect to ensure readers locate what they are looking for/ I would say the Russian invasion was the more common term in 2022 and 2023, but since it has continually perpetuated as an ongoing war, that is likely to have more long-term significance than the starting invasion of said war. — Trailblazer¹⁰¹🔥^{(discuss · contribs)} 05:26, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to List of invasions and occupations of Ukraine – by far the most logical option as that page functions as a disambiguation page and easily directs the reader to the article they want. Chessrat ^{(talk, contributions)} 07:38, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to "List of invasions and occupations of Ukraine". Given that no particular event is currently regarded as being the WP:PRITOP of this title, redirecting to an article ("Russo-Ukrainian war") that merely happens to encompass some information about two or three of the most significant events to which the title may refer would probably be unhelpful. Readers likely would not understand why this title redirects to the article of a conflict that is not an invasion in itself. A separate disambiguation page is also unlikely to be necessary given the presence of the "List of invasions and occupations of Ukraine" article. The high number of incoming links to this title may be an issue, but it is clearly a fixable one. –Gluonz^{talk contribs} 17:18, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retain the current target Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) as WP:PRIMARYTOPIC both per usage and per long-term significance. The latter is evidenced by the fact that the term was almost never used prior to 2014. Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) has five times more daily pageviews than 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, and readers of the latter article typically navigate to the former[20], the opposite movement almost doesn't happen[21]. This proves that they're mostly interested in the Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) article. Kelob2678 (talk) 12:34, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I will pose to you the same question I did to another user above: If there's no problem with calling the war an "invasion", and the war is commonly called an "invasion", then what was the point of moving that article away from Russian invasion of Ukraine (thereby breaking thousands of links) and creating a separate sub-article entitled "2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine"? To create a needless headache for editors and confuse readers by having two separate articles with similar titles? The status quo means Russian invasion of Ukraine and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine would co-exist but point to different pages — that is confusing to readers. The pageview comparison is irrelevant because the 2022 invasion article was just created two months ago. InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:59, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Consensus can change. The RM that brought us here determined that there is no consensus for the primary topic of Russian invasion of Ukraine, so the past discussions are irrelevant.
Retaining the redirect wouldn't lead to any problems with broken links, in contrast to retargeting. Having multiple articles with similar titles is standard practice for Wikipedia, the year in 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine acts as a natural disambiguator. Pageviews are relevant as they are stable, WP:PT1 refers to the current usage, not a hypothetical future one. Kelob2678 (talk) 20:53, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retaining the redirect wouldn't lead to any problems with broken links Yes, it would. There is currently a large number of links to Russian invasion of Ukraine that need to be retargeted to 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine instead of Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present); Chessrat has provided a list of examples above. This was caused by the RM in August/September, not this RfD; disambiguating would help both readers looking for either article get to their desired target. "Consensus can change", yes, but unlikely in the span of just two months, and this RfD obviously cannot override larger consensus on another page (WP:CONLEVEL). The most recent RM also did not contradict the consensus of the RM before that. I will reiterate that pageviews are not useful in this instance because we have a significant number of backlinks to the three-year-old article compared to the two-months-old article. InfiniteNexus (talk) 22:14, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that for some it would be better to redirect to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, but I disagree that they are "broken", as they somehow managed to serve their purpose before the creation of the separate article on the invasion. This is a community discussion, so it can easily override local consensus formed on the talk page. The most recent RM overturned the past consensus, had it been otherwise, the RM would have been closed with "moved".
I don't understand your argument with respect to pageviews. If you want to say that the problem is that we don't have enough links to 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, then this is not the case, as a five-fold difference cannot be explained by this. 30% of incoming views at Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) are from other articles. Let's say that one-third really should be targeted at 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. In that case, pageviews for the war would drop by 10%, and for the invasion article, they would increase by 50%. We will still get a three-fold difference, which is large enough to satisfy WP:PT1. Kelob2678 (talk) 22:40, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Chessrat's list is somewhat tangential; as for why, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine article is an inferior article, that consists largely of content copied out of Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present), with very little original material. See Cinderella157's analysis. An editor that ends up at Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) from a link to Russian invasion of Ukraine will never be inconvenienced, because this is a comprehensive article that contains all of the relevant content related to the 2022 military operation, as well as broader events. On the other hand, any editor mistakenly directed to the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine article will have to wade through irrelevant content before arriving at the more comprehensive article. At present, the 2022 invasion article offers very little to the reader. Yours, &c. RGloucester — ☎ 00:57, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Responding to both Kelob2678 and RGloucester: The RM in August resulted in consensus to move this page to Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present), alongside a consensus to create a separate article about the 2022 invasion. This was a very well-attended and highly contentious RM, with the closer writing a lengthy and thoughtful closing statement in their assessment of the community's consensus, so it is bold of you to suggest that a handful of editors unhappy with the outcome of the RM and/or the present quality of the split article (remember, Wikipedia is a work in progress) can somehow override, ignore, or overturn hard-fought community consensus obtained in a high-profile RM. I think I've said this elsewhere, but I personally have no opinion on the outcome of the RM; however, I do care that consensus is enforced, and if the community has agreed that the approach most beneficial to readers is to have an article titled "war" about events post-2022 and another article titled "invasion" about the initial attack, so be it. If your argument is that the distinction between "war" and "invasion" does not, in fact, benefit readers, and the split article was a terrible idea, then please challenge the consensus by opening a new RM or RfC. As for the pageviews matter, I am struggling to understand why Kelob2678 keeps going on about PT1 and whatever — the point I was making is that the "2022 invasion" article is brand-new, hot-off-the-press, so of course it is not going to have very many pageviews compared to a much older and longer article! This is essentially a form of WP:RECENTISM argument. InfiniteNexus (talk) 08:31, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No one is contesting the original page move, or the creation of the invasion article. All we want is to make sure that readers get where they want to go. Based on your attitude here, I do not think I can support a retargeting, because it seems like you are attempting to make a WP:POINT, rather than trying to improve the encyclopaedia. Yours, &c. RGloucester — ☎ 09:43, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Enforcing community consensus is not disruptive behavior to make a point, and falsely accusing others of doing so is itself disruptive and not WP:AGF. As I wrote above, it seems we are in agreement that whatever we do should benefit readers, and yet your proposal (i.e. the status quo) does not align with what the larger community thinks is best for readers. If you think the community is wrong, this is not the appropriate venue to challenge that. InfiniteNexus (talk) 17:30, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The August RM was extremely voluminous, and the discussion about primary topic wasn't central to it. However, the October RM centered around this issue and concluded with, I would find that there is an absence of consensus here as to the primary topic of "Russian invasion of Ukraine". The closing statement also said, a well-argued request might yield a different outcome at RfD i.e., the point of this RfD is to reargue the October RM. In these discussions, "No consensus" usually means retaining a long-standing status quo, in this case, it means sending readers who type "Russian invasion of Ukraine" to the article that covers the war as a whole. Here, readers should be especially put first, as the redirect itself gets more views than 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. I also don't think language such as "hard-fought" is appropriate for this discussion. Kelob2678 (talk) 18:05, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The August RM came to the consensus that "war" and "invasion" describe two distinct topics, while the October RM found no consensus on the primary topic for "Russian invasion of Ukraine". The former strikes off Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) as a possible target because editors agreed that the article should be called a "war" and not an "invasion" (the nominator's rationale was: The word 'invasion' is used only in reference to Russia's initial 24 February act of invasion, and is not used to describe the current war, and the closer wrote that the word "invasion" creates a mismatch between title and scope), while the latter strikes off 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine as a possible target because editors did not agree it was the primary topic (which I disagree with, but respect and accept). This seems like a fairly clear reading of consensus to me, and I am not sure why some editors disagree. Do you agree with this interpretation of the two RMs' consensus? (P.S. "Hard-fought" means "achieved through a large effort", as in it was very difficult to come to a consensus on what to call the war, but a consensus was eventually achieved, and it was to call it "war" and not "invasion".) InfiniteNexus (talk) 18:58, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with this interpretation. The August RM didn't rule on the primary topic, the quote from the closure you provided was a summary of the argument, not the closer's verdict. "No consensus" in the October RM means that the current redirect should be retained, as usually happens in "No consensus" RMs, AfDs, and RfCs. Kelob2678 (talk) 19:12, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When did I suggest the August RM "ruled" on the primary topic? I said it found consensus that the war article cannot and should not be referred to as an "invasion". That is quite literally what the closer wrote. Yet the status quo does just that, continuing to call the war an "invasion" via a redirect. InfiniteNexus (talk) 20:53, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It did not find this. That was an argument made by one side of the debate, which the closer accurately summarized. The closer found that Consensus to move this page to Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present), alongside a consensus to create a separate article about the 2022 invasion No one challenges this, we are not at RM or AfD. Kelob2678 (talk) 21:07, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is irrelevant. As I said above, redirects from incorrect but commonly-used names are common across the encyclopaedia. This discussion is about the redirect, not about the article title. Again, no one is relitigating the article title. The presence of a redirect from Russian invasion of Ukraine to Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) cannot in any way be considered equivalent to 'calling the war an "invasion"'. Redirects are for navigational purposes only, and the existence of a redirect in no way legitimises the accuracy of the name used by that redirect. In fact, redirects are, by default, names that the Wikipedia community chose not to use as an article title for one reason or another. Yours, &c. RGloucester — ☎ 23:59, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus is determined by comparing the arguments of supporters with those of opposers and determining which is best supported by PAGs and benefits the reader the most. In this case, the closer found consensus in favor of the proposal, meaning they found consensus in favor of the arguments presented by the supporting side. If the closer found consensus for the proposal but not for the reasons presented, you would think they would say so as this is unusual (and dubious, as it would likely be a WP:SUPERVOTE). InfiniteNexus (talk) 01:05, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retain the current target Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present), per the reasons of the previous comment. Lklundin (talk) 12:46, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retain the current target or Re-target to Russo-Ukrainian war – There is only one conflict that is widely referred to as the 'Russian invasion of Ukraine': the currently on-going conflict between Russia and Ukraine. There are two phases in that conflict that are referred to by that phrase in reliable sources and those are the incursion in 2014 and the 'full-scale' invasion in 2022. If there is any need to disambiguate then that can be done by re-targeting to the wider scope article which covers these and has a reasonably large readership as well. Directing readers to a page that has less than a hundred daily views and that lists only one conflict that can be described as being between Russia and Ukraine anyway exacts a pointless tax on the readership. We'd be leading probably 99.5% of the readership to a page where they would ask: Ummm... Why'd you lead me here? and the majority of those will continue I just want to know what's going on in the conflict. There's only one target for that: Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present).
I stated in the linked RM discussion that I am indifferent as to the title of the article limited in scope to the invasion period. It can hold the title 'Russian invasion of Ukraine', but with the precondition to resolve the issue that the majority of links to 'Russian invasion of Ukraine' are intended to direct the reader to Russo-Ukrainian war (2022–present) before such a move. There are underlying issues with the structure and coverage of this conflict on Wikipedia. Too many to condense into a brief paragraph. There are hundreds to thousands of interrelated articles affected by major changes to the overarching parent articles. The proposal to move '2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine' to just 'Russian invasion of Ukraine' should not on its face be controversial, but it has to be because it has consequential knock-on effects, and the links are simply one of the more noticeable problems.
In the present circumstance, considering that the purpose of the encyclopedia is to benefit the readers the status-quo remains as the best outcome. The invasion article substantially duplicates the main war article, though it offers more detailed coverage of that phase of the conflict. Misdirecting the reader to the war article where the invasion article may have been more desirable has limited consequence. The reverse is less true particularly considering that most readers want to know what is happening rather than what has happened. Both are served by one article, whilst only the latter is served by the other. A weaker, but still functional choice would be to re-target to the main main war article which covers both plausible targets for a 'Russian invasion of Ukraine'. Mr rnddude (talk) 04:20, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – "World War II receives substantially more pageviews than Invasion of Poland, and there have been many other invasions of Poland by many countries at many points in time throughout history, so Invasion of Poland should be moved to 1939 German invasion of Poland and the redirect left behind should be retargeted to World War II because readers would not be inconvenienced by being sent to a broader article that also discusses the 1939 invasion, is more well-written, and has more information overall."^[sarcasm] InfiniteNexus (talk) 08:47, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The parent article is titled World War II not German–Polish War. Kelob2678 (talk) 09:45, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retain current target - That would seem to be the target sought by a user making the inquiry. Carrite (talk) 12:53, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retain current target A random person searching on Wikipedia for "Russian invasion of Ukraine" is almost certainly looking for the currently ongoing war - as I was when I was redirected and got to the redirect page that is currently 'broken' because of this request for deletion. Redirecting to a disambiguation page or to the 2022 invasion is just going to confuse people, and the faster this closes the better. Hentheden (talk) 21:52, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

X (née Twitter)

X (née Twitter) → Twitter (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Implausible as search term. It was only used on one page, which has since been removed. I cannot reasonably think of a scenario in which someone would search an incorrect term like this. X (formerly Twitter) perhaps, but not née. – {{u|hekatlys}} ^WOOF 03:35, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Used in a variety of places, including Ars Technica, Gizmodo, Kotaku, and a New York Times op-ed. This is only a weak keep, though, because it's not clear to me from these sources that the phrase is more meaningful than the sum of its parts; i.e., it's not so much an alternate name as just one way to phrase the fact that X was previously called Twitter. That said, it's not inconceivable that someone in one of these contexts could think that "X (née Twitter)" is the name, or not understand the referent and search it by those exact words, so I see some benefit to the redirect. (Sidenote, it should be né, since "X" is not feminine, and also technically X' original name is "Twttr", but at RfD we don't care whether the term is right, just whether it's used.) -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 03:46, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Tamzin - sources are using the term to refer to the topic. No harm in keeping. BugGhost 🦗👻 10:49, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Nominator needs to broaden their vocabulary: wikt:née. wikt:né is an uncommon, usually italicised form used when giving the former name of a man. I'm unsure whether Twitter is a man or a woman. The feminine form is more common because women commonly take the name of their man, not vice versa. If, one of these days, the community finally agrees to move Twitter from its former to its current name, and it doesn't become the new primary topic for X, the title will need some form of disambiguation, and the parenthetical "née" is more concise than "formerly". The common usage in sources cited by Tamzin show that not only is this title plausible, it's a good candidate for the new title of the article, whenever the page finally moves. – wbm1058 (talk) 11:42, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, utterly pointless. Just because it's been used in a cutesy fashion by others doesn't mean we need this as a redirect. It really stretches credulity that anyone is going to search for this who just wants to get to our main article about it. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 03:11, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PANDORA. Crouch, Swale (talk) 21:38, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep contra Crouch, Swale. It's a helpful redirect as Tamzin demonstrated so it doesn't make any sense why or how PANDORA would come into play. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:53, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Except it's not a helpful redirect. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 16:18, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Except that it is a helpful redirect. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:18, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...titles that turn articles or article subtopics into questions, like What is the current name of Twitter?
...whose existence might encourage the few readers who stumble upon them to assume that there exist redirects of the same type for other targets as well (opening a "Pandora's Box" of user expectations, e.g., expectations that Wikipedia might actually title the name of an article about a product by its current name, rather than its former name...
- Category:Redirects from former names (29,173 pages)
- Category:Redirects to former names (396 pages)
Users expecting that former names redirect to current names might be _surprised_ by this outlier example, leading them to think that maybe Wikipedia is biased against the current product.

Given the strong association of the former name with the current product, why wouldn't a parenthetical with (Twitter) be more recognizable than any of (app), (online service), (platform), (service), (social media), (social network), or (website) – wbm1058 (talk) 19:14, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Very much unambiguous. WP:CHEAP Servite et contribuere (talk) 08:35, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Undemocratic

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

I propose retargeting to authoritarianism. Many types of undemocratic government exist. Autocracy is a specific type where absolute power is held by one person. A more general term is authoritarianism which indicates a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality. Uhoj (talk) 01:41, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, hopelessly vague. Wikipedia, for example, is undemocratic. It doesn't just refer to governments, but even if it did, there's still no clear target for this. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 03:17, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Democracy as an {{r from antonym}}. Whatever kind of "undemocratic" is looking for, an explanation of democracy should help them find it. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (they|xe|🤷) 12:40, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did consider that, but given that the word is very often used outside of the governmental usage, plus being an adjective, plus being an antonym...this is a bit of a reach. Even DemocraticDemocratic redirects to the Democrat dab page. So if we really have to keep this, that's probably going to be a better target. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 14:19, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as vague. This adjective can be used to describe any number of institutions, practices, governments, policies, etc. on a spectrum. The meaning is usually clear from context and when it's not, it should be defined or reworded rather than linked for an explanation (MOS:NOFORCELINK). —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:45, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Democracy per Tamzin. That article does discuss undemocratic governments, for example in the lede: Democracy contrasts with forms of government where power is not vested in the general population of a state, such as authoritarian systems. -- Tavix ^(talk) 17:48, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Șaaru River

Șaaru River → Prahova (river) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Șaaru River was originally a stub on "a tributary of the Prahova River". It was converted to a redirect by Markussep in 2019, with the edit summary "not sure this river exists".

I have done a little searching myself and am unable to find any online sources that confirm the existence of Șaaru River. The Romanian stub ro:Râul Șaaru still exists, but I cannot access its sources.

The redirect receives very few pageviews and "Șaaru" is not mentioned on the target page. ~2025-32085-07 (talk) 00:31, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, and also the version without diacritics Saaru River and the version with the wrong diacritics Şaaru River. It's not in the Atlasul cadastrului apelor din România (should be on page 351 = scan 322 of 654). I tried again, without success, to find it on maps (according to Romanian wikipedia it should flow into the Prahova near Comarnic). Markussep ^Talk 15:38, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Crashpad

Crashpad → Bouldering mat (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I am wondering whether this should be retargeted to crash pad or just hatnoted. 1234qwer 1234qwer 4 00:30, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A 'crashpad' (written as one word) is a common term in rock climbing for a bouldering mat such as here and here. I haven't seen as much use of the single word version for other areas? Aszx5000 (talk) 23:18, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

November 14

List of mayors of Clarence

List of mayors of Clarence → City of Clarence (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
List of mayors of Burnie → City of Burnie (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

No such list exists at the targets; misleading for people expecting one. Rusalkii (talk) 23:10, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - I can only see current mayor(s) and 2022 election results on each page. Blue Sonnet (talk) 11:18, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of current PWD ministers in India

List of current PWD ministers in India → State governments of India (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
List of current education ministers in India → State governments of India (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I'm not sure what a PWD minister is in this context (public works department?) and Google is not enlightening me, but the only list of ministers we have at the target is the chief ministers of the current state governments. There is also no list of education ministers on the page. Something of a WP:RETURNTORED case as well, as this user seems to have been attempting to create seperate pages for these lists. Rusalkii (talk) 22:58, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - I don't see it either. Blue Sonnet (talk) 11:22, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fasting cheese

Fasting cheese → Vegan cheese (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I assume this is a type of vegan cheese, but we don't mention it in the article, and the connection is unclear to me. We mention it briefly at Aleksandar_Zega#Food_analyses but that is a trivial mention that doesn't merit a redirect. Rusalkii (talk) 22:42, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as creator. "Fasting cheese" is indeed just a synonym for vegan cheese; it's a term used by some companies to advertise their products to Greek Christians over lent. While a somewhat niche term, you can find several uses (as well as product listings) by searching up "fasting cheese" or "Greek fasting cheese" on Google. While the term isn't mentioned in the target article, this isn't a necessary requirement for redirects; I personally think it's helpful per reason 3 of WP:RKEEP (as I've encountered the term often in my everyday life), although I do acknowledge that reason 8 of WP:RDELETE may contradict this. Loytra^✨ 23:16, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep per Loytra's comment. Fasting in this context refers to cheese not violating the Eastern Orthodox fasting rules, the relevant rule here being no dairy. Since vegan cheese by definition has no dairy, it can accurately be described as fasting cheese (and described many times, there are 5000 results on Google Search.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bis-Serjetà? (talk • contribs) 17:31, 16 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, unmentioned at target. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 04:12, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
delete unless mentioned. a synonym like this should be mentioned, because if it's not, it would still count as surprising consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 17:51, 18 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. In addition to the reasons already stated, which I agree with, I found some evidence of ambiguity. For example this product made with sheep's milk is marketed as "fasting cheese". —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 16:06, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UTV Software Communications

UTV Software Communications → Disney India (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This title has a category of more than 4 subcategories and more than 6 entries, but no article, surprisingly! Per the page history, this title was created as a redirect to UTV Motion Pictures and has been subject to re-targeting between it and Disney India; the latter of which this has been designated as its subsidiary in its current page revision. I see it as an WP:ASTONISH factor for readers, newbies and editors alike, so I've brought it over here for discussion. Intrisit (talk) 20:43, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Created the rd due to the cat some years ago, looks like the target was changed shortly thereafter by an IP. And I don't necessarily disagree as the film division was but a part of the larger company (I had rd'd to what I felt was the most apt target then). I don't think astonish applies as mention of rd is clear there in the target. FWIW, the Disney Wiki also rds this to the same target: [22]. Gotitbro (talk) 02:54, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Duke Nukem 3D Total Conversions

Duke Nukem 3D Total Conversions → Duke Nukem 3D (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

no such list in the target, or mentions of total conversions in the first place. used to exist as an unsourced stub until an afd was closed as merge back, but all the content that was merged back was one (still unsourced) sentence that was tweaked within 13 hours, so i doubt it actually counts

as an aside, eduke (the one mod listed) is a source port, not a total conversion consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 19:18, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Blue Sonnet (talk) 11:30, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of enemies in Duke Nukem 3D

List of enemies in Duke Nukem 3D → Duke Nukem 3D (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

used to be a pile of unsourced fancruft, and there's no list in the target 18 years later consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 18:58, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, definitely not in there. Blue Sonnet (talk) 11:32, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nick Jr. (Polish TV channel)

Nick Jr. (Polish TV channel) → Nick Jr. Channel#International (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This redirect was created on 7 June 2021, but it's not mentioned in the target article's section as at this listing since its creation. I suggest delete. Intrisit (talk) 15:41, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It clearly exists from searching so I added it to the list. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:50, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dragonfly nymph

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

i was gonna refine this, but should it be to #anatomy, #ecology, or #life cycle? all three seem to be equally plausible in absence of a section or article specifically about those nymphs. in case of doubt, i'll lean towards refining to #anatomy just because it's the first one. it also existed as an unsourced stub for a week back in 2007, but we're not restoring two sentences that are already in the target consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 14:07, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, it's a plausible search term that folks might paste in, and it should redirect to Dragonfly. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:12, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...yes, that's the point, the question was over which section (if any) to refine to consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 14:15, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - leave it directed to the article, not to a section. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:51, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as it is. Since nymphs are mentioned multiple times in the article, I'm not sure it would be helpful to to target to one of them. Chess enjoyer (talk) 01:23, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Odonta

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

should've just been a plausible misspelling of odonata, but as it turns out, results were extremely torn between a bunch of stuff related to odontology (which, to my knowledge, is not an order of insects), with only about two actually related to insects

also, some books say it might be "tooth" in some language, but don't seem to elaborate on which consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:59, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's a plausible typo but as you say, it's ambiguous. Probably best we just delete it. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:12, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Google Scholar search shows it to be a not too uncommon typo for Odonata in the published literature, so it's not just a plausible typo, but an actual one people might search for. FunkMonk (talk) 14:32, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - both plausible and actual. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:51, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

wouldn't that be a reason to retarget to odonata instead? consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 19:41, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. Retarget to odonata. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:13, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dining needle

Dining needle → Dragonfly (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

unmentioned brooklyn(?) slang for darning needle. i guess there's a wiktionary entry that says it's also used for dragonflies, but that one doesn't have any references, so it would probably be a good idea to do away with it. hell, even if it was presentable, it would still be vague consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 13:50, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. "Darning needle" is commonly used but that doesn't mean this is. Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:58, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added some quotes to the Wiktionary entry, but it's not common enough for me to care what happens to this redirect. --Schützenpanzer (Talk) 14:43, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Doesn't serve a useful purpose. - UtherSRG (talk) 18:52, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lower Frisian

Lower Frisian → Saterland Frisian language (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

That's because I haven't been able to find any reliable sources that use this term or a variation 'Low(er) Frisian', let alone as a synonym for 'East' or 'Saterland Frisian'. PK2 (talk; contributions) 06:25, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Seems like it might refer to some kind of Frisian. This piece about ladybugs uses the term twice, but it's not for Saterland Frisian (SF doesn't use å). It's definitely for another kind of Frisian though, maybe a form of Goesharde Frisian since it uses that letter. This piece on the Mennonites seems to put in or around West Frisia. Other than that, I have found nothing else useful. ThaesOfereode (talk) 23:15, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adventure Time babies

Baby Tree Trunks → List of Adventure Time characters#Tree Trunks (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Baby Magic Man → List of Adventure Time characters#Magic Man (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Baby Lady Rainicorn → List of Adventure Time characters#Lady Rainicorn (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Baby Jake (Adventure Time: Fionna and Cake character) → Jake the Dog (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Baby Ice King → Ice King (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Baby Cinnamon Bun → List of Adventure Time characters#Cinnamon Bun (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The Baby World appears at the start of one episode of Fionna and Cake and does not reappear. None of these redirects are useful. Left out Baby Finn, as the character reappears later on. Sorry about not bundling these nomination. I cannot remember how. (Oinkers42) (talk) 06:04, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@(Oinkers42), I recommend using WP:MASSXFD for bundling, or you can follow the manual instructions at WP:RFDHOWTO step II. I've bundled them for you. Rusalkii (talk) 23:06, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will keep in mind the mass XFD tool for future reference. (Oinkers42) (talk) 06:03, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Petrikov (Vampireworld)

Simon Petrikov (Vampireworld) → Ice King (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This version of the character appears solely as a corpse. The redirect is not useful for navigation. (Oinkers42) (talk) 05:57, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cn studios

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Kenny (Pokémon)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Beetle bug

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Speed (online streamer)

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

November 13

Génération

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Skipiti Toilet

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 20#Skipiti Toilet

Aculeus

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

technically a plausible term for stings (as in the thing a stinger does, not the stinger itself), but also to thorns, spines, and prickles in plants. so... i guess soft redirect to wikt:aculeus? but would that even work if we do technically have info on the thing the term refers to?

also, this used to be an unsourced stub about a fixed star, and i guess onoba aculeus is there too consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 18:03, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This should be a disambiguation page, not a redirect. It has too many uses, and - as an entomologist working with stinging insects - the stinger is never referred to as an aculeus. In scorpions, yes, but in insects, no. The only use in insects appears to be for a female ovipositor that is not used to sting. It's a pretty narrow functional application of the term. Dyanega (talk) 18:14, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
does this mean wiktionary was mistaken about it being a term for stings? again, not the stinger itself consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 18:17, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The definition given for Latin is accurate; I don't think I agree with the definition they give for English. Dyanega (talk) 18:26, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Interesting. Merriam-Webster also gives "an insect's ovipositor especially when modified into a sting" as the main meaning. I'm not arguing—I wasn't familiar with this term and just did some initial poking around. I don't expect generalist dictionaries to be authoritative on specialized vocabulary but M-W is usually pretty good (and sometimes famously wrong). —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:59, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see set index article potential for the related meanings in plants and arthropods. This could link to Stinger; Ovipositor; and Thorns, spines, and prickles (and other appropriate articles) in the body while explaining what aculeus means in each context. I don't think it's a good dab page candidate as we only have partial title matches where aculeus is the species name of several organisms—Acropora aculeus, Turbonilla aculeus, Onoba aculeus. The SIA could include links to these species and unrelated uses of aculeus in a 'See also' section and could even include wiktionary and canned search links. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:27, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 19:25, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Consarn @Dyanega I have drafted a set index article at Aculeus. Thoughts? This is largely based on the discussion here as I don't have any expertise in this area. Feel free to edit. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:14, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i'm not entirely sure it would be a good idea when only one of the targets actually mentions the name (that being scorpion)... but at the same time, it's there, so eh consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 19:21, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SIAs can stand on their own to define the set and don't have to follow WP:DABMENTION and other dab page constraints. But I'm unsure about the value of this one, too. The description at Scorpion is quite sparse. I haven't ruled out deletion. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 20:33, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The non-redirect version looks decent, to me - it points to all the known uses, which is a massive improvement over the unitary redirect. Dyanega (talk) 22:07, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2026 NRL Women's season

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Soccer Team

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 20#Soccer Team

6/8 time

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 20#6/8 time

USA cricket

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

'MINE CRAFT' redirects

MINE CRAFT → Minecraft (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
MINE CRAFT music → Music of Minecraft (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

The space in particular seems really implausible. I would understand MINECRAFT as that's how the logo's stylized, but nowhen in MC's history has the logo ever been stylized with a space - not even in the Alpha releases, where the logo looked more like it was crafted using cobblestone blocks. Even though Amazon listings have occasionally used "Mine Craft" to try to get around copyright, I couldn't find a single usage of "MINE CRAFT" anywhere.
The second redirect is even LESS plausible than the first, as if you'd wanted to know about their music you'd most likely already know how to properly spell Minecraft. User:Someone-123-321 (I contribute, Talk page so SineBot will shut up) 06:18, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While I think Mine Craft is plausible, the combination of the caps and space together is implausible and would also be covered since the search is case-insensitive. Same thing for the 2nd one, even moreso. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:08, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When "Mine Craft" is plausible, "MINE CRAFT" should be plausible too, especially since it's written in all uppercase in the game's logo. Maxeto0910 (talk) 21:36, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, the search is case-insensitive so it doesn't actually matter if the MINE CRAFT redirect exists at all. Therefore, it's better not to have to bother with 2 redirects. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 00:16, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both as implausible. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:39, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Any reasons for why you think it's implausible?

As explained above, it can be argued that "Mine Craft" and "MINECRAFT" are plausible. There's no valid reason not to think that someone could use both variations at once. Maxeto0910 (talk) 23:06, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the nominator and @Zxcvbnm. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:06, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jay 💬 17:59, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both per non and other comments above. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 20:40, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep bc many people have heard the name before seeing it in writing, making it more plausible Drew Stanley (talk) 19:08, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:33, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep People do love to over capitalise and this feels like the very likely target for this spelling anyways. And this redirect feels WP:CHEAP. Servite et contribuere (talk) 01:12, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete If search is not case-sensitive then these are unnecessary. Blue Sonnet (talk) 10:56, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep both per Servite et contribuere. Redirects are cheap and don't hurt anyone as long as they are not controversial or otherwise problematic, which is clearly not the case here.--Maxeto0910 (talk) 19:02, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Magistral (1982 film)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Heat sore

Heat sore → Herpes (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

I can't find any evidence that this is a synonym for herpes, cold sore, etc. When I search heat sore (without quotes) on both Google and DuckDuckGo I get results for heat rash and some results about treating sore muscles with heat. The pages do not use "heat sore" as a synonym for heat rash. When I search with quotes, "heat sore", I get more sore muscles results including a lot of hits for a product called Cool and Heat Sore Muscle Roller. Google Scholar turns up nothing about herpes. Google and DuckDuckG both have suggested search heat sores on lip that do turn up results related to cold sores as well as canker sores and other lip/mouth sores but I'm not finding sources that actually use "heat sore" and results are essentially the same as simply searching sores on lip. I expected to at least find Quora posts if this is a term used by some with this specific meaning. I'm inclined to delete as this phrase is not really found anywhere except incidentally and has no clear meaning. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫‍(talk) 20:32, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:31, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leaning retarget to heat rash. BD2412 T 03:31, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What about burn, blister and friction burn? Maybe dabify? All the best: Rich Farmbrough 10:23, 2 November 2025 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 16:24, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unless we have some sort of list of physical ailments of skin caused by heat, this redirect just seems vague. Steel1943 (talk) 20:17, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
And even then, only if the list contains some entity that is known as "heat sore". —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 22:29, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment in some non-english languages, these sores are referred to with terms related to fever or fire: French: bouton de fièvre, lit. 'fever pimple', Spanish: calentura, lit. 'fever (-thing)' or fuego labial, 'lip fire', Dutch: koortslip, lit. 'fever lip', German: fieberbläschen, lit. 'little fever blister', Arabic: بثور الحمى, lit. 'fever blister'... There is also in wiktionary fever blister for which the definition is 'a cold score'. I still don't think it's necessarily the right target, but I can kind of see why someone who only vaguely remembers the name would assume it's a "heat" sore. Shazback (talk) 03:10, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We do have fever blister as a redirect to cold sore, as this is a well attested synonym in English. I understand the logical connections that might lead someone to coin the term "heat sore" for cold sores but it's equally if not more plausible as a coinage for burns, blisters, heat rash, and any number of "sores" caused or characterized by "heat". What I have not seen is any evidence whatsoever that this term is in use for at all, and certainly not with any consistent meaning. We are guessing at the possible meaning of an unused term with many hypothetical meanings, which is an argument for deletion. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:03, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist. Any thoughts?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 10:26, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete If we have to put this much work into guessing what the term could theoretically relate to, it's not a useful redirect. Blue Sonnet (talk) 11:01, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Meg

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 20#Princess Meg

Twisted Metal PS3 (working title)

Twisted Metal PS3 (working title) → Twisted Metal (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Apparently a placeholder name until the game was released, currently at Twisted Metal (2012 video game). BD2412 T 00:25, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Unused, obsolete redirect. ~~Deletion is consistent with the consensus for similar redirects for upcoming films per WP:UFILM and upcoming albums per this recent RfD.~~ —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 01:55, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:UFILM wouldn't really apply here in any form or fashion, and this redirect really isn't all that similar at all, given that "working title" ≠ "upcoming". In fact, we have {{R from working title}} (which redirects to {{R from former name}}), which populates Category:Redirects from former names. Steel1943 (talk) 20:03, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That makes sense, thanks for correcting this. (And seems rather obvious now!) True working and former titles do make more sense to preserve. That said, this one has unnecessary disambiguation (demonstrated by the existence of Twisted Metal PS3) and very little use to I say it can still safely be deleted. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 20:38, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't see the sense of the disambiguated title redirect. The actual working title was Twisted Metal PS3, which is unobjectionable as a redirect. BD2412 T 19:02, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Agree. I still support deletion for this reason. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 20:41, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete "working title" is no longer needed. LDW5432 (talk) 02:24, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ per above --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:01, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Heads up @LDW5432 @Lenticel see @Steel1943's correction to my faulty reasoning and my response above, in case that changes your assessment here. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:11, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:43, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Twisted Metal (2012 video game). Yep, if it's a working title, then that would be the proper target. However, Twisted Metal PS3Twisted Metal PS3 exists to serve the same purpose, and neither the subject of the current target nor my proposed target is a "working title" (they are video games [series]); if this is retargeted, this redirect would be a {{R avoided double redirect}} and {{R from unnecessary disambiguation}} for Twisted Metal PS3Twisted Metal PS3. Steel1943 (talk) 19:57, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per Steel --Lenticel ^(talk) 00:44, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget Twisted Metal PS3 (working title) → to Twisted Metal (2012 video game); mainly per WP:CHEAP, unsure if it was a real working title or not, or just series name + platform, either way for someone to use this redirect it's very clear what the desired article is. Shazback (talk) 03:16, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, implausible as a search term. -- Tavix ^(talk) 03:57, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusalkii (talk) 06:49, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. There are no incoming links and no one is going to search for this, especially since Twisted Metal PS3 exists. I₂Overcome ^talk 11:13, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as implausible term for a game that's nearly 15 years old. I'd understand if the working title was significantly different to the released title, but it's almost identical. Blue Sonnet (talk) 11:11, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this was briefly article back in 2008, before being BLARed as WP:CRYSTAL. This history doesn't seem to have been merged anywhere, and I don't think this should be a barrier for deletion. Rusalkii (talk) 23:17, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WAST (defunct)

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 20#WAST (defunct)

Kurdish genocide

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 20#Kurdish genocide

Ethnic Christians

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Sir Thomas Wells

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

Donald Trump Electric Chair

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

November 12

Cathedral of the Immaculate Conception, (Crookston, Minnesota)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2000s internet

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 20#2000s internet

hydrocortisone brand names

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 19#hydrocortisone brand names

Epicort

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Dermil

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Dermaspray

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Derm-Aid

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Delacort

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Cobadex

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Clear aid

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

56 (game)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

-20

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Speedy Delete, G7.

Agudela

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 20#Agudela

Kahīr

Kahīr → Shahdad-e Kahir (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Ambiguous with Kahir, the larger settlement, and possibly more villages. Retarget there (a hatnote exists) or second choice disambiguate. J 947 ‡ ^edits 03:16, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dabify per WP:TWOOTHER. There are a number of places known as "Kahir" already listed at Kahir, in addition to this one. There are more too, like Kahir Dara, Kahir Dari, the wiktionary definition [23], etc. Katzrockso (talk) 05:09, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clarify, Kahir should be a disambiguation page and Kahīr should redirect to that... Katzrockso (talk) 18:29, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 06:21, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DABify per User:Katzrockso. ~2025-31416-56 (talk) 17:21, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

DABify per above. Blue Sonnet (talk) 10:31, 15 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation draft requested Rusalkii (talk) 09:07, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hand practice

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Marlon Barber

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 20#Marlon Barber

J-Ho

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Joseph Putz

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

Jack Carlson (ice hockey) (version 2)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Mario and Luigi

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Mario Brothers

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Schmear

Schmear → List of English words of Yiddish origin#Schmeer (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Lawrence Cohen/work/Schmear/draft – speedy close
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schmear – redirect to Cream cheese

A recent AfD closed with this redirecting to Cream cheese. The closer noted that there was some disagreement about the proper target and suggested further discussion could occur at the talk page or RfD. Shortly after the AfD closed, the original nominator unilaterally retargeted this to their preferred article, which received limited support in the original discussion. Following a brief discussion at Talk:Schmear#Where to redirect? and on my user talk page I am bringing this here for more visibility and input. I will notify AfD participants and suggested target pages.

The proposed options are:

—Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 17:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC) Edit: Jewish food is a redirect to Jewish cuisine so I've updated that in the listing. 17:50, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Language, and list of Judaism-related deletion discussions. Thepharoah17 (talk) 00:13, 5 November 2025 (UTC) [reply]
Retarget to Bagel and cream cheese where the word is defined and appears multiple times, including in the second paragraph of the lead and in an image caption. This has more detail that the other page and provides relevant context. The other meanings in Yiddish are likely of less interest to the average reader but a link to the entry at List of English words of Yiddish origin#Schmeer could be placed in Bagel and cream cheese. (Copied with some edits from my AfD !vote.) —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:01, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per Myceteae. ←Metallurgist (talk) 18:11, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget per Myceteae and Metallurgist. Any time I have seen this in any media, that has been the meaning. BD2412 T 18:29, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to bagel and cream cheese Andre🚐 23:15, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Bagel and cream cheese per Myceteae --Lenticel ^(talk) 03:04, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
STrONG KKEEP May be I cannot read Englisch, but the word schmear is NOT defined neither in Cream cheese nor in Bagel and cream cheese . TThis is the primary reeason I retargeted, clearly decrived in edit summary. If you disagree, please cite me the definition of "Schmear" from Bagel and cream cheese. We do not redirect to random pages that use the word. List of English words of Yiddish origin gives a proper definition. --Altenmann >talk 09:31, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A schmear is defined as a synonym for bagel and cream cheese at Bagel and cream cheese § American Jewish cuisine: In American Jewish cuisine, a bagel and cream cheese is sometimes called a "whole schmear" or "whole schmeer". Besides this, the word appears multiple time in the article, providing much more information about its typical usage than the brief definition at List of English words of Yiddish origin. Having an explicit definition is not the only criterion for deciding an appropriate redirect. As I've stated here and at AfD, a link to the entry at List of English words of Yiddish origin could be added to Bagel and cream cheese to provide even further information, and/or additional definitions could be added directly to Bagel and cream cheese. My proposed target provides the most relevant context, does provide a definition, and is the best place to expand the coverage. This provides more value to readers and is more encyclopedic than the WP:DICTDEF entry you proposed. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:58, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- re: A schmear is defined as a synonym for bagel and cream cheese - no, ity is not. It is a sloppy misinterpretation of sources cited and I removed this statement from the article. That it is used multiple times without definition gives no value to its meaning. 'Schmear' is "smear" and if anywhere, it must be described in "cream cheese" (which is a smear indeed). But he word has more meanigs and if explained and targeted there, you have to add a {{redirect}} hatnote. --Altenmann >talk 22:26, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  The solution is to fix the description at Bagel and cream cheese. Yes, the main meaning is smear but specifically in the context of bagels with cream cheese, as covered extensively in the article. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 23:06, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  If you agree that the main meaning of schmear is cream cheese, then you must fix the "Cream cheese" article, rather than Bagel and cream cheese. and only after that request retargeting. Nu? --Altenmann >talk 19:34, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  As I have explained numerous times, and other editors have agreed, the primary meaning is related to cream cheese in the context of bagel and cream cheese. That is the single article that already contains the most relevant encyclopedic content about this concept. I have already made edits to bagel and cream cheese to provide the dictionary definition/gloss and other editors are free to expand the coverage. Cream cheese would be my second choice but that article contains only one mention of the word "schmear" and points back to bagel and cream cheese for full coverage. "Schmear" is, appropriately, mentioned on multiple pages that link back to one another. Bagel and cream cheese provides the most comprehensive coverage currently and is the best place to expand coverage. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:36, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Altenmann. His recent edits to the Bagel and cream cheese article demonstrate a need to keep the target where it is. The current target is where it is defined. Thepharoah17 (talk) 22:55, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or keep?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 01:53, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Create Article~~: Someone should just create the stub article "Schmear" and end this discussion. PK-WIKI (talk) 19:28, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There was limited discussion about this at AfD, with one editor suggesting article potential but not having capacity to work on it at this time. We have to do something with this in the meantime. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 19:39, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Retarget to Bagel and cream cheese. And add as a MOS:BOLDALTNAME in lead. Harder than I expected to find reliable source articles about the historic/linguistic difference between schmear and "normal cream cheese" (although they might still exist). But it does mean "spread", as in something spread on a bagel, not just a block of cream cheese sans bread. PK-WIKI (talk) 00:12, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Reading the nomination statement, most likely Shmear, a redirect that targets the same target as the nominated redirect, should be bundled into this discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 10:33, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. This used to target Schmear and was retargeted after that page was converted to a redirect. I have tagged it as {{R avoided double redirect}}. I prefer not to bundle an additional redirect this late in the game but I plan to keep an eye on this and will retarget as need to align Shmear with Schmear after this closes. This seems uncontroversial given the history and that these are straightforward spelling variants. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 18:57, 14 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Note that bagel and cream cheese liberally links the word "schmear" to different targets in different context. I'm not sure we made things better by deleting the article. As @Altenmann states, we've now obfuscated where to learn about this word. I think I lean towards keep; it makes more sense for the list of words to point to bagel than the other way around in my opinion. I also note that there wasn't really consensus on where to redirect at the original AfD. Tduk (talk) 17:16, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Post-cycle therapy

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Sid the Shark

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

November 11

Bаttle For Dream Island

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Camp Bragg

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 20#Camp Bragg

Ince (Manchester) railway station

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

1946 Grand Cane tornado

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Hindu marriage Ceremony

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Telephone shower

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Shower (for washing)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Walk-in shower

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Walkin shower

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Epifoam

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ohio Sea Grant

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 19#Ohio Sea Grant

Hindu marriage

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 19#Hindu marriage

Victoria Tjonadi

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Umbrium

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 18#Umbrium

The 17's

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

8+4

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

XI (cricket)

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

CipheR

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Make your own soap

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 18#Make your own soap

Jabonería

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Baby wash

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 18#Baby wash

Americo-pope

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Dawans

Dawans → Sigismund-Helmut von Dawans (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

This does not seem like a useful redirect - only one "Dawans" currently on en:wikipedia, and although it is a relatively rare name, there are multiple articles on other persons with this name on other language wikipedias, including one with a highly similar name to the current target (see Wikidata, fr:Adrien Dawans, de:Sigismund von Dawans). If not redirect, could be a short disambiguation page. Shazback (talk) 05:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation with interlanguage links seems the best solution. -- Recon rabbit 18:06, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The purpose of redirects from a surname is to assist the reader who can only remember the surname or who does to wish to type out the full name. They are used either when Wikipedia has only one article about a person with the given surname (this case) or because one individual is the most likely topic sought by this surname. See WP:RKEEP #6. Greenshed (talk) 18:19, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Someone might be looking for the Atoni people, also known as Dawans. Sting Kipu (talk) 19:28, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps a disambiguation page would be best then. Greenshed (talk) 22:06, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would the following be OK as a disambiguation ?:

Dawans may refer to:

The Atoni people, ethnic group on the island of Timor

Sigismund-Helmut von Dawans (1899–1944), German general

~See also~

Dawan (disambiguation)

Shazback (talk) 17:24, 10 November 2025 (UTC):: Davan[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:07, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Dawan (disambiguation)? After all, if we are to accept Dawans having two major meanings here (the Atoni people, and Sigismund-Helmut von Dawans), then it's instead a case of WP:ONEOTHER. Perhaps we can instead list the Wehrmacht general within the Other uses or the See also sections in that disambiguation article? Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 13:34, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gaza massacre

Gaza massacre → Casualties of Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Gaza Massacre → Casualties of Israeli attacks on the Gaza Strip (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Previous RfDs for this redirect and similar redirects:

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 February 16 § Gaza massacre – retarget

Retarget to Gaza war or Israeli invasion of Gaza --MikutoH ^talk! 03:21, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Gaza war to match Gaza Massacre (2008)Gaza Massacre (2008) → Gaza War (2008–2009), Gaza massacre (2012) → 2012 Gaza War, and Gaza massacre (2014)Gaza massacre (2014) → 2014 Gaza War disambiguate Thepharoah17 (talk) 03:42, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I bundled Gaza Massacre Thepharoah17 (talk) 05:03, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Gaza war per nomination. Achmad Rachmani (talk) 07:50, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget to Gaza War (2008–2009) as alternative name in boldface, and/or otherwise create disambiguation page for this term. There is no mention of "Gaza massacre" in the Gaza war article like there is for the 2008-2009 war, so oppose this. For context the following "Gaza massacre" redirects include; Gaza Massacre (2008), 2010 Gaza massacre, Gaza massacre (2012), and Gaza massacre (2014), thus there is a logic to a disambiguation page that includes not only the war articles but also outliers such as 2010 Gaza flotilla raid. Courtesy ping to editors above. CNC (talk) 14:59, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate: Make this a disambiguation page pointing to the various articles people have been suggesting here. IOHANNVSVERVS (talk) 01:39, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate this is a concise description of many events that have unfortunately happened in Gaza. While this is a very likely search term, its also pretty ambiguous since Israel has created no shortage of such events. User:Easternsahara_{review and this} 10:39, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Retarget or disambiguate?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:05, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Gaza war per nom -- .nhals8 (puhLEASE ping when responding) 13:13, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguate due to the ambiguity of such a term. There is, regretfully, no shortage of such atrocities within the Gaza Strip. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 13:36, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget to Gaza genocide or disambiguate. Yung Doohickey (talk) 16:03, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguate: I think the fact that we have four different target options suggested here (five including the current target) illustrates that there is likely not a clear WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT, which naturally strengthens the case to disambiguate. Left guide (talk) 23:36, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Disambiguation draft requested. Left guide (talk) 23:36, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete this and all other similar redirects It is overly vague and can refer to numerous possible things. Since DAB pages are not a search index, disambiguating it would be out of the question. Rather, it should be deleted to let the search function take over. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:59, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Gaza massacre (2012) is also at RfD - WP:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 19#Gaza massacre (2012). Jay 💬 14:59, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ninan Abraham

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Cutting cycle

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Draft:SECURE 2.0 Act

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Win Streak

Win Streak → Taichung Win Streak (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
WinStreak → Taichung Win Streak (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
~~Win+StreakWin+Streak → Taichung Win Streak (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]~~ Withdrawn. Steel1943 (talk) 17:32, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:DIFFCAPS, I do not believe that a capital in "S" in "Streak" is enough to differentiate these redirects' target from Winning streak, the target of redirect "Win streakWin streak". With that being said, here are my votes for these redirects:

Retarget Win Streak to Winning streak, adding a hatnote there pointing towards the current target of the nominated redirects

Delete WinStreak as an unnecessary WP:CAMELCASE redirect since it was created well after the cutoff year for such redirects being useful (2004 or 2005)

Delete Win+StreakWin+Streak per precedence set at the RfD discussion for Compressed+natural+gas at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 October 29#Compressed+natural+gas

Steel1943 (talk) 02:46, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move WinStreak without redirect to Winstreak. Even if technically "incorrect", it could plausibly be thought of as a compound word, with evidence that some of our editors think of it that way. ~~Otherwise agree with nom on the other two.~~ Left guide (talk) 03:43, 11 November 2025 (UTC) Forgot to add it should be subsequently retargeted to Winning streak. Left guide (talk) 07:15, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Left guide: Per WP:MOVEREDIRECT, since WinStreak contains essentially no history that needs to be retained, it would make more sense if you created Winstreak yourself. Steel1943 (talk) 07:06, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, if it helps establish consensus, as a second choice I would be ok with deleting WinStreak so long as creating Winstreak as a redirect to Winning streak is allowed. Left guide (talk) 23:12, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Win+StreakWin+Streak: Hariboneagle927 has shown evidence below that the organization publicly uses this style on their website and social media. To me, that's more than sufficient to be considered both helpful and plausible. Left guide (talk) 08:00, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Left guide's viewpoint: Retarget Win Streak and WinStreak to Winning streak~~, and Delete Win+Streak~~. Winstreak is plausibly viewed as a compound word. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 06:59, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@DemocracyDeprivationDisorder: Just FYI, Left guide actually stated that WinStreak should be deleted. Steel1943 (talk) 07:06, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I support their view that "winstreak" itself could be seen as a compound word and thus WinStreak is a valid understanding of the word. I don't agree with the conclusion that it should be deleted. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 07:29, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Issuing a correction to Keep Win+Streak as a specific trademark, per Hariboneagle. Frank_{(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion)} 12:40, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, that seems like a different case, the volleyball team specifically is referred to as "Win+Streak". It seems everyone is overlooking that its a trademark/brand name. Its a plausible search term for someone just copying pasting that term. I could see the arguments that everything else could be retargeted to Winning streak in retrospect.Hariboneagle927 (talk) 07:04, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hariboneagle927: I currently do not see such evidence or mention about "Win+Streak" referring to the current target of these redirects in the current target of these redirects. If there can be evidence provided, I will retract my "delete" stance on Win+Streak since such evidence would invalidate my nomination rationale. Steel1943 (talk) 07:10, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The page owns socials uses "Win+Streak" 1, 2 (as per on the note on the page itself). But I have to concede that third party sources overwhelmingly refer to the team without the "+" stylization, but the club does use it on their logo and in its own channels (more accurately they are inconsistent with using WinStreak, Winstreak, Win Streak and yes "Win+Streak")Hariboneagle927 (talk) 07:34, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What I'm saying is that this stylization is not mentioned in the sections of the article prior to the content referred to in MOS:FOOTERS. I see the mention in Taichung Win Streak#Notes, but redirects from phrases such as this really should be in the body of the article somewhere. Possibly state the alternative name(s)/stylization(s) in the body of the article somewhere, possibly rendering the note unnecessary? Steel1943 (talk) 07:45, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator follow-up: Withdrawn my stance on Win+Streak, but cannot actually withdraw it from this discussion due to an active non-"keep" vote regarding it. Steel1943 (talk) 08:18, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Update. Since there are no more non-"keep" votes, I have withdrawn Win+Streak. Steel1943 (talk) 17:32, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've manually pulled the RfD tag there to implement this withdrawal. Hopefully it doesn't screw up the script for the eventual closer of the other entries; if it does, the closer can feel free to revert my edit there right before closing. Left guide (talk) 19:38, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget Win Streak to Winning streak, with hatnote, and Delete WinStreak as an unnecessary per nom. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 21:20, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

12+12

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Apricity

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: disambiguate

When it's done

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 19#When it's done

Judas hatch

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 19#Judas hatch

November 9

Eka Budianto

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Jules Guerin

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Shake it like a Vinfast

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Unordered

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Body soap

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 16#Body soap

2025 Donald Trump visit to the Middle East

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Sotong

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Random City Titles

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget Marvellous City (along with The Marvelous City) to Cidade Maravilhosa. Delete Amazing City and Wonderful City. -- Tavix ^(talk) 19:01, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dum Dums

Dum-Dums → Dum Dums (lollipop) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Dum Dums → Dum Dum (disambiguation) (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

These have different targets, but should probably be in sync. Should they both redirect to the lollipop article? Or the dab page? Left guide (talk) 04:36, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move Dum Dums (lollipop) to Dum Dums. It is not just the primary topic but the only topic with this name—there is nothing else on the dab page called Dum Dums. The string /dums/ appears only three times on the page: In the lead, in Dumdums (band), and Dum Dums (lollipop). None of the Dum Dum entries are things that would take a plural. There is nothing else that could possibly occupy the base name Dum Dums besides the lollipop; this satisfies WP:DIFFCAPS and WP:PLURALPT considerations. WikiNav shows that Dum Dums (lollipop) is the only page readers navigate to from the dab page. It seems Dum Dum (disambiguation)'s primary function at this point is slowing down readers looking for Dum Dums (lollipop) by making them scroll through a bunch of partial title matches. Dum-Dums should also target the lollipops so retarget to Dum Dums if this is moved; keep, failing that.. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 05:37, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Creator of Dum-Dums,
Dumdums (band) also exists, Dum Dum (song), Dum Dum (Sickotoy and Ilkay Sencan song) and similar pages, I don't disagree with @Myceteae, but it might not be a bad idea to consider all alleyways before final choice.
Move Dum Dums -> Dum Dum (disambiguation), No opinion on Dum-Dums. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 06:07, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But a song called Dum Dum would not be referred to in the plural, Dum Dums, nor would the band be Dumdums be styled that way. Those would represent gross errors or very unusual usage, at least. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 06:15, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
True but it could be an unlikely redirect. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 06:16, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why would we send readers somewhere unlikely to be what they are looking for? We can add a hatnote for the unlikely destinations listed at the dab page. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 06:24, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
True... Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 06:25, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Valorrr Also I am suggesting a WP:PAGEMOVE rather than maintaining this as a redirect. I think you mean ‘keep’ Dum Dums as a redirect to Dum Dum (disambiguation), is that correct? —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 06:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. Valorrr ^{(lets chat)} 06:23, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 19:00, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Move Dum Dums (lollipop) to Dum Dums as the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 22:16, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget both to → Dum Dum (disambiguation); strongly unconvinced that Dum Dums (lollipop) is WP:PRIMARYTOPIC - perhaps in the USA, but even then, there would be a (quite) high bar to show that this is a case of WP:PLURAL. "Dum dums" and "dum-dums" have been frequently used to refer to hollow-point or expanding bullets both in the US and abroad (e.g., The Gateway 1975, The Arlington Day 1970, Gunsmith Cats 2010, Long ridin' man 2015, Death minus one, 1996, An ordinary atrocity : Sharpeville and its massacre, 2001, Alan Partridge: Alpha Papa, 2013, Miami Showband Massacre, 2007, Haringey Advertiser, 2010, (more allegorical) Splattery, 2007 - only examples taken from sources that do not discuss early military history). I'd even consider based on what I have seen that the disambiguation page should be amended to include the most common use I have seen: Stupidity... Shazback (talk) 20:09, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, I wasn't familiar with the nickname for these bullets. Looking at Google Books and the sources you posted, while there is some inconsistency, the bullets are usually sentence case dum dums or dum-dums while the capitalized proper name Dum Dums almost always refers to the candy. The hyphen is almost always used for the bullets although some sources, including NYT, use Dum-Dums for the candy. Regular Google and DuckDuckGo searches and a Google News search exclusively return results for the candy. JSTOR returns many more hits for the bullet, with some variation, but most oven lowercase and with a hyphen, dum-dums. ETA: And, notably, dumdum bullets are most often spelled as a single word. See this Ngram for example. This Ngram shows that they are more likely to be pluralized dumdum bullets than dumdums though of course both are used. This all supports the capitalization, spacing, and plural making the lollipops the primary topic for Dum Dums; perhaps Dum-Dums is more ambiguous. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:20, 11 November 2025 (UTC) Edited 15:44, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I've added Stupidity to the dab page under 'See also'; it could perhaps be moved somewhere else on the page. I agree this informal usage is common although it does not show up as often in reliable sources. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 15:25, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget Dum-Dums to Dum Dum (disambiguation) as {{a2r|Dum Dums}}. The lollipop isn't the primary topic now, and remains ambiguous with expanding bullets (at least). Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 22:16, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Move lollipop to Dum Dums per Myceteae; I'm convinced this is the primary topic per WP:DIFFCAPS even if "dum dums" was more commonly the bullet, which it doesn't appear to be. Rusalkii (talk) 19:09, 17 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dum Dums has a long page history from 2004, and I just tagged it as an {{R from merge}}. If there is consensus on the lollipop page move, then first move Dum Dums without leaving redirect to Dum Dums (disambiguation), which was bot-created in 2010 and doesn't hold a page history. Jay 💬 15:57, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cary Huang

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 17#Cary Huang

Thorncliffe, Thorncliffe, Kirkburton

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

TISE

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Category:Members of the United States House of Representatives from Massacheusetts

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

St Paul's Shipwreck

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 16#St Paul's Shipwreck

Racisme anti-arabe

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Kangaroo hop height

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Unlikely Redirects

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 17#Unlikely Redirects

Hotchips

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

Bnuuy

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

McRonald's

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

Tampo, FL

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Frozen desert

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 17#Frozen desert

Tree Dollar

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Mariz Ricketts

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

PlayStation 7

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Michael Kovach

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 16#Michael Kovach

Crossrail Lines 2 and 3

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

November 4

Mario and Luigi

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 12#Mario and Luigi

Mario Brothers

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 12#Mario Brothers

The old

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Frenchee

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Mabbing

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Transpeptidation

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Retarget Transpeptidation , Keep Transpeptidase (disambiguation)

Schmear

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 12#Schmear

Shameena Riaz

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Liu Siya

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Ruqayya Salem

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Robyn McAlpine

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

C Lalramsanga

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Suryaksh Rawat

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

BFDI drafts

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Dawans

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 11#Dawans

Post-cycle therapy

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 12#Post-cycle therapy

Wikipedia:Pages for deletion and similar titles

Wikipedia:Pages for deletion → Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:PFD → Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:Pfd → Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]
Wikipedia:PfD → Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion (talk · links · history · stats) [ Closure: keep/retarget/delete ]

Pages are not just limited to articles; they are also categories, files, templates, etc. I should also note that Wikipedia:PfD redirects to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. I believe these redirects should be retargeted somewhere else, maybe Wikipedia:Deletion process#Deletion discussion venues. Also, tell me if there are redirects similar to the ones being nominated that I missed. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 14:13, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I noticed that WP:PFD was linked on a page created in 2005, though I created the page in 2014. I then noticed that WP:PFD was speedy deleted in 2012 per WP:G8. Admins ... what did WP:PFD target before being deleted in 2012? Steel1943 (talk) 15:38, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, regarding stating that "...WP:PFD redirects to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion": Umm, no it doesn't... Steel1943 (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops. I meant Wikipedia:PfD, with a lowercase F. My bad. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 16:08, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added to the discussion, considering what happens to one "PFD" title should affect the others. Steel1943 (talk) 20:14, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

...Discovered via WP:REFUND that the answer to my question is: WP:PFD apparently used to target Wikipedia:Page for Drunks in 2012. Steel1943 (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe disambiguate? I thought we already had a DAB or similar page for different deletion discussions but I can't find it. Crouch, Swale (talk) 17:12, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At the minimum, Keep Wikipedia:Pages for deletion. This is a former/historical name of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion which apparently predates the "other" former name of AfD "Wikipedia:Votes for deletion" (which was apparently a transition all "Pages for deletion" titles made in 2005). See the search of pages that begin with "Wikipedia:Pages for deletion/" for further details. Steel1943 (talk) 20:09, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget the rest (PFD, PfD, Pfd) to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion (for the ones that do not already). I'm not seeing any evidence that AfD (or any of its predecessor names) was ever referred to as "PFD" ~~(pending my inquiry about the pre-2012 state of Wikipedia:PFD)~~, meaning the most plausible title which this acronym could refer to in the "XfD" group of pages is a non-existent "Wikipedia:Portals for deletion", which is a redirect towards Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. Steel1943 (talk) 20:21, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per this statement, prior to being deleted in 2012, Wikipedia:PFD targeted Wikipedia:Page for Drunks ... which is ... well, silly. Either way, since WP:PFD, WP:Pfd and WP:PfD were created in 2014, 2024 and 2019 respectively, this further establishes that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion was never known as "PFD" ... which enforces my previous comment in this discussion thread. Steel1943 (talk) 20:51, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It appears that all the pages with the Pages for deletion prefix were moved to the versions with Articles for deletion when the venue was renamed at some point. Thanks, 1isall (he/him) (talk | contribs) 01:43, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I no longer have any opinion or stance on any of the redirects in this discussion other than "Wikipedia:Pages for deletion", considering that we really should not be breaking the associations of historical names of project namespace venues in such a manner. Steel1943 (talk) 15:05, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

wouldn't it be better to retarget all to match wp:xfd, and then add a hatnote there? consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 00:09, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I oppose this option for Wikipedia:Pages for deletion per my finds above. I'm "weak oppose" regarding the rest since I prefer my resolution since it matches an established naming scheme. Steel1943 (talk) 00:15, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget all to Wikipedia:Deletion_process#Deletion_discussion_venues per Consarn, except I wouldn't even add a hatnote. We shouldn't care about what something may or may not have been called for a short period ages ago. And even if we did care it's not even clear going to AfD would be correct, as the relevant era was before individual deletion discussion venues were split out so there is no equivalent to the old VfD. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 14:43, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What we now know as Project:Articles for deletion was for Project:Pages for deletion for about a week at the end of August and start of September 2005. I myself briefly favoured "pages" over "articles" (as can be seen in the contemporary archives of Project talk:Articles for deletion) which were two of several suggestions, until people came up with the idea that became Project:Miscellany for deletion that satisfied the concerns that led to a preference for "pages". People ran the deletion mechanisms with "Pages for deletion" as the name for that week, until we adjusted what the templates were doing (c.f. the same contemporary discussions), making per-article pages and per-day pages with "pages" in the names. There was likewise a Category:Pages for deletion.
I created Project:Miscellany for deletion at the end of August (Special:Diff/21961239), and the process switched from "pages" to "articles" a short while later. We had already split out images, categories, and other stuff by that point (two years beforehand in the case of images for deletion), so it is not the case that "pages for deletion" ever encompassed things that were not pages, such as images.
I have no attachment to the shortcuts that were created a decade or two after the fact, but the actual Project:Pages for deletion redirect is correctly targetted, as it currently stands, at where both it and all of its sub-pages (Special:Prefixindex/Project:Pages for deletion, including the per-day pages for that week) actually ended up being renamed to.
And yes, pages are not limited to articles. As one of the several people who brought up this point 20 years ago, e.g. at Special:Diff/21958405, I can confirm that none of us who made the point back then has been worried that we've had redirects from "pages for deletion" to "articles for deletion", reflecting the actual history, for all of that time. We've likewise not been worried that Project:Votes for deletion and a similar lot of sub-pages redirect to the same place, even though, 20 years ago, the fact that "votes" are not "articles" was a point similarly made back then. As one of the people who did the work, and even made the point, 20 years ago, I think that it's a little fussy to re-argue it over the redirects that resulted, and inconsistent to argue it over merely one of those many redirects.
Uncle G (talk) 03:23, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Wikipedia:Pages for deletion as a former name for for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Target the WP:PFD redirects to Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion as an abbreviation for Wikipedia:Portals for deletion. -- Tavix ^(talk) 20:18, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retarget all to Wikipedia:Deletion_process#Deletion_discussion_venues per @consarn. Unless there is a historical projectspace page that describes that AfD used to be Pages for deletion, we should not add a hatnote per @Pppery. On Wikipedia, every namespace is composed of pages. The "X" in "XfD" functions as an "insert page type here". Retargeting would also maintain consistency with the averarching category for XfDs, Category:Pages for discussion. The fact that AfD was Pages for deletion for a single week from August–September 2005 does not justify retaining the redirect twenty years later. I've never seen MfD referred to as "Portals for discussion" or "Portals for deletion" so oppose retargetting any of these to MfD. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:34, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:58, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

should've mentioned that my comment wasn't a vote. not that that's worth much consarn _{(talck) (contirbuton s)} 18:30, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retarget all to Wikipedia:Deletion process#Deletion discussion venues to align with WP:XFD. This is by far the most intuitive target and it includes links to MfD and AfD. Readers expecting a more specific topic will find it listed here. —Myceteae‍🍄‍🟫 (talk) 14:08, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be confused

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

2016/0280(COD)

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

Good offices

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Type-67

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: keep

Witch Beam

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: Delete * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 18:27, 13 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bulking cycle

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Cutting cycle

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 11#Cutting cycle

Anasteroids

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Gaza massacre

Relisted, see Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2025 November 11#Gaza massacre

Steroids in High School Athletics

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: retarget

Caerussalem

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

Juice monkey

Closed discussion, see full discussion. Result was: delete

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